Angry Men

[bèlla]

A 50 Shades rebuttal? Like a novella?

Not in that sense. They’re nonfiction titles meant to tackle sexual topics for women as a result of 50 Shades and increases in pornography use. Few know how to cover the subject. The writing seems stilted and repressed.

I will say that kind of man is probably more desirable as a fantasy than a reality. I think women gravitate towards those kinds of overly masculine men for both attraction and the sense of security....but it can be problematic if he never really exhibits any sense of vulnerability or need.

Why do you consider him overly masculine? I’ve seen similar examples growing up. My grandfather was very affectionate and emotionally balanced. He was secure in his manhood.

I mean, it's my experience at least, that women don't just want to be desired and loved...they want to feel needed as well. When a guy becomes this sort of island unto himself....it can lead to real questions of insecurity in a woman. They begin to question whether or not he really needs her at all, and that becomes a source of self doubt.

I think the problem is many want him to display his need in the manner they’re most familiar with. Namely other women. Most men will never behave that way.

They’re not an endless faucet of emotions. Restraint doesn’t mean disinterest or absence. Men are problem solvers not problem discussers. ;-)

 

[bèlla]

I don't think those who I help through various charities are interested in having 'face time' with me. They have enough problems.

That wasn’t the group I was addressing.

Also I believe that God appreciates it when one shores up their own life. If a blind man leads another blind man they will both likely wind up in the ditch.

Getting your house in order is not the same as a me-centered existence. The life you’re describing has been my reality since my thirties and I’m in my forties now. I have a lot of life ahead.

There are seasons which may require self-focus to accomplish goals or meet responsibilities. But I wouldn’t label them selfish. That was your descriptor and its meaning is clear.

devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

That isn’t a mindset the Lord builds or maintains.

Sacrificing yourself for another in the context we are talking about is a zero-sum game, if you think about it.

No one is suggesting sacrifice. But that doesn’t dismiss the problem and our desire to understand and provide aid if we can. That is the biblical example we’ve been given.

 

[bèlla]

I like this MGTOW. I'm a Christian, although not married (long divorced). There is great satisfaction having only to answer to yourself and to God rather than to other people.

It’s interesting you’d find kinship in a group of angry misogynist male supremacists. I don’t know how that correlates to Christ.

 

[bèlla]

I am curious about so called "nice guys". Perhaps they are just vanilla men who are unable to grasp how love and rough elements can blend together?

Men aren’t penalized for being nice. Few women consciously pursue someone who will harm them. What many find offensive is when a man permits himself to be ill used and remains in that state in the hope of gaining her notice or favor.

Many nice guys I hear sound pretty entitled. They act like a woman is a freak and broken if she likes a man who's a little rough.

Many people enter subcultures in search of love and acceptance. They aren’t always diehard adherents or naturally attracted to the topic. Their need to belong is the driver.

There’s nothing special or unique about that culture. All the ills you see in society are there too. It attracts the disenfranchised and those who feel left behind. That isn’t the whole of the spectrum; but there are quite a few.

If she doesn't respond well to his boring kindness and flowers she is the problem and not him. I know when 50 Shades Of Grey came out many men were confused about the attraction. Perhaps there are more masochistic women than sadistic men?

Men aren’t mind readers. Both must articulate their needs. They can’t expect their partner to read their minds and hearts.

Grey was a broken man with lots of cash. He was attractive because of his wealth and obsession. He catered to her. That’s why women liked him. The kink was a bonus. It wasn’t the reason most were drawn to him. @Ana the Ist addressed this in his response on romance novels. Its the same formula.

Women love an emotional man if expressed in a certain way.

I value authenticity. I can’t control how someone expresses themselves. Some forms resonate more than others.

 

[bèlla]

I have heard about most men being sexually unattractive to women. It's called the 80/20 idea. I'm starting to think there is some truth in it.

Can you expound on that please?

 

[bèlla]

Their problems aren't with sex really, but with themselves and their expectations of the world. Modern western society wants to idolize sex, so I could see how some people overemphasize the importance of sexuality, but disgruntled, maladjusted, angry young men have deeper problems than "getting laid".

I agree. Sex won’t solve their problems. It would probably add more to their plate.

 

[bèlla]

Today's billionaires and wannabes have not build anything, have not invented anything, have not created jobs and otherwise contributed to the wellbeing of their community and common good.

In your opinion, what does “anything” imply?

They sit in glass towers playing with faceless algorithms as they buy and trade to increase their personal fortune without any care how many communities and families get hurt, laid-off, evicted, environments and livelihoods destroyed for their greed. It's always someone else who pays the price of their misadventures. The sense of personal responsibility is gone.

The robber barons didn’t have that ideal either. And playing with algorithms and making a mint isn’t easy. The world isn’t altruistic and America never was. The divide always existed. Globalism brought it to the fore.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That wasn’t the group I was addressing.



Getting your house in order is not the same as a me-centered existence. The life you’re describing has been my reality since my thirties and I’m in my forties now. I have a lot of life ahead.

There are seasons which may require self-focus to accomplish goals or meet responsibilities. But I wouldn’t label them selfish. That was your descriptor and its meaning is clear.

devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

That isn’t a mindset the Lord builds or maintains.



No one is suggesting sacrifice. But that doesn’t dismiss the problem and our desire to understand and provide aid if we can. That is the biblical example we’ve been given.

Good points. I'll take back what I said about my selfishness, however I am definitely "me" centered.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It’s interesting you’d find kinship in a group of angry misogynist male supremacists. I don’t know how that correlates to Christ.

I read an extensive description of the movement. While I don't agree with most of it I do agree with some. As I stated it's a hodgepodge of disparate as well as related subjects and attitudes.

One thing is certain, that the women's movement has not endeared itself to men generally.

 

[ViaCrucis]

What are the root causes of male disenfranchisement? How do we help them manage their anger in a healthy way? How have you tackled this within yourself or with others?

Please share your thoughts.

A lot of it is upbringing and culture.

We don't bat an eye when a little girl wants to play with toys marketed to boys, but little boys who want to play with toys marketed to girls are shamed, their masculinity is attacked and questioned at an early age. This sort of thing establishes, at a very early age, that masculinity is a fragile thing that must be protected and reinforced, through anger and aggression.

Boys aren't allowed to just be boys, they must be boys in this or that particular way. Repression and oppression becomes the way in which boys experience their masculinity, and that leads to anger, resentment, and toxic behavior.

Men are reared in a culture of shame. Shame for showing emotion, shame for being "weak", shame for not being "manly" enough, shame for this, shame for that.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Paidiske]

That's what I said.

No, you said it was biological. Our gender-based behaviour is mostly not biological.

That's a big problem, people doing whatever they want to do (developing their "gifts") rather than doing what is needed.

?? God gifts each of us gifts in order that we might use them where they're needed, to serve. It's not either developing gifts or meeting need, it's both/and.

And of course (some) men haven't liked the women's movement. We've challenged men's privilege and hegemony. Doesn't mean it was wrong to do so.

 

[bèlla]

I read an extensive description of the movement. While I don't agree with most of it I do agree with some. As I stated it's a hodgepodge of disparate as well as related subjects and attitudes.

I have known my share and wouldn’t advise it. Looks are deceiving and its far darker than they admit.

One thing is certain, that the women's movement has not endeared itself to men generally.

No it hasn’t. There too much anger on both sides. Its very distressing.

 

[bèlla]

We don't bat an eye when a little girl wants to play with toys marketed to boys, but little boys who want to play with toys marketed to girls are shamed, their masculinity is attacked and questioned at an early age.

That’s true. In my daughter’s early years I purchased her toys from independent stores. I looked for skill building activities. She attended a Montessori school and I employed many of those methods at home. We didn’t hit Toys R Us until second or third grade.

She never liked dolls. She put them in the bath. She preferred toys that made her think or allowed her to build. That meant the boys aisles in most instances. On the other hand, she’s not domestic, wasn’t keen on marriage (that’s changed) and wanted a small family (she’s openminded now).

You could argue that the absence of those influences played a part. She was more interested in sports than girly things growing up.

Boys aren't allowed to just be boys, they must be boys in this or that particular way. Repression and oppression becomes the way in which boys experience their masculinity, and that leads to anger, resentment, and toxic behavior.

I sense this sometimes when I’m engaging with men. They’re expecting directives and hoops. I have none. Just be yourself and be kind. That’s all I ask. I try to give them the space to define what that means and how they relate. I won’t micromanage or mother him.

Men are reared in a culture of shame. Shame for showing emotion, shame for being "weak", shame for not being "manly" enough, shame for this, shame for that.

Perhaps the extremes we’re encountering are the result of those practices. I include the ‘beta male’ in that group. I don’t like the term. But it seems the responses are hailing from a similar brokenness.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

No, you said it was biological. Our gender-based behaviour is mostly not biological.

Gender is biological, therefore...

?? God gifts each of us gifts in order that we might use them where they're needed, to serve. It's not either developing gifts or meeting need, it's both/and.

Most people use their so-called gifts to serve themselves, not others.

And of course (some) men haven't liked the women's movement. We've challenged men's privilege and hegemony. Doesn't mean it was wrong to do so.

Yes, but we don't have to like it.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I have known my share and wouldn’t advise it. Looks are deceiving and its far darker than they admit.

There is a positive side to it...fewer children. We are overpopulated and this helps.

No it hasn’t. There too much anger on both sides. Its very distressing.

Both should read their bibles more.

Women: Proverbs 31
Men: Proverbs 24:27

 

[OldWiseGuy]

A lot of it is upbringing and culture.

We don't bat an eye when a little girl wants to play with toys marketed to boys, but little boys who want to play with toys marketed to girls are shamed, their masculinity is attacked and questioned at an early age. This sort of thing establishes, at a very early age, that masculinity is a fragile thing that must be protected and reinforced, through anger and aggression.

Boys aren't allowed to just be boys, they must be boys in this or that particular way. Repression and oppression becomes the way in which boys experience their masculinity, and that leads to anger, resentment, and toxic behavior.

Men are reared in a culture of shame. Shame for showing emotion, shame for being "weak", shame for not being "manly" enough, shame for this, shame for that.

-CryptoLutheran

I never played with my sister's toys but I did read "Little Lulu" comics. They were a hoot. Of course my main comic fare was strictly boys stuff, with the exception of the Disney comics which were also a favorite.

 

[Paidiske]

Gender is biological, therefore...

Not exactly. Sex is biological. Gender is about social constructs of sex-based behaviour. Because they're social constructs, they're not biological as such.

Most people use their so-called gifts to serve themselves, not others.

But that's not an argument against recognising, developing and using one's gifts. As indeed the woman of valour in Proverbs 31 does.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Not exactly. Sex is biological. Gender is about social constructs of sex-based behaviour. Because they're social constructs, they're not biological as such.

I think those gender constructs pretty much reflect the different sexes; a 'distinction without a difference'.

But that's not an argument against recognising, developing and using one's gifts. As indeed the woman of valour in Proverbs 31 does.

The Proverbs 31 woman had developed her abilities and responsibilities as a wife and mother, not her 'gifts'. Most people never develop their special talents as their time is taken up by their responsibilities. That said my special gift is discharging my responsibilities at a higher level than is required.

 

[ChicanaRose]

I read an extensive description of the movement. While I don't agree with most of it I do agree with some. As I stated it's a hodgepodge of disparate as well as related subjects and attitudes.

You know, there are better alternatives for Christian men, such as the Better Man Ministries:

Front Page

 

[Noxot]

Today's billionaires and wannabes have not build anything, have not invented anything, have not created jobs and otherwise contributed to the wellbeing of their community and common good

Providing stability in jobs and the ability to obtain all kinds of potentially useful things is a good in my eyes. Capitalism is more stable because it requires less of people. No one wants to be forced into the system but nature is very cruel as well and we might forget that since we live in luxury.

Our President was snapped shoveling snow from his driveway after a particularly ferous snowstorm and his popularity shot through the roof. Proof that he is anything but lazy.

not being lazy AKA dutifulness is a common trait of Republicans and so of course he must be appealing to Republicans in order to be elected. The high rank of president means very high competition and therefore they will use every single trick in their book to win. There is plenty of psychological tricks that go on in politics.