Why Men Think Women Are Crazy

It goes both ways. He just said something to you that, no matter how hard you try to figure out, makes absolutely no sense at all. You give him a blank stare, wondering if he missed some key words in his explanation. He looks at you like he’s just said the most obvious thing in the world… and so it goes… Dr. John Gray scurries off to write another book, the producers of Dr. Phil develop more show topics, and women and men all over the world just shake their heads, wondering if they’ll ever understand the opposite sex.

I’ll make it easy on you… NO. You will never understand them– not because they’re crazy or you’re stupid, but because despite the obvious anatomical differences between men and women, they also have very different brains. And it all started a few days after your dad banged your mom.

Let’s review what we learned in 7th grade Sex Ed… Everyone has either an XX chromosome combination, or an XY combination. If you’re female, you have XX. If you’re male, you have XY. Your gender was actually determined by your father… all eggs are X, and sperm are either X or Y. The X given to you by your father, is what tells your sex body to develop female sex organs. The Y tells your body to develop testes. But that’s not all… within about 5 days of finding the magic combination, very different hormones begin to influence the development of your brain. Very soon after conception, the fetus develops either a “female brain” or a “male brain” because it is being influenced by “female hormones” or “male hormones.”

So the male brain, according to an article written by Doreen Kimura in Psychology Today, is better at completing “certain spatial tasks, especially those requiring accurate orientation of a line or pattern, imaginal rotation, or discerning a figure embedded in a background pattern.” She goes on to say that men are typically better at mathematical reasoning than women. Keep in mind that training and education can overcome these differences– a woman trained as a mathmetician could easily excel just like her male counterparts– but studies have shown that boys are predisposed to be better at these things. Even studies done comparing male and female monkeys have shown that male monkeys accomplish tasks relating to spatial evaluation, more quickly and accurately than female monkeys.

The female brain excels over the male brain at certain verbal tasks– particularly verbal fluency and articulation. It also tends to be better than the male brain at fine manual skills (is this why women typically have better handwriting than men?), and faster at scanning a perceptual array to match two identical images. Here’s where it gets more interesting… studies on women have shown that the female brain becomes “more female” at times when a woman’s monthly cycle causes more “female” hormones to be secreted. During pre-menstruation (when the female hormones are highest in a woman’s body) women actually perform more poorly at “male brain” tasks than they do at times of the month when they are not secreting as many “female hormones.” So the secretion of hormones not only affects the brain during it’s prenatal development, but continues to affect it during the course of one’s life. Likewise, male rats who were castrated (stopping the secretion of male hormones), began to approach problems (getting through a maze) in a way that was more characteristic of the “female brain.”

It’s all biological. We really do think differently. We’re not crazy. And recognizing that your counterpart approaches communication and problem-solving differently than you do, is the beginning of really understanding where he/she is coming from.

So… the next time you’re standing there… trying to figure out why the hell you can’t communicate with your boyfriend or girlfriend… keep in mind it has everything to do with his/her brain and a simple X or Y chromosome that came from his/her father. It’s all the father’s fault really… which makes sense, because men are usually the ones to blame when something goes wrong anyway… right??? ;-)

161 thoughts on “Why Men Think Women Are Crazy

  1. Clearly what Christine is trying to say is that women are inferior to men.. I mean we can add to 4 and draw a straight line while women can only write and speak more clearly.

    Seriously tho, while it might be true that it is all biological.. that does not mean she is any less crazy.. she really is but you can’t blame her, she never got the Y that would help her understand complexities of the world so she is just a bunch of simple X’s… take pity on her and keep it simple.

  2. From Christopher’s response, my point is proven.

    What he was trying to say was… that he agrees that men are good at manual labor (professional line drawer, mathemetician that can find factors of 4, etc.), while the careers that require a high level of communication skills (ambassadors, politicians, professors) should be left to the women.

    Of course, being a male, Christopher’s verbal skills aren’t quite up to par, so his response didn’t come out quite the way he meant it. But that’s okay… I’m a girl… and compensating for Christopher’s shortcomings is what I’m here for. :-)

  3. I’ll agree with that, women never seem to shut the hell up.. they will talk and talk and talk and talk.. it would be great if we could just use them to talk.. I mean they are good with their mouths.. i won’t argue that for a second.

  4. I’ve been keeping an eye on this sort of research for a long time, and I’ll be curious to see if it stands up over time as we learn more.

    I don’t doubt biology plays a role, but I’ve known a lot of guys who talk endlessly, particularly about their feelings and gossip. I, on the other hand, prefer action to words and refuse to share my feelings more than twice a year. Rage excepted. It’s always okay to show rage. :D

    I do suck at math, though. So that part holds up. ;)

  5. LOL! There’s actually a really good book about this if you really are interested in looking at it from a research based pov– even though this book is written by a psychologist. It’s called “What Could He Be Thinking?” by Michael Gurian. I am reading it right now and feel that a lot of it holds true from my experiences.

    I on the other hand, love to talk about my feelings and was pretty good at math. Although I have to say, that math skill must have proved less worthy than other skills because as I’ve become an adult, my brain replaced my ability to do math with other things… ;-)

  6. Very soon after conception, the fetus develops either a ?female brain? or a ?male brain? because it is being influenced by ?female hormones? or ?male hormones.?

    You neglected one very important point, though: women’s addled minds never recover from the onslaught of hormones. Only sex or large quantities of chocolate will afford them a temporary respite, and a rare opportunity for equilibrium.

  7. Leave it to a man to think that because women are different, they must be inferior… honestly, I think it takes a much more evolved thought process to accept and understand that it is this balance between the female mind and the male mind that has ensured the survival of the species. Whether you believe in Creation or Evolution, it is this balance between the man and the woman that is built into us… we are designed to seek out a mate as our counterpart… that is a need within most of us… and the combination of the male and female– including everything that makes up that combination– their ways of thinking, their internal drives, their ability to nurture vs. go out and support their family– is required for procreation. If women and men thought exactly alike, there would be no desire to find a partner of another gender. While I woldn’t possibly ever pretend that I understand the male brain all the time (or even most of the time), it is because it is what it is that makes me attracted to men. And while you sit there and criticize women for thinking like women, the truth is… the way we think and talk and look and act are all part of why you probably don’t go a day without thinking about women (or at least one special one).

    And Alex, actually, in the early stages, a fetus receives only female hormones… in later stages, the actual sex of the fetus is determined by a change in hormones that makes it either male or female.

  8. Okay, came back to this one… What interests me is that you mention a woman’s thought process becomes ‘more female’ during the ‘female’ hormone influx associated with pre-menstruation, and they perform more poorly in ?male? oriented tasks. It took scientific study to figure that out? Every guy has known this since Eve threw the apple at Adam. I do agree with all your points however. The one corollary you missed is that since WOMEN are the volatile ones who can?t control the fluctuations in their thought processes every month, maybe Chris is right and they all are just crazy? Thank goodness MEN aren?t slaves to a hormone like you guys are :-) Then where would the human race be?

  9. Seriously. Can you imagine if we had a woman president, the rest of the world would be wondering each day if there were going to be on the victim of a hormone induced invasion, because the cost of their shoes or makeup went up.

  10. You make it sound like women are incapable of being anything more than slaves to their hormones and have little perception beyond reacting to how much materialistic items cost… despite what you think… it’s the differences between women and men that make them compatible and give us that drive to be with someone of the opposite gender. Christopher’s “woman hating” really does get old. As a woman, I enjoy being one, and it’s sad that you feel we should all be like you. As a matter of fact, I have a feeling that if we were, you wouldn’t fall all over yourselves doing everything in your power to try to make us happy. So think women are crazy if you want… or have a little tolerance beyond your own limited little world and realize that not only do women and men think differently because of hormones, but there’s nothing wrong with it. And quite frankly, if you can’t figure that out… then you’re either stupid or your machismo is so in the way of your ability to open your mind, you might be better off with a little more estrogen and a little less testosterone.

  11. Ahh,
    Accept once men realize that a happy woman is an impossiblity.. we eventually just give up and accept our fate. I don’t hate women.. I love women! Women are good for all kinds of things that women contribute to society. I can think of four right off the top of my head.. (breakfast, lunch, dinner and sex..) now if anybody thinks they can expand on that list good luck!

  12. And he wonders why women just aren’t so happy with him…???

    I’ll let you in on a secret… keeping a woman happy is easy. Treat her with respect, and she’ll be your’s forever. :-)

  13. You’re right… I’m sure there are women who leave relationships that were good and where they were being treated with respect. But there are also women who stay and try to work it out when their guys aren’t being all that nice to them… and there are men who bail out of 25 year marriages to be with younger woman, and there are those who love their wives and never cheat or want to leave. The key is finding the right person I guess, but trying to generalize about it will probably make you look like an ass because I can always find an example to prove the theory wrong.

  14. well i am going to sum all this up….. men don`t understand women and admit it by saying they are crazy. While women think they know men and go about trying to change them (and the women go off on there mental times of the month).

  15. So Kyle… how exactly does “Women are just crazy” equate to “I don’t understand women”? Funny how a man’s way of admitting one of his own incompetencies turns into deciding someone else must have the character flaw. LOL!

  16. hmm well i may be incompetent but i am quite certain that i do not have incompetencies…. but who cares about spelling… well let`s see how about alaskan crab fishermen. now they must be crazy right? to risk all their lives for a quick pay day…. but to them you`d be crazy not to.. so the term crazy just depends on your point of view. We don`t know how to justify a woman`s actions so we think they must be crazy… even though other women think that they are just acting normal

  17. Anyone with at least a pea of a brain in their head would read this exchange and have to logically conclude hands down that Christine has the much better argument.

  18. “Anyone with at least a pea of a brain in their head would read this exchange and have to logically conclude hands down that Christine has the much better argument.”

    But anyone with at least a normal size brain would agree with Christopher.

    This reminds me of an old sexist joke:
    Why does the doctor slap babies when they’re born?
    To knock the penes off the stupid ones.

  19. Christopher my dear,It’s okay.all of this pressure is leaving you in a bit of a situation,so you keep on repeating the same thing.Poor little insecure sexist you. Atleast women can think of more to say. In our world,speech and thought is what shapes us,not baseball or golf. As a man,i appreciate women in every sense of the word,and realise that they are far more complex than us.thats what makes them so beautiful. i think that it is only those who are insecure with themelves that view the opposite sex as inferior.

  20. i can’t believe that someone would actually pen that women are stupid and crazy! that is almost offensive! woman will always have more intelligence than men! they will just never use it until after they go psychotic and jump to the wrong conclusion first! i however will happily leave my name because every woman that i degrade and turn into a whore is my next example of proof to my theory! all except christine ofcourse ;-) , love ya baby

  21. For a gender that has been described as stupid, crazy, and psychotic, we sure seem to have a lot of power of you boys. The things guys have done to try to get my attention/affections/pussy took an unbelievable amount of planning and effort.

    I find it interesting that guys (at least on this blog) feel this way about women. Most women that I know– not all, but most– have a lot of respect for men in general. The things that make us hot for them are the things that are unique to men… their bodies, their voices, their strength, the way they approach situations which are many times, very different from the way we do it. Most women love being around men. I think there is a balance achieved for us when we are in the presence of testosterone. And I think “inferiority” is subjective. You can look at the opposite sex and think they are inferior because they, for example, aren’t as strong as you are and can’t lift as much weight. Or… you can look at the opposite sex and appreciate that they are soft and slender and aren’t packed with muscle (unless you’re gay). You’re in charge of how you want to see things, and I suppose we all choose what we think serves us best.

  22. Christine
    Your statements are flawless, enlightening and entertaining. Your points well written and Immaculately clear. If it is respect that you seek Madam you have it!!!

  23. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    Geez, what a suck-up! ;)

    As a rule (well, MY rule), neither ethnicity nor gender makes one inferior. You may very well have encountered numerous Asians, Hispanics, African-Americans, Caucasians, men, women or ___________ (fill in your personal bias choice here) which you feel are inferior, but that perception is usually based on your limited exposure to, or your unreasonable expectations of, that particular group.

    For example: 60-65 years ago, most Americans felt Germans and Japanese were ALL evil little miscreants. With the benefit of time and mass communications, we now see that NOT all Germans were actively supportive of the Holocaust, nor were all Japanese aware of the death marches. Furthermore, history shows us that Japan *probably* intended for their declaration of war to be delivered prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor — the single event which galvanized Americans’ distrust of all things Japanese for the next 25-50 years.

    In short, judge individuals’ (or perhaps small group) actions, not entire classes of people.

  24. Only 3 types of people ‘declare war’… The British, the losers and Bugs Bunny… And technically the third ain’t a people… If’n I’m gonna wage war on sump’in, I ain’t lettin’ on ’till the very last second…

  25. Well PJ… Looks like it’s just you and me against the world here bro… Well, Mike’s not going to be much help hiding in Christine’s butt ;)

    I left this one alone ’cause Christine was jumping all over the place with her so-called argument… Starting off all scientifical with chromosomes, mental abilities, reasoning etc… And then boiling down to physical attraction based on “their bodies, their voices, their strength, the way they approach situations”…

    Fact is, and I quote little Joseph, in Kindergarten Cop… “Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina!”… This is what drives all men to conform to whatever insipid frivolity waxes forth from womens’ rarely closed mouths…

    Even Christine’s last statement outlined this… “For a gender that has been described as stupid, crazy, and psychotic, we sure seem to have a lot of power of you boys. The things guys have done to try to get my attention/affections/pussy took an unbelievable amount of planning and effort.

    I find it interesting that guys (at least on this blog) feel this way about women. Most women that I know– not all, but most– have a lot of respect for men in general.” …to adjust the correctness of this, one would only have to do the following:
    “For a gender that has been described as stupid, crazy, and psychotic, we sure seem to have a lot of power over you boys. The things guys have done to try to get my attention/affections PUSSY took an unbelievable amount of planning and effort.

    I find it interesting that guys (at least on this blog) feel this way about women. Most women that I know– not all, but most– have a lot of respect for men in general… After they realize that when they’ve finished polishing up that ‘diamond-in-the-rough-of-a-man-they-found’ that all they were left with was a sweaty brow, finger-cramps, and a smaller, shinier rock, of no real greater value to anyone… Other than ANOTHER woman… Once they’ve smartened -up and realized that men are beautifully simplistic, ergonomic and superior creatures who will only suffer and regress when confined by the limits of female logic”…

  26. (c) The last comments were pretty predictable but I must admit the number of syllables surprised me. Comming from you single guys( surprise ) dosn’t really hold much weight.

  27. Oh boy, Mike… you have no idea what you just walked into. Prophet Joe (surprisingly enough) has a hot wife that’s much younger than he is… and Trouble, well… the name says it all.

  28. I guess he must be rich!…………………………That was uncalled for. My appologise Joe.

    Incidently I am part of a small group, some of them young men newly married and we are disscussing and I guess if you will studying the female heart. In partnership, the ladies are attempting to study male heart. We are using 2 books appropriately named ” for men only” and for women only. Both appear so far as excellent and endorsed for the most part by both groups. In the beginning some of the young men referred to women as emotionally unstable, illogical, unscientific etc.
    I presented your article along with it’s blog history and I dont mind telling you they were shocked and humbled by your reaction to attacks. What was most interesting and I think you might find the same is- a young lady like yourself goes against their perceptions and presents something logically, concise and scientific based and the MALE reaction to this result in anger induced attacks and the need to resort to petty insult (not all I might add ). As I continued to read down, in order, I see and hear within our group an anticipation of your response. In short ( Too late for that I guess ) I heard comments like “Ohh Noo she is gonna explode!!!” I read your final response DEC.10 2006. It remained calm, accurate and actually complimentary to men in sections. There was silence in the room as if they were expecting more. Come on where is the attack back when does she lose it. Didnt happen. There are a few young men with a whole new opinion forming about the female heart and mind. It begs the question, who is emotionally unstable? Anyways, sucking up is not my intent rather it is to broaden my genetically closed mind. Once again my applologise to my attack on some of the men in this blog for my comments. They were out of line and actually there was some excellent humor in some of the response and at least they took the time to read your article and respond.

    Peace and thanks to all for the great material

  29. Wow, Mike’s a suck-up AND he’s using us as research subjects — this blog has sunk to a new low!!!
    ;)

    Seriously (yes, Christine, I can be serious – it’s just that I normally opt not to be when I’m here), it is true. I’m in my mid 40′s, have 3 great kids and am married to an incredibly hot (let alone, wonderful) wife who is about 12 years younger than I.

    I must now reiterate and expand upon my earlier comment:

    As a rule, neither ethnicity nor gender makes one inferior.

    It is a natural (or perhaps you’d prefer, “scientific”) fact that women are different than men. If you look at group stereotypes, you could easily say many women are naturally maternal and this leads to them wanting to “mother” their men and mold them into “better men”. Likewise, many men are simplistic in their social skills and come across as uncaring (when really it is inexperience that is the problem). In terms of a stereotype, I suppose it is reasonable (albeit foolish) to say that women nag their men and men take their women for granted.

    If, however, you look at the individuals you see a different dynamic at work — Individual women may act crazy during their period, or they may act crazy during 2-3 periods in the last 24 months — that does NOT mean all women are crazy during their periods! Likewise, individual men are not typically slow and simplistic as women might have you believe — well, except for Mike the suck-up…

    OK, that’s where I just quit being serious again ;)

    Oh, and Mike, one more thing — don’t take EVERYTHING you read here to be factual or honest. I’ll admit I sometimes play the devil’s advocate and I’m not certain, but I’m pretty sure that others do too. Hell, there was even a rumor that Christopher wasn’t a man at all, but was really Christine’s lesbian lover playing an alter ego online, but I don’t want to go into that whole mess again. I wouldn’t want t0 malign the person who started THAT thread…

    Cheers! (b)

  30. Mike said: “…studying the female heart. In partnership, the ladies are attempting to study male heart. We are using 2 books appropriately named ” for men only” and for women only.

    Of course the book about women is a 42 volume set and the book about men is 42 words long! ;)

  31. You’re all completely insane. I started reading this thread and really wanted to respond to some stupid things that were said, then by the time I got to the end of it there were just too many. I would have needed 3 hours to respond to everything stupid said by both sexes/sides, and no one statement stood out more idiotic then the other, all I can really say without wasting half my day is that it all was complete horse sh*t. I really hope some of you are not this stupid, but it doesn’t surprise me. Good luck.

  32. Geez, do they inundate you with Ditech commercials in the Cayman Islands too??

    I thought that was a private, American burden we were forced to bear by ourselves — hell, for that matter, I thought the Cayman Islands were supposed to be paradise.

    Well, it almost 2:00.. time for a (d)

  33. Males and females are indeed different, and it’s a wonderful system of difference.

    As a previous user mentioned, our differences provide a balance that allow the survival of our species. Females are not so much inferior as they are generally suited to certain tasks, like empathetic reasoning, nurturing, and child rearing. Males generally exhibit more dominant character traits, mentally and physically. This is why Males have pretty much made the rules for thousands of years in our species. The modern world has brought about a new age of “the eroticization of equality,” in which we are striving to “liberate” females of their natural roles, but I suspect certain species-typical traits between our sexes will be difficult to erase in the long run.

    Are women crazy? Only when socially pressured to be something they’d rather not be. (u)

  34. If men generally make the rules… then it must be men who want prostitution to be illegal.

    I think Mael is right in the sense that many men don’t see value in “empathetic reasoning, nurturing, and child-rearing.” And they tend to devalue women who bring those inherently feminine qualities to the workplace. For example, the study they just did on women who get raises and promotions. In short, women who “act” like men and approach problems without empathetic reasoning, are promoted faster and make more money.

    Men don’t understand how women think, so it makes life much easier for them if women don’t “act” like women and instead “act” like men. Then they know how to deal with them and life is easy and good.

    Because of that, I think a lot of women are sort of forced to let go of who they are and how they would inherently think and approach issues– and while it may get them ahead in their jobs, it doesn’t necessarily allow them to be who they are. I mean, if we made men act more like women, most straight men are probably smart enough to figure out how to do it, but they wouldn’t feel comfortable.

    I don’t think it’s that women want to necessarily be housewives as Mael was sort of suggesting. It would be great if women could go out in the world and do whatever they want to do for a career, and not have to compensate and prove to men that they are worthy by denying some of the inherently feminine qualities they have. We’re just not there yet, in my opinion.

    Some men are much more aware of this and accepting than others, but as this blog post proves, there are still many who find it easier to just assume women are crazy than understand that they inherently think differently.

  35. “If men generally make the rules… then it must be men who want prostitution to be illegal.”

    Of course… Well… Not so much illegal, as government regulated to keep the prices down…

  36. I was thinking of prostitution more broadly — you know, that at the end of the day, women barter for things, love, affection, etc with sex. Or at least, that is a theory I’ve heard from some who are argue that most women are prostitutes. Although for the women who truly enjoy sex, this theory probably doesn’t work.

  37. Our generation’s own feminine mystique.

    But I think I meant to say desire sex as much rather than enjoy. Or not. I was at a slumber party some months back — it was a mentoring effort for teenage girls by the young adults at the church I attend. On the topic of sex, several of the women expressed that it was no big deal, that it was nice but nothing to write home about, etc. I can admit it. I was quite aghast. I thought “My god, what kind of sex are you people having?” Maybe these are examples of repressed Christian women. Maybe I’m just a closet freak who thinks every woman should be able to point to a great sexual experience in her life. But I have heard of many women at least not enjoying the sex they’re getting for whatever reason yet they still feel compelled to put out.

  38. “Are women crazy? Only when socially pressured to be something they’d rather not be.”

    “Like a housewife.”

    Or a another poster girl clone conditioned by social trends to advance the agenda of the “strong, ruggedly individualistic and empowered woman”—hear her roar!

    :[

  39. Did someone just lose their job to a woman???

    You know it’s kind of interesting though that there are men out there (like Christopher) who actually LIKE being with someone who is strong, ambitious, individualistic. He not only supports me being that way, but encourages it. When I feel beat down at work, he tells me to buck up and keep kicking ass. I think he also likes that I have my own life and my life doesn’t revolve around him.

    I’m not saying women should be housewives or not be housewives. I think women should do what truly makes them happy whether it’s advance the agenda of empowered, career-oriented women or find fulfillment staying home and raising their kids. Who are we to criticize either choice– as long as it’s her choice and she’s not giving up something she wants because she’s married to someone like Mael or feels she has to go out and work when she’d really rather be at home with her family.

    When I was working at a health club, I knew a woman who had quit her job to stay home with her baby and despite that’s what she thought a good mother should do, she was miserable. She was wound so tight and she always came in looking totally frazzled. One day she burst into tears because one of the women in the babysitting room gave her some unsolicited advice about how to get her son to sit down when it was time to eat. I can tell you, she was literally going crazy because she was trying to be something that didn’t fulfill her. On the other hand, I’ve seen women stop working and raise kids and be completely happy doing it. I’ve also known a couple of men who quit their jobs to take care of the kids and their wives continued to work– and they didn’t have any complaints.

    Mara: With regards to the repressed Christian women— that’s interesting. Maybe they were just trying to downplay it so the virgins wouldn’t think they’re missing out on something and then go get pregnant? I will say (I know I’ve told this story before) that there was a time in my life with ex-fiance where I did not want to have sex with him– I just really didn’t enjoy it anymore. It wasn’t about sex so much as there were so many things bothering me about our relationship that I just wasn’t attracted to him anymore. Maybe some of the women are in such a rut with their husbands or boyfriends that they’re experiencing that.

    I also do think (and we’ve all discussed this before) that it can be hard for women to know how they should fit in to the angel/whore thing. If they choose “angel,” they feel a little threatened by women who enjoy and want sex… if they choose “whore,” they feel like hypocrites in trying to live a Christian lifestyle.

    Or… like you said, maybe their guys just need a lesson in female anatomy 101.

  40. Christine:

    “I think Mael is right in the sense that many men don’t see value in “empathetic reasoning, nurturing, and child-rearing.” And they tend to devalue women who bring those inherently feminine qualities to the workplace.”

    I never said that, but you are an inventive soul…

    The Straw Man ;)

  41. Sorry to be misleading. I meant… you are right in that women inherently have those qualities. I was adding my own opinion (from my own experience) when I added that most men typically don’t see value in those qualities.

    To set the record straight… that is my opinion, not yours. Trust me when I say, our opinions are dissimilar in every way.

    By the way, Mael… your site http://www.humbledfemales.com, is quite the interesting read. Creepy, but interesting nonetheless.

    Here’s a little sample from the site…

    “Our philosophy is centered around a simple, albeit unfasionable notion in mordern day society: that the female is meant to submit and defer to her male counterpart—that she is, by her very nature, a slave to the man who keeps her.”

    Thank God the philosophy of the site is not centered around correct spelling. LOL.

    Okay, back on a serious note. Could you clear something up?

    You said in this thread: “Females are not so much inferior as they are generally suited to certain tasks, like empathetic reasoning, nurturing, and child rearing.”

    But your site says… “Likewise, we support Male superiority, allowing men the freedom to be Men, and to use their strength and natural leadership instincts to shape their females and inspire loyal servitude.”

    Call it my inferior feminine mind, but those two things sort of seem to… oh what’s that really hard word I always hear men using???… Oh yeah… “conflict.”

  42. Christine, you may be right. I definitely think some Christian women (having been one myself once upon a time) feel a certain tension if you will when it comes to sexuality. And these probably were not the best examples of women to use since based on other conversations where teenage girls were not involved, my impression is that they’ve never been fucked right.

    On to other topics, my jab at the housewife went right to what you said — women, people really, should be allowed to do what makes them happy, whether that’s choosing to have a career, staying home and raising your babies or doing both!

  43. “You said in this thread: “Females are not so much inferior as they are generally suited to certain tasks, like empathetic reasoning, nurturing, and child rearing.”

    But your site says… “Likewise, we support Male superiority, allowing men the freedom to be Men, and to use their strength and natural leadership instincts to shape their females and inspire loyal servitude.”

    Call it my inferior feminine mind, but those two things sort of seem to… oh what’s that really hard word I always hear men using???… Oh yeah… “conflict.””

    There’s really no conflict in this at all. Many of us (and I include my own life experience) have lived productive and harmonious lives under this philosophy. The key word in the text you quoted is inspire. THAT is what many men fail to do, unfortunately. And…thanks for the plug. Spelling errors and all (now fixed, thanks). ;)

  44. My pleasure– you are quite welcome for the plug. One of my many purposes in life is to eradicate the blogosphere of poor spelling practices. Just kidding… but we certainly do welcome alternative viewpoints on this site and our regular readers (me and Chris included) enjoy debating issues such as this one (you obviously realize that if you’ve spent any time on our site).

    I did read the part about the inspiration. It wasn’t lost on me. But two questions remain…

    1. You never answered the first about how “supporting Male superiority” and saying “Females are no so much inferior” are not hypocritical. Instead, you sort of skirted the issue (no pun intended) and tried to focus on inspiration.

    2. Doesn’t female submission inherently suggest that the female submit prior to being “inspired” by the male to submit? If one must wait for inspiration, then they are making a choice at the point in time they wish to submit, and the ability to make that choice suggests free will. Free will is the opposite of submission, so I’m not sure I understand that whole concept.

    I’m not saying you can’t live a harmonious life under this philosophy, but I do see that for many, choosing a lifestyle of submission (whether you’re male or female) is a way to “escape” from the difficulties and pressures associated with making decisions and accepting the responsibility for the outcome of those decisions on some level. By allowing someone to control you, you essentially put all decisions in their hands, freeing you of the pressure and work needed to “create” your own destiny and accomplish things on your own. I can certainly see how that might be liberating on some level. But it’s not that much different than someone who decides to escape through drugs and alcohol (no offense, Trouble ;-) ). An addict gives his life away to alcohol, and when he is high or drunk, he can escape from making decisions. The person who cares about the addict and supports that behavior is engaging in co-dependency. The men who choose to control a woman’s life either for their own benefit or because she wants to engage in that lifestyle is creating a codependency as well.

  45. Saying that women are not inferior yet claiming male superiority is not a conflict? You can’t have it both ways, Mael. Or can you? (See other discussion re: cake).

    Speaking of cake, I’m considering 3-tier wedding cake with each layer a different flavor. I went to a bakery yesterday and the choices were endless. I still think we should elope…

  46. Christine, your second question reminded me of this cult I was in, albeit briefly. God, I’ve lived a lifetime in my 27 years…ANYway, total female submission was obviously one of the tenets of this group and there was definitely the view that women were to submit regardless of desire or inspiration. While I don’t think this is true for all men who embrace this philosophy, these men were dissatisfied with their own lives and wanted someone or something to control. Yes, they would couch it in “spiritual” language and whip out a Bible verse or two (Paul being the favorite, of course). Yet it was so obvious that these guys were not the “leaders” in the world, that they felt emasculated and controlling “their” women was how they regained self-respect which in turn led me to having absolute no respect for any of them.

    And again, I do not think all men who advocate this philosophy get their kicks by controlling other people. I have some friends that live this way. I don’t get it, but if that’s what works for their family, hey, that’s what works for them. I just question the wisdom in basing intimate relationships on power and control and whether it is ultimately healthy for either of the parties involved.

  47. Christine (the Lioness),

    In our chosen way of life, we support and promote male superiority, but we readily acknowledge it’s not for everyone. Within the non-religiously based tenets of our lifestyle, we do practice this way of thinking, but recognize diversity. The site says it better than I…

    “We understand there is seldom, if ever, a single road to accomplishing anything in bioevolutionary terms, but we should not, at the height of our contemporary vanity and pride, denigrate or outright ignore the wisdom of a species-typical system that has worked for us…”

    That is to say, we are open to new ideas, but choose to embrace a male dominant/female submissive lifestyle, because it works, and works well.

    Your drug addict analogy is interesting. There is certainly an element of addiction and co-dependency inherent in such an imbalanced power structure, but one could say this about many things in life, if one looks deeply enough. I prefer to look at the authority structure as a symbiosis, not an evil plot of codependency for its own sake. Ironically, many women find freedom in submission to men. We advocate this path only if one is sure of it.

    Mael (The Virgin)

    P.s. I think not…

  48. It’s interesting that you use the words “contemporary vanity” that is obviously a step in that bioevolutionary system that seems to have worked for so long. By ignoring that we have come to this point through that system, aren’t you doing exactly what you suggest you aren’t doing? Ignoring it?

    BTW… was there a reason you didn’t answer the question I asked when Mara re-asked it the second time?

    And is there a reason you avoided answering the second question I asked about it taking free will to decide if you’re inspired enough to be submissive?

    The truth is… there is no answer to that question that you could give that wouldn’t contradict the statement about inspiration (my guess as to why you are avoiding it).

    “Your drug addict analogy is interesting. There is certainly an element of addiction and co-dependency inherent in such an imbalanced power structure, but one could say this about many things in life, if one looks deeply enough.”

    That is not, of course, to suggest that because it can be said about many things in life, that it is healthier than say the lack of addiction and co-dependency, is it?

    I realize you’re not trying to put your beliefs off on anyone, but you do seem to be avoiding certain questions. And be assured, I certainly don’t think that there are any “evil plots of codependency.” Codependence is a natural phenomenon that occurs when someone finds another person who will feed his/her dependency.

    Mara, I’m glad you got out of that. To be honest, it surprises me that someone as intelligent and logical as you are (and this may sound like a backhanded compliment, but it’s not intended to be) could get sucked into that even briefly. I know a few people who are in female submissive relationships under the pretense of religion as well– actually, I don’t really know them anymore. Friendships tend to disintegrate quickly when you have trouble relating to each other.

    I can understand the sexual aspect of submission. I mean, is there anything hotter than having a big, strong alpha male type on top of you, his fingers entwined in your hair, the ridge of his shoulder inches from your face… you can taste the salt from his sweat and smell just a trace of his cologne still clinging to his wet skin as his other hand pins your wrist above your head… the stubble on his face rubbing against your cheek as he slides into you, repeatedly whispering in that gruff, masculine voice in your ear, “You’re mine… I can do anything I want.” Damn, I love that. Ahhhhh. :-)

    On a primal level, female submission in sex can certainly be fulfilling and erotic. Beyond that, I’m not sure I get it. When children are young, and you ask them what they want to be when they grow up, they’ll tell you they want to be whatever is interesting them at the time– girls might say “ballerina,” “veterinarian,” “singer,” “doctor,” etc. They base their dreams, goals, aspirations on a forming identity. If you asked a little girl what she wanted to be and her answer was “nothing. I want to be a slave to a man and do nothing more than serve him,” I would guess most people would be stunned. Why? Because children (who are a natural product of bioevolution without being “tainted” by societal pressures yet) would never, ever say that. Giving up an identity is counter-intuitive to how the human mind works. Humans are constantly trying to find ways to set themselves apart from others– and it has nothing to do with pride, it has to do with our natural drive to be the best and individuate ourselves from first our parents, then our peers.

    Anyway… that’s all I have to say about that right now.

    Mara, the three-tiered cake will be great regardless. Why is the whole wedding planning thing stressing you out so much? I think you should enjoy it. If you are one of the lucky 40% of people in this country, you’ll never have to do it again. :-)

  49. Christine, I don’t think it was a matter of intelligence or logic. I think when people are looking for something, they find it and will do anything to hold onto it. I wasn’t quite that extreme. I was fairly religious at the time, was looking for a church and they didn’t present themselves as a cult in any way. And when I realized what it was, I left. It was an interesting experience and though it was extreme, I realized some years and several churches that the Christian religion by its own terms (not spirituality or even faith) requires a person to surrender their rationality to some extent. They have to. How else could they believe that 2,000 years ago someone was raised from the dead when everything they know about the natural world says that it is physically impossible? They’ve never observed anyone coming back from the dead yet they believe it happened. Yet, if someone today were to say they witnessed something like that, many of us would be suspicious, we wouldn’t believe it.

  50. Oh boy… I think you just found something Christopher could go off for HOURS about… ;-) He’s been going through an increasingly anti-religion stage lately.

    I have to agree with you though, Mara, and I can completely understand that it’s natural to look for something “more” and that drive often brings people to religion (or in some cases– those who would like to corrupt religion for their own gain). But the intelligence part is a factor because ultimately it was your reasoning and rationale that made you recognize it was a cult.

    By the way… Christopher and I recently saw “Jesus Camp.” It’s a very interesting documentary about Evangelism and the Christian “right.” Christopher and I both found it to be disturbing. The “religious experiences” they manufacture for their children are borderline child abuse if you want my opinion.

  51. One must feel faith, not rationalize it. If Christian doctrine is correct (which I believe) then our (mere mortal) brains cannot comprehend the omnipotence of His existence…

  52. PJ, I totally agree. That is, with people feeling faith, not Christian doctrine being correct. I think ultimately for me, I have a problem with using faith to make historical arguments instead of theological ones and I believe Christianity attempts to do both. To say that something is historically true requires the introduction of rationality into the equation. You do not *feel* history. In my own views, if there is a god, I question any one religion’s ability to comprehend or explain that god.

  53. I might propose that there is one “God” and that all religions are worshiping (or attempting to, anyway) the same deity.

    The discourse comes from human ‘interpretation’ of the Deity. For example, the Catholic Church says the Pope is God’s representative on earth (ok, I’m not Catholic and that’s painfully obvious [by now] to the Catholics amongst us, but this is meant to be a loose definition) — if that were the case, and if the Pope had Jesus’ ear, so to speak, why wouldn’t he have used all of the Church’s vast millions and put in on the Giants to win? Then the Pope could have used the winnings to eliminate poverty!

    Why didn’t he? Because, when the “church” (and I didn’t capitalize it for a reason, I mean any organized religious structure, not just the Roman Catholic Church) starts interjecting politics and dogma into the argument, then reasoning flies out the window.

    The CHURCH teaches us that the Bible is infallible. We know it was written by mortals and we know they changed it over time, so how can it be divine? On the other hand, people used to say that the Great Flood was just a story told to get the masses in line (through fear and intimidation), but there is some scientific evidence to suggest that it really happened…

    On the other hand (is this the third hand??), what about the dinosaurs. Why did they become extinct? Was it a massive cosmic event which changed the atmospheric climate?? Or were they practicing sodomy on the little dinosaurs, and thus felt the wrath of the Lord, ala Sodom and Gomorrah?

    Just my 2 :[ worth for today

    (btw, I’m co-opting the bat to also represent a penny or “cent”)

  54. I see we finally found a subject PJ is interested in. I agree with you, Mara. I see a definite distinction between faith/spirituality and religion. Religion can be easily corrupted — and those who want to corrupt it and use it to control gravitate to it like sleazeballs gravitate to selling used cars.

    And the Bible was written by man and therefore is not infallible. Anyone who has spent any time writing (and I say this honestly since I make a living doing exactly that) will tell you that words are easily manipulated, misinterpreted, and even in their purest form don’t adequately represent the thoughts they are trying to convey. They are the best representation we have, but they certainly don’t keep even the simplest notions from being misinterpreted.

    PJ… how can you devalue a bat like that? They are worth much more than pennies…

  55. Christine, Re: the infallibility of the Bible, we’d of course have to agree on what Bible we’re even talking about (e.g., the Catholic canon) or if any bible will do.

    PJ, I have always found the concept of biblical infallibility interesting because I do not think (nor did I when I was a Christian) it is required to have a sound and true faith. If divine means that a text was inspired of god or inspired by the writer’s own revelations concerning god, then it is certainly possible to have a divine bible that is fallible.

  56. “Christine, Re: the infallibility of the Bible, we’d of course have to agree on what Bible we’re even talking about (e.g., the Catholic canon) or if any bible will do.”

    But you’re missing my point. No bible is infallible because it is a written account of events and doctrine which is fallible (so it doesn’t matter which Bible specifically).

    I agree that a Bible is not necessary for faith or to be Christian, but to play devil’s advocate, those who use the Bible as “the word of God” (for example, born again Christians) cite that they do follow only the Bible’s teachings because the fallibility comes into play when people try to interpret it or base teachings on only part of it while discounting the other parts. My personal opinion is that there is very little difference between the two and it is inevitable that a book written even one hundred years ago (let alone two thousand years) will include elements that are no longer relevant or interpreted the way they would have been by the culture at the time they were written.

  57. Christine, I wasn’t saying that the bible isn’t necessary for Christian faith. I just don’t think a Christian necessarily has to believe in biblical infallibility. I also think that whether the bible is theologically infallible and whether it is historically are two different discussions. That the bible would include elements that were no longer relevant would not necessarily take away from its theological infallibility.

  58. Our decision is one of choice in the light that much of what is going on in society causes a lot of confusion and tension between the sexes. Western modernity has allowed us the luxury of confusing our “gender” roles. Will the current direction of society and all its inherent social experimentation stand the test of time? We shall see.

    “And is there a reason you avoided answering the second question I asked about it taking free will to decide if you’re inspired enough to be submissive?”

    We openly advocate women having a right to choose the men they serve. We do not see women as brainless automatons that simply obey men without question, nor do we want them to be. We do, however, believe most women are naturally suited to submissive roles in how they relate to men. We believe in encouraging and shaping their submission intelligently, as well as diffusing knowledge and understanding in men about what makes them worth following.

    “And be assured, I certainly don’t think that there are any “evil plots of codependency.” Codependence is a natural phenomenon that occurs when someone finds another person who will feed his/her dependency.”

    Agreed. And on that basis, we can see many examples throughout society in which this phenomenon applies. No one reading this message board is free of dependency, really. I’m certain I don’t need to itemize everyday examples of that. What is “healthy” and what isn’t in this vein becomes quite relative.

    “On a primal level, female submission in sex can certainly be fulfilling and erotic.”

    And it can be far more so when it is undertaken mentally and spiritually, as well as sexually.

  59. Women are crazy because they don’t think the Bible is infallible…

    sorry, just offering a counter balance to Mael Diabolus’ sex rant — wait a minute, I LIKE sexually submissive women… and sexually aggressive women… and tight wet women (I thought I’d beat Trouble to the punch[line])
    ;)

  60. “Western modernity has allowed us the luxury of confusing our “gender” roles.”

    Or the luxury of choosing them as individuals. As I said, freedom of choice brings responsibility. The interest in finding away to avoid responsibility by handing over both responsibility and freedom of choice, certainly says something about the individual who wants to do that.

    But that’s okay… some of us were born to lead and others were born to follow. I just don’t think that necessarily has to do with whether you were born with a penis or a vagina as much as it has to do with your individual ambition and drive.

    Being all for women to choose whatever role they want to take, I obviously have to accept and encourage this submission as a possible choice if it truly makes them happy. My only worry about that is that having had many different relationship experiences myself, I can tell you that it’s incredibly fulfilling to find a man who is literally your best friend, your biggest supporter, someone who understands and respects you as the equal feminine half to his masculine half. And if there are women who have experienced that fulfillment in a relationship and still continue to choose submission, that’s all well and good. If they choose submission because they haven’t found that man yet and experienced true equality in a relationship, then I do feel sorry for them. But not that sorry, because like an alcoholic has the choice to take a drink or not, these women have the choice to not engage in this type of relationship.

  61. “If they choose submission because they haven’t found that man yet and experienced true equality in a relationship, then I do feel sorry for them. But not that sorry, because like an alcoholic has the choice to take a drink or not, these women have the choice to not engage in this type of relationship.”

    Submissive women who choose to wholly submit without exploring all the options are like alcoholics who can’t kick a bad habit? Once again, this logic doesn’t carry over very well to a lot of things in life. We all have visceral preferences about certain things we like or want, sometimes to the exclusion of considering other options. In other cases, yes, exploration is healthy, but I wouldn’t lump those who are sure of their path into the category of “pitiful, codependent junkies who don’t know what they’re missing.”

    I do trust you have given yourself fully and completely as a slave to a man you love and admire, just so you could explore it fully to make an informed decision about what you want and like today? :d

  62. I see some inherent problems in any person (man or woman) submitting themselves wholly to another person as a slave.

    1. Whenever you give up your independent thought, you become easily exploited. It’s nice to believe that the men who are looking for “female slaves” are doing so because they want the women they’re with to be fulfilled in life, but I have a little trouble buying that. They want a slave. They want, like all “masters” throughout history, to have slaves do the things they aren’t willing to do– whether that’s a woman doing a man’s laundry or an African brought to the U.S. to pick cotton.

    And men who can’t really take care of themselves and want a slave to do it, aren’t likely to put out the effort it would take to give of themselves and fulfill a woman. They are in that relationship for themselves.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “inspiring loyal servitude.” If a guy pays a prostitute $100 for a blowjob, she’ll be inspired to give him a blow job. It doesn’t mean the woman is fulfilled in doing it– it just means the $100 served her need for money.

    The word “inspire” is where things go south I think. You “inspire” someone to want to be with you by treating them with respect. Slaves, by sheer definition of the word, are not respected by masters. A submissive person doesn’t have the luxury of standing up for herself if she’s being mistreated– doing so would make her, well, not submissive. So therefore, to say that the men inspire servitude implies the men have some responsibility to the slave, which again, by definition, they don’t. So that part, I don’t really understand. You suggest that the women have free will to choose this lifestyle, but by choosing the lifestyle, they’re giving up free will and could possibly be exploited by a man who couldn’t care less about her, but is simply glad he found someone who won’t complain about being mistreated, or worse yet, leave him.

    2. What happens to a woman who has devoted herself fully to being a slave and then her “master” decides to leave (via divorce, death, break up, whatever)? She has not done anything to help herself deal with that situation. Does she just quickly find whatever master she can who will enslave her? If she hasn’t worked or furthered her education because her previous master didn’t want her to, what does she do? I think we all have a responsibility to take care of ourselves and be self-sufficient people. For those who choose not to, I don’t feel too sorry for them when the master dumps them for someone else. They put themselves in that situation.

    For me personally, I can see the problems with signing over my identity and free will to someone else (whether it be a man, or a religion, etc.) and I certainly don’t need to try out a slave/master relationship to realize that (which I realize was your point that the slave women don’t need to try balanced power relationships to know what they want). But just as I have outlined two problems with slave/master relationships, I’m not sure what the “problem” is with being a self-sufficient woman.

  63. “And men who can’t really take care of themselves and want a slave to do it, aren’t likely to put out the effort it would take to give of themselves and fulfill a woman. They are in that relationship for themselves.”

    Speaking from experience, I know I can certainly take care of myself. I earn more than enough to live the type of lifestyle I want, and I am tremendously fastidious about my environmental aesthetics, personal health and social responsibility…and yet I enjoy having a woman serve me as obediently as a slave. Many men who do likewise are sufficient and self-actualized. I suppose it’s more comforting to envision the slovenly wifebeating troll in the position of “master” when the entire idea of personal subjugation to a man is so abhorrent. This tv-ish image doesn’t jive very well with the reality-based model, however.

    “Slaves, by sheer definition of the word, are not respected by masters.”

    Call it a hunch, but I suspect many who live this way of life would disagree with that comment. I know I do. It takes tremendous selflessness, understanding and strength to submit fully. The mastery we advocate recognizes this and harnesses its power fully.

    “What happens to a woman who has devoted herself fully to being a slave and then her “master” decides to leave (via divorce, death, break up, whatever)?”

    Based upon our community ideals, she is provided for in all circumstances, ideally. Outside of this, it is impossible to speak for all individuals involved and what they personally imagine or prepare for. Since we advocate accountability and responsibility in a master, it would be against our doctrine for a man to “dump” his female off at the local shelter.

    “But just as I have outlined two problems with slave/master relationships, I’m not sure what the “problem” is with being a self-sufficient woman.”

    We really have no wish to break out the black helicopters and declare a new world order for women. Humbledfemales.com has fulfilled a desire (the ethos of which is quite secular, btw) in many who wish to reject the increasingly popular trend of male bashing and gender bending in the media and social institutions of today. We offer an environment in which a woman can submit to a man without shame, scorn or mockery. We find these relationships create harmony between the sexes. Assumptions to the contrary by a wide and prevailing culture is why we have organized and supported each other.

  64. And of course harmony is created when one party isn’t allowed to voice opposition. That goes without saying, doesn’t it?

    “What happens to a woman who has devoted herself fully to being a slave and then her “master” decides to leave (via divorce, death, break up, whatever)?”

    “Based upon our community ideals, she is provided for in all circumstances, ideally. Outside of this, it is impossible to speak for all individuals involved and what they personally imagine or prepare for. Since we advocate accountability and responsibility in a master, it would be against our doctrine for a man to “dump” his female off at the local shelter. ”

    Just because something is “against a doctrine” doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. The problem here is that if it does happen, the woman who has not developed herself at the expense of submitting to a man, is kinda shit outta luck.

    From an intellectual standpoint, it makes no sense to do that. But I guess if it happens to them, it’s their own fault.

    We can of course disagree… but I think the most self-actualized men are not threatened by women or their degree of power in society or in a relationship. Self-actualized men don’t feel a need to respond to “male-bashing” or “gender-bending” because they’re not threatened by it. Self-actualized men retain their masculinity without needing to dominate anyone else and they know that their girlfriends, wives, etc. will stay with them not because she needs a man to submit to, but because he offers her the same things she offers him– companionship, sex, intellectual stimulation, loyalty, etc. That, of course, is my opinion and based on my 34 years of experience.

    Hey, if you’d rather have a slave to take care of you so that you don’t have to as opposed to having a true partner in your life, that’s your thing and as long as no one is being exploited in that situation, then go for it. I can’t say that I’m not a a part of that prevailing culture that “assumes the contrary” because I am. But I applaud your efforts here to educate us more about the type of lifestyle you’re a part of.

  65. Well, you all know I’m a firm advocate of CYA.

    I cannot relate to wanting to be anyone’s slave in any way, shape or fashion. Hell, I can’t even be a slave to a god.

  66. “Just because something is “against a doctrine” doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.”

    Well of course. I’m sure you’d agree rape, violence, and drunk driving accidents are against our societal doctrine too, but it happens anyway and will continue to do so. Meanwhile, we all live day to day, taking risks and hoping it won’t happen to us.

    It’s unfair to find the worst possible scenario that can occur in a system and dismiss it all based on the event scenario “X” might happen. Using that logic, we might as well all stay home and never drive our cars, walk through the neighborhood or exercise a risky stock option. We take lifestyle risks everyday that don’t make picture perfect intellectual sense, but we are driven by our wants and instincts to do something, so we do it.

    I would also add self-actualized men, being thus, will do as they wish, even if it goes against the grain. This may also involve dominating a woman and putting her in her place, even though it’s not “correct” to do so these days. And who says a dominant man cannot get companionship, love, sex and intellectual discourse from a submissive woman, or give it to her? Any woman that has served me has had these qualities in spades, and in my thirty-seven years of experience, they tend to be a cut above the crowd, intellectually speaking.

    So that sort of puts the “True Partner®” idea in a new light, in the very least.

    Thank you for the thanks. I applaud your efforts in applauding my efforts. This exchange has been fun, though I have this funny feeling you’ll insist on having the last word…
    ;)

  67. I cannot relate to wanting to be anyone’s slave in any way, shape or fashion. Hell, I can’t even be a slave to a god.

    Ahh, but TtP would willingly submit to being your sex slave ;)

  68. The last word? Well… this is MY site… and while you may own the women in your life, your “mastery” doesn’t apply here… And as you can tell, I’m far from the slave women who have any interest in submitting to you.

    With regards to your analogy about never driving because we could be in an accident, you’re choosing to use an example of things we can’t control. Yes, at any given time that I’m driving, someone could run a red light and kill me. But I cannot control that. I CAN control putting myself in a situation where I stack the cards against myself in a slave situation. There’s a definite difference there.

    I would like to say though that since you’ve had several slave women in your life… it seems that perhaps you didn’t follow your own doctrine and keep them as your slave forever, it seems that perhaps you aren’t following your own doctrine of taking care of all the needs of your slaves. Maybe you didn’t dump them off at the nearest shelter, but if a slave can’t count on her master to keep her (with of course the incredible amount of respect he has for her for submitting wholly, and be a part of this harmonious relationship), who can she count on really? Something to ponder…

    By the way, where is Ttp these days?

  69. “The last word? Well… this is MY site… and while you may own the women in your life, your “mastery” doesn’t apply here… And as you can tell, I’m far from the slave women who have any interest in submitting to you.”

    That’s quite alright; rest assured I have no interest. ;)

    The point is, we all take risks for our passions. Those who do not tend to lead boring lives.

    The relational philosophy in question does not guarantee “forever” for the slave. Forever is an illusion and all things are impermanent. But since you’re pondering, it may interest you to know the past women in my life haven’t spontaneously combusted. They are somehow still alive!

    (l)

  70. Present Miss Christine! I just couldn’t bring myself to jump back into this ‘debate’… I honestly think the only reason you’re still in it is because you have absolutely nothing better to do with Chris being so busy…

    Mael… While I applaud your ability to purportedly maintain your lifestyle …that which can never be more than a fantasy to the rest of us men, I can’t help but wonder why, if it is such a symbiosis, that you can actually claim that “the past women in my life haven’t spontaneously combusted. They are somehow still alive!” when it suggests that either you or they could no longer “jibe” with the terms of the relationship?
    Perhaps it is not that you experience any difficulty to “earn more than enough to live the type of lifestyle [you] want, and [you are] tremendously fastidious about [your] environmental aesthetics, personal health and social responsibility” …but can you separate your colours from your whites, cook your self a nice dinner and select a chaise-lounge upholstery that doesn’t clash with the curtains?

    A dog is a creature not without its good attributes, though being unable to achieve a percieved intelligence surpassing that of the average 2-year old child, it can never be respected as an equal being by a normal thinking adult human… When a man says he respects a dog, it is because he fears the unpredictable nature of the beast, not because he sees it as an equal. Truly respecting a creature that you do not view as an equal is a fallacy, and stating that position is little more than attempting to convince yourself that your position is far more noble than it actually is.

    Personally I feel that your attitude gives us misogynists everywhere a bad name… Outside of the sex-chair Christine just posted about, I would have no use for a woman who would even consider ‘subjugating’ herself to me in totality …and I don’t respect dogs either.

    You state “…companionship, love, sex and intellectual discourse from a submissive woman, or give it to her? Any woman that has served me has had these qualities” …There have been women who possessed these qualities you speak of “in spades” long before yours, Geisha were one such group, and I can assure you that serving their own interests came well before serving their men.
    Since you’re capable of dispensing such ethereal philosophy regarding relationships as “Forever is an illusion and all things are impermanent”, I don’t wonder how you became so self-aware, conversely I do how you managed to circumvent its encumbering your self-actualization…

    You see, Mike’s attitude didn’t “jibe” with mine because it takes the ‘metro-sexual, empathetic’ reasoning to the extreme …and your’s doesn’t “jibe” with mine because it takes the ‘masculine, dominant’ reasoning to the extreme… …people who take extreme attitudes do so because they are incapable/intolerant of seeing the three sides to every coin… The same way I have a problem with women who claim equality, yet can’t change their own car tire, I have a problem with men who claim superiority to women but who can’t change a baby’s diaper. Both inadequacies I use as example, stem from false beliefs based on poor attitude.

    Your rhetoric is impressive, and your debate is well rehearsed, unfortunately all the rehearsals in the world cannot help a script that is abysmally poor in its creation.

  71. I admire many (&) — they have many wonderful attributes (which far exceed most 2 year olds, I might add) such as loyalty, compassion, protectiveness, etc. I respect them for knowing their place in the pack (world).

    And for the record, both of my (&) are bitches.

    (d)

  72. I have found that the role a person (man or woman) takes in a relationship (be it in a one-on-one relationship or a group relationship) rarely has a direct correlation to the person’s intelligence.

  73. “When children are young, and you ask them what they want to be when they grow up…..”

    Along these lines.. but something that has very little to do with this conversation.. I pretty much heard the best response to this question ever on super bowl sunday. The exact questions was. Where are you going to go to college…? “USC” What are you going to study there? “Being a Princess”

  74. PJ – “One must feel faith, not rationalize it. If Christian doctrine is correct (which I believe) then our (mere mortal) brains cannot comprehend the omnipotence of His existence..”

    Statements like this make my brain hurt. This is the type of statement that is taught in “irrational arguing 101″ it is impossible dispute. It is designed to allow control through indisputable, unarguable statements. Of course if God as the Christian faith presents is real it would be incomprehensible because nothing and I do mean NOTHING about the religion makes actual sense.

    Omnipotent entity creates life, punishes life, promises of ever lasting life (which feeds naturally on our biggest fear), doesn’t do anything to actually promote the type of life that would earn savior other than to create a book to tell you to act a certain way (which happened to be created by humans), corrupt organizations are created around this promise of salvation, then at the end of the day there is simply no evidence that God cares to involve himself in day to day life, has ever cared to involve himself, that religions are anything more than a tool of manipulation and power mongering. The response to this… “Our meager. Our human minds cannot comprehend God’s existence or plan.”… Arrrrr.

    Lets not let children go to Church until age 18 and then we will see religions role in society.

  75. Mael… you’re back! :-)

    I think if you really read what he wrote, you’ll see it’s more than just a stream of consciousness.

    You do have to admit, Mael, that there are some inherent fallacies in your belief system (attack or no attack). For example, on your site, there’s an article suggesting that female slaves should control their weight and not be fat (for their master’s sake of course). While it helps to perpetuate the male fantasy which you are trying to make real (thin, fit slaves are more sexually attractive than overweight ones), you honestly can’t strip someone of their vanity and pride totally and then expect them to somehow care about how they look. It’s quite unfair for you to even compare women who have decided to forgo freewill and all the positive things that come with it to women who have chosen to do all the things that make women attractive because they do take pride in themselves– whether it be pride in their appearance, their accomplishments, their health or their relationships.

    Along with the other points Trouble made much more succinctly than I did, you can’t objectively look at that “system” without seeing where it falls apart. But if you are hell-bent on believing that your system is truly more harmonious and symbiotic than ours, an objective eye probably doesn’t serve your desire to believe that.

  76. Well, as per the usual, this thread tangented like the proverbial muthafucka…
    I meant to say this yesterday, but didn’t have time… My philosophy on this subject is actually that, “Any given woman has the potential to equal or even best any given man at any given task, and the same applies vice versa.” It all condenses to attitude… Potential alone does nothing.

    I have no doubt that Gina Carano would knock-me-the-fuck out inside 20 seconds, Sonia Thomas would out-eat me, Danica Patrick would out-drive me, etc…etc… and those would “typically” be considered things that a male [or the male-brained individual] would excel at.
    So as Christine originally hypothesized [from information she read], while her theory can “typically” apply, there will always be exceptions to the rule. The above women’s dominance in tasks that are “typically” associated with male behavior, is due to their attitude overcoming the opposing pressure that they are participating in events more “suited” to men.
    When a woman delves into a male dominated activity with the attitude that she has to prove to the world that a girl can do it just as well, or better than a guy, then she’s setting herself up for a very difficult, frustrating climb.
    I have noticed from watching many interviews with women who have reached great heights in activities that were previously male dominated, that they usually profess vast “love” for their activity from a young age, a competitive nature, and a supportive family who never hinted to them that they were doing something that wasn’t “suited” to their gender. Of course they would come to “realize” that themselves in time, but by then it was too late, the fuse had been lit.

    On the other side of the coin, there are men who excel at activities that are generally considered “feminine”… Like the aforementioned “empathetic reasoning, nurturing and child rearing”, home decorating, fashion etc… And some of them are even straight… Once again, an open attitude has allowed them to develop that side of their potential.

    On my side of the coin [which is the outside edge...] the lines that most people see are very blury.
    I know that my brain is mostly “male-oriented”, Every IQ test I was subjected to, outlined that my spatial-temporal skills were dominant, I have a curiosity about how everything works, I am an engineer by trade [and perhaps ironically, my boss is a woman], I enjoy “masculine” hobbies like working on my car, wave-runner racing, and darts …yet I realized long ago that I also had potential to excel at “feminine” things too, and I enjoy cooking, decorating my apartment, and can sew the most intricate Halloween costume from scratch.
    I am regularly asked by both men and women, if there “is anything that I can’t do?” …my reply is usually, “I’ll let you know as soon as I come across it…”

    However that is really a joke, because I have noticed that I am not very good with people. Meaning that I am very impatient, no good at nurturing peoples’ feelings at the expense of my own sanity, and although I can begin any relationship easily enough, I have difficulty maintaining it. It’s not that I can’t express myself clearly, that’s no problem, but I get frustrated when I realize that the person I’m expressing myself to really doesn’t care enough about what I’m expressing.
    I get weary of people very quickly, their attitudes towards other people & life in general are the main peeves.
    This is a noticeable [to me] shortcoming I have, and it is almost entirely based on my ‘developed’ ability to tackle any task, which stemmed from my attitude of wanting to know everything, regardless of the stigmas attached.

    Unlike certain men who think they’re superior to all women because they were lucky enough to be born with a penis, make more money than or are physically stronger than some women …I know I’m superior to many women, because of my attitude towards life. I acknowledge the many other women out there who would [and perhaps already] kick my ass at certain tasks, but I have yet to meet one who can even come close to matching me, in terms of diversity and competency over a vast range of talents …I do look forward to that meeting though.

    Now I know that is long-winded and sounds like I am “blowing my own horn”, but it’s not about that, I’m simply outlining that I always had the potential to excel over many women, and my attitude allowed me to exercise that potential to what I feel is a fruition. Every woman also has that potential to excel over men, it’s whether they chose to acknowledge it, and use it.

    That being said, I am a self-proclaimed misogynist, not because I hate or feel superior to all women, but because I mistrust them in general. I understand that women have been subjugated throughout history, and that has created an ingrained desire to “turn-the-tables” on men wherever they find the opportunity, but I disagree with the philosophy many women have, that they must prove superiority over men to win the war, I find it to be very counterproductive. I actually agree with Mael, that there are gender roles that actually make sense, and I have noticed that in recent history, the percieved abandonment of those gender roles is resulting in a deterioration of society in general, starting in the home.
    If you are a woman, and you feel you must pursue your career to CEO level in order to prove you are better than men, by-all-means shoot for the proverbial moon… but then you should not attempt to exercise your rights as a mother as well. There must be balance, and there are very few individuals who can handle both “jobs”. So unless your man is willing to accept the nurturing role in your home, and do it well, then you have to chose which path you are going to commit to, or settle yourself to the consequences you are creating… And those consequences extend outside yourself, and on into society.

  77. “If you are a woman, and you feel you must pursue your career to CEO level in order to prove you are better than men, by-all-means shoot for the proverbial moon… but then you should not attempt to exercise your rights as a mother as well. There must be balance, and there are very few individuals who can handle both “jobs”.”

    This seems counter to your statement that with the right attitude, women can, like you proclaim to be, good at balancing both traditionally feminine and masculine roles. I think there are plenty of men who are at a CEO level and after a divorce, don’t just readily give up custody of their children because they don’t feel they should have rights as a father as well. As a matter of fact, more and more men are actually taking an active interest (thank God) in raising their kids whereas even until the early 80s that task was primarily given to the mothers and the issue of custody after a divorce was a non-issue– the women got it.

    If a woman wants to pursue her career to CEO level, who are you to judge her on why she wants to do that? Do we judge men who do the same thing?

    There is of course, limited time in one’s day. If you spend 10 hours at work, that is of course 10 hours that you won’t be able to spend with your children– whether you’re male or female. That isn’t to say that one can’t be good at both. When I think of people I know who are truly great parents, one couple comes to mind. Both are CEOs and both spend all their free time with their daughter.

    I personally don’t think it’s that difficult to handle both. If you have the drive to make something work, chances are you will. When you’re forced into a situation where you’re doing something you don’t want to do– that’s when you feel “boxed in” and lose that drive. If achievements in career and being a good mother/father make one happy, the drive to do both with persist. The problem that many people get into is that they are forced to work because of finances when they’d really rather be home with their kids or they’re forced to stay home and take care of kids because they can’t afford child care when they’d rather be working. I find it amazing how many people “think” they want something other than they really do and then once they have it, realize they didn’t want it. I have known both kinds of women– those who should never have had kids because they are truly happier working, and those who it would certainly behoove not to have to work because they miss being with their kids when they’re working.

  78. Christine, any system or idea has its flaws, including the notion of sexual equality in all things, or “50/50″ relationships, and so on.

    “[...] you honestly can’t strip someone of their vanity and pride totally and then expect them to somehow care about how they look.”

    Per experience, you are quite incorrect in that assumption. You forget the other half of our message; perhaps due to focusing only upon the negatives.

    Thanks for the welcome back, btw! I was feeling unloved. (f)

  79. “I understand that women have been subjugated throughout history, and that has created an ingrained desire to “turn-the-tables” on men wherever they find the opportunity, but I disagree with the philosophy many women have, that they must prove superiority over men to win the war, I find it to be very counterproductive.”

    I have to disagree with that statement. The fact that my great grandmother, grandmother and maybe even mother have been subjugated throughout history really has no affect on me at all. I realize, as a woman, I can do many amazing things, but being able to live my life as an extension of theirs isn’t one of them. It’s the same with blacks who tout that they deserve something more than whites because their great-grandparents were enslaved. No they don’t. We can only react to what happens to us in our own lives. So I don’t think women try to turn the tables on men whenever given the opportunity. I can I assure that I personally, get nothing out of seeing a woman succeed over a man. But I do take issue when anyone automatically assumes a woman can’t or shouldn’t do something simply because she’s a woman. The problem with generalizing whether it be with regards to genders or ethnicities is that it takes away your ability to see someone as an individual and let them prove their own worth based on their own skill sets. I think women who go into situations trying to constantly prove they’re better than men are suffering from the same generalization problem you are. They assume– erroneously– that all men are out to get them and therefore, men are the enemy and must be “defeated.” They don’t go into a situation seeing men as individuals and then deal with the mysoginistic ones as they come to them– they tailor their behavior and responses as if all men are the same. And they’re not. Neither are all women.

    But until people can get past their “general mistrust” of the other sex for whatever reason they’ve assigned to make that justifiable, they won’t be able to see people for individuals and since our lives are no more than a series of dealing with individuals one after the other, it certainly helps us understand an individual better when we get past any preconceived notions and assess the best way to deal with them based on their own character traits.

  80. I don’t think feminism was always about turning the tables on men, so to speak (though a great deal of it today seems to be about just that). I think that a lot of women simply never wanted to be relegated to the role of mother and housewife in the first place but due to social pressures, had to. Or in some cases, simply would have liked to explore and develop other interests (for instance, in my maternal grandmother’s day where she lived, women did not have extra curricular activities outside of the home). To some extent one’s biological sex determines their gender role, i.e., females become mothers, males become fathers. I just disagree with the notion that one should be confined to that role. I don’t think a woman has to choose between mother and CEO. Of course, I think it’s much easier to determine if a woman is a good CEO than whether she is a good mother since the latter is entirely subjective and we all have our own ideas about what constitutes good mothering. My own personal opinion is that a lot of women impose impossibly high standards on themselves in both being mothers and CEOs and would probably be a lot happier if they learned to strike a balance and stopped thinking of their personal mission in life as besting a man or being the perfect mother. I wonder if men feel the same pressure about fatherhood…

    But what Trouble said about men accepting the nurturing role was interesting because I often wonder what would happen if men were taught to be more nurturing by the women who raise them (as an aside, I have always found it ironic that the same woman who complains that she must overcome in a world of insensitive men is the same woman who raises an insensitive man). A male friend used to always tell me everything he knows about women and perceived female traits, he learned from women (e.g., how to be affectionate, etc). Why don’t more boys learn it from their mothers?

  81. Christine, I agree that when you’re forced to do something you don’t want to do, chances are you’re going to be unhappy (working women who’d rather be at home and women at home who’d rather be working). I also think that there seems to be this idea that if a woman isn’t home with her children all day spending every waking moment with them, she isn’t a good mother. That isn’t healthy for any of the parties involved. Children do need to learn that they are not the center of the universe at some point before they reach adulthood (even of their own parents) and parents need feel like the whole persons they are instead of just the mother or just the doctor or whatever.

  82. Mara, I think you bring up a good point. But I’ve also seen many times where a woman will be criticized by her husband or other men by being “too nurturing” with boys. They admonish her for creating a “pussy.”

    It’s ironic that Christopher and I got into this exact conversation the other night. He was relaying a story to me about the Snoop Dogg show in which two of Snoop’s sons where screwing around. Snoop told them not to, and instead of stopping, their situation escalated and one brother ended up punching the other brother in the face. The boys’ mother immediately went to the son that was crying after being punched and started to admonish the brother who didn’t follow the instructions to stop screwing around. Snoop told her to stay out of it because she couldn’t understand because she was a “woman” and got on his crying son for not being able to take a punch.

    I felt that (1) it was wrong for Snoop to disrespect their mothers’ authority in front of the sons because that basically teaches the kids that it’s acceptable to disrespect the way women choose to handle things and that (2) instead of learning to take a punch, it was more important to learn to respect your father’s directions. Christopher, on the other hand, thought it was perfectly acceptable for Snoop to say what he said to the boys’ mother and that Snoop was right in that he needed to step in and make sure the kid knew it wasn’t acceptable to be a pussy when you get punched.

    I’m not saying that any of us should learn our parenting skills from Snoop. But just the fact that Christopher and I saw that differently shows that men often react that way, women often react the way their mother did, and yet, it ends up not being the way the mother would have chosen to handle the situation. If men truly feel women are better at child-rearing, I’m not sure why they don’t have the same sense to step back and let her handle situations. But in my experience, the same men who think women are “more suited to raising kids” will also be quick to step in and tell her she’s doing it wrong if they don’t agree.

    Are men who are raised by single mothers more nurturing than those who are raised by two parents? Perhaps. But to answer your question, I think boys DON’T learn it from their mothers because their fathers don’t want them to in many cases.

    The second part of that question I suppose is– is it important for men to be nurturing? Christopher pointed out that many of the things I like about him and attract me to him are the opposite of nurturing. His point was that if I like feeling safe in his arms, would I feel that way if I knew he was a pussy who couldn’t physically protect me. If he hadn’t, as a boy, learned to take a punch too, would he be the kind of guy that a woman would someday want to be with?

    He has a good point, and that could also be the reason why some mothers will run over and “nurture” a little girl that falls down, but they’ll just yell to the little boy to get up and keep going.

  83. Christine, I wouldn’t go so far as Mael in insinuating you are using a “straw-man argument” against me, but you are paying more attention to a couple of trite examples I used than the general gist of what I said.

    I was not countering my own statements, nor was I judging anyone… I am not a CEO, because I realize that the rigors of that profession, would interfere with my ability to raise my 3 children to my satisfaction, and I see the latter as more important than the pro’s of the former.
    I maintain that anyone has the “potential”, but I never said that everyone has the “ability.”

    “one couple comes to mind. Both are CEOs and both spend all their free time with their daughter.” …And you find that statement an example of a ‘healthy family demographic’ how?

    My “general mistrust” of women goes a lot deeper that you might care to understand, but rest assured, the ability for a woman to make a statement like, “The fact that my great grandmother, grandmother and maybe even mother have been subjugated throughout history really has no affect on me at all.” is actually one of the main reasons I distrust them… ;)

  84. Mara, regarding the last comment you made, I couldn’t agree with you more and you stated that perfectly. I do think many women feel they aren’t good mothers if they’re not at home with their children every waking moment and I also think that society (other women and men) put that stigma on women, but they don’t suggest that if a man works and isn’t home all day, he isn’t a good father. Much of that is self-imposed. And like I said earlier, the best parents I know (parents who seem to have a good disposition, don’t yell or hit their kid, provide for their kid, give her as many opportunities as possible, etc.) both work as CEOs. They also adopted this little girl and wanted a child badly as opposed to many couples who wind up with kids because “it just happened, but wasn’t really planned.”

    The flip side of that, however, is there are also parents who are having kids but have no interest in being parents at all. I used to teach private swim lessons to two kids in Westwood whose parents were both lawyers. Not only were they not around and left their kids to be raised by a nanny who did not speak a word of English, they never once came out of their house to even watch a lesson or see how their kids were behaving, or progressing. During most lessons (on weekends) they would be hanging out inside with friends or on the phone, or doing something else. The kids were monsters. Particularly the oldest. One day, I was in the pool with the younger one and the nanny came out of the house with the older boy following her, berating her, because she wouldn’t give him some package of cookies he wanted. She came all the way out to the pool with the phone in her hand– I didn’t speak any Spanish at the time — but I could gather she was threatening to call his mother’s cell phone. The boy kicked her in the leg because he didn’t want her to call. I got out of the pool went over, and told the nanny to call the mother. I wanted to tell her myself what just happened. The boy, realizing he couldn’t manipulate a native English speaker like he could his nanny, threw a fit, cried, rolled around on the ground, and when that didn’t work, got up, pointed, and yelled at me “You’ll never work in this town again!” (hrmmm, wonder where he heard that?) I figured I’d chance it and spoke to his mother anyway who pretended to be shocked by his behavior and said she’d handle it.

    The point? Those two people should never have had kids. They had no interest in giving up any of the things people give up to be decent parents. I personally have never understood wanting to have kids just so you could hand them off to a nanny to raise. If you don’t see any fulfillment in the actual raising of the kids yourself, then why do it? Societal pressure? The need to carry on your name?

    But on the other hand, I agree that making a child the center of your universe doesn’t make one a good parent. Parents are individual people first, and parents second. Anyone who becomes obsessed with only one thing becomes a very boring individual.

  85. Christine, I see your point. And I admit, I’m attracted to really masculine men. Between me and Chris, I’m definitely the more affectionate and nurturing person and he likes “feminine” women so there you go. But does a man being nurturing take away from him being able to take a punch? Can’t he be both?

  86. I have often found it ironic that a woman who will admit she can’t begin to understand her husband’s thought processes, will claim any level of competency in raising her son…

    The reason it is seen as an ‘ideal’ to have a mother & a father is for ‘balance’… In Chris’ example, it is actually the mother of Snoop’s kid who disrespects Snoop’s authority first, by rushing into ‘handle’ a situation she probably knows precious little about, without first conferring with Snoop, who I will go out on a limb and say, probably has a lot of experience with… But who would expect a woman to see that? 8)

  87. “one couple comes to mind. Both are CEOs and both spend all their free time with their daughter.” …And you find that statement an example of a ‘healthy family demographic’ how?

    Why are you assuming it’s not a healthy family demographic? Both parents are happy, fulfilled individuals and their daughter is fortunate enough to be around two happy fulfilled individuals as role models. Both parents respect each other and enjoy being parents but haven’t given up their own dreams and identities to do it. What isn’t healthy about that???

    I also have a friend who until her kids went to school, stayed home with them and was a terrible parent. She yelled at them constantly, spent more time on the phone or watching t.v. than actually playing with the kids, and the father would come home from work and want nothing to do with them either because he’d had a long day and wanted to have some piece and quiet. I think individuals who are happy with their roles in their relationship whether it be the mom at home, the dad at home, or both at home part of the time, is better under every circumstance than ones that are forced into roles where they’re miserable.

    “My “general mistrust” of women goes a lot deeper that you might care to understand, but rest assured, the ability for a woman to make a statement like, “The fact that my great grandmother, grandmother and maybe even mother have been subjugated throughout history really has no affect on me at all.” is actually one of the main reasons I distrust them…”

    I can’t say I understand your point– perhaps you were being cryptic on purpose… but my point was, it’s not my place to fight the battle of my ancestors or to feel guilty for the mistakes they made. I think this “tie” to the past that many people have where they feel they need to punish a group or prove something because of what happened to the blacks before them, or the women before them, or the Jews before them does very little to serve their agenda. It simply perpetuates an “us” and “them” mentality. I have never set out to prove something for the sake of women, I prove it because it’s something I want to do. Whether I’m motivated by competition or my own drive or even to make my parents proud, it’s because I want it for me. Perhaps that attitude is what inspires the mistrust in you, but there are plenty of women who would disagree with my somewhat selfish reasons for my ambition. Do they inspire the mistrust also?

  88. “The reason it is seen as an ‘ideal’ to have a mother & a father is for ‘balance’… In Chris’ example, it is actually the mother of Snoop’s kid who disrespects Snoop’s authority first, by rushing into ‘handle’ a situation she probably knows precious little about, without first conferring with Snoop, who I will go out on a limb and say, probably has a lot of experience with… But who would expect a woman to see that?”

    So now we can cross “child-rearing” off the list of things women are more suited for than men? Funny how that list seems to be getting shorter and shorter.

    If a woman felt the need to confer with a man before reacting the way her gut is telling her to react and handle a situation, then by all means, we should move in with Mael and all woman should forgo any ability they have to assess a situation and deal with it.

    I’ve seen men get into fist fights in bars and wind up arrested. They would probably have been better served conferring with their girlfriends first, but would they think to do that? Or did their inherent masculine traits take over and cloud their ability to rationalize and predict the consequences of their actions?

  89. Christine,

    From first-hand experience in these relationships, there is not a problem here, if things are done in the spirit we profess. The desire to please and be pleasing and the joy received in doing so is the component you may be missing.

  90. Trouble, you’re suggesting the mother in the Snoop situation jumped in to handle something she knew precious little about. If a father has two daughters and sees one yank a toy away from the other, should he assume he knows precious little about how girls interact and has no right to discipline his daughter? Should he run over to the mother and say, “Honey, little Sarah just took a toy from little Alice. What should I do? Do you want to come handle it?”

    I don’t think God gave women the ability to bear children assuming they could would know too precious little to raise them. The only reason there is anything that you see wrong with how the boys’ mother handled the situation is because you’re taught that it’s wrong by a society that proposes boys should be tough enough to take a punch without showing emotion or pain. If that were the natural way men were born, the boy wouldn’t cry to begin with. He would naturally not cry because it is natural for him not to. Teaching a boy not to cry when his natural instinct is to cry, is therefore unnatural and a product of societal pressure for the boy to be accepted in a gender role society created.

  91. Mael, if there’s no problem, then why the need to post an article about the “problem” of fat slaves? Typically, if there’s no problem, there’s nothing to address.

  92. “So now we can cross “child-rearing” off the list of things women are more suited for than men? Funny how that list seems to be getting shorter and shorter.”

    Actually Christine …That is a dictionary perfect example of Mael’s “Straw-man argument…

    Read my statement again… In that instance, she disrespected Snoop first… NOT the other way around as you stated prior.

  93. Okay, now we are all talking too fast…

    “I don’t think God gave women the ability to bear children assuming they could would know too precious little to raise them.”

    Another “straw-man arguement” Christine…

    I was referring to that particular singular instance.

  94. I know you like to paraphrase people Christine, but there is a line between quoting someone for emphasis or clarity, and misquoting someone to make it seem like their argument is weaker than it actually is…

  95. Christine,

    “Fat slaves.” Now that’s funny.

    Obesity is a society-wide problem, and affects women (and men) from all walks of life. The article was written with the intent to address the degraded aesthetic found in modern women, and to point out deeply rooted flaws in the minds of some women who believe submitting completely does not include managing their physical appearance.

  96. In answer to Mara’s question …Yes, it is very possible to be both tough, and nurturing… There are different situations which require different example methods, and still others which might require both. As a parent [whether male or female] you have to make that decision without prejudice.

  97. …and Mael… I trust there is no ‘double-standard’… As in, the ‘master’ must also keep himself in a physical manner which ensures his desirability as a ‘master…

  98. “I was referring to that particular singular instance.”

    Not exactly considering it would be impossible for one to recognize that that was the particular instance that she should have referred to her male counterpart to handle when she was reacting in accord with her own maternal instincts. I don’t think it’s so much about her not understanding what was going on in that situation. I think she understood it completely and was handling the primary problem she saw which was that one of her sons just hit the other one and that’s not acceptable in her house. Assessing that as the primary problem, she handled it just fine. The problem came when Snoop assessed a different primary problem– the fact that his son cried after getting hit (regardless of who hit him). And seeing that as the primary problem, he handled that the way he felt was best. Seeing as how they both assessed different issues, to suggest that she did indeed see the same problem that Snoop did and then intentionally avoided addressing it so that she could address a secondary issue is ridiculous. If Christopher and I both see a situation and he steps in to handle it, I don’t assume he’s disrespecting me by reacting and using his own perception of the situation to form that reaction. There’s nothing disrespectful about that. He may ultimately see that he didn’t choose the best way to handle it, but I can’t fault him for doing the best he could with the information he had. As my partner, I have to trust him to do that. And as a good partner to him, if I assess he’s handling it wrong, I certainly wouldn’t point that out to him in front of anyone else– kids, strangers, or whomever. If I respect his authority as a parent to our kids, there’s no good reason to undermine that authority even if I disagree. The proper way to handle that would be for me to take him aside later and let him know why I thought it was mishandled and if I needed to have a discussion with my son about “how to not be a pussy” go have a father/son chat with him later when he’s not in front of his mother or his brothers or anyone else.

  99. Well, if you do any reading on obesity– which I will assume you have– you know that indeed, obesity due to medical issues is much less widespread than people would like to believe. The reality, most fat people are fat because they eat too much. It’s not because they can’t grasp the concept that a carrot stick has fewer calories than a french fry– it’s because eating is a form of escapism. Some people, when they can’t handle stress or pain, turn to over-eating in the same way others turn to drugs/alcohol/self-mutilation/whatever. When your body is not hungry and yet you continue to eat, there is a psychological reason one does that.

    I’m assuming we can agree on that so far.

    And yes, people of all walks of life fall into that form of escapism. My point was that if a symbiotic, harmonious slave/master relationship is so fulfilling and there is no barrier for a woman to commit herself wholly, then in this world which you suggest is so much more “harmonious,” than the regular old crappy world the rest of us live in, why is there a need to stuff your face and pack on the pounds?

    And with regards to Trouble’s assumption that the male master would also be under the same standards to remain attractive, that inherently doesn’t work in a master/slave relationship by definition. Perhaps this is what is meant by “inspiring loyal servitude,” but again, if a female slave can decide to no longer serve her master because he’s fat and balding and she’s not attracted to him, then she hasn’t really given up free will and become a slave. And if she doesn’t have that ability (if the threat of her leaving if he lets himself go isn’t present), then there’s no incentive for him to maintain a physical appearance that she finds attractive.

    So either this is much more a give/take relationship which is not a master/slave relationship, or there is absolutely no reason that a male in this sort of relationship has any obligation to fulfill any desire his slave has– whether it be to remain physically attractive, give her an orgasm, etc. The men in these relationships may do their best to remain attractive for their themselves, but it’s not to fulfill the female in the relationship. And if she gets one that doesn’t get fat, she would, I suppose, just consider herself lucky and be the envy of all her slave-women friends. LOL.

  100. Christine… You said this:

    “I felt that (1) it was wrong for Snoop to disrespect their mothers’ authority in front of the sons because that basically teaches the kids that it’s acceptable to disrespect the way women choose to handle things and that (2) instead of learning to take a punch, it was more important to learn to respect your father’s directions.”

    And I said in response, this:

    “The reason it is seen as an ‘ideal’ to have a mother & a father is for ‘balance’… In Chris’ example, it is actually the mother of Snoop’s kid who disrespects Snoop’s authority first, by rushing into ‘handle’ a situation she probably knows precious little about, without first conferring with Snoop, who I will go out on a limb and say, probably has a lot of experience with… But who would expect a woman to see that?”

    I was pointing out that If you were going to start laying a ‘blame’ foundation, that the first layer would have to have been the baby-mama’s… I am not saying a) Either Snoop or his baby-mama is a prime example of parent, or b) he was not wrong to disrespect her in front of the kids [especially since he usually treats other women with such high regard]… I pointed out that chronologically, she not only disregarded Snoop’s parenting method first, but she undermined his authority as a father, by attempting to control the situation using ONLY her authority and method, with blatant [whether conscious or not] contempt for how I’m fairly sure she knew Snoop would have handled it.

  101. “I think she understood it completely and was handling the primary problem she saw which was that one of her sons just hit the other one and that’s not acceptable in her house. Assessing that as the primary problem, she handled it just fine. The problem came when Snoop assessed a different primary problem– the fact that his son cried after getting hit (regardless of who hit him).”

    I must disagree with this reasoning… She THOUGHT she understood it completely, and handled what SHE THOUGHT was the problem in HER OWN way. That is actually what initiated the REAL problem.

    First off, I was unaware that she paid for the house… My bad… That still does not justify her to feel she is the only one who is allowed to decide what behavior is acceptable or not in HER house… Boys have to learn to be tough in certain situations, and that begins in the home, and does not always end on the receiving end of a broken bottle in a bar-room brawl as you yourself conceded earlier:

    “If he hadn’t, as a boy, learned to take a punch too, would he be the kind of guy that a woman would someday want to be with?

    He has a good point, and that could also be the reason why some mothers will run over and “nurture” a little girl that falls down, but they’ll just yell to the little boy to get up and keep going.”

    …but it is also a parents responsibility to try and show their children the different situations where society will require them to be tough, and when it is okay to just have a good ole’ cry…

  102. “I was pointing out that If you were going to start laying a ‘blame’ foundation, that the first layer would have to have been the baby-mama’s… I am not saying a) Either Snoop or his baby-mama is a prime example of parent, or b) he was not wrong to disrespect her in front of the kids [especially since he usually treats other women with such high regard]… I pointed out that chronologically, she not only disregarded Snoop’s parenting method first, but she undermined his authority as a father, by attempting to control the situation using ONLY her authority and method, with blatant [whether conscious or not] contempt for how I’m fairly sure she knew Snoop would have handled it.”

    I know. I get what you’re saying. But I disagree. When Snoop told the kids to stop fighting and they did anyway. The mother was supporting Snoop’s authority by getting pissed at the kid that didn’t listen to his father. Had she been disrespecting him, she would’ve said “It’s fine, kids, do whatever you want.” Which is not what she did, but when he told her to stay out of it, tha’s what he was doing to her.

  103. I think you’re taking the “her house” thing a bit far. It’s irrelevant whose house it is… she has a right to discipline her kids.

    And I know of very few situations where someone who decides to handle a situation actually knows everything there is to know about it. If we all waited around to get all the facts about everything, there’d be a lot of research and little actual reacting. Why would she ever stop and think hrmm… maybe I don’t know all the facts here?

    But that’s really not even the case here anyway. She did know what she needed to know about it. She and Snoop saw the kids arguing. She heard him tell them to stop. They didn’t. One got hit by the other. Where, exactly, are the details she missed? Why would she assume there is more to this. Snoop, on his own, decided to use this incident as an example of why his kid shouldn’t cry when he gets punched. He could have just as easily ignored that and used it as an example of why you should listen to your father, or not play rough inside the house, or a whole myriad of other things. He unilaterally made that decision without conferring with her and yet she was supposed to predict that? I mean, women are incredible, but we haven’t mastered reading minds yet.

    And just because two people identify different primary concerns in a single situation doesn’t make one right and the other wrong. You’ve never been at work and had two people assess a situation and come up with different ways to handle it because based on the information they have, they feel one aspect is more important to deal with first? That happens quite often.

    What you’re suggesting is that their mother should have, even after assessing all the details about the situation, assumed that for some reason– even though you admit she didn’t know what that reason was– that there was more to it. If the father of my children constantly sat back and didn’t reprimand my kids because he assumed he didn’t know the whole situation when he was sitting right there as it played out, I’d be pretty annoyed with him. Basically Snoop chose to teach his sons to be tough at the expense of also teaching them that they don’t have to respect what their mother says because “she’s a woman and doesn’t get it.” I can promise you that if a father was admonishing his daughter for going out of the house dressed in a short skirt and told her to go change, and the mother came in and said “Don’t listen to your father, he doesn’t get it, he’s a guy,” that’s pretty damn disrespectful and uncalled for. Even if the skirt is probably fine and the father is just a little over-protective, the mother should never say that in front of the kid. The proper way to handle that is to support what the father said and then talk to him later and explain that the skirt wasn’t really that short, it’s in fashion, etc. Once you start disrespecting your partner in front of your kids based on the gender of the other parent, you’re teaching the children to not only do the same with that parent, but in their future relationships too.

    It’s a parent’s instinct to go to a child who is crying– I think this is especially true for women if we’re going to collectively decide that they’re more nurturing. You can’t say that children are served by having the balance of a mother and father and then suggest that the mother retract her half of the balance when she was simply doing what she thought was right and was it was in her nature to handle the situation that way.

    And no one is saying parents shouldn’t show their children that there are different situations where they should be tough and not cry. Of course they should. But I think that can be handled much better without telling the mother in front of her kids that she’s a woman and therefore doesn’t know what’s going on. Like I said, you take that kid aside later and talk to him about why he shouldn’t have cried in that situation. But then again, that would take some respect for your wife, some forethought, and some parenting skills.

    It’s hard to fully allow children to thrive in that balance of a male and female parent when the male parent impresses upon the kids that the female’s parent way of doing things is wrong. Suddenly, no more balance.

  104. “My point was that if a symbiotic, harmonious slave/master relationship is so fulfilling and there is no barrier for a woman to commit herself wholly, then in this world which you suggest is so much more “harmonious,” than the regular old crappy world the rest of us live in, why is there a need to stuff your face and pack on the pounds?”

    Remember that our website is devoted to honing authentic submission in women. “Submission” as it is currently interpreted in many other circles of power exchange often isn’t submission much at all, but role play. Being thus, such articles are made available on our site to enhance and challenge popular notions put in place by the BDSM/kink culture. So you see that we challenge not only modern feminism, but the assumed “laws” of the BDSM culture as well.

  105. So you’re suggesting that the women become fat because they feel it’s expected of them if they’re going to be slaves?

    Most people are fat because they over-eat, not because they are “trying” to go from a size 6 to a size 16.

  106. “I think you’re taking the “her house” thing a bit far. It’s irrelevant whose house it is… she has a right to discipline her kids.”

    That was tongue-in-cheek”… I was using a “straw-woman argument” against you for effect. I knew exactly what you meant by what you said. As a matter of fact, I believe that 90% of what you’ve said on this subject the last couple days is correct and the other 10% has merit when viewed from different angles.

    “What you’re suggesting is that their mother should have, even after assessing all the details about the situation, assumed that for some reason– even though you admit she didn’t know what that reason was– that there was more to it. If the father of my children constantly sat back and didn’t reprimand my kids because he assumed he didn’t know the whole situation when he was sitting right there as it played out, I’d be pretty annoyed with him.”

    There is almost always more to an altercation than initially meets the eye. I did not say anything to do with “reprimand”, sometimes the lesson can be learned and does not even require the parent to intervene. If one parent leaves discipline all up to the other, there will most likely be a problem. You used an example earlier:

    “If a father has two daughters and sees one yank a toy away from the other, should he assume he knows precious little about how girls interact and has no right to discipline his daughter? Should he run over to the mother and say, “Honey, little Sarah just took a toy from little Alice. What should I do? Do you want to come handle it?”

    …but to me it held no water, because selfish behavior is common to both little girls & boys, and grown men & women alike… snatching things is unacceptable in society for both genders… whereas, fighting physically when an issue cannot be resolved, is much more common to little boys [trust me.] Father’s, having once been little boys, may not have all the answers in that situation, but usually have more experience.

    “To disrespect someone, you have to know you’re disrespecting them or it doesn’t come from a place of disrespect.”

    I’ll agree that it may not come from the same place… but the effect is usually the same, whether you realize you are dissin’ or not.

    I’ll check in later, but for now I gotta run again.

  107. “…and Mael… I trust there is no ‘double-standard’… As in, the ‘master’ must also keep himself in a physical manner which ensures his desirability as a ‘master…”

    Most certainly, Trouble. Men are not let off the hook in this regard as far as our message is concerned. Sharon’s “Finding Good Men” article touches upon this very subject.

  108. “So you’re suggesting that the women become fat because they feel it’s expected of them if they’re going to be slaves?”

    No. Rather, society’s popular dysfunction is alive and well in many who are “devoted” servants to their masters within the popular BDSM circle, and many so-called masters in said community haven’t developed their authority deeply enough to instill needed transparency and commitment in their girls.

  109. “…but to me it held no water, because selfish behavior is common to both little girls & boys, and grown men & women alike… snatching things is unacceptable in society for both genders… whereas, fighting physically when an issue cannot be resolved, is much more common to little boys [trust me.] Father’s, having once been little boys, may not have all the answers in that situation, but usually have more experience.”

    Granted, I have to agree (having taught 3rd-6th grade P.E. for two years) that boys do tend to fight physically when they can’t resolve an issue much more frequently than girls do it. I’m not so sure that’s an inherent difference between boys and girls. At the toddler age, you see boys and girls both hitting each other when they want something. As they get older, girls are taught that fighting is not okay under any circumstances and I don’t think that’s impressed so deeply with boys. Also, girls tend to develop verbal skills more quickly than boys all the way up until the early teen years, so perhaps where boys are relying on physicality (which will obviously continue to develop in boys along with increased testosterone levels which cause aggression), girls are already starting to rely on their verbal skills to fight without it getting physical.

    While fathers may have more experience with fighting as a boy than a mother would, I’m not sure that it matters in this instance. Physical fighting is not accepted as an adult by men or women in pretty much any given situation. So learning NOT to be physically aggressive seems like a better lesson than learning how to react if you’re punched– not that the second isn’t important– I think it is. But I think first and foremost, if you don’t want your kid kicked out of school, or called a bully, or have charges pressed against him by the parents of a kid who got his face punched by your son, you better curtail that physical aggression quick. And despite the fact that the male gender (even younger ones) are more prone to that, it doesn’t take a man’s understanding to know that if you let a kid act like that, bad things are bound to come from it. There is a time and place for little boys to explore that physical side of themselves– karate, wrestling, football, even dogpiling on each other at McDonald’s Playplace, but punching out of anger isn’t one.

  110. Interesting, Mael. I can’t say I’m ready to drink the Kool-Aid :p , but you’ve certainly opened my eyes to a group of people I had no idea even existed on the planet before you happened upon this blog.

  111. I kind of disagree. Men are conditioned in society to be less compassionate and less understanding, they are not born that way. Therefore, when a woman acts “crazy” he reacts in a way that is typically not very empathetic. But he “gets it” just as much as women do. They both “get it”. It’s how they choose to react to craziness, which is soley based on conditioning. Baby boys cry just as much as baby girls, but women and men deal with their emotions differently as adults. Maybe hormonal, yes, but I think mostly conditioning.

  112. Katie, while I basically agree with your answer, I do think there are other factors besides hormones and conditioning. There are some internal instincts as well. I agree baby boys and baby girls both cry equally, but I also see baby boys pick up a toy and make a vroom-vroom noise (where the heck did he learn that? we don’t do that — he didn’t have brothers and sisters at the time… he didn’t really watch TV and we lived out in the country, so there wasn’t socializing with the neighbors or at a day care) I’ve seen the same with little girls and baby dolls — they instinctively react sometimes.

    I don’t think men are less compassionate or understanding per se, but we have different wiring — we are problem solvers of a physical nature. Women are nurturing because they are more emotionally-based. Men are more assertive because we was more competitive. Historically (or perhaps physiologically) women gave life and nurturing. Men gave protection and the physical needs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>