USA is NUMBER 1

[GoodOlBoy]

In shows people like to see something they don't encounter every day, like screwups and losers with a lot of money or magic powers. You don't believe Americans have magic powers, do you? Or that TV shows "promote" vampirism? 

Internet forums also. 
Mam, you don't post here very often, but when you do post something it is usually "solid gold".
 
GOB

[Shadow]

Of course they are, they are getting a monkey 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kPmLT-xlcsM
 
 
There is also standup and Hollywood movies in the US, but I have yet to find a single person who uses that to learn valuable life lessons. 

That's why it's called entertainment, if people wanted to watch shows about every day events, driving children to school, going to work every day, working with excel files and so on, they have their life for it. In shows people like to see something they don't encounter every day, like screwups and losers with a lot of money or magic powers. You don't believe Americans have magic powers, do you? Or that TV shows "promote" vampirism? 

I do believe that people are more interested in the occult due to those TV shows. 

[Boethius]

I offered a handful of examples that simply reflect two generalizations that are true, not false.

- It is in vogue to promote a gender neutral society.
- In the course of achieving the above, it is commonplace to decrease the value of the "masculine."

(then, I rambled with stupid examples that show a lack of moral clarity and black and white consequences.  I think we loose something when the threat of an ass- whipping is replaced by 9-11 and "them." )

These points are societal, not specific.  Yet, they exist.   There seems to be to further be an abdication of the strong to the weak in every regard. Example one, children's movies often show the children as smarter than their parents (and the mother always seem to have it all over the father).  Example two, there are new stop signs in Florida where the pedestrians no longer stop and look both ways.  WTF?

So, it appears to me that in the USA, we see Chivalry Run Amok!  Now, Colombia, where I spend much time is the opposite.  In that society, we see Machismo Run Amok!    I prefer a sober middle ground.

Ukraine is a much more macho, and a much more chivalrous society than North American society.  I think a society that respects both genders, and views them as equal, is preferable to others. 


I tend to disagree also with the notion of the poor emasculated WM.  I have always worked with men, and don't see this emasculation that is the vogue in op ed pieces, etc.  If it were thus, most of the world (business and politics, at the very least) wouldn't be run by men.


I don't know the new stop signs in Florida, but I would hazard a guess they are designed to avoid litigation and, presumably, injury.

I have heard that complaint about movies for some time.  I don't go to children's movies anymore, but when I look back at the movies my kids watched, very few had any adults in them at all, other than the Harry Potter movies.  If we look at popular adult movies, the male superhero is the popular theme, so I tend to disagree.

As a de Tocqueville fan, do you also accept his premise that "Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith."?

[IAmZon]

As a de Tocqueville fan, do you also accept his premise that "Liberty cannot be established without morality, nor morality without faith."?

Faith is a gift, blessing, or curse depending on how it is applied IMO.   After one becomes educated and has real life experiences, a choice is formed on what ethics and moralities and faith to accept.   Of course, upbringing factors mightily - but, at some point this decision should become the individual's.

[IAmZon]

I tend to disagree also with the notion of the poor emasculated WM.  I have always worked with men, and don't see this emasculation that is the vogue in op ed pieces, etc.  If it were thus, most of the world (business and politics, at the very least) wouldn't be run by men.

A universal  movement towards gender neutrality is clearly underway. (if you disagree, mark my words, and see me back here in 20 - 20 years.   These things happen slowly).  The consequence?  Women will be more like men, and men will be more like women.   It has already happened to many, it will happen to most.

The Great American Man/Woman: I can say that when I reflect on my personal behavior in the distant past, and very often when I see WM function in business and politics - or family life - I often think under my breath "what a pussy."   I am referring to a lack of leadership, honestly, and clarity ... a preoccupation with comfort, and an avoidance of risk and any consequences.  These things are very often the cost of "civility" and the status quo."   (And after years of lying to oneself, and not knowing how to proper communicate and direct others ... a guy can "POP!" thus following his heart to Argentina - even if he is a sitting Governor, for example:)


But, these are my inner observations.  I share them on an anonymous discussion board. Certainly, I would not want to unnecessarily ruffle anybodies feathers.

[Boethius]

I disagree. 

Individuals have innate drives and characteristics.  Anyone with children can see this in them.  Not all men are risk takers, nor should they be.  Most people want some comfort in their lives.  I suspect the lack of honesty is no different than it was 2,000, or 5,000 years ago.

I suspect Sanford was very good at communicating, or he would not have made it to a governorship. I think it was his sense of entitlement that made him seek out a new woman, and the destruction of his family.

[IAmZon]

Very interesting points ... We fill in the blanks as we imagine them based upon our own experience.  Both equally true, or false.

Not all men are risk takers, nor should they be.  Most people want some comfort in their lives.  I suspect the lack of honesty is no different than it was 2,000, or 5,000 years ago.


I suspect Sanford was very good at communicating, or he would not have made it to a governorship. I think it was his sense of entitlement that made him seek out a new woman, and the destruction of his family.

What should a man be?  Or, what has evolution and the history of mankind made man?   Hunter Gatherers, farmers, warriors, office workers.  Different times calls for different roles.


It is possible that Sanford wanted everything his way.  He could have managed and communicated, and essentially had a more perfect relationship and family life with a worthy and capable partner.  This is true.  Or, Sanford could have been alienated from himself.  His manners and ambition dictating 99% of his behavior.   And, then, an awakening of ?  Created a change.  Obviously at the costs to others.   It is not a good story for anybody.


I am not talking about "honesty" in only one sense.   I am referencing a man knowing himself and his desires and getting in life that satisfaction of those things - with his eyes wide open.  Not such an easy thing, I admit.


   

[Boethius]

I am not talking about "honesty" in only one sense.   I am referencing a man knowing himself and his desires and getting in life that satisfaction of those things - with his eyes wide open.  Not such an easy thing, I admit.

Knowing yourself is difficult, hence, its emphasis in religion, philosophy, and literature.   
 
I don't think there is any one definition of a "man".  But, a man should be able to live the role in which he is most comfortable.  For some, that is being a mercenary capitalist.  For other men, it is being a warrior.  For yet others, it is in living a life of compassion and servitude to others, as a monk/priest/holy man, and so on.  The freedom to choose to live in a manner that is compatible to your nature is a positive development, I believe. 

I think the Western evolution of the roles of the sexes, which allows individuals to be themselves, is positive.  What I think you may be referring to more is the abdication of personal responsibility which is a plague of Western society.  I also think there is an acceptance of moral ambivalence or perhaps, an increase in moral relativism in the name of  "freedom" and "tolerance".  This is even evident in the views of posters on this forum.

[Shadow]

The role in which a man is most comfortable is that of a provider, regardless of how he fills that role. The hunter and the gatherer had different roles, but both provided.
Today's men have different ways from ancient men, but still their genetics are programmed to provide.
A woman is programmed as caretaker. That is also programmed in genetics. Regardless of the traditional role to prepare the gathered provisions in to food and care for the children and elderly, women have always contributed in physical labour.

The reasonable call vor equality in treatment and rights has led to women wishing to become provider as well as caretaker.  However where in modern society the provider role is easy for a woman to perform, the role of caretaker is still seen as less fitting for men. That part of equality has not been achieved, and for an unknown reason it seems women are opposing to be deprieved if their care taking role as much as men refuse to accept it.

The result is a movement where women feel they can be both provider and caretaker, removing the male role. While currently the male role is still needed for reproduction, genetic research might even remove this need, at which time the male will be dubbed as useless.

[Boethius]

I think you overestimate the desire of women to be providers, Shadow.  I think women want to have interesting careers.  I don't think they want to be required to support families. 
 
Men can be good caretakers, though in my observation, they are usually less "tender" than women.  That likely is genetics.
 

[Muzh]

I disagree. 

Individuals have innate drives and characteristics.  Anyone with children can see this in them.  Not all men are risk takers, nor should they be.  Most people want some comfort in their lives.  I suspect the lack of honesty is no different than it was 2,000, or 5,000 years ago.

I suspect Sanford was very good at communicating, or he would not have made it to a governorship. I think it was his sense of entitlement that made him seek out a new woman, and the destruction of his family.

And I'll agree with you to disagree. 

But instead of the metaphysical aspect of this reasoning, there is the biological aspect to take into consideration. I think someone is confusing the evolution of the species with the collapse of what is considered the 'normal.'

[Muzh]

The reasonable call vor equality in treatment and rights has led to women wishing to become provider as well as caretaker.  However where in modern society the provider role is easy for a woman to perform, the role of caretaker is still seen as less fitting for men. That part of equality has not been achieved, and for an unknown reason it seems women are opposing to be deprieved if their care taking role as much as men refuse to accept it.

The result is a movement where women feel they can be both provider and caretaker, removing the male role. While currently the male role is still needed for reproduction, genetic research might even remove this need, at which time the male will be dubbed as useless.

Baloney.

If women want to remove the male (role) it is because they are tired of their (male) bullshit.

[Shadow]

I think you overestimate the desire of women to be providers, Shadow.  I think women want to have interesting careers.  I don't think they want to be required to support families. 
 
Men can be good caretakers, though in my observation, they are usually less "tender" than women.  That likely is genetics.

From your posts speaks the duality of women wanting to have the pleasures but not the pains of equality.

[Boethius]

That is so only if you assume that men take no pleasure in their work, and work solely in order to provide an income to their families.

[Shadow]

That is so only if you assume that men take no pleasure in their work, and work solely in order to provide an income to their families.

In jobs that provide and offer pleasure the competition of women is too fierce. 

[IAmZon]

I think you overestimate the desire of women to be providers, Shadow.  I think women want to have interesting careers.  I don't think they want to be required to support families.

What I reference is not a movement for rights, but a trend in society = gender neutralization.   Some have referred to this as "role confusion."  Again, I do not think anybody on the individual basis WANTS this ... I do not see many men or women that are 100% happy with the results.  Nevertheless, forces of change have been unleashed.

[IAmZon]

 What I think you may be referring to more is the abdication of personal responsibility which is a plague of Western society.  I also think there is an acceptance of moral ambivalence or perhaps, an increase in moral relativism in the name of  "freedom" and "tolerance".

Yes, I agree.  The root of all these things have a common substance.  I see that it is not easy to make a comment on the amorphous core of this subject without simultaneously being a) misunderstood; or b) causing confusion.   


All I know is that much has changed, and I don't like it:)  This clearly has been a result of living in other places with a different type of accepted male role.  YET - there is a different of female role in these places too! And, not a weaker, subordinate role - just different. So, perhaps my comments could / should center on the contrast of : "responsible" "direct" and "consistent" in one's actions and life?

[Misha]

The hunter and the gatherer had different roles, but both provided.

Richard Lee's research demonstrated that the gathering provided most of the proteins consumed by the population of foragers (aka hunter gatherers) he was working with in the Kalahari desert. With the exception of the far North where the was not much to eat in the way of plant foods much of the year, the gathering of women would certainly have been the pillar of most communities when it cames to procuring food.

However where in modern society the provider role is easy for a woman to perform, the role of caretaker is still seen as less fitting for men.

This is gradually changing. More and more men are playing a much more active role in the "caretaking" and some men even become "stay-at-home dads" while their wives work. What is true now, may not be true 50 or 100 years from now.

[Faux Pas]

What I reference is not a movement for rights, but a trend in society = gender neutralization.   Some have referred to this as "role confusion." Again, I do not think anybody on the individual basis WANTS this ... I do not see many men or women that are 100% happy with the results.  Nevertheless, forces of change have been unleashed.

You thought I was taking a shot at you up thread but, I wasn't. What you say is happening in Western society, is in fact IMHO, happening. It is an immoveable force in which nobody has any control in a free society. There are many more women moving into masculine roles and your masculinity apparently, feels threatened by it. You will have to adapt. You can't change it. You can run and hide into foreign cultures but, that changes nothing, just a temporary band-aid. Those who portend to know and seek a truly civilized society has this as a goal. It's vehicle is political correctness.

[IAmZon]

You can't change it. You can run and hide into foreign cultures but, that changes nothing, just a temporary band-aid. Those who portend to know and seek a truly civilized society has this as a goal. It's vehicle is political correctness.

run and hide?  How about observe and chose ... IT CHANGES EVERYTHING.


I am happy (proud) to have the citizenship of a country that grants me the freedoms to think and act this way.  I am very proud of the story of the USA and its historical legacy.  I see this situation with clear eyes without one extreme, or the other.   Those groups, bodies, and social tides have little affect on me, personally, thankfully.   

[Faux Pas]

run and hide?  How about observe and chose ... IT CHANGES EVERYTHING.


I am happy (proud) to have the citizenship of a country that grants me the freedoms to think and act this way.  I am very proud of the story of the USA and its historical legacy.  I see this situation with clear eyes without one extreme, or the other.   Those groups, bodies, and social tides have little affect on me, personally, thankfully.

Yet, you're offended and dismayed at a perceived emasculation of the Western male?

[IAmZon]

Yet, you're offended and dismayed at a perceived emasculation of the Western male?

I see it!  Offended; dismayed?  Not really.  I suppose it may be like observing the rise of racism, in a certain place. If I was a Jew in Nazi Germany, I would like to think I would have been among the first to leave.

If I HAD TO date ONLY women in the USA, and live in the USA ... I would start to try and find deeper satisfaction and meaning to fishing, bowling, watching sports, and drinking beer.  I would stop exercising.  I would start eating all the good food, all the time ... like everybody else does here.  More cake please.   I probably would start planning on a bigger this, and a bigger that.  I would like to think that everybody tries to play their hand of cards the best possible way.

[Faux Pas]

I see it!  Offended; dismayed?  Not really.  I suppose it may be like observing the rise of racism, in a certain place. If I was a Jew in Nazi Germany, I would like to think I would have been among the first to leave.

If I HAD TO date ONLY women in the USA, and live in the USA ... I would start to try and find deeper satisfaction and meaning to fishing, bowling, watching sports, and drinking beer.  I would stop exercising.  I would start eating all the good food, all the time ... like everybody else does here.  More cake please.   I probably would start planning on a bigger this, and a bigger that.  I would like to think that everybody tries to play their hand of cards the best possible way.

But it's NOT racism or antisemitism, is it? It's nothing but the ability to stretch beyond borders and date. You don't have to have an excuse for it. You don't have to provide explanations to do it. Just do it and do not make excuses or apologies. You seem to have an elevated view of your own self worth as if your trying to convince the rest of us that something is wrong with us. There isn't. So you have the ability and the means, good for you. It doesn't make you enlightened, it only means you have the ability. Good for you, take advantage of it. Travel, date, eat, drink and be merry, fcuk. Do what you intend to do.

Western society is a sewer. It's been hijacked in the interests of the "enlightened". Yes, women are becoming more into masculine roles. It is part and parcel of equality but, it does not create any vacuum on your masculinity, that is, if you have any. If you do, you are comfortable with it and not threatened that someone else may have some, man or woman.

If you are as free mentally as you proclaim riv, you would understand this rather than carry the torch that AW are bad, fat, drug addicted, masculine, yadda, yadda, yadda. Women elsewhere must be better. They are not. Dude, stop living your life through media outlets and People Magazine. Men are still men and women are still women it does not matter on where the planet you travel. Attitudes are different all over the globe but, those attitudes  doesn't change you. You are what you are

[Shadow]

For countries who tout about their freedom of speech a thing like political correctness is the way to curtail this freedom. It disallows people to openly speak their mind, which causes more bad as good.

[facetrock]

Shadow. I agree completly. If you follow politcal correctness you cant call it the way you see it for fear of offending someone and then being called racist, uncaring, insensitive or whatever.