Leftbehind,
I should thank you too for illustrating so clearly the whole concept of derogatory male views of women. Since your sweeping insults are not based on religious grounds, however, I'll have to say my thanks are limited.
I find it difficult to resist commenting on a number of your points, so I hope you'll bear with me.
leftbehind said:
My point concerning a man needing a ***** is based on the definition of a man as one who is bound to his nature and has an agenda.
Many would argue that's way too specific; that a man is simply someone who has male genitalia and other male physical characteristics.
leftbehind said:
Such as, needing to satisfy sexual urges and seeking to become a father....
There are large differences among men regarding their "need" to satisfy sexual urges, just as there are large differences regarding essentially all other human characteristics: athletic ability, intelligence, musical talent, tendency to be outgoing vs. shy, and mathematical talent, to mention but a few. There are similarly large differences among women. Regarding sexual urges: roughly 1% of people, both men and women, are asexual (apparently — that's considered a weak statistic). (You can find some information on this by entering "asexual people" in the Wikipedia search box.)
leftbehind said:
.... I am very sure no man wants to waste time bothering with all the details and learning all about his woman. "He" wants it now and that's that.
This is a perfect example of the widespread tendency to assume all others (men, in this case) think and feel the same way you do — or if they don't, certainly they should.
In fact, there are many men who are interested in the psychological, biological and other details of how and why women differ from men, because (at least in part) they like women and want to have successful and rewarding relationships with them above and beyond sex.
leftbehind said:
Whores satisfy that urge. It is the barriers that cultures throw up at men that force them to cow-tow to a woman's need
to find just the right fit.
This may strike you as hard to believe, but a significant percentage of men live their entire lives without ever hiring prostitutes. For some, it's simply because there's no need to. Women find them attractive and seduction comes easily, so their sex is free. Others may resist the urge to hire prostitutes because they're fearful of sexually-transmitted diseases and don't want to pass such diseases along to their wives. Others still are so strapped for money that every dollar (or equivalent in their local currency) they earn is required for food and shelter and to support their families, if they have families.
It seems slightly unclear what you mean by "just the right fit," so I'll assume you mean that if a man wants a woman to become his lover, and/or wants to persuade her to become his wife, he has to approach her and treat her in ways that appeal to her. This, of course, is called "courting." Would it make you feel better if you realized that "courting behavior" is required of males by the females of essentially all pair-bond species throughout the biosphere, not just human females...? And if the male does not meet the standards of the female (and she feels she has alternatives), she rejects him then accepts the advances of a male she finds more desirable...?
leftbehind said:
I hate to sound blunt and full of truth but:
what else are women good for but sex and raising kids? At ground
zero you gals are just in the way. ....
That's an amazing statement. Where have you been for the past thousands of years? This is identical to a statement by a religious "philosopher" in the early days of the male organizations that were adopting patriarchy, justified by the teachings of Aristotle (which were nothing more than his opinions), which subsequently became what are now the world's major religions, and which, to this day, are still either exclusively or almost exclusively patriarchal. (A quote and the source are included in one of my initial 5 posts at the beginning of this thread.)
Your dismissal of "having sex and bearing and raising children" as among "the few things women are good for" is also astonishing. Is it actually necessary to point out that without women, the entire human species would be extinct within *one* generation...?
In contemporary society (i.e., at present), the answer to your question "what else are women good for?" is: almost all of the same things men are good for — except in many instances, women are better. There's some emerging evidence, for example, that in an average sense (not necessarily an individual sense, of course) women tend to be better managers than men. I suspect this is because, in addition to having essentially the same (or better) abilities to assimilate technical knowledge, women have superior ability to "read" others, hence potentially better ability to avoid bad feelings in workplaces and get good work out of others. The Norwegians have recognized this by passing a law that will *require* essentially all organizations, public and private, to have 50% female representation on their boards of directors and other governing bodies in the fairly near future. They're now in a period of transition. There will be heavy financial penalties for organizations that do not comply. (I've stated this from memory of a news article; the requirement for future 50% female representation in business, government and other organizations in Norway may be more comprehensive.)
leftbehind said:
You [women] don't like to watch movies
that don't suck....
So what? It's hard to imagine anything more irrelevant. As for women not being good at hunting and fishing.... even in primitive hunter-gatherer tribes, women were the "gatherers." I doubt the men of those tribes would have (or do) dismiss that as a trivial contribution, because it was (/is) so obviously necessary.
leftbehind said:
But you also have that cunt, those fine tits and with the proper training will satisfy our perverted appetites. That's why we're still married to you and hand you our pay checks, etc. Do otherwise, act contrary for even a short time, and the man is gone without a reverse glimpse back.
Not necessarily. There are many couples who regard themselves as life partners, are tolerant of each other, and deal with life's adversities as a team, thereby attaining greater success (in an average sense) on emotional, economic, and biological levels than those who are single.
leftbehind said:
My wife is a *****, a paid ******, I met her 28 years ago when she was a street walker. She will do anything for money - even murder.
That's interesting. During those 28 years, I imagine it must have caused you to feel somewhat uneasy to be always aware that if another man (or woman) wanted your wife sexually, or wanted you out of the picture for some other reason, he or she might offer her some money to "off" you and your wife would have accepted without giving it a second thought.
In any case, 28 years is a long time so it sounds like the two of you must find your relationship satisfying despite this unsettling characteristic.
leftbehind said:
My sexual urges demand such a women to debase me.
Well, whatever works for you. This isn't surprising... it isn't too unusual for prostitutes to be married. (Prostitutes need love, affection and emotional support pretty much like everyone else, ya' know....)
leftbehind said:
[My wife] adores her appetites; although aged and slow, she remains a *****. If I, at any time, had wanted her to stop dating, to change her ways, and to be like someone else simply because of a whim, she would be like your wife or the president's wife.
Your wife might be willing to pose as a "more typical" wife if you asked her to, but she would definitely not be like the president's wife. The latter is a highly-intelligent woman who graduated from an outstanding law school and obtained a position at a prestigious law firm, where she was her husband's boss when they met. Had she continued in her profession, she would now be earning a *lot* more than her husband as president. (Did you note that when Obama was elected, The Onion headline was: "Black Man Given Worst Job in America"....? But I digress....)
leftbehind said:
Because [my wife] is a *****, she gives me her
body and her soul for money - my money.
Incidentally, Baker (in his book "Sperm Wars: The Science of Sex") notes that in all other pair-bond species where he and/or others have observed their social interactions, there are females who exchange sex with males for some necessary commodity (e.g., food). Thus, ************ is not just "the oldest profession" among women. It's also widespread among other pair-bond species. In connection with this, Baker speculates that males of human and other species don't support themselves via ************ because they can't, not because they're "inherently more virtuous." The reason, as anyone might suspect, is that a female who wants sex can almost always find a male who's eager to furnish it for free.
leftbehind said:
A real man demands nothing less... nothing less. And truthfully, wants nothing more.
Again, the assumption that all other men are just like you... or if they aren't, they certainly should be (otherwise they aren't "real men"). To describe this comment as a "sweeping over-generalization" would be a vast understatement. It simply isn't true.
—Custer
