 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Pekka
|
 |
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snowflake
Really, if women are and act like men, would this thread be started? This thread was started as men complaining about how hard it is to understand and be understood by women.
There are three kinds of men out there. One kind of men complains about his SO, but still loves the fact that he is involved with his SO, even the fact that he is complaining.
Another kind of men is generally frustrated with women because he just couldn't get to know the one he is looking for. Is it because his own problems? Or the problems of the society? I'd say it's just he hasn't been lucky and he'll be in the first group given time.
Yet there is still another kind of men, who have had bad experiences with women. Some of them had lost hope and become bitter forever.
How much of these are related to problems of "Modern women"? I'd say very little. Women are women. No matter if we were in the cave time, or the 20s, 30s, or any other time. I never adovacate women should be treated like men. When everybody is the same, the world is going to be a very dull and boring place. Yes I work, and I don't wear much makeup, and I don't have many jewries. But I'm still very much a woman. I have my emotions, and my ways of looking at things that are different from men. And I'm proud of that. The relationship between men and women shouldn't be one of the oppressors and the slaves. It should be a relationship of respect and love. What's wrong with loving men and loving to do things for them, and loving to be loved by men and to be taken care by them?
Don't hold the false belief that it is the world of "the leader of femme domination club". It is sooo 2000. We are in 2004. The new agenda is women are women and men are men. The hate and fighting are in the trash. The love and understanding is what is fresh. Wake up and smell your coffee. It is a new era. |
Hey no problem. I prefer women who don't wear much make up. Make up is just a lie anyway. Excessive jewelry is disgusting. I never claimed you're not a woman.
But 2000 and 2004 are quite the same. These things don't go in Olympic intervals. Women (not all) want the destruction of the men. And some women, they want like super manhood of their man. That's equally stupid. They're the aggressive type 'kick his ass!'.. they're usually ugly when they're drunk too. And spit and smoke, and wear too big jackets, and have horrible hair.
But I like the new agenda you're trying to portray. I have no problems with that. As long as woman respects mans space and certain needs (I don't mean sexual needs, but needs to be man), it's all good, and man should do the same for the woman. But it has to be both ways, or it just don't work.
And I don't drink coffee, it's bad for you.
But you see, you're coming off short here. You're saying things the way man understands. You're using the proper logic here. I'm not accusing you of anything, but the woman usually acts very differently. If they would say what you just said, the actions wouldn't match the words.
What's wrong with loving to do something for someone? Nothing. But when you use that as an excuse to get something in return, then there is something wrong with that, because then you didn't love doing it just for the sake of doign it, but you wanted something in return, and that's a motivation other than love. I'm braking it down, so you understand 
For example, if you would come and say, do something for me to show you love me. Cool. But don't expect me to do anything in return right away. Hey, If I'm with the person who I'm with, it means I like/love her. I wouldn't be there in the first place, if I didn't. So dont' expect me to do anything. I mean, youi can expect, but if you demand, that's when you are sending mixed signals, and it's not because men couldn't understand mixed signals, it's because well.. mixed signals really are mixed signals. And since men do know it, they already knows they woman expects something in return. The love you see, is not unconditional then, and since the man didn't make the initiative, he didn't necessarily want to do something right then. Maybe he had other plans. Maybe he just feel like going smoothly without doing anything for a while.
The reassuring, the need to have him tell all the time 'yes I love you' is pathetic. If you love someone yesterday, the odds are they'll love her today too.
So, what's wrong with wanting to hear it everyday? Plenty. Plenty wrong. BEcause, if you DON'T say, it's bad. That's why there's plenty wrong to begin with. You shouldn't say it unless you feel like it. If he feels like it, he says it, and if he's there with you, he'll most likely love you anyway. He just doesn't feel like saying it all the time, because frankly, he has other things to think about. TO ask that all the time weakens the realtinship, as in 'don't you really know?'.
Women interpret mens failures towards the woman as 'he doesn't love me'. Then they go all in touch with their emotions, and that's when it just gets stupid.
Another sign of femme domination club. And of course I'm stereotyping. That's not the point. But a woman who is in relationship with a man, a classic old school relationship where the man works and the woman is more like home maker, keeping it together there, they are pissed off because they don't have much money. Of course they have mutual funds, which the woman is naturally accustomed to use too. Which is OK. HOwever, she wants her own money too, so she could buy stuff the man disagrees with. Clearly something that the household don't need. Something for herself. Understandable. However, she doesn't consider the fact, that the money that the man brings in, is meant for the whole unit. Maybe, just maybe all the money, for food, for everything, is a sign of love too. The amount of time the man spends working exceeds the amount of time having sex by far. And of course he likes the sex part more. So, everything the man does is a sign of that he cares for her and the unit. But the woman forgets. She wants her own money, so she does tihngs for her man because she wants to show her love and she loves doing it, and then expects all kinds of crap from the man, who just spent a long time in whatever it is that he does.
But this is normal, and man udnerstands this too and the needs of a woman, she needs her own stuff too. She complains that the man has a career so he can buy his own stuff and use the 'well I worked for it!' in the argument, where as the home making wouldn't be a work then? That gets them pissed off.. of course, making home is a work, ,and shouldn't be underestimated. It's a lot of job, and to make it comfortable is worth every effort for the man too. SO they're equal.
But when a woman goes for a career, she keeps it to herself. That's right, she keeps it to herself. It isn't the unit money anymore. That's not equal. That's arrogant.
and the women say 'we don't need men except for making a baby and lifting heavy stuff'. Well guess what, we don't need women either, except for making babies, and we can lift the heavy stuff ourselves! HA! We need women less! YES!
The Bottom Line: When woman does something 'because she loves her man'.. that means the man has to go to the wallet. The man knows this and it's a double trap too. If you don't go to the wallet, 'you don't love me' crap. If he goes, well it'll cost the whole unit. The problem is, the woman engages to these situations. It's not like 'can I get this?' first. That would be different. That would be straight up negotiating, which is good. Now the man has a real choice to express his opinion. Of course if the man says NO, he's being a cheap bastard, and maybe losing his love for her, according to the woman. If a man wants something exclusive, and the woman disagrees, then that's that, end of discussion. See the difference?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
And you can't fight with women either. Because they don't follow the rules of fighting, which is 'who has better argument, and is basing them on facts, wins'. Because they're in touch with their emotions. Emotion doesn't go with logic. Don't emotionate and logicate.
Yes, I made teh words up.
I've had a fight with a girl when everything was going just fine, and she just wanted to pick up a fight because she wanted to argue. I said I don't want to argue over that issue and she used the 'oh so you think I'm wrong?' and I replied 'No, I just don't feel like that issue isn't worth arguing about'. And by that, I meant what I said, I didn't mean 'I think you're stupid', I didn't mean 'I don't love you so I don't want to fight with you either'. The topic we were arguing about, I mean she was, that she hated that we never really fought. And we were together for a week to when she took that subject up. It pretty much ended there too.
You know, I don't particualry feel fighting over 'why you never fight with me', especially so when we had known for so little time. I could already see, there would be millions of fights, one sided ones. And you can't get them to shut up either. YOu think that ends a fight? No that just adds fuel to the fire. So I just figure better use the pre-emtpive strike and insult right there.
'so you don't think this issue is important enough?' 'No, I think you're fat'. That works way better. End of the fight, you win.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
And when the relationship has been there for some decades, and the man gets dreams, something he wants to do, it includes the unit. He has to work around the unit, so he can do the dream so that the unit doesn't take too much damage. Or if it does, then he has to forget about it.
If a woman gets a new dream at that point.. divorce. And her every friend is goign to her ear 'girl you earned it!'. They they go all oppressed, well, I had never time or chance to do my dreams because I had to take care of this and that, I had to make sure the house is still standing, I had to make food for that no good bastard, I had a baby and couldn't go with my career because that little bastard was in my stomach and now I'm doing my dream because I DESERVE IT! I have a vision!
Yeah, a vision. A vision of braking up the unit. The man was naturally fullfilling his wildest dreams too, working all the time for the unit. That's arrogant and selfish. What the hell do you mean earned it? It's a team game. There is no 'well I'll just divorce his ass and go with my dreams, because the unit doesn't fit with the dream'.
And THIS IS a phenomenon known in our societies.
A man does it? He's a bastard. Better pay support. If woman does it? IT's a vision and chase of the dreams.
And what the hell do they mean she earned it anyway, was it so much of a pain to take care of the unit? I guess she really loved him! Bullshit.
Women think, that they is something wonderful, if they could just get out and go wild. Ahh, 9 hour long bubble baths and red wine.. oh yes this is the life. But at the end it just leaves you wrinkled and wiht a hangover and broken unit.
It is acceptable in our societies to bash the man. It is to be expected. After all, a woman suffers so much. If man suffers, divorces, the woman suffers then too. But the man never suffers. And that's just a mistake to think about it like this. You assign with the unit, your orders are for life. That's it. End of discussion. Got dreams? Fine, negotiate and work it out, don't go sneaking up and doing disgraceful crap like that.
And somehow all her friends that didnt' say a word before now all hate the man too. 'Yeah he was a pain in the ass.. now that he's out of the picture, we can be free again'. Yeah, free for what? Being hypocrite?
You see, a common conception in our world these days are that the man is made out of steel, and they can take every kind of crap without flinching. But that's not true. If man kills his wife, he is a psycho and a sick bastard. If wife kills his man, then the man must of been abusing her for years, and it was on self defense. See the difference? These are the first thoughts that comes to peoples minds.
It's a racist society, where man is grabbed by the balls and twisted around, told he should be something he isnt, and expected things that are not logical. If you want something, say so. If you want to say something, well then say that, don't go beating around the bush, it isnt' 2pac lyrics where you're supposed to find evidence he is still alive. And we actually sometimes mean just that what we say, WITHOUT strings attached.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
.. and then you just take all this and call it love. And ask what's wrong in that. Well, nothing is wrong in love, and showing it, except when it's not about love anymore, and you just call it. I can eat 100 pizzas in a row and ask 'what's wrong with loving good food?'. It just isn't the same thing. Or shouting 'I HATE FOREIGNERS' and say 'what's wrong with being patriot?'.
They just arent' the same thing. If love would exist, it would be simple. It's when women attach things to it, then it becomes the famous painful. Why would you want to shake it up and shatter it, and then claim well, if it didn't stand itself, it wasn't true anyway. That's like an excuse to do **** and see what happens and then not feel bad about it. Every man has a braking point. Every single man has it. And if you test it enough, they will reach that point. So that's only a sick sadistic game women play.
Then they take that sadistic behaviour of theirs, and claim men are just simple. As if that's a bad thing? Being complicated is the negative thing. Being complicated means difficult to understand and difficult to communicate, which equals to difficult relationship. If men don't learn from their mistakes, then how come they have to fight the same fight all over again so many times? About 'you don't love me anymore'. If I don't love you anymore, you know it because you're **** is on the drive way the next morning. That's the sign. If I watch TV happily, that means I still love you. Simple.
The aggressive psycho *****es are the worst though.. I also had a gf for, hey that was over month, anyway it ended when we were at this festival, and she went to pee, and came back and said a guy grabbed her ass. Then she said that after that he grabbed her again, not from the butt but generally. She clearly indicated, with a glee in her eyes that I need to go kick his ass. So I asked her what did she do after he grabbed her ass the first time. She said she didn't do anything. I asked her if she told him she already had a boyfriend, or said to not do it and to f off. She didn't say that either. She said, that she didn't want to tip him off. Meaning she wanted to see me kick his ass. So she could cheer for me or some sick stuff. Then she pointed the guy at me, and he looks at me, and comes right in to apologize. And he says to me he didn't know she was taken. The apology was sincere, and I wasn't mood for starting anything anyway, so I said that he was being an ******* anyway, grabbing people he didn't know. And he apologized again and offered me a beer saying he knows and that yeah it was his mistake. It wasn't the fact that he did wrong that got me angry, it was the fact that all she wanted was to see us fight. She wanted that all along, and wasn't so much upset about being grabbed. You see, the aggressive psycho *****es are the worst. Needless to say it didn't last for long. And she acted surprised 'I thought you wanted to fight.. you go to gym to fight, you watch fights all the time..' ... YEAH right, of course it's safe to assume I want to fight everyone she brings in front of me too. I can be her knight or something, but I won't be her ****ing bully dog.
So what I'm saying is, women needs to be women. However of course they can be what ever they watn to, but I'm only attracted to women who are more old school. And by this I don't mean slave.
But the psycho girls I described with experience above, they're not accepted by oru society. And shouldn't be.
But hte ones that are accepted are way more in larger numbers. The ones that hit YOU.
There are these girls, who think, that since it's not cool that men hit women, and she knows you won't hit her, that they can hit you. As an acceptable form of arguing an issue too, it's not like you have done something wrong when it can happen. They can hit you, because you can take it? Damn it, a woman doesn't hit me, and I don't hit women, it's that simple. Hitting a person is the biggest insult you can throw out there. It's not the fact that you might not get injured from it, but it's the fact that she actually hits you, and you call that 'well I got angry with you'. Yeah? So you can't control yourself? And we accept it. No way! So, if you slap me in the face 10 times in a row hard, and I can take it because I'm a man, then how about I slap you back? It's not acceptable, because 'man hits harder than a woman, and man can take hits better than a woman'. Don't worry, I woudln't slap you back or any else either, so that's not the issue. But how about if my friend who is a girl slaps you back for me? i think that's not cool either. But somehow it's cool for woman to hit me. And they don't feel sorry either, they just keep yelling after that too. What's that all about? In touch with the 'RAGE' feel? I just have to whip out my prince and peniswhip back .
Last edited by Pekka on 10-08-2004 at 23:34
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snowflake
|
 |
falling, once again
Apr 2003
time: 23:34
|
|
I don't drink coffee either. I said smell it.  I drink grapefruit juice. 
Both you and I have limited first hand evidence so I'd agree with you that there might be women as you described, that thinks they don't need men excepting for lifting stuff and there might be women who think she has the right to ask her man to do everthing for her while she doesn't want to do anything for him.
But I'll have to say that there are plenty of men who have biased toward women too, and some things in your posts are evidences of such biases. Like when you express your disapprove of women wanting money to buy her own stuff but you consider it perfectly normal when men wanted to buy his own stuff.
quote:
But when a woman goes for a career, she keeps it to herself. That's right, she keeps it to herself. It isn't the unit money anymore. That's not equal. That's arrogant.
|
I'd agree with you if that was true. But I do not personally know a lot of such cases. I have a career and my money goes to the unit. Same with many people I know.
quote:
Of course if the man says NO, he's being a cheap bastard, and maybe losing his love for her, according to the woman. If a man wants something exclusive, and the woman disagrees, then that's that, end of discussion. See the difference?
|
Not true either. Of course many stuff women buy men think are nonsences and just a waste of money. But the same goes from women to men. Just think about it, somewhere in this planet some women may be complaining the same thing about men. "When he wants something, it's absolute necessary and he has worked for it. When I want something, it's a waste of money then that's that, end of discussion." Why couldn't there be a concensas that both man and woman can buy some of their useless stuff without getting the approval from the others?
I'm not saying what you are complaining are nonexisting. But my thinking is that there are plenty counter evidences out there. So you shouldn't over generalize. Not all women dislike taking responsibility. Yes they like to talk about love and they like to associate everything with love or not love. What would it cost you to say an extra three words every day if it can get her happy? You should know that a happy woman likes to do lot more stuff and an unhappy woman like to fight much more.
Women has different views about love from men. Men think love as if it is a stone. There, it is there. See? It was there yesterday. Why wouldn't it be there today? Women think love as if it is a tree. You need to water it everyday.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snowflake
|
|
falling, once again
Apr 2003
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
And you can't fight with women either. Because they don't follow the rules of fighting, which is 'who has better argument, and is basing them on facts, wins'. Because they're in touch with their emotions. Emotion doesn't go with logic. Don't emotionate and logicate.
Yes, I made teh words up.
I've had a fight with a girl when everything was going just fine, and she just wanted to pick up a fight because she wanted to argue. I said I don't want to argue over that issue and she used the 'oh so you think I'm wrong?' and I replied 'No, I just don't feel like that issue isn't worth arguing about'. And by that, I meant what I said, I didn't mean 'I think you're stupid', I didn't mean 'I don't love you so I don't want to fight with you either'. The topic we were arguing about, I mean she was, that she hated that we never really fought. And we were together for a week to when she took that subject up. It pretty much ended there too.
You know, I don't particualry feel fighting over 'why you never fight with me', especially so when we had known for so little time. I could already see, there would be millions of fights, one sided ones. And you can't get them to shut up either. YOu think that ends a fight? No that just adds fuel to the fire. So I just figure better use the pre-emtpive strike and insult right there.
'so you don't think this issue is important enough?' 'No, I think you're fat'. That works way better. End of the fight, you win. |
When you learn to read women, you'll find the logic behind it. When she asked "Why do you never fight with me?" She was wondering if you really care for her. Not about how she looks or how she was in bed. But actually what she thinks and what she beliefs. You told her you don't agree with her but you are not going to fight her. To her that means you really don't care what she thinks. And the last "pre-emptive strike" is really a nice touch. I'd be surprised if any girl would be stupid enough to hang around with you after that. Not only slow to understand her, not only uncare about the non-physical side of her, but also rude and disrespective. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
Snowflake, no you misunderstood me with the money issue. If a man has his own money, it's mutual money. She wants something, they negotiate about it. If man says no, he's being cheap and will never hear the end of it. If man wants something, asks about it, woman says no, that's the end of discussion.
If however, woman gets her own money, it's not mutual money. That's the difference.
Now, if you know women that don't fit the profile, please, introduce me to them .
And when you turn it around, that the woman says the same in different household, well, that could happen too, to which I say well, it isn't fair that way either. What you might fail to see, I'm not sure if you do or don't, is that I'm not endorsing these ways of doing things. It doesn't mean the woman has to shut up and let me do the exact same things in return. Not at all. I'm more about democracy anyway. Both must understand each others needs and then try to satisfy them the best ways possible.
And I can generalize, because I've seen this more than I've seen the other .
But that's the whole point of saying 'I love you' all over agian. You see, it becomes expected ritual. It's not an expression of love to the man anymore, it's like an ultimatum, if you don't say it, that's BAD. So it's not like it's a free will thing now. It's enforced. And quite frankly, if it's repeated all the time, it becomes a victim of inflation. Just like hearing the same song again and again, it was first super hit but now it just sucks.
The stone and water thing.. that just don't make sense. Admit it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
And no, saying 'I don't want to argue this issue' DOESN'T mean I don't think so. It means I dont' want to argue this issue . You see, you see? Selfownage!
And yes I agree the pre-emtpive strike is pretty good. But if it makes you feel any better, I didn't say that to her, and I have never said that to a girl.
Slow to understand.. like I said, I already see where it was going to.. she wanted to argue. What ever the issue, just that itself, or because she wanted me to argue something so it would end up me saying I'm sorry and that I sure love her very much, if that was the original agenda. But you see, there are times when you just don't feel like arguing! If she wants to hear me saying that I still care for her, then she should ask if I care for her. And that's OK, unless you do it every day, and it's ok if it's withjout strings attached.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Snowflake
|
|
falling, once again
Apr 2003
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
Slow to understand.. like I said, I already see where it was going to.. she wanted to argue. What ever the issue, just that itself, or because she wanted me to argue something so it would end up me saying I'm sorry and that I sure love her very much, if that was the original agenda. But you see, there are times when you just don't feel like arguing! If she wants to hear me saying that I still care for her, then she should ask if I care for her. And that's OK, unless you do it every day, and it's ok if it's withjout strings attached. |
Exactly very slow, still. I need to go slower with you in this case. It means nothing if you SAY you care for her. (Leave alone the fact if she asked you that you'd be even more annoyed and think "how stupid she is. I loved you yesterday right? Why wouldn't I love you today?") But the point is, if you do care about what she thinks and beliefs, you'd actually want to know what she thinks and why she thinks so. And you'd respect her enough to tell her if you agree with her or not. And if not you'd lay out your reasons why. If you've been doing this she would know you cared for her for who she is not for how she looked. And she didn't even need you to SAY that you care for her. Because she would KNOW. But obviously you haven't been doing that, because you just told us that.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Pekka
|
|
em seu burro dos pais!
Feb 2002
time: 07:34
|
|
No. I would be interested to hear what she wants to say, but not in a form of fight. That, I do not care if the issue isn't something important. If it's something else, we should talk about it and I'll listen. I guess staring a fight with hidden agendas, going like this, taking enery drain for both of us when she just can't come up straight with it is a part of the weird tree thing.
CHOP DOWN THE TREE!
Somehow it is now my fault then? What about the fact that she wanted to argue, when I didn't? Hey, it's not cool to start arguing about everything, just because you want to talk about something else. It's like saying 'well you take the stabbing in your stomach to show you care for me'. OK, I guess I don't care that much . It's the endless testing zone I talked about earlier. The sadistic girl nature, wanting to shake it up only to see if it stands, and it would, but she keeps on testing and testing. And every man has a braking point.
And aboslutely I don't care for a girl who starts an argument that early about a thing like that. Because it means, that those kind of arguments will be weekly for years to come. No thanks.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Snowflake
|
|
falling, once again
Apr 2003
time: 23:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Pekka
Basically you are countering my arguments with 'women are more complex than that, they are more emotional where as men are simple'.
But you can't explain that complexity then? Uh oh... right.
|
No no. Don't put words in my mouth. Where did I say men are simple? All human are complex. But you have to accept the fact that they are complex, and then try to comprehend them. Not complain and then trash them.
quote:
Like said, you expect me to go over to my knees every other second to show my love for the girl, because she demands it. It's not a show of love, it's an ultimatum. LIke said, it's bad if you don't go and explain her that yeah you still care for her. It's like saying psychos are cool because they're just like that and for psychos it's normal to kill people. Yeah they're like that but it's still not OK. |
I'll give you this is a pretty good argument.
Yes it might actually be right that for psychos it's normal to kill people. They are uncool because well all you get from them are suffering. Whereas in the women's case, you get kicks, and thrills, and suspenses, and all the other nice things if you manage not to be killed.
But back on the topic. I do not expect you to go over to your knees every day. I just wanted to show you how you could read a girl. When you read her well you won't need to go over to your knees. If you don't read her well, well you won't fare well even if you truely love her, I mean, even if you truely have a crash on her.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-08-2004 22:25
Yes it is way more romantic and powerful if you savor those words for yourself pekka. That's a good strategy too. Know that you could use that weapon, but are not using it merely because of your mercy. Wouldn't that make you feel very manly? 
|