What is you Definition of a REAL man????

[Sim54]

I'm not sucking up, just making a point, that's all.

Research has never really got the measure of people, it's all dry science, and misses a lot of the nuances in human relationships. Arguing that a woman isn't offering a valid opinion because she's just one person is pretty insulting. And at the end of the day, the question asks us to offer our opinions, and that's what were doing. We're not wrong for disagreeing with John, it's too subjective for that.

[hrtlsngl7]

I'll leave the first part for Velvette as that's her question.

 

 

 

Ok, so you've talked about what women are attracted to, based on the psychology of attraction. What are men supposed to be attracted to, based on this science?

 

In many circumstances I'd recommend 'rolling with the punches', but in the case of your identity, who you are - I can't see one solid reason to compromise it to appease anyone else. Attracting women based on a guise? Never compromise your core for someone, John. If they won't take you as you are they are wrong, wrong, wrong for you and don't deserve you, and in the long-run your relationships with them are going to fall apart because there's not a whole of genuine there to sustain it.

 

It is not attracting based on a "guise" it's called "change". You can change 4 the better or worse. Relationships are kind of like jobs. If in the interview you are not what the employer is looking 4....some1 else gets the 80k job. I'll change some to make 80k. If I had to modify my personality a little to get an attractive woman who meets 100% of the qualities I'm looking 4, so be it.

[hrtlsngl7]

I'm not sucking up, just making a point, that's all.

Research has never really got the measure of people, it's all dry science, and misses a lot of the nuances in human relationships. Arguing that a woman isn't offering a valid opinion because she's just one person is pretty insulting. And at the end of the day, the question asks us to offer our opinions, and that's what were doing. We're not wrong for disagreeing with John, it's too subjective for that.

 

Well I didn't say her opinion is invalid. She's saying that his opinion is invalid because it's based on many people,...and that's insulting. He's not a female and can't speak from a female perspective. He's relying on the research he's done. Research can't get all "the nuances" of a relationship, but it can get pretty specific about the parts we are trying to pinpoint: What is the Definition of a (REAL) man? A lot are disagreeing with -JOHN- and that's okay, but they are clearly attacking his "MASCULINIST" view and he is simply defending with CLEAR logic. It goes back to the Philosophical conundrum, " If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

The answer is obviously yes it does make a sound, even if no one hears it and that translates to there is an absolute truth to a situation even if no one knows the it. Velvette is presenting her own situations as absolute truth,...instead of an opinion as if it invalidates -JOHN-....LOL...I got a B- in PHIL 102 ;D

[Sim54]

It's not possible to answer with certainty that it makes a sound, unfortunately, as there is no-one there to verify it. And in my opinion CLEAR logic sucks. Life is never that simple.

I disagree, she is simply saying that as part of the demographic that johns research purports to represent, she doesn't actually feel represented. It's not that john is wrong exactly, but his rather over bearing tone, and need to speak in absolutes is bound to get peoples backs up. Logic never sells itself very well to fallible humans. And hiding behind logic is the preserve of men who are often disconnected from their feelings.

[Jake]

I don't mean to stir this thread up by posting this, my intent is to post before I disregard it... in self-denial. I discovered this article 15 minutes ago, I've just finished reading it and I want to see what everyone else's thoughts are. Again, this isn't an attack on anyone as I find myself in the article as well (I'm the "clinically depressed" person).

 

link removed

[-John-]

I don't mean to stir this thread up by posting this, my intent is to post before I disregard it... in self-denial. I discovered this article 15 minutes ago, I've just finished reading it and I want to see what everyone else's thoughts are.

 

That article is dead-on, and is consistent with my own research. Here's the nut:

 

why women don’t just say what they want. Why do they say they want nice guys but go with jerks? Are women just liars? It’s not a malicious lie so much as a natural two-part human response that people have when asked a question: (1) they want to give the answer that gives the most flattering impression and (2) they often go so far as to delude themselves into believing at some level that this flattering fiction is actually true. Not everyone is emotionally and psychologically strong enough to reveal unflattering truths about themselves, especially to themselves. Self-deception is a very important coping mechanism among human beings. And women are much better at believing their own BS than men.

 

There is a very simple reason why this is: once again, people cannot control who they attracted to. Women will often come up with a long list of what they want in a man (tall, handsome, a good listener, sensitive), but will often be attracted to men who aren't really like this. That's because most humans cannot control who they are attracted to, so whatever pre-written list these women have come up with goes out the door once that attraction trigger goes off at the sight of a male who demonstrates certain masculine qualities. (Women often ask themselves "Why do I keep choosing the wrong guys?" after being burned by jerks. It's because she hasn't "chosen" anything. She's instead being led around by millions of years of subconscious attraction triggers in her brain.)

 

Two things can remedy this situation:

 

(1) Men need to nurture and develop their masculinity, just like the jerks, but express that masculinity in positive and constructive ways: become gentlemen.

 

(2) Women need to get better at using their intellect to filter the objects of their attraction so that fewer jerks, and more gentlemen, get through.

[90_hour_sleep]

If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? The answer is obviously yes it does make a sound, even if no one hears it and that translates to there is an absolute truth to a situation even if no one knows the it.

 

lol...obviously yes? does your inner scientist question that assertion? what if sound is only an experience...and it only really exists if there is someone there to experience it? sound is just air displacement really...and that displacement is recognized by us because our ears translate that displacement into what we perceive as sound. if there is no ear to translate that displacement...is there really a sound to be perceived?

 

hahaha. i'm not serious. i have no idea what the answer to that question is. but i think it's anything but obvious.

 

like your thread here, hrtlsngl...but i have to question the definition of ''clear logic''. if we're talking in terms of philosophy...we're really outside the realm of absolutes. that's why philosophy exists...to answer the questions that by definition have no absolute answer. think the abortion argument (where there is no difinitive consensus). whatever your vantage point...for you it's right. and for those opposed to your vantage...they're right too. it's perception...it's belief. there is no right...and there is no wrong...unless we're speaking in terms of our own beliefs. situations are neutral...it's you and i that polarize them as absolutes...as good/bad, right/wrong.

 

isn't that what we've come to in this thread?

[Jake]

That article is dead-on, and is consistent with my own research. Here's the nut:

 

There is a very simple reason why this is: once again, people cannot control who they attracted to. Women will often come up with a long list of what they want in a man (tall, handsome, a good listener, sensitive), but will often be attracted to men who aren't really like this. That's because most humans cannot control who they are attracted to, so whatever pre-written list these women have come up with goes out the door once that attraction trigger goes off at the sight of a male who demonstrates certain masculine qualities. (Women often ask themselves "Why do I keep choosing the wrong guys?" after being burned by jerks. It's because she hasn't "chosen" anything. She's instead being led around by millions of years of subconscious attraction triggers in her brain.)

 

This is mainly the part that really stuck for me as it really speaks volume of humans as a whole and is not just the subject at hand.

 

"Self-deception is a defense mechanism that apparently keeps us sane through ego protection. Take it away and give people unflinching reality and the average person’s mind will not be able to take it and their mental health will suffer."

 

 

Two things can remedy this situation:

 

(1) Men need to nurture and develop their masculinity, just like the jerks, but express that masculinity in positive and constructive ways: become gentlemen.

 

(2) Women need to get better at using their intellect to filter the objects of their attraction so that fewer jerks, and more gentlemen, get through.

 

I would agree, however, this subject as a whole is still very subjective and dangerous if taken in the improper manner. The truth of the matter is women have a higher capacity for emotion and expression much more so then men. Men on the other hand, are better at handling emotions (male brain has more hormones for handling distress). It's the natural response as a guy to try and "fix" stuff but because of this different perception we also tend to see things as black or white (broken or working).

 

This subject, overall, I would say brings up supportive information that is true for me personally. Now, is it true for everybody else? No, I don't believe that to be so as there's always an exception to the subject at hand, as proven by others posting in this thread. It therefore comes as no surprise that many of us posting in this thread are relating or disagreeing with each other because it really depends on your own experience in life or even just your opinion in general. As for me, I agree with you John because my life is mainly accopanied by solitude. Can I see where other people are coming from on this? Sure, but it doesn't mean it's reality for me as well and so I can only do what I think will help my own situation.

[Jake]

I forgot to give another food for taught that I really wanted to mention. I find it ironic that I found that article in all honesty by googling the words:

 

"I can't trust anybody"

 

 

I don't know about you guys but that makes me think even harder on the subject....

[90_hour_sleep]

I forgot to give another food for taught that I really wanted to mention. I find it ironic that I found that article in all honesty by googling the words:

 

"I can't trust anybody"

 

 

I don't know about you guys but that makes me think even harder on the subject....

 

hey jake...

 

can you elaborate on that statement?

[Jake]

hey jake...

 

can you elaborate on that statement?

 

On what part? The thinking harder part? The subject or both?

[90_hour_sleep]

On what part? The thinking harder part? The subject or both?

 

why you're thinking about all of this even harder after the google search...and specifically...why the words ''i can't trust anybody'' are important to you.

 

just curious.

[Jake]

why you're thinking about all of this even harder after the google search...and specifically...why the words ''i can't trust anybody'' are important to you.

 

just curious.

 

I searched those words specifically because I have that problem. They're important to me because I can't trust anybody and have been so since childhood. I was looking for articles on the subject or at least material related to that phrase and it was ironic and upsetting that my search brought me back to this thread.

 

I've studied other subjects and many have brought light to my own personality / issues. I think long and hard about all this because I want to get better, I'm what you would call an "emotionally unstable person".... in nice terms.

 

In frank terms, I'm crazy.

[90_hour_sleep]

I searched those words specifically because I have that problem. They're important to me because I can't trust anybody and have been so since childhood. I was looking for articles on the subject or at least material related to that phrase and it was ironic and upsetting that my search brought me back to this thread.

 

I've studied other subjects and many have brought light to my own personality / issues. I think long and hard about all this because I want to get better, I'm what you would call an "emotionally unstable person".... in nice terms.

 

In frank terms, I'm crazy.

 

do you see a correlation with those specific words...and the general theme of this thread? i think that's what i was getting at. why was it upsetting that it lead you back here? maybe i should read the article...haven't been there yet.

[Jake]

do you see a correlation with those specific words...and the general theme of this thread?

 

Yes, a very resounding yes and that's what's bugging me in that it rings true to the theme of this thread but in the bad sense because what we're talking about is theoretically true, yet, it's based on not being able to trust people. Which in no way makes you more capable of having a relationship, much less wanting to be in one.

 

 

i think that's what i was getting at. why was it upsetting that it lead you back here? maybe i should read the article...haven't been there yet.

 

Well the article is basically what is being argued in this thread. Hence why I said it was ironic that I found it with the phrase "I can't trust anybody."

[90_hour_sleep]

Yes, a very resounding yes and that's what's bugging me in that it rings true to the theme of this thread but in the bad sense because what we're talking about is theoretically true, yet, it's based on not being able to trust people. Which in no way makes you more capable of having a relationship much less wanting to be in one.

 

okay. so...you were experiencing a general feeling of agreement with this thread...perhaps a bit of a boost, because things were making sense...only to experience a bit of a let down because ultimately this particular frame of mind is also associated with an inability to trust? am i even close?

 

you know...i have a hard time agreeing with either perspective on this thread. on the one hand...i don't find labels very useful beyond categorical necessity. beyond that...i find them to be quite limiting. and the word 'identity' (which was thrown into the mix somewhere in this thread) is almost interchangeable with 'limitations' from my perspective. but then...there is also some solid reasoning for having an 'identity'. it's often associated with feelings of belonging...even if that feeling is a belonging with those that just don't belong. i guess...in my own life, where i find a problem with the 'identity' is when it becomes rigid. when i become consumed with a certain pattern of belief because it's a part of who i am -- my identity -- and refuse to open to something else because it feels threatening to this identity i've adopted...then i begin to question what purpose it serves. why is it so important to have an identity. i ask that question regularly of myself. and beyond the typical rhetoric...i don't have a simple answer. as much as i can see the benefits on the level of intellect...my feeling doesn't align with that. i've grown to see identities as essentially very destructive prisons. they often keep us in bondage to our own suffering. look at the breakup forum...and the overwhelming identification with the victim identity. yes...it absolutely makes sense as a reactive mechanism...as a way to cope with threatening feelings of loss and grief. but beyond that reactive state...it's the identification with the feelings of being wronged...of being hurt...of being betrayed, manipulated, etc that serve to keep the pain alive. this breed of identity serves no other purpose than to keep us stuck.

 

as i see it...other forms of identification work in much the same way. the identity promotes this sense of separateness from others. as it stands today we're conditioned to find strength in our uniqueness (this message is everywhere). and while the uniqueness of humanity is at times exceedingly beautiful...it also has a way of promoting arrogance. when we cross that line from unique to separate and better...or separate and right...it takes on a new shape. it's different. and in terms of trust...i can think of no greater obstacle. i know...when i feel separate from the people around me...the last thing i feel i can do is trust. how can you trust that which you feel disconnected from?

 

i dunno. i think it definitely relates to this thread...but more in terms of the discussion itself...as opposed to the content. and you're absolutely right. if you can't trust...how can you develop meaningful relationships. i don't have the right answer for that. for me...it has to do with giving up my desire to be separate...to be better, or right, or more than the next guy. it's a bit of a balancing act sometimes...but it's what works for me. humility and acceptance. and to be honest...i get that vibe from you in your posting.

 

and jake...if you have some free time...you might find this other article interesting. i think it gets into the heart of craziness. but...i think we're all nuts...seriously. neurotic...and just a bit insane. every single one of us.

 

link removed

[Jake]

okay. so...you were experiencing a general feeling of agreement with this thread...perhaps a bit of a boost, because things were making sense...only to experience a bit of a let down because ultimately this particular frame of mind is also associated with an inability to trust? am i even close?

 

Correct and exactly on the mark!

 

 

you know...i have a hard time agreeing with either perspective on this thread.

 

Do you flip from one side to the other? Because I'm finding I'm doing this.

 

 

on the one hand...i don't find labels very useful beyond categorical necessity. beyond that...i find them to be quite limiting. and the word 'identity' (which was thrown into the mix somewhere in this thread) is almost interchangeable with 'limitations' from my perspective. but then...there is also some solid reasoning for having an 'identity'. it's often associated with feelings of belonging...even if that feeling is a belonging with those that just don't belong. i guess...in my own life, where i find a problem with the 'identity' is when it becomes rigid. when i become consumed with a certain pattern of belief because it's a part of who i am -- my identity -- and refuse to open to something else because it feels threatening to this identity i've adopted...then i begin to question what purpose it serves. why is it so important to have an identity. i ask that question regularly of myself. and beyond the typical rhetoric...i don't have a simple answer. as much as i can see the benefits on the level of intellect...my feeling doesn't align with that. i've grown to see identities as essentially very destructive prisons. they often keep us in bondage to our own suffering. look at the breakup forum...and the overwhelming identification with the victim identity. yes...it absolutely makes sense as a reactive mechanism...as a way to cope with threatening feelings of loss and grief. but beyond that reactive state...it's the identification with the feelings of being wronged...of being hurt...of being betrayed, manipulated, etc that serve to keep the pain alive. this breed of identity serves no other purpose than to keep us stuck.

 

I completely agree, putting your personality or ones self in a box is a very bad idea. Thank you for posting this, it's brought more light to my own thoughts in this!

 

 

as i see it...other forms of identification work in much the same way. the identity promotes this sense of separateness from others. as it stands today we're conditioned to find strength in our uniqueness (this message is everywhere). and while the uniqueness of humanity is at times exceedingly beautiful...it also has a way of promoting arrogance. when we cross that line from unique to separate and better...or separate and right...it takes on a new shape. it's different. and in terms of trust...i can think of no greater obstacle. i know...when i feel separate from the people around me...the last thing i feel i can do is trust. how can you trust that which you feel disconnected from?

 

i dunno. i think it definitely relates to this thread...but more in terms of the discussion itself...as opposed to the content. and you're absolutely right. if you can't trust...how can you develop meaningful relationships. i don't have the right answer for that. for me...it has to do with giving up my desire to be separate...to be better, or right, or more than the next guy. it's a bit of a balancing act sometimes...but it's what works for me. humility and acceptance. and to be honest...i get that vibe from you in your posting.

 

Yeah... I'm in a bit of a war with myself you could say. I feel different yet I know I'm nothing special yet at the same time I feel different. Very confusing. At times I have a desire to live on an island by myself in total isolation and then in other moments I'm longing to fall in love with total intimacy. I'm entirely perplexed of myself....

[Jake]

and jake...if you have some free time...you might find this other article interesting. i think it gets into the heart of craziness. but...i think we're all nuts...seriously. neurotic...and just a bit insane. every single one of us.

 

link removed

 

Thanks man for the link! I will for sure keep that on favorites for another time, okay, I have to go study now!

[90_hour_sleep]

Correct and exactly on the mark!

Do you flip from one side to the other? Because I'm finding I'm doing this.

 

in terms of the thread? good question. i think i lean more to the side of ''people don't fit into boxes''. but at the same time...it's next to impossible to ignore the trends. i'd say, ideally we shouldn't fit the molds just because generations upon generations are dictating as such. but...i think on a broad scale we're all very suscpetible to our oldest patterns. jesus lol. yes...i'm flipping back and forth...but still a bit more to one side.

 

I completely agree, putting your personality or ones self in a box is a very bad idea. Thank you for posting this, it's brought more light to my own thoughts in this!

 

 

 

Yeah... I'm in a bit of a war with myself you could say. I feel different yet I know I'm nothing special yet at the same time I feel different. Very confusing. At times I have a desire to live on an island by myself in total isolation and then in other moments I'm longing to fall in love with total intimacy. I'm entirely perplexed of myself....

 

okay...call me crazy...but if you're no longer sure of just who you are...maybe that means that you're finally free to be just as you are...right now.

 

 

[Jake]

in terms of the thread? good question. i think i lean more to the side of ''people don't fit into boxes''. but at the same time...it's next to impossible to ignore the trends. i'd say, ideally we shouldn't fit the molds just because generations upon generations are dictating as such. but...i think on a broad scale we're all very suscpetible to our oldest patterns. jesus lol. yes...i'm flipping back and forth...but still a bit more to one side.

 

Isn't it annoying how you can't pick one? I want to pick the trusting perceptive of this thread but I'll be honest, I tend to go to the "dark side" often lol!

 

 

okay...call me crazy...but if you're no longer sure of just who you are...maybe that means that you're finally free to be just as you are...right now.

 

 

 

Yeah, I really tend to speak my mind on ENA. I've got nowhere else to go really.

[Unknown1607307972]

I certainly don't fit in a box I have the physical look of a very feminine girl but the mind of a feminist (not the crazy type who hate men, just the ones who think we should be treated as equals in both good and bad). I just hate gender roles with a passion because the media gives me this impression that I am not what I am supposed to be. Just take a look at the adverts we see, who they target them at, it's a shame the world is still this way. In a man I look for an equal, I don't expect him to not be a man but I do not want a man who will try and make me submissive. I am a woman, I don't reject everything about being a woman but I don't want to conform to the gender role when it doesn't feel right to me. Therefore I wouldn't want a man who *totally* conformed to his gender role either because we might clash.

[90_hour_sleep]

gender roles...yet another notch in the identity belt!

 

bring me a beer!!

[mad rabbits]

I haven't read this entire thread...

 

Something just occurred to me though. Concepts such as "real" men or "real" women don't really have a value that corresponds with reality. They are abstractions - ideals, in the platonic sense (I mean platonic as in plato the philosoper, not platonic as in "we're just friends

 

What I mean is that if you consider any "essence" of a thing...that essence is not something that absolutely exists in reality but a perceived distillation of prior instances. So one generalises from all the actually existing instances of a thing a bunch of qualities associated with a thing, bunches them all together, and then says "this is the REAL thing." But it isn't - its an intellectual abstraction.

 

I think what I'm saying is that therefore... the question "what is a real man" maybe can't be answered in any meaningful way, and maybe isn't a useful question.

[Sim54]

If you are secure in yourself, strong and authentic, then what does it matter if you conform to some external ideal, or set of attributes that are culturally defined?

 

Authenticity is hugely attractive!

[hrtlsngl7]

Your post makes my head hurt badhabits, but i will try to respond. It was hinted to by Bulletproof that my tittle is flawed and should probably be "What is your definition of a man" ommitting "REAL" because of the stereotypes it might conjure. Thx 4 the wordy/"platonic" way to say my thread is useless, even tho it got 10 pages of responses.