Suscipe Domine Traditional Catholic Forum

A female friend of mine passed this on to me.  I thought it was food for thought and intriguing.

Why women lose the dating game
Bettina Arndt listens to the other voices in this debate: the men.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/why-women-lose-the-dating-game-20120421-1xdn0.html#ixzz2GbeGoKM3

QuoteNaomi sat in the back row of Melbourne's Grattan Institute, about to watch her fiance give a lecture. She was joined by three unfamiliar women - all attractive, well groomed, in their mid-30s. From their whispered chat, she quickly realised they weren't there to hear about politics and economics but to meet her eligible man. Naomi explains: ''He's 36 years old and is definitely someone who falls into the alpha-male category: excellent job in finance, PhD, high income, six feet two, sporty and very handsome. And he's an utter sweetheart.''

Naomi is an attractive 28-year-old PhD student. She has been in a relationship with her fiance for six years. Her new companions were very friendly and chatted to her during the break. But then her partner, who had been socialising at the front of the room, made eye contact with Naomi and smiled.

''The women saw this and it was like the room had suddenly frozen over. There was silence and then one of them asked me if I knew him. I wasn't going to lie, so I told them he was my partner and how long we'd been together. It was amazing how they responded. They stopped smiling at me, shifted awkwardly in their seats and looked me up and down as if they were trying to figure out how a girl who still wears jeans and ballet flats could land a guy like that.'' The women left before her man gave his speech.

Naomi is stunned by the number of women in their 30s who throw themselves at her partner: the colleagues who sign emails with kisses; the female journalist who pointedly asked, post-interview, if he was married. Yet given the plight of thirtysomething women seeking partners, it's hardly surprising that her boyfriend is in their sights.

We hear endless complaints from women about the lack of good men.

Women astonished that men don't seem to be around when they decide it is time to settle down. Women telling men to ''man up'' and stop shying away from commitment.

But there is another conversation going on - a fascinating exchange about what is happening from the male point of view. Much of it thrives on the internet, in the so-called ''manosphere''. Here you will find men cheerfully, even triumphantly, blogging about their experience. They have cause for celebration, you see. They've discovered a profound change has taken place in the mating game and, to their surprise, they are the winners.

Dalrock (dalrock.wordpress.com) is typical: ''Today's unmarried twentysomething women have given men an ultimatum: I'll marry when I'm ready, take it or leave it. This is, of course, their right. But ultimatums are a risky thing, because there is always a possibility the other side will decide to leave it. In the next decade we will witness the end result of this game of marriage chicken.''

The endgame Dalrock warns about is already in play for hordes of unmarried professional women - the well-coiffed lawyers, bankers and other success stories. Many thought they could put off marriage and families until their 30s, having devoted their 20s to education, establishing careers and playing the field. But was their decade of dating a strategic mistake?

Jamie, a 30-year-old Sydney barrister, thinks so: ''Women labour under the impression they can have it all. They can have the career, this carefree lifestyle and then, at the snap of their fingers, because they are so fabulous, find a man. But if they wait until their 30s they're competing with women who are much younger and in various ways more attractive.''

The crisis for single women in this age group seeking a mate is very real. Almost one in three women aged 30 to 34 and a quarter of late-30s women do not have a partner, according to the 2006 census statistics. And this is a growing problem. The number of partnerless women in their 30s has almost doubled since 1986.

The challenge is greatest for high-achieving women in their 30s looking for equally successful men. Analysis of 2006 census figures by the Monash University sociologist, Genevieve Heard, reveals that almost one in four of degree-educated women in their 30s will miss out on a man of similar age and educational achievement. There were only 68,000 unattached graduate men in their 30s for 88,000 single graduate women in the same age group.

And the higher-education gap keeps widening. In the past year, the proportion of degree-educated women aged 25 to 34 rose from 37.7 per cent to 40.3 per cent, according to the Bureau of Statistics, while for males the figure remained below 30 per cent, having risen only 0.5 per cent in the past year.

Although there are similar numbers of single men and women in their 30s overall - about 370,000 of each across Australia - half these available men had only high school education, 57 per cent earned $42,000 or less and 95,000 of them were unemployed.

The high expectations of professional women are a big part of the story. Many high-achieving women simply are not interested in Mr Average, says Justin Parfitt, the owner of Australia's fastest growing speed-dating organisation, Fast Impressions. Parfitt adds: ''They've swallowed the L'Oreal line: 'Because you're worth it!' There's a real sense of entitlement.''

He finds many of his female members are determined to meet only men who are tall, attractive, wealthy and well educated. They want the alpha males. ''Most of the professional women rarely give out 'yes' votes to men who aren't similarly successful,'' reports Parfitt, who struggles to attract enough of these successful men to his speed-dating events. Sixty per cent of his members are female. Most are over 30.

During their 20s, women compete for the most highly desirable men, the Mr Bigs. Many will readily share a bed with the sporty, attractive, confident men, while ordinary men miss out. As Whiskey puts it at whiskeysplace.wordpress.com: ''Joe Average Beta Male is about as desirable to women as a cold bowl of oatmeal.''

Data from American colleges show 20 per cent of males - the most attractive ones - get 80 per cent of the sex, according to an analysis by Susan Walsh, a former management consultant who wrote about the issue on her dating website, hookingupsmart.com.

That leaves a lot of beta men spending their 20s out in the cold. Greg, a 38-year-old writer from Melbourne, started adult life shy and lonely. ''In my 20s, the women had the total upper hand. They could make or break you with one look in a club or bar. They had the choice of men, sex was on tap and guys like me went home alone, red-faced, defeated and embarrassed. The girls only wanted to go for the cool guys, good looks, outgoing personalities, money, sporty types, the kind of guys who owned the room, while us quiet ones got ignored.''

He barely had a date through much of his 20s and gave up on women. But then he spent time overseas, gained more confidence, learnt how to dress well and hit his early 30s. ''I suddenly started to get asked out by women, aged 19 through to 40. The floodgates burst open for me. I actually dated five women at once, amazing my flatmates by often bedding three to four of my casual dates each week. It is a great time as a male in your 30s, when you start getting more female attention and sex than you could ever have dreamt of in your 20s.''

That's when some men start behaving very badly - as the manosphere clearly shows. These internet sites are not for the faint-hearted. The voices are often crude and misogynist. But they tell it as they see it. There is Greenlander, an apparently successful engineer in his late 30s. In his early adult life, he was unable to ''get the time of day from women''. Now he's interested only in women under 27.

''The women I know in their early 30s are just delusional,'' he says. ''I sometimes seduce them and sleep with them just because I know how to play them so well. It's just too easy. They're tired of the cock carousel and they see a guy like me as the perfect beta to settle down with before their eggs dry out ... when I get tired of them I just delete their numbers from my cell phone and stop taking their calls ... It doesn't really hurt them that much: at this point they're used to pump & dump!''

It's easy to dismiss such bile but Greenlander's analysis is echoed by many Australian singles, both male and female.

''It's wall-to-wall arseholes out there,'' reports Penny, a 31-year-old lawyer. She is stunned by how hard it is to meet suitable men willing to commit. ''I'm horrified by the number of gorgeous, independent and successful women my age who can't meet a decent man.''

Penny acknowledges part of the problem is her own expectations - that her generation of women was brought up wanting too much. ''We were told we were special, we could do anything and the world was our oyster.'' And having spent her 20s dating alpha males, she expected them to be still around when she finally decided to get serious.

But these men go fast, many fishing outside their pond. The most attractive, successful men can take their pick from women their own age or from the Naomis, the younger women who are happy to settle early. Almost one in three degree-educated 35-year-old men marries or lives with women aged 30 or under, according to income, housing and marriage surveys by the Bureau of Statistics.

''I can't believe how many men my age are only interested in younger women,'' wails Gail, a 34-year-old advertising executive as she describes her first search through men's profiles on the RSVP internet dating site. She is shocked to find many mid-30s men have set up their profiles to refuse mail from women their own age.

Talking to many women like her, it's intriguing how many look back on past relationships where they let good men get away because they weren't ready. American journalist Kate Bolick wrote recently in The Atlantic about breaking off her three-year relationship with a man she described as ''intelligent, good-looking, loyal and kind''. She acknowledged ''there was no good reason to end things'', yet, at the time, she was convinced something was missing in the relationship. That was 11 years ago. She's is now 39 and facing grim choices.

''We arrived at the top of the staircase,'' Bolick wrote, ''finally ready to start our lives, only to discover a cavernous room at the tail end of a party, most of the men gone already, some having never shown up - and those who remain are leering by the cheese table, or are, you know, the ones you don't want to go out with.''

So, many women are missing out on their fairytale ending - their assumption that when the time was right the dream man would be waiting. The 30s are worrying years for high-achieving women who long for marriage and children - of course, not all do - as they face their rapidly closing reproductive window surrounded by men who see no rush to settle down.

And, of course, many women eventually do find a mate, often ending up with divorced men. There are complications with that second-marriage market, in which men come complete with former wives and children. That was never part of the plan.

Many really struggle with the fact that they aren't in a position to be too choosy. American author Lori Gottlieb gives a painfully honest account of that process in her book Marry Him: The Case for Settling for Mr Good Enough.

''Maybe we need to get over ourselves,'' she writes. The 40-year-old single mother enlisted a team of advisers who helped her realise that while she was conducting her long search for the perfect man - Prince Charming or nobody - her market value had dropped through the floor.

''Our generation of women is constantly told to have high self-esteem, but it seems that the women themselves are at risk of ego-tripping themselves out of romantic connection,'' she writes. She acknowledges she made a mistake not looking for a spouse in her 20s, when she was at her most desirable. She advises thirtysomething women to look for Mr Good Enough before they have even less choice. ''They are with an '8' but they want a '10'. But then suddenly they're 40 and can only get a '5'!''

Women delaying their search for a serious relationship have set up a very different dating and marriage market. The Sydney barrister, Jamie, finds himself spoilt for choice. Like many of his friends he's finding women actively pursuing him, asking him out, cooking him elaborate meals, buying him presents. ''Oh, you're a barrister,'' they say.

While many of his mates are playing the field, determined to enjoy this unexpected attention, Jamie is ready to settle down. He's very wary of Sex and the City types, women who are convinced they are so special, but he's confident he will soon find someone with her feet on the ground.

''I'm lucky,'' he says, ''to be in a buyer's market.''

It offers several ideas, but let's remember these are neo pagans talking.

Quote from: Bonaventure on December 31, 2012, 12:01:41 AM
It offers several ideas, but let's remember these are neo pagans talking.

Oh, I agree.  I just thought it was an interesting commentary on the lives of secular 20- and 30-somethings. 

This was bound to happen in a world of seemingly consequence-free sex. Women can't spend their 20s giving out the milk for free and then expect people to want to buy the cow ten years later. Men are, of course, behaving in an equally disgusting manner, but again, when sex is seen as mere recreation and is divorced from its actual purpose, disgusting behavior from both men and women is to be expected.

Good post, P.

Yes, both parties are to blame.  I say men are to blame first.  By first, I don't necessarily mean primarily, but chronologically.  If we accept the traditional premise of men and women have innate differences, and if one of those differences is the leadership quality of men over women and the woman's tendency to submit to the rule of the man, it follows that it is due to a lack of manhood that women have rebelled against their nature.

Good posts all around.

But what a Hellish world that article conjures!

Quote from: PenelopeHmm. I have an idea for another thread because I don't want to derail this one... Let's see if I can make this materialize.

Nope. Gave up.

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on December 31, 2012, 02:10:22 AM
Good posts all around.

But what a Hellish world that article conjures!

Ancilla, it's because that article has a complete spiritual disregard. It's as if their spiritual tuners are on mute.

What a shitty life.

Must be very depressing dating a lot of well used slappers.  That has to get boring pretty fast.  Lots of lies, betrayal and STDs I expect.

Useful lesson though.  Know what you're worth to a partner.  Are your personality features really attractive to the opposite sex or not.  Cut your coat to suit your cloth.

So whoredom doesn't pay off?

What a surprise!

They actually used the Alpha, Beta paradigm, lol. It is true to a certain extent though, women have grotesque levels of expectation. Now I'm not attacking all women here, just the modern kind, most traditional girls are not like this, but if we look just at the women on dating sites, they almost always say they will not date a man unless he is 6' or taller and makes above 60k a year. That is a huge problem, first, because it is pathetically shallow, second because with the market the way it is, I'd say probably only 5% of males fall into this category. 75% of men are under 6' tall, at least in the U.S. Often times as well, women don't want a strong Christian male, in fact, I've noticed, most modern women detest a man who actually has morals, but then when the guy sleeps with them and then a few weeks later tells them to get lost, they are like a bewildered puppy and confused. Well, if you actually didn't require a "bad" guy who is aesthetically pleasing and "alpha" then you might actually have a successful relationship. All the succesful relationships I've seen are because the woman was willing to settle for a guy who may not be the most attractive guy on earth, but was strong morally and committed to fulfilling the male role in the family and the relationship.

All these Pick Up Artist advice blogs and stuff always say that you have to take control of the relationship as a man and always keep her guessing, which I do agree with. Often times, being an alpha male on these PUA type sites all deal with just getting her in bed, and I guess that's what a lot of them want anyway, most modern males don't really want a relationship or to settle down because if they get married to some girl who is truly not a good girl (except tradiitonal Catholic girls, they tend to be really good) then they will end up getting divorced say anywhere from 3 to 10 years later and lose everything they own because she just got bored with him and society says she is empowered and should get everything she desires, so she cheats and steals then blames it on the male for "not caring about her," or some trash like that.

All these "beta" guys could do better if they put a little effort into talking more to women and not being so perverted when speaking to them. I've seen beta guys fall flat on their faces when talking to girls, simply because they do not understand women and approach them in a very juvenile way. I've never really had much difficulty with dating women, I've had many girlfriends, and I'm 5'8 and not really that buff and don't make a lot of money. A lot of it has to do with how you approach them, and how you make them feel. Most guys simply do not know how to do that. They give the example in the article of the guys who are just standing there by the cheese table not talking to the women, well, there's problem number one, they're not taking the initiative, they're not going after what they want. Women are shy by nature and men are more bold and outgoing by nature, so they compliment one another. If a guy is effeminized, like the example with the betas, he is not going to approach women for fear of being rejected, instead he waits and hopes that Suzie Q will come up to him and ask him to take her out for a night on the town, etc. This is just simply not realistic in the mind of women. Women like to be pursued, they enjoy feeling wanted and appreciated. Most beta guys do not understand this, that is why most guys get the cold shoulder at parties. Lastly, most modern men have a bad problem with pornography, and this gives them the illusion that the girl they need to have is some girl who wears 6 inch heels, wears a ton of makeup and is perfectly primped and smells like aphrodite, that is simply insanity, those type of girls are not the girls that you would want to have a relationship with anyway because they will try to control you. Betas need to realize that there is no shame in going for a 5-7.5 girl, or even an 8, you just have to learn how to approach and hold a conversation and keep them interested, if you can't do that, then you might as well go be a monk or a priest.

I am sick of the dating scene/game and all that, and I have no problems dating women, if I wanted to, I could probably get a date with a 7 by tonight if I really wanted to because that's the determination and confidence I have, and it's not to sound prideful, it's just that I know how to do it. Most guys are scared little puppies hiding behind a wall of videogames and pornography. But I would much rather give my life to Our Lord Jesus Christ, pray for me a sinner!

Quote from: Ascetik on January 01, 2013, 01:44:38 PMNow I'm not attacking all women here, just the modern kind, most traditional girls are not like this,

Quote(except tradiitonal Catholic girls, they tend to be really good)

Thank you for making this distinction. So often such articles and the posts that follow seem to be attacking women or men in general, when it is really the secular culture that is at fault, with its undermining of the true nature of both genders.

I don't know to what extent this article paints an accurate picture of modern culture. I don't really know any women or men who behave this way, but then I've always made a point of avoiding the dating scene. From what little I know of it I find it appallingly superficial. I honestly couldn't care less about a man's height, his income, or his level of formal education. And I find it dehumanizing to both men and women that they are divided into alphas and betas on the one hand and rankings from one to ten on the other, and based almost entirely on superficialities. Whatever happened to looking for someone who shares your interests and values? That is the only way you're going to find long-term compatibility. Oh, but you see, there's my mistake! I'm actually looking for long-term compatibility. So few people these days are, regardless of their age or alpha-numeric ranking. At least, that's my impression.   


 

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 02:17:49 PM
And I find it dehumanizing to both men and women that they are divided into alphas and betas on the one hand and rankings from one to ten on the other, and based almost entirely on superficialities.

I very much agree with this.

Quote from: Ascetik on January 01, 2013, 01:44:38 PM
I am sick of the dating scene/game and all that, and I have no problems dating women, if I wanted to, I could probably get a date with a 7 by tonight if I really wanted to because that's the determination and confidence I have, and it's not to sound prideful, it's just that I know how to do it. Most guys are scared little puppies hiding behind a wall of videogames and pornography. But I would much rather give my life to Our Lord Jesus Christ, pray for me a sinner!

Dude, are you seriously referring to women as numbers on a rating scale? Even if you're joking it's not appropriate. Fortunately, it will also make women hate you.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 02:47:16 PM
Dude, are you seriously referring to women as numbers on a rating scale? Even if you're joking it's not appropriate. Fortunately, it will also make women hate you.

I'm referencing it for the article, because that's what most people do. Their initial first impression of someone is their aesthetic appearance, and I'm not trying to offend people, just pointing out the reality that most people's first impression of someone is how they look on a 1-10 scale. That's just reality. Women do the same to men, so it goes both ways.

Why would it be fortunate that women hate me? That's a very cold thing to say. I am just giving an example from the article to reality of how modern people think. We're all guilty of it.

Quote from: Ascetik on January 01, 2013, 02:52:47 PMI'm referencing it for the article, because that's what most people do. Their initial first impression of someone is their aesthetic appearance, and I'm not trying to offend people, just pointing out the reality that most people's first impression of someone is how they look on a 1-10 scale. That's just reality. Women do the same to men, so it goes both ways.

Why would it be fortunate that women hate me? That's a very cold thing to say. I am just giving an example from the article to reality of how modern people think. We're all guilty of it.

It's one thing to notice how someone looks. It's quite another to assign them a value based on that and that alone.

Interesting observations, but it still isn't any consolation for those 20-something males who want to get married in the near future.

Quote from: Lyubov on January 01, 2013, 02:22:04 PM

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 02:17:49 PM
And I find it dehumanizing to both men and women that they are divided into alphas and betas on the one hand and rankings from one to ten on the other, and based almost entirely on superficialities.

I very much agree with this.

I agree as well and I used to be really surprised when I saw guys specifically doing this. My friends and I never thought to describe men in that way, but rating women on a 1-10 scale is apparently a ubiquitous, immediately understood system for men to discuss women. I always thought it was a joke that was used in the movies, but no. This is how many guys discuss women, and I think they do so without being conscious of what they're really doing. I think what bothers me most about this ranking system, though, is not that men are trying to quantify women's characteristics (I think it's probably normal for men to want to quantify things, including things that don't seem as though they can be quantified), but that, as Ancilla pointed out, only a woman's physical characteristics are considered when coming up with a number to describe her. Turning something subjective ("She's attractive") into something seemingly more objective ("She's a 9") might be an intuitive thing for a guy to do, but it really is off-putting to women. And, again as Ancilla notes here,

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 03:12:55 PMIt's one thing to notice how someone looks. It's quite another to assign them a value based on that and that alone.

in going from the subjective to the seemingly objective, guys are assigning a woman a certain value as opposed to merely observing how a woman looks, and that's what, in my opinion, is the most off-putting part of this idea of ranking people using a number system.

Of course, the same would apply to women using the alpha-beta binary to rank men, but I have honestly not personally encountered this system being used to discuss men, whereas I have personally experienced men using a ranking system to discuss women.

Quote from: Penelope on January 01, 2013, 03:36:48 PM
Of course, the same would apply to women using the alpha-beta binary to rank men, but I have honestly not personally encountered this system being used to discuss men, whereas I have personally experienced men using a ranking system to discuss women.

I've only ever heard men use these terms.

But on a more positive note,

Quote from: Ascetik on January 01, 2013, 01:44:38 PMAll the succesful relationships I've seen are because the woman was willing to settle for a guy who may not be the most attractive guy on earth, but was strong morally and committed to fulfilling the male role in the family and the relationship.

I wouldn't call that settling. I'd call that hitting the jackpot.

 ;D

Well, I agree with you. Settling was just the first word that came to mind because when addressing an issue like the article states I am tending to try and portray the thoughts of a modern man who is morally bereft of sensibility in these types of situations.

I wouldn't recommend getting so worked up about phenomena such as the alpha-beta binary, or the 1-to-10 hotness scale. Even if a man finds it too tacky to verbalize it, he will probably have thought it. It's part of the male's habit of quantifying and categorizing everything he sees. Plenty of women use the same systems, too, whether they want to admit it or not. My girlfriend and I casually bandy these terms about all the time in reference to other people (jokingly, of course). Women are especially adept at assessing whether a man is working, middle, or upper class within seconds of first contact.

Quote from: The Harlequin King on January 01, 2013, 04:20:49 PM
I wouldn't recommend getting so worked up about phenomena such as the alpha-beta binary, or the 1-to-10 hotness scale. Even if a man finds it too tacky to verbalize it, he will probably have thought it. It's part of the male's habit of quantifying and categorizing everything he sees. Plenty of women use the same systems, too, whether they want to admit it or not. My girlfriend and I casually bandy these terms about all the time in reference to other people (jokingly, of course). Women are especially adept at assessing whether a man is working, middle, or upper class within seconds of first contact.

I've been around women and men enough to see no significant difference in this aspect either. It is how people are.

One thing I noticed is that women seemingly think men care about their opinions to spontaneous express their views on a man's looks. Yet for some reason we cannot voice the truth about their weight.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 05:05:58 PM
One thing I noticed is that women seemingly think men care about their opinions to spontaneous express their views on a man's looks. Yet for some reason we cannot voice the truth about their weight.

Criticizing someone's appearance is rude, regardless of gender.

I dunno, people of walmart is pretty bad.  ;D

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 05:48:08 PM

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 05:05:58 PM
One thing I noticed is that women seemingly think men care about their opinions to spontaneous express their views on a man's looks. Yet for some reason we cannot voice the truth about their weight.

Criticizing someone's appearance is rude, regardless of gender.

I was not expressing a desire to reference people's weight, but just stating some of my observations.

Many women have volunteered "tips" to make me more attractive without any provocation, yet men are held to silence about the slightest acknowledgement of facts towards these same people.

In particular, I noticed women seem more open to expressing "disgust" at attributes of men and being surprised when offense is taken.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 06:09:48 PMI was not expressing a desire to reference people's weight, but just stating some of my observations.

Many women have volunteered "tips" to make me more attractive without any provocation, yet men are held to silence about the slightest acknowledgement of facts towards these same people.

In particular, I noticed women seem more open to expressing "disgust" at attributes of men and being surprised when offense is taken.

Those women should have been taught better manners. Unfortunately it would be bad manners to point that out to them.   :)

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 06:28:37 PM

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 06:09:48 PMI was not expressing a desire to reference people's weight, but just stating some of my observations.

Many women have volunteered "tips" to make me more attractive without any provocation, yet men are held to silence about the slightest acknowledgement of facts towards these same people.

In particular, I noticed women seem more open to expressing "disgust" at attributes of men and being surprised when offense is taken.

Those women should have been taught better manners. Unfortunately it would be bad manners to point that out to them.   :)

I do not think it is just manners. Even well meaning girls do it sometimes.

It seems to be a cultural thing.

Guys must be quiet about the fat chicks, and accept that girls may volunteer that they think normal body hair is disgusting. Now that I think about it, the media fantasy about men and women is exaggerated. Women are hyper-feminine, whereas men are less many, pre-adolescent versions of themselves, but taller. Maybe there is a connection there.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 06:35:23 PM
I do not think it is just manners. Even well meaning girls do it sometimes.

It seems to be a cultural thing.

Guys must be quiet about the fat chicks, and accept that girls may volunteer that they think normal body hair is disgusting. Now that I think about it, the media fantasy about men and women is exaggerated. Women are hyper-feminine, whereas men are less many, pre-adolescent versions of themselves, but taller. Maybe there is a connection there.

I see. The women in question are criticizing traits in general, not an individual. That's not as personally insulting, I guess. But still, if a man says he prefers thin women, he would be criticized for it. Our culture has made body image a very volatile issue for women.

I agree that the media also promotes a very effeminate standard of male beauty. It doesn't appeal to me personally. I like body hair.  :) So I have a hard time finding actors or models attractive these days. Oh, well...

I'm not sure about hyper-feminizing women though. Sure, we see some elaborate make-up, hairstyles, clothing, and accessories, but also boyish haircuts and clothing, not to mention tattoos and a general courseness of behavior traditionally only tolerated in men.

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 06:59:56 PM
I see. The women in question are criticizing traits in general, not an individual.

The observations are about both. The more polite women make general comments.

QuoteThat's not as personally insulting, I guess. But still, if a man says he prefers thin women, he would be criticized for it. Our culture has made body image a very volatile issue for women.

Women have made it a very volatile issue for women. Nobody is harder on women than other women.

Quote
I'm not sure about hyper-feminizing women though. Sure, we see some elaborate make-up, hairstyles, clothing, and accessories, but also boyish haircuts and clothing, not to mention tattoos and a general courseness of behavior traditionally only tolerated in men.

Women in the media look like dolls. Their faces are painted on, their hair might as well be a wig, and the function of their body is ignored.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 06:09:48 PM

Quote from: Ancilla Domini on January 01, 2013, 05:48:08 PM

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 05:05:58 PM
One thing I noticed is that women seemingly think men care about their opinions to spontaneous express their views on a man's looks. Yet for some reason we cannot voice the truth about their weight.

Criticizing someone's appearance is rude, regardless of gender.

I was not expressing a desire to reference people's weight, but just stating some of my observations.

Many women have volunteered "tips" to make me more attractive without any provocation, yet men are held to silence about the slightest acknowledgement of facts towards these same people.

In particular, I noticed women seem more open to expressing "disgust" at attributes of men and being surprised when offense is taken.

If someone states that she doesn't find a particular attribute attractive, why do you take it as a personal offense?

When I hear things like "I don't like skinny/brunette/etc women" I don't see it as an insult, it's just personal preference.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 11:03:06 PM
If someone states that she doesn't find a particular attribute attractive, why do you take it as a personal offense?

If a 250 lb woman volunteers to tell me she thinks my beard "looks like shit" without any provocation, I take some offense, if only for the severe breech of social protocol. I do not care to look attractive to anyone, in fact, I would rather not, but I am mindful of the intent of others.

Quote
When I hear things like "I don't like skinny/brunette/etc women" I don't see it as an insult, it's just personal preference.

If a man such as myself told you specifically that you looked bad in a very coarse manner without being in a position to give any such opinion, would you see it as an insult?

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 11:09:05 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 11:03:06 PM
If someone states that she doesn't find a particular attribute attractive, why do you take it as a personal offense?

If a 250 lb woman volunteers to tell me she thinks my beard "looks like shit" without any provocation, I take some offense, if only for the severe breech of social protocol. I do not care to look attractive to anyone, in fact, I would rather not, but I am mindful of the intent of others.

Quote
When I hear things like "I don't like skinny/brunette/etc women" I don't see it as an insult, it's just personal preference.

If a man such as myself told you specifically that you looked bad in a very coarse manner without being in a position to give any such opinion, would you see it as an insult?

First you mention women "expressing disgust at the attributes of men", and now you are talking about women specifically coming up to you and insulting you. These are two very different things. Speaking in general, "I don't like beards", is not insulting.

I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 11:28:18 PM

First you mention women "expressing disgust at the attributes of men", and now you are talking about women specifically coming up to you and insulting you. These are two very different things. Speaking in general, "I don't like beards", is not insulting.

It was a minor point which I did not intend to expand. I think you have bigger fish to fry now...looking at was posted after this.

 ;D

Very true!

"If a 250 lb woman volunteers to tell me she thinks my beard "looks like shit" without any provocation, I take some offense, if only for the severe breech of social protocol. I do not care to look attractive to anyone, in fact, I would rather not, but I am mindful of the intent of others."

Just...lol

Quote from: Bonaventure on January 02, 2013, 12:17:48 AM
"If a 250 lb woman volunteers to tell me she thinks my beard "looks like shit" without any provocation, I take some offense, if only for the severe breech of social protocol. I do not care to look attractive to anyone, in fact, I would rather not, but I am mindful of the intent of others."

Just...lol

It was very surreal, and at work.

But the point was, originally, that the modern media conception of "man" and "woman" is very distorted and the culture has its own issues too.

Men are very physical and visual, as a general rule -- so it's no shock to me that they assign numeric values to women based on their looks.  Now, I don't think they should walk up to women and tell them they are a 2 or something, but I don't blame them for thinking it and even using that system when talking to other men.

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 02, 2013, 01:28:56 AM
Men are very physical and visual, as a general rule -- so it's no shock to me that they assign numeric values to women based on their looks.  Now, I don't think they should walk up to women and tell them they are a 2 or something, but I don't blame them for thinking it and even using that system when talking to other men.

Actually, men seem to descent into a binary system most of the time.

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

Ben, for whatever my opinion may be worth to you, I feel that this post is getting a bit close to the lacking charity line. Your ideas are your ideas and I'm not asking you to change how you feel about a certain group or a certain person, but your phrasing of your ideas is potentially insulting to both entire groups and to individuals who may read or post here. One thing specifically that I find lacking charity is your delight in the public ridicule of an individual. To take pleasure in someone being publicly insulted (particularly for her appearance) is not an attractive trait in a person.

Quote from: Evangelium Gratiæ on January 01, 2013, 11:53:53 PM
...and yet, friends, putting aside all mutual recriminations that men and women often harbour against each other in their egotistical shallowness - as this thread demonstrates once more if need be - people of all walks of life; alphas, betas, ones, tens, virgins, whores, teenagers, mothers, fathers, old people, law-abiding citizens, petty criminals, etc., all of them are still consummed by pride and lust. All are vitiated by sin, being like rotten apples that can only revel in rottenness instead of the sound tree they came from. Our depravity knows no limits if God doesn't rein in. Human beings are experts in using other human beings to placate their selfish desires. Even couples and families who sincerely love one another are not free from using each other, in more subtle or more explicit ways. It's a vile reality when you stop and think about it.

O lost innocence! How far we've all fallen from the glory of God.

Yes, but we can rise above this, being transformed in Christ.

As many Catholics say nearly every Sunday, lavabis me, et super nivem dealbabor.

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 02, 2013, 01:28:56 AM
Men are very physical and visual, as a general rule -- so it's no shock to me that they assign numeric values to women based on their looks.  Now, I don't think they should walk up to women and tell them they are a 2 or something, but I don't blame them for thinking it and even using that system when talking to other men.

No one said this was shocking, but to say it is acceptable is wrong.

So you believe that dehumanizing women is natural to men and acceptable behavior?

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

First, what is unattractive to you is not objectively ugly. There are plenty of men in the world who think big women are attractive.

Second, what kind of Christian takes pleasure in someone being called ugly?

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 09:49:24 AM

Second, what kind of Christian takes pleasure in someone being called ugly?

I think the key was that the person in question (I do not know her) was perceived to think otherwise about oneself.

''The women I know in their early 30s are just delusional,'' he says. ''I sometimes seduce them and sleep with them just because I know how to play them so well. It's just too easy. They're tired of the cock carousel and they see a guy like me as the perfect beta to settle down with before their eggs dry out ... when I get tired of them I just delete their numbers from my cell phone and stop taking their calls ... It doesn't really hurt them that much: at this point they're used to pump & dump!''

I don't know about women in their early 30's, but this describes delusional secular culture. Sadly, you meet people like this in daily life outside of conservative Christian circles. Guys that act like this are pigs and the women that fall for them and hang around are sad.

Quote from: CamelliaSinensis on January 02, 2013, 01:41:34 PMGuys that act like this are pigs

Agreed.

Quote from: CamelliaSinensis on January 02, 2013, 01:41:34 PMand the women that fall for them and hang around are sad.

Prayers for an increase in the virtues of charity and chastity, for both sexes.

Quote from: tmw89 on January 02, 2013, 01:45:29 PM

Quote from: CamelliaSinensis on January 02, 2013, 01:41:34 PMGuys that act like this are pigs

Agreed.

Quote from: CamelliaSinensis on January 02, 2013, 01:41:34 PMand the women that fall for them and hang around are sad.

Prayers for an increase in the virtues of charity and chastity, for both sexes.

Amen.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 09:49:24 AM

First, what is unattractive to you is not objectively ugly.

Quote

Then the Elephant Man wasn't objectively ugly, either. What tells me you (and 4 billion other women) wouldn't be thrilled if he hit on you.

QuoteThere are plenty of men in the world who think big women are attractive.

Men will go for what they can get. If I'm stranded on a desert island with Rosie O'Donnell I would probably start to find her attractive at some point. Most fat women prefer thin men, though.

QuoteSecond, what kind of Christian takes pleasure in someone being called ugly?

I took pleasure in seeing someone knocked down to size. No one likes a dumb guy who thinks he's smart, or a wicked man who thinks he's holy, or an ugly women who thinks she's the best thing since sliced bread.

Quote from: Penelope on January 02, 2013, 02:14:14 AM

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

Ben, for whatever my opinion may be worth to you, I feel that this post is getting a bit close to the lacking charity line. Your ideas are your ideas and I'm not asking you to change how you feel about a certain group or a certain person, but your phrasing of your ideas is potentially insulting to both entire groups and to individuals who may read or post here. One thing specifically that I find lacking charity is your delight in the public ridicule of an individual. To take pleasure in someone being publicly insulted (particularly for her appearance) is not an attractive trait in a person.

Hey, I'm just telling the truth. I didn't say all blacks, did I?

As far as taking pleasure in seeing someone humiliated, that's untrue. It's seeing an arrogant person confronted with reality for the first time that is pleasurable.

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

Marked for later reading.

Quote from: CoolCat on January 02, 2013, 03:09:01 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

Marked for later reading.

You mean later thinking about? It only takes a couple seconds to read.

Quote from: Ben on January 02, 2013, 03:19:37 PM

Quote from: CoolCat on January 02, 2013, 03:09:01 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception. Countless loud fat black chicks come to mind. I tend to see this weakness in the black community more than other communities. Lots of ugly blacks walking around thinking they're good looking.

When I was younger very ugly black women would frequently make passes at me. They didn't seem to be aware of how physically unappealing they were, and how out of their league I was.

I remember a few years back some magazine posted a list of the ugliest women in Hollywood and Sarah Jessica Parker was listed. Through the years of watching her it was apparent to me that she fashioned herself a looker, so I took some pleasure in her finally being called out in a major magazine.

Conversely, being attractive and not realizing it is a very attractive trait.

Marked for later reading.

You mean later thinking about? It only takes a couple seconds to read.

No. I meant later reading like after 7:00pm. When my kids are gone to bed.

Quote from: Ben on January 02, 2013, 03:00:54 PM

Men will go for what they can get. If I'm stranded on a desert island with Rosie O'Donnell I would probably start to find her attractive at some point. Most fat women prefer thin men, though.

I took pleasure in seeing someone knocked down to size. No one likes a dumb guy who thinks he's smart, or a wicked man who thinks he's holy, or an ugly women who thinks she's the best thing since sliced bread.

I don't know how you've missed this fact, but there are men who honestly prefer big women, and not because "it's all they could get".

Also, I am not seeing how Sarah Jessica Parker thought she was the 'best thing since sliced bread'- for all you know, she might not think she's all that attractive. She is, however, in great shape, with very nice hair, and she wears clothes well, and she has used these things to her advantage in her career.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 03:36:32 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 02, 2013, 03:00:54 PM

Men will go for what they can get. If I'm stranded on a desert island with Rosie O'Donnell I would probably start to find her attractive at some point. Most fat women prefer thin men, though.

I took pleasure in seeing someone knocked down to size. No one likes a dumb guy who thinks he's smart, or a wicked man who thinks he's holy, or an ugly women who thinks she's the best thing since sliced bread.

I don't know how you've missed this fact, but there are men who honestly prefer big women, and not because "it's all they could get".

Also, I am not seeing how Sarah Jessica Parker thought she was the 'best thing since sliced bread'- for all you know, she might not think she's all that attractive. She is, however, in great shape, with very nice hair, and she wears clothes well, and she has used these things to her advantage in her career.

Yeah, thin man-fat woman conventions. There are thin men who find fat women attractive. Not many though, and they tend not to be very attractive thin men. And why do you call them "big women." Is there something that offends your feminist sensibilities about "fat women."

No, Sarah Jessica Parker exhibits all the characteristics of a JAP. She admitted that it came as a surprise to her.

Quote from: Ben on January 02, 2013, 03:40:32 PM
Yeah, thin man-fat woman conventions. There are thin men who find fat women attractive. Not many though, and they tend not to be very attractive thin men. And why do you call them "big women." Is there something that offends your feminist sensibilities about "fat women."

Yes I find the word fat offensive, unless it's describing a baby. I teach my children not to call people fat, so why would I say it myself?

Quote from: Ben on January 02, 2013, 03:40:32 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 03:36:32 PM
I don't know how you've missed this fact, but there are men who honestly prefer big women, and not because "it's all they could get".

Also, I am not seeing how Sarah Jessica Parker thought she was the 'best thing since sliced bread'- for all you know, she might not think she's all that attractive. She is, however, in great shape, with very nice hair, and she wears clothes well, and she has used these things to her advantage in her career.

Yeah, thin man-fat woman conventions. There are thin men who find fat women attractive. Not many though, and they tend not to be very attractive thin men. And why do you call them "big women." Is there something that offends your feminist sensibilities about "fat women."

Forum folk, I can see a disagreement brewing... but let's not invoke the F-word.

I most certainly do have feminist sensibilities. It's not an insult!

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 04:02:14 PM
I most certainly do have feminist sensibilities. It's not an insult!

Feminist, you mean, in the sense of THE popularly-known movement?

Quote from: tmw89 on January 02, 2013, 04:22:49 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 04:02:14 PM
I most certainly do have feminist sensibilities. It's not an insult!

Feminist, you mean, in the sense of THE popularly-known movement?

If you mean being for equality and against objectification, against oppressive double standards, and against narrow definitions of "femininity"etc, then yes.

If you mean being pro-abortion, no.

Interesting - how is a Trad to reconcile the (as far as I know) novel concept of the "equality" of the sexes with the traditional understanding of their complementarity?  Or am I reading too far beyond a simple equality in value of life?

...apologies for turning into the Inquisition, but I am genuinely curious as to how one reconciles those concepts.

Quote from: tmw89 on January 02, 2013, 04:50:08 PM
Interesting - how is a Trad to reconcile the (as far as I know) novel concept of the "equality" of the sexes with the traditional understanding of their complementarity?  Or am I reading too far beyond a simple equality in value of life?

...apologies for turning into the Inquisition, but I am genuinely curious as to how one reconciles those concepts.

I think it comes down to one's definition of "trad". I say I'm a trad because I want an end to the Novus Ordo and "indifferentism", and a return to the TLM, to good catechesis, to the Sacraments, to respect for the Blessed Sacrament.

I would not say I ascribe to a traditional view of how society should be, or how men and women should relate to one another.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 09:42:28 AM

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 02, 2013, 01:28:56 AM
Men are very physical and visual, as a general rule -- so it's no shock to me that they assign numeric values to women based on their looks.  Now, I don't think they should walk up to women and tell them they are a 2 or something, but I don't blame them for thinking it and even using that system when talking to other men.

No one said this was shocking, but to say it is acceptable is wrong.

So you believe that dehumanizing women is natural to men and acceptable behavior?

I don't consider it dehumanizing.  Looks and attraction are huge for men -- they're just being realistic and honest by not hiding it.  Now, maybe they should be a bit less blunt about it in mixed company, sure, but I don't think it's dehumanizing to put a numeric value on it.  By that definition, an IQ test is also dehumanizing.  After all -- we are born with a capacity for intellect, just as we are for beauty.  Some get more, some get less.  *shrug*

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 02, 2013, 06:40:04 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 09:42:28 AM

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 02, 2013, 01:28:56 AM
Men are very physical and visual, as a general rule -- so it's no shock to me that they assign numeric values to women based on their looks.  Now, I don't think they should walk up to women and tell them they are a 2 or something, but I don't blame them for thinking it and even using that system when talking to other men.

No one said this was shocking, but to say it is acceptable is wrong.

So you believe that dehumanizing women is natural to men and acceptable behavior?

I don't consider it dehumanizing.  Looks and attraction are huge for men -- they're just being realistic and honest by not hiding it.  Now, maybe they should be a bit less blunt about it in mixed company, sure, but I don't think it's dehumanizing to put a numeric value on it.  By that definition, an IQ test is also dehumanizing.  After all -- we are born with a capacity for intellect, just as we are for beauty.  Some get more, some get less.  *shrug*

Well, other than you with your self-loathing, most people find it dehumanizing to be thought of as just a number. We hear comments to the effect of "I felt like just a number" in relation to many aspects of life, and it is always negative. When you assign a person a numerical value, you are not keeping in mind that the person is created by God with an immortal soul.

As an aside, just because something is "huge" for men, or commonplace, doesn't mean it's not inappropriate. You of all people should not want men assigning numbers to women.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 04:56:10 PM
I would not say I ascribe to a traditional view of how society should be, or how men and women should relate to one another.

Something I'd like to note here is that I think that the "traditional" American view of how society should be or how men and women should relate to one another is largely rooted in protestantism. Unfortunately, I see a number of trads on the internet buy into some view of the 1950s suburban American housewife and her office-working husband as being the model for an ideal marriage, but it's important to remember that mainstream American culture, at least the parts of it that stem from religion at all, stem from protestantism. We shouldn't really uphold that as an ideal, in my opinion.

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception.

You're being ironic, right? Because this is the ugliest thing anyone could have written.

#weuglypeopleneedlovetoo

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 11:03:06 PM
If someone states that she doesn't find a particular attribute attractive, why do you take it as a personal offense?

When I hear things like "I don't like skinny/brunette/etc women" I don't see it as an insult, it's just personal preference.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 03:43:50 PM
Yes I find the word fat offensive, unless it's describing a baby. I teach my children not to call people fat, so why would I say it myself?

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 04:02:14 PM
I most certainly do have feminist sensibilities. It's not an insult!

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 04:46:15 PM
If you mean being for equality and against objectification, against oppressive double standards, and against narrow definitions of "femininity"etc, then yes.

If you mean being pro-abortion, no.

So, only oppressive double standards, not "feminist double standards"?

I am not going go go through your words I quoted here, but I think it is worth considering.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 07:14:07 PM
Well, other than you with your self-loathing, most people find it dehumanizing to be thought of as just a number. We hear comments to the effect of "I felt like just a number" in relation to many aspects of life, and it is always negative. When you assign a person a numerical value, you are not keeping in mind that the person is created by God with an immortal soul.

I'm not self-loathing, just realistic.  Often times when people tak about feeling like "just a number," it is when dealing with the government or a large company.  I don't expect the California state DMV to treat me as anything but a number -- in fact, my greatest hope is that they will call my number quickly, get my paperwork processed, and get me back out the door to my real life.   :)

Often, when men are talking about women in terms of numbers, it's someone they met in passing or even someone they saw without meeting at all.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 07:14:07 PM
As an aside, just because something is "huge" for men, or commonplace, doesn't mean it's not inappropriate.

By "huge" I actually meant that it matters a lot to them -- it's a huge priority for them in terms of who they will date and marry.  And I get that -- I had my dealbreakers, too, back when I was single.  I'd rather someone was honest with himself than persue women he isn't really interested in. 

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 07:14:07 PM

You of all people should not want men assigning numbers to women.

That sure got personal fast.

Now that I know who you are, "Paeniteo", I am not going to bother with you.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 07:44:17 PM
Now that I know who you are, "Paeniteo", I am not going to bother with you.

I will be cordial with you, but I only see the words you write, so one must be careful to exercise reason and have some attention to correctness.

If one writes error, engages in logical fallacies, or presents a potential scandal to the Faith, I may correct it if I see it.

You make discussions very personal.

"You of all people", "now that I know".

Is this how you wish to be treated? Should I have seen your name, and resolved to interact in a certain way? I cannot do that.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 02:47:16 PM

Quote from: Ascetik on January 01, 2013, 01:44:38 PM
I am sick of the dating scene/game and all that, and I have no problems dating women, if I wanted to, I could probably get a date with a 7 by tonight if I really wanted to because that's the determination and confidence I have, and it's not to sound prideful, it's just that I know how to do it. Most guys are scared little puppies hiding behind a wall of videogames and pornography. But I would much rather give my life to Our Lord Jesus Christ, pray for me a sinner!

Dude, are you seriously referring to women as numbers on a rating scale? Even if you're joking it's not appropriate. Fortunately, it will also make women hate you.

This is a very American male thing.  I've not seen other cultures do it anything like as frequently.  It's a little bit like Gridiron Football or Baseball and the obsession with statistics in sport.  It becomes an accepted part of the culture and the way men talk.  Like Londoners saying "bollocks" and other swear words.

In Britain you might refer to a real beauty as a 10 but I've never heard a man describe his girlfriend to other men as a 7, 8 or 9.

Not that we are not just as obsessed with looks, we are, but the "out of 10" thing is definitely American.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 01, 2013, 11:09:05 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 11:03:06 PM
If someone states that she doesn't find a particular attribute attractive, why do you take it as a personal offense?

If a 250 lb woman volunteers to tell me she thinks my beard "looks like shit" without any provocation, I take some offense, if only for the severe breech of social protocol. I do not care to look attractive to anyone, in fact, I would rather not, but I am mindful of the intent of others.

You should reply, in a Churchillian tone, "Madam, tomorrow I may wake clean shaven, if I desire, but you'll still be just as fat"

Quote from: Greg on January 02, 2013, 08:36:37 PM
You should reply, in a Churchillian tone, "Madam, tomorrow I may wake clean shaven, if I desire, but you'll still be just as fat"

I could think of many such things to say, but I had no desire to get into that kind of discussion with her. It was an out of the blue comment.

That was the worst, but I see such tendencies all the time. It is a weird thing.

If people could just acknowledge, "Yes, I live in a particular culture in which people have commonly presented themselves in a certain way for most of my experiences, therefore, I have a bias which is not biologically, culturally, or personally universal.".

I am not looking for any personal relationships, so I am not concerned with being attractive or getting attention, or seeking courtship.

On another such note, I have a distinct hairline, as do many people in my family, and I comb my hair straight back, so it is very visible. A girl I know tried to tease me about going bald, that is a possibility in the future I suppose, but there is no evidence of it now though, and I said my hairline was in fact the same as it always has been, and it is a trait found in many members of my family, and none of my family from the grandparents forward (the only people I've seen) have had any significant hairloss, yet, she persisted, as if she thought I was just in denial, so I dropped it.

People have trouble recognizing what is "their thoughts" and "other people's thoughts". If I went around assuming that people had the same goals, ways of thinking, and desires of me, I would be locked up.

I've never been troubled about what people thought about me.  I have a very thick skin and it has served me well.  I would not be without it.

I went thin on top at 25 and shaved my head (before Bruce Willis made it popular).  Some women didn't find it attractive, so fine, I didn't date them.  Enough women did that I was never short of women to date.  You don't need to win them all.   All any man needs is one decent woman.

Back in the late 1980s I was classmates with a rather ugly Pakistani chap when I was at university.  We would go to pubs and bars occasionally and even uni events he would simply approach random women and talk to them, nothing special, the standing chat-up line stuff.  He was reasonably witty and had some charm but nothing outstanding.   9 out of 10 of them were not in the least interested and made it clear based on first appearances.  He got told to ___ ___ most of the time, because he was definitely below average in the looks department, with a slightly pox marked face and a hooked nose, but he simply did not care.  For him it was like water of a duck's back.  He was always dating different women and they were always rather attractive.

Being shy and sensitive to others opinions holds a lot of people back.  If you can rationaize and internalise not caring about the people who reject you, you'll do better in the dating pool and in many other walks of life.

If I knew at 20 what I know now at 44 ....

Quote from: Greg on January 02, 2013, 09:09:25 PM
Being shy and sensitive to others opinions holds a lot of people back. 

This is so very true.  ;D

Quote from: 1 Peter 3:1-9"In like manner also let wives be subject to their husbands: that if any believe not the word, they may be won without the word, by the conversation of the wives. Considering your chaste conversation with fear. Whose adorning let it not be the outward plaiting of the hair, or the wearing of gold, or the putting on of apparel: But the hidden man of the heart in the incorruptibility of a quiet and a meek spirit, which is rich in the sight of God. For after this manner heretofore the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their own husbands:

As Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters you are, doing well, and not fearing any disturbance. Ye husbands, likewise dwelling with them according to knowledge, giving honour to the female as to the weaker vessel, and as to the co-heirs of the grace of life: that your prayers be not hindered. And in fine, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, being lovers of the brotherhood, merciful, modest, humble: Not rendering evil for evil, nor railing for railing, but contrariwise, blessing: for unto this are you called, that you may inherit a blessing."

Any resemblance to modern conceptions of marriage, love and marital roles is pure coincidence.

Quote from: Ascetik on January 01, 2013, 02:52:47 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 01, 2013, 02:47:16 PM
Dude, are you seriously referring to women as numbers on a rating scale? Even if you're joking it's not appropriate. Fortunately, it will also make women hate you.

I'm referencing it for the article, because that's what most people do. Their initial first impression of someone is their aesthetic appearance, and I'm not trying to offend people, just pointing out the reality that most people's first impression of someone is how they look on a 1-10 scale. That's just reality. Women do the same to men, so it goes both ways.

Why would it be fortunate that women hate me? That's a very cold thing to say. I am just giving an example from the article to reality of how modern people think. We're all guilty of it.

I don't think that is true. Sure everyone notices attractiveness, but I seriously doubt that everyone put it's to a scale and then calls that person a "7" or a "5" or whatever. I think that the number ranking is a carryover from the secular culture that came about with movies like American Pie that holds sex as priority #1. 

If you were to get married, would you tell your friends you snagged a 9? I surely hope not.

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 02, 2013, 01:28:56 AM
Men are very physical and visual, as a general rule -- so it's no shock to me that they assign numeric values to women based on their looks.  Now, I don't think they should walk up to women and tell them they are a 2 or something, but I don't blame them for thinking it and even using that system when talking to other men.

Since they are more physical and visual.... wouldn't it make more sense for them to use adjectives instead of numbers? Numbers reduce the person they are talking about in to something that is not human (at least on the surface). Words like "cute," "pretty," "sexy," or "beautiful," can be categories without ranking. Also they are more accurate as I'm sure everyone has a different picture of what each number would mean.

Another big problem I see with the scale is that it could prevent men from being wholly satisfied with the woman they end up with. What is the pictured "10?" I would venture to guess that it is some type of model or celebrity; these people do not exist in the real world. 

Oh and a PS:

People like to throw around the word feminist a lot and that sucks. The Church holds men and women as equal, although recognizing the different roles and natures of the two. One can ask for equality in terms of respect without forsaking her nature and role in society.

When discussing what comes naturally to people, I think it's important to remember that nature is fallen. Not everything that comes naturally is to be embraced as though original sin and its consequences don't exist. Many things must be overcome and uplifted to the supernatural.

I believe it is natural and instinctive to notice if someone is attractive or not. I think it happens so quickly and automatically that many don't even notice they do it. However once it becomes a standard by which people measure each other's worth, which is usually the mentality behind the numbers game, it crosses a line from automatic human reaction to conscious fostering of sinful tendencies, whether it ends in lusting after a 10 or denigrating a 1 or even no outright sin, just a gradual loss of respect for others. It doesn't matter if they never meet that person or have any relationship with them, those men are still developing their own characters and it impacts them personally in a negative way. It is not a habit I would encourage my sons to develop, even keeping in mind that finding a wife who is attractive to them is a good and healthy pursuit. Women can be attractive, or not, but I'd hope they'd leave it at that.   

Quote from: Magnificat on January 03, 2013, 11:11:58 AM
When discussing what comes naturally to people, I think it's important to remember that nature is fallen. Not everything that comes naturally is to be embraced as though original sin and its consequences don't exist. Many things must be overcome and uplifted to the supernatural.

I believe it is natural and instinctive to notice if someone is attractive or not. I think it happens so quickly and automatically that many don't even notice they do it. However once it becomes a standard by which people measure each other's worth, which is usually the mentality behind the numbers game, it crosses a line from automatic human reaction to conscious fostering of sinful tendencies, whether it ends in lusting after a 10 or denigrating a 1 or even no outright sin, just a gradual loss of respect for others. It doesn't matter if they never meet that person or have any relationship with them, those men are still developing their own characters and it impacts them personally in a negative way. It is not a habit I would encourage my sons to develop, even keeping in mind that finding a wife who is attractive to them is a good and healthy pursuit. Women can be attractive, or not, but I'd hope they'd leave it at that.

Yes, this x 1000.

Quote from: Magnificat on January 03, 2013, 11:11:58 AM
When discussing what comes naturally to people, I think it's important to remember that nature is fallen. Not everything that comes naturally is to be embraced as though original sin and its consequences don't exist. Many things must be overcome and uplifted to the supernatural.

I believe it is natural and instinctive to notice if someone is attractive or not. I think it happens so quickly and automatically that many don't even notice they do it. However once it becomes a standard by which people measure each other's worth, which is usually the mentality behind the numbers game, it crosses a line from automatic human reaction to conscious fostering of sinful tendencies, whether it ends in lusting after a 10 or denigrating a 1 or even no outright sin, just a gradual loss of respect for others. It doesn't matter if they never meet that person or have any relationship with them, those men are still developing their own characters and it impacts them personally in a negative way. It is not a habit I would encourage my sons to develop, even keeping in mind that finding a wife who is attractive to them is a good and healthy pursuit. Women can be attractive, or not, but I'd hope they'd leave it at that.

Well said.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 03:43:50 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 02, 2013, 03:40:32 PM
Yeah, thin man-fat woman conventions. There are thin men who find fat women attractive. Not many though, and they tend not to be very attractive thin men. And why do you call them "big women." Is there something that offends your feminist sensibilities about "fat women."

Yes I find the word fat offensive, unless it's describing a baby. I teach my children not to call people fat, so why would I say it myself?

You need to lighten up. Fat people call fat people fat people.

Quote from: Spooky on January 02, 2013, 07:27:56 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 01, 2013, 11:45:02 PM
I'm annoyed with ugly people who think they're good looking. It suggests a pathological lack of self-perception.

You're being ironic, right? Because this is the ugliest thing anyone could have written.

#weuglypeopleneedlovetoo

Already answered.

Quote from: kayla_veronica on January 03, 2013, 10:01:31 AM

Since they are more physical and visual.... wouldn't it make more sense for them to use adjectives instead of numbers? Numbers reduce the person they are talking about in to something that is not human (at least on the surface). Words like "cute," "pretty," "sexy," or "beautiful," can be categories without ranking. Also they are more accurate as I'm sure everyone has a different picture of what each number would mean.

Men are also more math minded than women, so I think numbers come more naturally than words for them at times.  Numbers might make more sense than saying "kinda cute."

Quote from: kayla_veronica on January 03, 2013, 10:01:31 AM
Another big problem I see with the scale is that it could prevent men from being wholly satisfied with the woman they end up with. What is the pictured "10?" I would venture to guess that it is some type of model or celebrity; these people do not exist in the real world.

I don't think that getting rid of the numbers would prevent disappointment.  In fact, I think it's a good thing for men to be honest about what they can accept.

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 01:09:13 PM
You need to lighten up. Fat people call fat people fat people.

Calling people fat is rude. Didn't your parents teach you any manners?

Quote from: erin is nice on January 03, 2013, 01:35:30 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 01:09:13 PM
You need to lighten up. Fat people call fat people fat people.

Calling people fat is rude. Didn't your parents teach you any manners?

Yes, calling someone fat is rude.  Talking about the fact that there is such a thing as people who are fat is not rude.  IMO, this thread has kept it general (or referred to a specific woman that other posters have no way of knowing).

You are overly concerned with looks. Hence, you are overly offended at a man describing some woman as fat. If she's, fat she's fat. Nothing I can do about it. If I was a fat woman I would dislike being called a big woman.

Being fat is not the end of the world. I've seen fat women I found attractive. Back in the day I found Carnie Wilson and Rikki Lake attractive.

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 02:12:34 PM
You are overly concerned with looks. Hence, you are overly offended at a man describing some woman as fat. If she's, fat she's fat. Nothing I can do about it. If I was a fat woman I would dislike being called a big woman.

This.

I'm fat at the moment.  I'm not BIG though -- I still have a small frame and I'm rather short.  There's just a bit of excess on that frame. ;)

Quote from: erin is nice on January 03, 2013, 01:35:30 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 01:09:13 PM
You need to lighten up. Fat people call fat people fat people.

Calling people fat is rude. Didn't your parents teach you any manners?

It is at least a verifiable physical condition.

And I think you have no basis to speak of "manners", especially on a fine point as admitting excess of subcutaneous adipose tissue (yes, I use that term in real life in speech too...it is quite a handy way to speak of this without emotionally charged words for some people).

Quote from: Penelope on December 31, 2012, 01:45:51 AM
This was bound to happen in a world of seemingly consequence-free sex. Women can't spend their 20s giving out the milk for free and then expect people to want to buy the cow ten years later. Men are, of course, behaving in an equally disgusting manner, but again, when sex is seen as mere recreation and is divorced from its actual purpose, disgusting behavior from both men and women is to be expected.

As Mith said below your post, Penelope, I also agree.  However, I would fault men primarily. 

All too often, we hear about how "men are the leaders of society" and other such things, yet how willing are men to deal with the responsibility and consequences of this.  As you often hear trads say, a fish rots at the head.

Men need to be men and not put up with this crap.  And men SHOULDN'T be acting in the same fashion.  These men who were "woe is me I'm unsuccessful with women in my 20s" shouldn't be whoring around with women in their 30s.  And it shouldn't be accepted. 

But then, I would say, the problem doesn't stem quite completely from the women.  Look at the example of this guy:

QuoteThat leaves a lot of beta men spending their 20s out in the cold. Greg, a 38-year-old writer from Melbourne, started adult life shy and lonely. ''In my 20s, the women had the total upper hand. They could make or break you with one look in a club or bar. They had the choice of men, sex was on tap and guys like me went home alone, red-faced, defeated and embarrassed. The girls only wanted to go for the cool guys, good looks, outgoing personalities, money, sporty types, the kind of guys who owned the room, while us quiet ones got ignored.''

He barely had a date through much of his 20s and gave up on women. But then he spent time overseas, gained more confidence, learnt how to dress well and hit his early 30s. ''I suddenly started to get asked out by women, aged 19 through to 40. The floodgates burst open for me. I actually dated five women at once, amazing my flatmates by often bedding three to four of my casual dates each week. It is a great time as a male in your 30s, when you start getting more female attention and sex than you could ever have dreamt of in your 20s.''

(Let's ignore the alpha/beta bull, that's just a dodge, and far too humorous).  If a woman is "making or breaking" a man with one look (he's obviously exaggerating, but still), then the man has issues - either with himself, his self-confidence, or his person.  He needs to get his crap together.  Could it be that he didn't garner a woman's attraction until he "spent time overseas, gained more confidence, and learnt how to dress well?"  Who wants to date a bland drip who can't put a set of clothing together to save his life?  The fact that he is in his 30s is probably far less of a factor in his (disgusting) behavior with women than is his travels and dressing well. 

I also had to laugh at this part of the article:

QuoteTalking to many women like her, it's intriguing how many look back on past relationships where they let good men get away because they weren't ready. American journalist Kate Bolick wrote recently in The Atlantic about breaking off her three-year relationship with a man she described as ''intelligent, good-looking, loyal and kind''. She acknowledged ''there was no good reason to end things'', yet, at the time, she was convinced something was missing in the relationship. That was 11 years ago. She's is now 39 and facing grim choices.

''We arrived at the top of the staircase,'' Bolick wrote, ''finally ready to start our lives, only to discover a cavernous room at the tail end of a party, most of the men gone already, some having never shown up - and those who remain are leering by the cheese table, or are, you know, the ones you don't want to go out with.''

Pardon me honey, but your life already started 39 years ago.  It's a shame and pity that these women bought into some notion that life starts once you've got a middle-level career job, a house, a degree, and a <whatever else>.  Your life is and has been going on since you started breathing.  Day to day, that's your life.  It's also woefully depressing that she left a guy because "something was missing."  How do you do that?  Just dumb. 

And of course, the article ends on an equally-disgusting note...

QuoteWhile many of his mates are playing the field, determined to enjoy this unexpected attention, Jamie is ready to settle down. He's very wary of Sex and the City types, women who are convinced they are so special, but he's confident he will soon find someone with her feet on the ground.

''I'm lucky,'' he says, ''to be in a buyer's market.''

How is one to respect his wife if he sees her as some cattle ready to be picked up?  Reading this article again, it's woefully depressing and saddening.  The way these people and our culture view the two sexes is so divorced from reality.  What can he get me and what can I get from him?  Can I pick up a 10 in my buyer's market?  That's not nearly a good basis for a healthy relationship with the opposite sex.  It's no wonder that these people are single, if their views are so....  bad.

Quote from: The Harlequin King on January 01, 2013, 03:23:05 PM
Interesting observations, but it still isn't any consolation for those 20-something males who want to get married in the near future.

The 20-somethings need to get their crap together, then. 

Dress nicer, learn how to carry a conversation, be interesting and bring some worth to the table.

If all you do is play video games, DnD, watch cartoons and other sophomoric media, and drink, what worth and interest do you bring to the table? 

Quote from: The Harlequin King on January 01, 2013, 04:20:49 PM
I wouldn't recommend getting so worked up about phenomena such as the alpha-beta binary, or the 1-to-10 hotness scale. Even if a man finds it too tacky to verbalize it, he will probably have thought it. It's part of the male's habit of quantifying and categorizing everything he sees. Plenty of women use the same systems, too, whether they want to admit it or not. My girlfriend and I casually bandy these terms about all the time in reference to other people (jokingly, of course). Women are especially adept at assessing whether a man is working, middle, or upper class within seconds of first contact.

Wouldn't you say this is part of the problem, though, HK? 

Men might be more visually-oriented, but does this make it OK?  Should men be objectifying women based on their appearance alone?  Or should we rather be looking at the whole person and treating them as people? 

I think this is more a consequence of our sex-driven culture which sees sex as something to be tossed and bandied about. 

People try to see who is at fault for the breakdown, men forsaking their roles, women forsaking theirs, etc, and I think there is something forgotten.

Humans are animals. Without God, we are just rational animals, and most of the time, animals. If people do not have the grace of God and exercise reason only for the satisfaction of their passions, then it is more of a mathematical/biological thing than a truly human act.

So, when I see women and men in such a disordered situation, it is not a matter of who has the primary responsibility.

Judgement is by God by what is in one's soul, not what others have done. A man cannot use the scandalous behavior of women as an excuse for his own sins, and likewise, women cannot use the scandalous behavior of men as an excuse. Those who commit scandal will be judged for that, but those who take the occasion of sin to sin, will be judged accordingly as well.

Otherwise, the behavior outlined in the article is a reflection of biological reality. Human procreation urges are animal and we can observe it in other animals to various degrees.

Quote from: Penelope on January 02, 2013, 07:14:37 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 02, 2013, 04:56:10 PM
I would not say I ascribe to a traditional view of how society should be, or how men and women should relate to one another.

Something I'd like to note here is that I think that the "traditional" American view of how society should be or how men and women should relate to one another is largely rooted in protestantism. Unfortunately, I see a number of trads on the internet buy into some view of the 1950s suburban American housewife and her office-working husband as being the model for an ideal marriage, but it's important to remember that mainstream American culture, at least the parts of it that stem from religion at all, stem from protestantism. We shouldn't really uphold that as an ideal, in my opinion.

It's not just on the Internet, Penelope.  The Fiftiesism bunk pervades traditionalism, it seems.  I was listening to a conference by Bp. Williamson from 1996 or 1997 and this question came up (about traditionalists and "Fiftiesism").  He has also (if I recall correctly) written against Fiftiesism as rector of St Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, MN.

But, I agree.  Saying the 1950s is the last kind of cultural image we want to extol and follow.

Quote from: Greg on January 02, 2013, 09:09:25 PM
Being shy and sensitive to others opinions holds a lot of people back.  If you can rationaize and internalise not caring about the people who reject you, you'll do better in the dating pool and in many other walks of life.

This is a lot more important than I think people take it for.  Practically speaking, we are in this world for, at most, 100 years.

If someone rejects you for no good reason, why bother or persist in dealing with them (assuming, of course, you're not being rejected for something objectively bad).  There are over 6 bln people on this planet.  Why let the thoughts and concerns of someone who means (practically) nothing to you affect your life. 

Now, I'm not saying be a sociopath.  But, why let other people pull and drag you down? 

This thread reminds me of ??. This is the Chinese term for women who put off marriage.

The law in China is a little different, the age of marriage is higher than we would think (20 for women, 22 for men) and most marry very quickly after those ages are reached. Women who do not, are called "??" (sheng nu), and have a very hard time finding a husband. I think the age where one could say is the tipping point is 27.

Chinese culture is not communist. It is Chinese and the family is very strong, however, modern developments have made people seeking education and careers (like in the USA) and putting off family until they are ready.

Even in a country where there are not enough women, women who reach a certain age, find it very difficult to find a husband.

Despite what culture and government may dictate, human biology has a very strong influence in how we act and develop.

Quote from: Magnificat on January 03, 2013, 11:11:58 AM
I believe it is natural and instinctive to notice if someone is attractive or not. I think it happens so quickly and automatically that many don't even notice they do it. However once it becomes a standard by which people measure each other's worth, which is usually the mentality behind the numbers game, it crosses a line from automatic human reaction to conscious fostering of sinful tendencies, whether it ends in lusting after a 10 or denigrating a 1 or even no outright sin, just a gradual loss of respect for others. It doesn't matter if they never meet that person or have any relationship with them, those men are still developing their own characters and it impacts them personally in a negative way. It is not a habit I would encourage my sons to develop, even keeping in mind that finding a wife who is attractive to them is a good and healthy pursuit. Women can be attractive, or not, but I'd hope they'd leave it at that.

I feel this is a very important consideration. 

If it's a tendency that men have, we shouldn't be promoting it. 

Recognizing someone's attractiveness (which is apparently biological in nature for fertility, youthfulness, and health) is not an issue.  Categorizing that and "ranking" them can lead to superficial relationships and, as Magnificat said, a loss of respect for others.  "Oh, why should I talk to that girl?  She's *only* a 5.  I only deal with 7s or above." 

That's just wrong. 

(Now I'm caught up and done posting here for a while!)

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 03, 2013, 05:56:19 PM
People try to see who is at fault for the breakdown, men forsaking their roles, women forsaking theirs, etc, and I think there is something forgotten.

Humans are animals. Without God, we are just rational animals, and most of the time, animals. If people do not have the grace of God and exercise reason only for the satisfaction of their passions, then it is more of a mathematical/biological thing than a truly human act.

So, when I see women and men in such a disordered situation, it is not a matter of who has the primary responsibility.

Judgement is by God by what is in one's soul, not what others have done. A man cannot use the scandalous behavior of women as an excuse for his own sins, and likewise, women cannot use the scandalous behavior of men as an excuse. Those who commit scandal will be judged for that, but those who take the occasion of sin to sin, will be judged accordingly as well.

Otherwise, the behavior outlined in the article is a reflection of biological reality. Human procreation urges are animal and we can observe it in other animals to various degrees.

Except I can see this tending towards something of a cop-out. 

Humans still have free will and the ability to make choices.  We can be given all the grace in the universe from God, yet if we do not accept that grace, it is all for naught. 

Men should not forsake their responsibilities and obligations.  They shouldn't be disgusting and pigs.  Women and men should be virtuous. 

You need all the pieces of the puzzle to be successful.  Without one, it will crumble, and I think modern society has showcased this.

I, of course, am not trying to "blame" someone to shirk my responsibilities.  However, recognizing what went wrong where and when can be helpful in figuring out where to go from there. 

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 03, 2013, 06:11:37 PM

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 03, 2013, 05:56:19 PM
People try to see who is at fault for the breakdown, men forsaking their roles, women forsaking theirs, etc, and I think there is something forgotten.

Humans are animals. Without God, we are just rational animals, and most of the time, animals. If people do not have the grace of God and exercise reason only for the satisfaction of their passions, then it is more of a mathematical/biological thing than a truly human act.

So, when I see women and men in such a disordered situation, it is not a matter of who has the primary responsibility.

Judgement is by God by what is in one's soul, not what others have done. A man cannot use the scandalous behavior of women as an excuse for his own sins, and likewise, women cannot use the scandalous behavior of men as an excuse. Those who commit scandal will be judged for that, but those who take the occasion of sin to sin, will be judged accordingly as well.

Otherwise, the behavior outlined in the article is a reflection of biological reality. Human procreation urges are animal and we can observe it in other animals to various degrees.

Except I can see this tending towards something of a cop-out. 

Humans still have free will and the ability to make choices.  We can be given all the grace in the universe from God, yet if we do not accept that grace, it is all for naught. 

Men should not forsake their responsibilities and obligations.  They shouldn't be disgusting and pigs.  Women and men should be virtuous. 

You need all the pieces of the puzzle to be successful.  Without one, it will crumble, and I think modern society has showcased this.

I, of course, am not trying to "blame" someone to shirk my responsibilities.  However, recognizing what went wrong where and when can be helpful in figuring out where to go from there.

When I interact with women, the blame is on men and how they should act. When I interact with men, the blame is on women, and how they should act.

My own personal experiences and perspective:

For me, I act how I choose, and men and women who are complaining about the perversions of each other find me confusing. This is how Catholics are called to live.

When a man in the world interacts with me, often this comes up. They do not think about what they do. They think what they do is normal, natural, and everyone does it. Then they meet me (in my personal experience...I am not some prophet for the world), and they see a man who does not engage in such behavioral despite much opportunity to do so, and a man who does not abuse himself and watch pornography, and a man who condemns such things. Men who would boast of their exploits and what they have seen, then either express disbelief or admiration. How many men have looked at me and regretted their pornography habit? Many men, when they ask me of this, have expressed admiration and a desire to be like that, although, not for long as far as I know.

Men, who I do think ultimately have the highest responsibility in this matter although I would not "blame" them more than women for the general social chaos, who engage in such behavior do so because they abdicate their will and given into their passions.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 03, 2013, 06:19:00 PM
When a man in the world interacts with me, often this comes up. They do not think about what they do. They think what they do is normal, natural, and everyone does it. Then they meet me (in my personal experience...)

But then this just reinforces my point.

As more and more men have shirked responsibility, good role models have failed to be around as much. 

If there were more "proper" men, the average man would be confronted with his fallen nature more and realize the errors of his way.

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 03, 2013, 06:33:07 PM

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 03, 2013, 06:19:00 PM
When a man in the world interacts with me, often this comes up. They do not think about what they do. They think what they do is normal, natural, and everyone does it. Then they meet me (in my personal experience...)

But then this just reinforces my point.

As more and more men have shirked responsibility, good role models have failed to be around as much. 

If there were more "proper" men, the average man would be confronted with his fallen nature more and realize the errors of his way.

I think I understand your point. However, the responsibility and failure of men in this regard is more of a philosophical problem than an actual solution.

The failures of men and women feed each other, so that any individual is left without their own circumstance to sort out, and their particular situation is centered on their own choices, and what influenced them, which could be scandalous men, women, or everyone.

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 03, 2013, 05:49:50 PMWouldn't you say this is part of the problem, though, HK? 

It is one of those "just sayin'" posts. I don't think anything is wrong with observing a person's sexuality as long as it's not distilled to only that. Sexuality is still part of a person's overall package.

Quote from: The Harlequin King on January 03, 2013, 06:56:20 PM

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 03, 2013, 05:49:50 PMWouldn't you say this is part of the problem, though, HK? 

It is one of those "just sayin'" posts. I don't think anything is wrong with observing a person's sexuality as long as it's not distilled to only that. Sexuality is still part of a person's overall package.

Oh.

Gotcha.  :)

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 03, 2013, 05:46:58 PM

Quote from: The Harlequin King on January 01, 2013, 03:23:05 PM
Interesting observations, but it still isn't any consolation for those 20-something males who want to get married in the near future.

The 20-somethings need to get their crap together, then. 

Dress nicer, learn how to carry a conversation, be interesting and bring some worth to the table.

If all you do is play video games, DnD, watch cartoons and other sophomoric media, and drink, what worth and interest do you bring to the table?

Just like that Hopsin song you told me about...

;)

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 03, 2013, 06:33:07 PM

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 03, 2013, 06:19:00 PM
When a man in the world interacts with me, often this comes up. They do not think about what they do. They think what they do is normal, natural, and everyone does it. Then they meet me (in my personal experience...)

But then this just reinforces my point.

As more and more men have shirked responsibility, good role models have failed to be around as much. 

If there were more "proper" men, the average man would be confronted with his fallen nature more and realize the errors of his way.

The problem is that if the head falls, the body will. We have to lead, and if we fail to do so, disaster ensues. Of course, women have some of the blame, but most of it is on us.

A concept I've recently learned about is how long it takes for the results of an idea to set in. For about 200 years, the West has been bombarded with propaganda denigrating authority, hierarchy, stability, and so on. We are seeing the conclusions of these ideas now.

Quote from: Bonaventure on January 04, 2013, 01:03:43 AM
The problem is that if the head falls, the body will. We have to lead, and if we fail to do so, disaster ensues. Of course, women have some of the blame, but most of it is on us.

I agree.  And, this is my point, I think.

You see tomes and tomes written on the necessity of women to be "obedient."  Yet, how often do we hear of the man needing to take responsibility?  To fulfill everything that is required of him?  No where near in proportion.  And really, if men are to lead the society and culture, they need their act together to properly lead. 

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 04, 2013, 09:10:15 AM
You see tomes and tomes written on the necessity of women to be "obedient."  Yet, how often do we hear of the man needing to take responsibility?  To fulfill everything that is required of him?  No where near in proportion.  And really, if men are to lead the society and culture, they need their act together to properly lead.

Women should be reading, thinking, and talking about what women need to do.  Men should be reading, thinking, and talking about what men need to do.  It is very bad when people look at what someone else needs to do while avoiding examining their own lives.

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 03, 2013, 01:34:50 PM

Quote from: kayla_veronica on January 03, 2013, 10:01:31 AM

Since they are more physical and visual.... wouldn't it make more sense for them to use adjectives instead of numbers? Numbers reduce the person they are talking about in to something that is not human (at least on the surface). Words like "cute," "pretty," "sexy," or "beautiful," can be categories without ranking. Also they are more accurate as I'm sure everyone has a different picture of what each number would mean.

Men are also more math minded than women, so I think numbers come more naturally than words for them at times.  Numbers might make more sense than saying "kinda cute."

Quote from: kayla_veronica on January 03, 2013, 10:01:31 AM
Another big problem I see with the scale is that it could prevent men from being wholly satisfied with the woman they end up with. What is the pictured "10?" I would venture to guess that it is some type of model or celebrity; these people do not exist in the real world.

I don't think that getting rid of the numbers would prevent disappointment.  In fact, I think it's a good thing for men to be honest about what they can accept.

Whatever the reasons behind number ranking is, it isn't a respectful or wholesome to view a woman as a number.

One could list the reasons behind racist thinking all day, but that doesn't make racism okay.

Quote from: RealJayneK on January 04, 2013, 09:46:13 AM

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 04, 2013, 09:10:15 AM
You see tomes and tomes written on the necessity of women to be "obedient."  Yet, how often do we hear of the man needing to take responsibility?  To fulfill everything that is required of him?  No where near in proportion.  And really, if men are to lead the society and culture, they need their act together to properly lead.

Women should be reading, thinking, and talking about what women need to do.  Men should be reading, thinking, and talking about what men need to do.  It is very bad when people look at what someone else needs to do while avoiding examining their own lives.

Agreed.

Quote from: kayla_veronica on January 04, 2013, 11:08:06 AM
Whatever the reasons behind number ranking is, it isn't a respectful or wholesome to view a woman as a number.

One could list the reasons behind racist thinking all day, but that doesn't make racism okay.

Eh, I'm not sure of that.  Then again, that's going with the assumption that they are viewing the person as a number rather than as a person with an assigned score.  And yeah, I can see why people think that, because of how they structure it -- "She's a seven."  But then again, we would also say, "She's a blonde."

Numbers work well for generalized conversation -- for example, when people talk about 9's who marry 2's.

And bringing racism into it seems a little excessive, no?

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 03, 2013, 02:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 02:12:34 PM
You are overly concerned with looks. Hence, you are overly offended at a man describing some woman as fat. If she's, fat she's fat. Nothing I can do about it. If I was a fat woman I would dislike being called a big woman.

This.

I'm fat at the moment.  I'm not BIG though -- I still have a small frame and I'm rather short.  There's just a bit of excess on that frame. ;)

Haha!

Voluptuousness should be distinguished from fatness. I notice many women who are voluptuous calling themselves fat. I assume they're taking their cue from the homosexual-dominated fashion industry. Homosexual men have different standards of beauty than do normal men.

Quote from: Ben on January 04, 2013, 05:22:49 PM

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 03, 2013, 02:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 02:12:34 PM
You are overly concerned with looks. Hence, you are overly offended at a man describing some woman as fat. If she's, fat she's fat. Nothing I can do about it. If I was a fat woman I would dislike being called a big woman.

This.

I'm fat at the moment.  I'm not BIG though -- I still have a small frame and I'm rather short.  There's just a bit of excess on that frame. ;)

Haha!

Voluptuousness should be distinguished from fatness. I notice many women who are voluptuous calling themselves fat. I assume they're taking their cue from the homosexual-dominated fashion industry. Homosexual men have different standards of beauty than do normal men.

No, I'm actually fat. Most people are, in America.

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 04, 2013, 05:26:22 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 04, 2013, 05:22:49 PM

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 03, 2013, 02:42:46 PM

Quote from: Ben on January 03, 2013, 02:12:34 PM
You are overly concerned with looks. Hence, you are overly offended at a man describing some woman as fat. If she's, fat she's fat. Nothing I can do about it. If I was a fat woman I would dislike being called a big woman.

This.

I'm fat at the moment.  I'm not BIG though -- I still have a small frame and I'm rather short.  There's just a bit of excess on that frame. ;)

Haha!

Voluptuousness should be distinguished from fatness. I notice many women who are voluptuous calling themselves fat. I assume they're taking their cue from the homosexual-dominated fashion industry. Homosexual men have different standards of beauty than do normal men.

No, I'm actually fat. Most people are, in America.

You have statistics to back that up?

•Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are obese: 35.9% (2009-2010)
•Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are overweight (and not obese): 33.3% (2009-2010)
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/overwt.htm

Adds up to well over 60%.

I bet a good number of the merely overweight would not be called "fat" if seen walking down the street. I associate fat with amorphousness, where you can no longer see the human form.

Quote from: Ben on January 04, 2013, 05:38:14 PM
I bet a good number of the merely overweight would not be called "fat" if seen walking down the street. I associate fat with amorphousness, where you can no longer see the human form.

I associate it with having too much body fat.

They consider it overweight for women if the waist measurement is over 31 inches, right? Because that's when the health risks go up?

Quote from: erin is nice on January 04, 2013, 06:08:34 PM
They consider it overweight for women if the waist measurement is over 31 inches, right? Because that's when the health risks go up?

Not getting a man is considered a health risk for most women.

Quote from: erin is nice on January 04, 2013, 06:08:34 PM
They consider it overweight for women if the waist measurement is over 31 inches, right? Because that's when the health risks go up?

No, there's a height/weight chart.  I can be overweight via the chart and still be under 31 inches.  But yes, some studies show that belly fat is worse.

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 04, 2013, 06:47:09 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 04, 2013, 06:08:34 PM
They consider it overweight for women if the waist measurement is over 31 inches, right? Because that's when the health risks go up?

No, there's a height/weight chart.  I can be overweight via the chart and still be under 31 inches.  But yes, some studies show that belly fat is worse.

That's probably the BMI chart, which I don't think is 100% accurate.

Quote from: Ben on January 04, 2013, 05:38:14 PM
I bet a good number of the merely overweight would not be called "fat" if seen walking down the street. I associate fat with amorphousness, where you can no longer see the human form.

True that.  Based on BMI alone Mike Tyson was 'obese' when he was knocking out world champions and former world champions.  He is a short stocky guy with a lot of muscle mass.

On the other hand, it is clear that most people cannot use the "I'm too above average in terms of muscular mass for the BMI chart to apply".

In fact, I think most people fall under "the BMI chart is spot on and I am too fat".

However, it is an overly formal way to judge a person's health and it is meant to be used with other medical tests, such as waist line measurements and blood work.

For most people though, I think the visual test works. Does anything spill over and is one's basic movement impaired?.

For "basic movement", jogging a few miles, standing up from a full squat with two legs, and climbing a tree would be the sort of thing I would consider to be "basic".

Quote from: OCLittleFlower on January 04, 2013, 06:47:09 PM

Quote from: erin is nice on January 04, 2013, 06:08:34 PM
They consider it overweight for women if the waist measurement is over 31 inches, right? Because that's when the health risks go up?

No, there's a height/weight chart.  I can be overweight via the chart and still be under 31 inches.  But yes, some studies show that belly fat is worse.

Indeed: An "apple shape" has a greater health risk (mostly cardiovascular/endocrine...read: hypertension, high cholesterol, coronary artery disease, diabetes) than the "pear shape." However, regardless of shape, you should not be obese or fat. On the bright side, most women tend to be pears and men apples when they gain extra weight.  :)

Why does it matter?  People subject themselves to all sorts of risks of disease and slightly earlier death, through driving fast, poorly, in rain and snow, at night, without a safety belt, talking on a cellphone with driving, playing contact sports, smoking, regular consumption of alcohol, sun tanning etc etc etc.

While obesity might be a big killer it is only making people drop dead at 70 who would otherwise live to 80 on average.

What is this obsession with longevity?

Do those few extra years really matter that much?  To me they don't.  When I die is pretty unimportant to me and those 10 years are not going to be he best years of my life anyway.  If I could live my 20s again you might have a point.

Quote from: Greg on January 05, 2013, 08:14:20 PM
Why does it matter?  People subject themselves to all sorts of risks of disease and slightly earlier death, through driving fast, poorly, in rain and snow, at night, without a safety belt, talking on a cellphone with driving, playing contact sports, smoking, regular consumption of alcohol, sun tanning etc etc etc.

While obesity might be a big killer it is only making people drop dead at 70 who would otherwise live to 80 on average.

It is giving people who are 20 diabetes, joint trouble, and reduced physical ability.

Quote
What is this obsession with longevity?

I do not think there is an obsession. I think quality of life is what concerns people more.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 06, 2013, 02:08:42 AM
I do not think there is an obsession. I think quality of life is what concerns people more.

At least with diabetes, it's no jokes. It's either lose weight and eat healthy now or take many pills, go to dialysis, lose limbs, or even go blind later. No one wants that. That's the medical side of being severely overweight. The social consequences are already bad enough. Watch the 500 lb man or some other video on Youtube. No one wants to live like that.

And few do live like that. Most are moderately overweight and have no significant problems.  20 to 40 lbs over your ideal bmi ain't going to make most people diabetic of blind.

Enjoy life, eat steaks, bacon, drink wine and beer. Do a little extra exercise but don't waste hours in the gym or jogging down the streets.

If you fit in an economy seat you're probably going to be ok.

Quote from: Greg on January 06, 2013, 07:15:10 AM
And few do live like that. Most are moderately overweight and have no significant problems.  20 to 40 lbs over your ideal bmi ain't going to make most people diabetic of blind.

Enjoy life, eat steaks, bacon, drink wine and beer. Do a little extra exercise but don't waste hours in the gym or jogging down the streets.

If you fit in an economy seat you're probably going to be ok.

I agree. One shouldn't obsess over it. Health freaks and what not.

Quote from: Greg on January 06, 2013, 07:15:10 AM
And few do live like that. Most are moderately overweight and have no significant problems.  20 to 40 lbs over your ideal bmi ain't going to make most people diabetic of blind.

I think a person should accept their own choices without complaint.

Quote
Enjoy life, eat steaks, bacon, drink wine and beer. Do a little extra exercise but don't waste hours in the gym or jogging down the streets.

It is easy for people who do not think at all about something to think that others who do are "obsessed" or going over the top.

That is the fact about life. For most things, most of the time, everyone will not actively consider what they are doing. We use habits and convenience to guide us through life.

In our land of plenty, the widespread availability of calorie rich food has led to the population swelling up because as human beings, we are made to live in need, and our biological responses reflect that. What made the Plains Indians tall and healthy and one of the tallest populations of their time also makes them prone to obesity, heart problems, and diabetes now.

The command to "enjoy life" is morally misguided though. One should make good use of one's time in life, regardless of how enjoyable it is, with the focus on the highest good first.

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 06, 2013, 11:48:04 AM

Quote from: Greg on January 06, 2013, 07:15:10 AM
And few do live like that. Most are moderately overweight and have no significant problems.  20 to 40 lbs over your ideal bmi ain't going to make most people diabetic of blind.

I think a person should accept their own choices without complaint.

Quote
Enjoy life, eat steaks, bacon, drink wine and beer. Do a little extra exercise but don't waste hours in the gym or jogging down the streets.

It is easy for people who do not think at all about something to think that others who do are "obsessed" or going over the top.

That is the fact about life. For most things, most of the time, everyone will not actively consider what they are doing. We use habits and convenience to guide us through life.

In our land of plenty, the widespread availability of calorie rich food has led to the population swelling up because as human beings, we are made to live in need, and our biological responses reflect that. What made the Plains Indians tall and healthy and one of the tallest populations of their time also makes them prone to obesity, heart problems, and diabetes now.

The command to "enjoy life" is morally misguided though. One should make good use of one's time in life, regardless of how enjoyable it is, with the focus on the highest good first.

It is not a command, it is an opinion or suggestion based on 35 years of being around Trads.  They can be very anal about all sorts of things, not just the faith.  Some turn into sour, sad and over scrupulous characters.