women overpowering men in achievement, especially in the younger age groups

[simcha]

Maybe it's because I am European and have a different cultural backgrond, but all this "achievement" rating seems rather Bourgeois to me.

If you achieve A,B, and C then you are a success. If you are X,Y, and Z then you qualify to be my mate material because I am A,B, and C.

Is this the Middle Class American dream?

It seems somewhat two dimensional to me.

Welcome to the thinking of corporate American whores. This is what they live for, strive for, and can never have. It keeps everyone on that hamster wheel of working for the capitalist overlords hoping to get your brass ring. The brass ring isn't coming, corporate whores. The big bad capitalist rich overlord will keep all his brass rings and take yours too. Pay no attention, drink your cocktails at the end of another long day of working in your cubicle hoping to reach that pinnacle, only to drone on and on to nothingness...

 

[Drifterwood]

I am also shocked by how judgmental these people become of those of us who don't buy into their simple world view.

It's about order and control. It's bollocks really.

 

[Act2_Begins_Now]

No, not at all. There's also the question of emotional rescue for some women.

Emotional rescue is a WHOLE other thing. I think the women who 'search for/allow' emotional rescue are a big part of the problem. Because at some point in the developed relationship the rescue need is met and then what are the roles? The rescuer feels ousted because the rescuee no longer needs rescuing. Bare with me here, I am not saying all but rather ... in my experience.

The rescuer comes in and meets the warped emotional need of the damsel. Why is he searching for a damsel? Wouldn't he rather have a 'whole' person? Just thoughts to ponder. The damsel accepts the hero and instead of figuring out how to get her self out of the wet paper bag she puts that misplaced responsibility on the man. This man, again in my experience, is insecure at the core. He doesn't feel he has enough value to catch the interest of a women who has it all together. Why? Well again in my experience it is because he is less educated and accomplished. He lacks the drive to 'do' he is one of the emasculated males but most don't see it because his role with the damsel gives the image that he is a man's man. But deep down he is less secure in who he is and what he has to offer.

So the rescuee may possibly always remain in distress and they will live happily ever after. Another possibility is that they both mature and learn together and live happily ever after. Or in other cases, the rescuee matures, grows, address emotional wounds and heals, maybe not fully but begins to travel on that path. So the rescuer remains in his role of spouting his hero capabilities instead of doing, conquering, accomplishing, growing, etc. So what happens? The rescuer is displaced. They both move on in a variety of ways.

If a man's role as provider is supposedly determined by nature it means women aren't capable of providing for themselves or that men are better at providing than we are which makes us incomplete without them.

For me, I think the man should want/desire to provide for the woman. Nowadays we are dealing with a variety of detours. For me and my detours, I will likely remain in the business world and continue to grow my career. To be 43 with kids darn near raised, returning to the home just doesn't seem viable. However, that doesn't mean that my desire to be provided for will be gone. And by 'provided for' I am referring to far more than finances. In fact, I would say that the finances are of really no concern to me. However, I think with most men it is important to them that they bring more to the table than the woman. My provided for is more a reference to emotional (not in a rescuing way) offerings, a man that will have the gumption to capture, nurture and protect his treasure.

It also means that if a woman's natural role is that of caregiver and nurturer, then men are incapable of raising a child and keeping his own house by themselves, which is an insult to all single fathers everywhere.

Hmm, this is a very good point and I am glad that you mention it, as I have often mulled over the thought that it is the absence of 'real' men in the homes as one of the factors of why women are 'taking over'.

 

[viking1]

Welcome to the thinking of corporate American whores. This is what they live for, strive for, and can never have. It keeps everyone on that hamster wheel of working for the capitalist overlords hoping to get your brass ring. The brass ring isn't coming, corporate whores. The big bad capitalist rich overlord will keep all his brass rings and take yours too. Pay no attention, drink your cocktails at the end of another long day of working in your cubicle hoping to reach that pinnacle, only to drone on and on to nothingness...

More truthful words have never been spoken...

 

[Drifterwood]

Act II - do you have any consciousness of nurturing a man's masculinity?

 

[Act2_Begins_Now]

Act II - do you have any consciousness of nurturing a man's masculinity?

Absolutely. My nature is submissive. My mistake has been to gift my submission to those who were dictators, not leaders.

 

[Drifterwood]

I can't speak for all men of course - but ime, submission comes later, it is a deep act of trust. First there is respect for the feminine or masculine, a desire to empower it, let it blossom and breathe, express itself. If your feminine nature is submissive, so be it, but wear it as an empowered woman, not a doormat.

 

[Act2_Begins_Now]

but wear it as an empowered woman, not a doormat

It is the insecure emasculated male that would require the doormat type of submission.

 

[Drifterwood]

But can you pick spiders out of the bath?

 

[titan1968]

I disagree. On the contrary, we're very much in survival mode. Look around you, look at all the people who are struggling to make ends meet.

This is where I have problems with wldhoney's theory. Men were providers by nature at one time because they were physically built for it and it was necessary for survival. We're no longer in survival mode.

Men and women are different physically and psychologically. I think their roles are determined by nature, and they perform their roles differently.

I don't believe that women are overpowering men in achievement-- that's a fallacy. It makes the headlines of newspapers, but newspapers aren't there to sell news but to sell newspapers. In three-quarters of the world, where most of people live, people struggle just to feed themselves or stay out of harm's way. I don't think they give a rat's ass about Western ''trends'' or the battle of the sexes.

If a man's role as provider is supposedly determined by nature it means women aren't capable of providing for themselves or that men are better at providing than we are which makes us incomplete without them. It also means that if a woman's natural role is that of caregiver and nurturer, then men are incapable of raising a child and keeping his own house by themselves, which is an insult to all single fathers everywhere.

Time to evolve.

 

[Act2_Begins_Now]

But can you pick spiders out of the bath?

I can and do. Pick that is, no squashing in my house. They are all entered into a relocation program and taken outside to where they belong.

 

[whatireallywant]

I agree with MercurialBliss... and this is a real hot button with me too and can get me VERY angry so I prefer not to discuss it in detail... I will just say that I am totally unsuited to the role that society keeps trying to force me into as a woman.

 

[whatireallywant]

I can and do. Pick that is, no squashing in my house. They are all entered into a relocation program and taken outside to where they belong.

You're kinder than I am - I squash them.

 

[Drifterwood]

I can and do. Pick that is, no squashing in my house. They are all entered into a relocation program and taken outside to where they belong.

Absolutely. With the dog and the ex :wink:

You're kinder than I am - I squash them.

Then you deserve

1/ to struggle with the continued imposition of roles in a post modern society.

2/ to have flies and mosquitos in your house.

 

[whatireallywant]

Absolutely. With the dog and the ex :wink:



Then you deserve

1/ to struggle with the continued imposition of roles in a post modern society.

2/ to have flies and mosquitos in your house.

Ouch. Just because I've squashed spiders without thinking? I swat flies too - it's just the way I was raised. Funny that I was actually an animal rights activist at one time. Weird huh? I guess I just didn't think about flies and spiders and stuff that way.

And believe me, I HAVE struggled with the continued imposition of roles. I am not really suited for either role, but am probably a bit more suited to the traditionally male one than the traditionally female one.

 

[Drifterwood]

Ouch.

And believe me, I HAVE struggled with the continued imposition of roles. I am not really suited for either role, but am probably a bit more suited to the traditionally male one than the traditionally female one.

Don't ouch too much it was a gentle prick. :tongue:

If you know yourself, why do you still struggle? Does it matter what other people think?

 

[whatireallywant]

Don't ouch too much it was a gentle prick. :tongue:

If you know yourself, why do you still struggle? Does it matter what other people think?

Oh, ok you were just kinda kidding me...

Actually, to me I guess it DOES matter what other people think. I always want to be liked, and I want approval. That's the reason why I am so shy in real life.

 

[Drifterwood]

The trick surely, is only to value the approval of those whom you truly respect.

Yes I was kidding you. But beware Spiderman.

 

[whatireallywant]

The trick surely, is only to value the approval of those whom you truly respect.

Yes I was kidding you. But beware Spiderman.

LOL about the Spiderman...

I have always struggled with this too. I guess I want everyone to approve of me. While I know that no one is approved of by everyone, I sometimes think that fewer people approve of me than they do of most people. This is probably just another one of my self-esteem issues coming out...

 

[Ethyl]

For me, I think the man should want/desire to provide for the woman. Nowadays we are dealing with a variety of detours. For me and my detours, I will likely remain in the business world and continue to grow my career. To be 43 with kids darn near raised, returning to the home just doesn't seem viable. However, that doesn't mean that my desire to be provided for will be gone. And by 'provided for' I am referring to far more than finances. In fact, I would say that the finances are of really no concern to me. However, I think with most men it is important to them that they bring more to the table than the woman. My provided for is more a reference to emotional (not in a rescuing way) offerings, a man that will have the gumption to capture, nurture and protect his treasure.

What's in bold above alarms me as well as clues me in on the thought process behind the supposed roles and norms set by society. If men are expected to bring "more" to the table, then that implies women generally have "less" to offer in a relationship.

Men and women are different creatures. What we bring to the table should be different, not of greater or lesser value. A "real" man recognises this and doesn't expect their counterpart will have less to give.