Yes. And yes.

More precisely, it's b/c we men often are not shrewd enough to recognize when we receive poor coaching from women (and from other men, but mostly from women).

Given the gigantic shifts created by feminism, wimpier men were inevitable. Over time, things will gradually work back towards equilibrium; towards natural order. However, we'll be dead before equilibrium is achieved.

Yes, men are at their wimpiest these days, and it probably is because of feminism. You only have to look at the transition of conservative tastes, for instance. Once upon a time, they worshiped Ronald Reagan, now their heroes are effeminate, doughy, out-of-shape pansies like Limbaugh and Beck.

I've had two women tell me they wanted me to be more "assertive", speaking wistfully of fantasies with rougher actions, and -- before giving them what they wanted -- I told them why I didn't act more assertively toward them... I didn't want to go to jail.

I may want to grab her firmly by the hair, back of the neck, exert some extra force, but one tiny misstep and any woman can go to the police, say they were forced to do something, and I go to jail on rape charges. Nuh uh, I'll take the easy road and let the women be frustrated that I'm not "manly" enough instead of becoming Bubba's love slave in a cell and branded with the rapist label until hopefully proven innocent.

I get my cookies no matter what, whether soft or rough, but women who don't speak up don't get anything more from me than kid glove treatment.

Yes and maybe. Raised by single moms to blame? Probably a factor. The flip side of the wimpy dude is the over-compensating macho fratboy/gangsta cariacature --neither had a proper male role model.
And what is it with "uptalking?" That used to be a chick thing; now I hear guys talk that way. Can I slap them, please?

As a wimpy man, I used to believe that what troubled me most was lack of muscle and fitness. But after reading David Deida's books, I realised that it's deeper than body image, it is about being a person who can be "a rock" in the face of adversity, be grounded, and be realistic about one's own edge, wherever that may be, and living on that edge, with just enough challenge but not overstreatching either.

This is why men are not "supposed" to cry, it isn't that they shouldn't have feelings, or not be sensitive and intelligent, but there needs to be a broader and deeper solidity, a core stable base which can have tears without being carried away by them, without being wrecked.

Perhaps this is why men are supposed to have a sense of humor, as it is a sign of their being able to carry the problems of life with solid commitment rather than being "blown away" in the wind by little upsets. Feminism can and has helped with some aspects, such as talking about feelings and respecting women, but it left out some stuff that was pretty key, such as, ok, now your man can cry, but is that really the most important thing for your man? Given the choice, would you like one who was essentially a rock and dependable?

Yes, I agree with what isomber said earlier...there's not enough guys that can flip back and forth between toughness and sensitivity... lack of role models and with all of the self-esteem that has been "handed out" there is no real confidence being exhibited...
example: US Forces in Afghanistan driving the streets of Kabul---tough; while listening to "Karma Chameleon" or "Tainted Love"...even better.

I wonder.

"News" organizations are popularized sensationalism. At the same time I find some public issues, like self-defense, voter responsibility and health care infantilized, I can't ignore the fact that life and death still happen, and people I know still cope with it.

Compared to my grandparents generation, the world war 2 generation, I would say yes, men seem to be whimper, less confident and assertive today.

I recently joined a weight lifting gym a few months ago and have been observing differences in the guys there. As I've met new people at the gym, what I've seen is the men tend to be calmer, more confident than the typical guy. And I've noticed the same thing at weigh lifting internet discussion web sights too. Why is that?

Who knows why, maybe the simple act of pumping iron and a bigger body gives more confidence. But the answer can also come from a change in hormone levels.

My guess is the confidence/ lack of whimpness at the gym comes largely from a low carb diet. A common theme with male weight lifters is to avoid carbohydrates and increase protein consumption. This is because it is fairly well known, it seems in the weight lifting community, that testosterone levels rise on a carbohydrate restricted diet. Dr Eades has not written about this directly - I believe, at least I do not recall seeing it - but he has posted on his twitter sight a few studies showing testosterone levels rise when carbohydrate intake drops.

So I'm guessing all the sugar we consume today is playing with hormone levels in men.

And I can not recall my grandparents families or friends eating the great amounts of sugar that this generation does. I recall snack foods being nuts, fruits, and beef jerky for them - not soda pop, donuts, and candy as it is today.

Thatcher was part of the WW2 generation, but when she was in power diet would have changed compared to what it had been when she was younger. And for my family, the older guys never did eat much sugar.

Feminism undoubtably compounds the problem for some guys.

Yes, and maybe. No one can make you be a wimp, you do that to yourself. Men may have done it thinking that's what women want. They're wrong, though. Real women want real men-which means being strong, caring for your family, being a hard worker, and being honest. Honest, as in telling women if you can't be monogamous or don't want to raise kids, BEFORE you commit and have kids. Being honest as in telling your wife there are problems, and working on them, not just getting some on the side.

Anyone read that theory (study?) about BC pill hormones in the water supply wreaking havoc with men's fertility (and, one would assume, testosterone in general)?

There is a serious problem with lack of male role models too. My DH's parents are still married, his dad was a marine and is now a civilian contractor for the army. He's a good role model, and it's no coincidence that my DH is a good man, who had the usual teenager fuck-uppery, but straightened out.

I don't think it's an accident that military men tend to be good men. Which is probably why leftists knock the military and serving in it.

Maggie is THE MAN!

Life is more comfortable now than it was 100 years ago. Very few of us live on farms. Very few of us face starvation or even mild discomfort. Heck, even our poor people are fat!

Nicolek, have I got a brilliant book for you.
_________

The questions discussed on this page are things that take care of themselves. People's behavior changes as their mutual needs change, and no single metric –certainly not a personal, emotional one– is going to tell the tale.

PS— I'd bet that in the dorms in college (etc.), Maggie wasn't one of the typically girly girls either, but she was probably wickedly exciting. "Wimpy" vs 'macho' probably doesn't cover it.

Yes but with a qualification.

They are when in the presence of females.

They are getting worse, more borish, when it is all males (or essentially all males). I use the example of what happens at NFL games and concerts that are predominately male.

I've been going to Seattle Seahawk games for about 30 years now. The crowd has turned from drunk, happy, let's-have-a-good-time to drunk, nasty, and bordering on out-of-control. The crowd looks the same (about 85% male) but the aggression, the nastiness, and the violence has gone up by a huge amount.

I also see it rock concerts. They've gone from not needing any security (early 1970's) to having a hundred or two security types roaming around the arena. And it is males that are causing the problems, fighting, getting booted out, etc., basically bordering on riot conditions in what are male-dominated concerts (heavy metal and rap). (It's funny, about the only time I ever see females causing as much trouble is at country-western concerts. They are usually all the same type, white trash with foul mouths. And white trash plus alcohol is always going be a problem.)

There is also the (male) softball teams. Back 30 years ago, all the taverns in my town vied to get the teams in after their games. Drank a lot, ordered a lot of food, no trouble. Now, no one wants them in, especially not more than one. Get a couple of teams in one bar, and it is now the same results; fights, drunken asshole behavior, stuff in the bar busted.

That's what I see, others may see something different.

Is there anything wimpier than blaming women for your wimpiness? Jeez, the guys around here blame the ladies for everything. It's pathetic.

Gender roles have been evolving for the past 50 years, ever since practical and effective birth control allowed women to compete more fairly in the workplace. Women had the advantage of having a Women's Movement to announce (and debate) a new paradigm for "womanhood". Men don't have that, so we're left confused. If we follow our instincts, we're labelled "macho assholes"; if we try to please women (and society) by acting sensitive, we're labelled "wimps". (Labeled, of course, by women!)

The more men try to please women, the more confused they become. And no matter what we do, women will complain and criticize -- it's pretty much all they know how to do.

My suggestion to my fellow men is to do whatever you want and quit trying to guess what you're supposed to do. If you want to pull a woman's hair, pull it. If you want to cry during "The Notebook", cry. If you want to smash into another guys playing football, smash away. And if a woman is whining and complaining and criticizing you, tell her to stop acting like a bitch.

Women have no idea what they want from men, and they certainly aren't hampered by silly little things like logic, fairness or consistency. Quit trying to please people who will never be pleased and you'll be a lot happier.

>>I'd bet that in the dorms in college (etc.), Maggie wasn't one of the typically girly girls either, but she was probably wickedly exciting. "Wimpy" vs 'macho' probably doesn't cover it.

She wasn't exactly "wickedly exciting" at Somerville, Crid.

She read chemistry at Oxford (when Somerville was still women only, and very academically demanding - as it is still is today) and became the chair of the university's Conservative Association.

From memory (I was obviously there much later, she was PM while I was a student), the undergraduate Thatcher had a reputation as a deadly serious nerd bluestocking.

Nothing wrong with that, natch.
But let's not get silly.

Men are wimps because they aren't required to grow up. Perhaps it's the fault of feminists, but somewhere along the way men decided they didn't want to dress well and stop playing games all day, and forgot what the proper role of an adult is.

I remember a funny book that came out a while back called "Real Men Don't Eat Quiche." They had a list of "Real Men," "Quiche Eaters" and "Guys That Think They're Real Men, But Really Aren't."

Maggie Thatcher and Nancy Reagan made the "Real Men" list.

>>Maggie Thatcher and Nancy Reagan made the "Real Men" list.

Just like George Clooney makes my "Real Women" list.

I would guess men on the whole are wimpier now then cave-man times. Maybe since the seventies too. I'm trying to think what might be a good measure of manliness/wimpiness over time. As for myself, I just try to have a good time in life.

Things I do that may be considered not so wimpy: get dirty working on my own vehicles; go shooting (responsibly) with my buds when chance permits; am part owner in a go getter construction business; talk loud and tell jokes badly around my friends (not in inappropriate places). I could likely think of some more but I think that illustrates good enough. Most of my friends I wouldn't say are much different.

I don't really think about emasculation via feminism, I just live my own life. Perhaps my ignorance is bliss. These things said, is society at large becoming more efiminate? I don't know. Maybe me and my friends are becoming a rare breed. I'ld like to think not.

It's a combination of laziness, self-absorption and lack of stamina.

Easier to blame. Women have become less communicative as far as being direct, polite and tactful. They seem to be more vague, distracted and prone to being victims.

We are so self-absorbed we forget to check in on the needs of those we love or interact with. Simple things, "I'm going to the store - need anything?" to "Do me a favor tonight, treat me like the 6th grade teacher you're sucking up to and open my doors, order for me, etc."

Women have to decide - which way do you want it? You are confusing men with wanting it both ways. It's exhausting to keep up with the ever-changing rules. Consistency takes dedication. People have become lazy, just like parents with unruly children; easier to cave than fight for the correct behavior or outcome.

Keep asking the questions, Amy. Lets get this discussions going momre often.

Yes and yes.

Too many men caved in under the combination of pressure from the "liberated" feminazis and the lack of support from other men. And society has gone to the dogs.

"Women are always trying to change a man. And once they've changed him, they don't like him anymore." -- Marlene Dietrich

No, and maybe.

Nothing wrong with the greatest generation, but the guys I see coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan have put in more combat hours and dealt with situations far crazier than anything from WW2 and even Vietnam. Most have deployed longer, been shot at more often, and had to deal with more civil-military cooperation strategies than previous generations have.

Now, as for the folks not over there, maybe guys today are less muscular and brash than our ancestors (including those from the 1970s), but does that make us less manly? Today, hard work might mean spending long hours in a conference room negotiating million dollar deals. Maybe it seems unmanly to the guy pounding nails into a railroad, but those negotiations require a lot of brain power that our classic "manly" relatives couldn't do.

Or, what about negotiating a global economy? We have men now that manage companies so large they span continents. How many men did that in the 1950s?

I think our lives have become better because we got smarter and used technology to our advantage. I don't have to lift my car up by hand because I can use a hydraulic jack. I don't have to club an animal to death because I can shoot him at 200 yards with a rifle.

My question would be, why would using technology to our advantage be unmanly? Is it more manly to get killed by a wild animal because we refuse to carry a gun?

As for feminism, all men are humans. You have to choose to be a wimp. Unless your hormones are so jacked up there is no bulge in your pants, you must actively make a choice to be feminized.

Oh my!
Re: men vs. women

Here's a fantastically imaginative safe sex film (from France), that is NOT SAFE...FW (via Metafilter)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WPNhlzGoM0

I first noticed these small changes in men back in the seventies, when the tv series MASH came on. Hawkeye Pierce started being written "sensitive", and I for one started losing interest in the show.

In these same years people (mainly men) started being instructed to simply give in to robbers and muggers, and were being fired for trying to stand up to them. I understand the reasons behind it, but it didn't help anything. Especially when robbers started killing people even after they were being cooperative and obedient!

Polite behavior took a hit, as men were slapped down by feminists whenever they performed a courteous act like holding the door, as women were expected (by other women) to be assertive and strong and demand to be allowed to open their own damn door, thank you very much.

I think in the feminist search for equality women created this monster, but it couldn't have happened if the men hadn't been so eager to comply, which could simply mean that they will do whatever it takes to get laid.

Comes right down to the bible story: Eve offered Adam the apple, and he took it.

> became the chair of the university's
> Conservative Association.

See? Tits-out, alluring as Hell.

And Another Thing: TV again. All in the Family. Working man who supports his family is also a racist, uneducated asshole. Traditional wife is an airhead.

Daughter and unemployed son-in-law are presented as the ones who know how life should be. As the show progresses, the women get stronger, but the men don't seem to grow at all. Archie Bunker and Michael don't do any growing, but they learn how to adjust. Maybe it's all Norman Lear's fault.

Women got Maude, men got Walter.

Ugly people who can't get laid except as a benefit of their social position often harbor these bitter resentments.

I mean seriously now, Maggie Thatcher, the Baroness of a failed Socialist society, is going to tell us what it means to be a man? Spare us the bitter old woman's rhetoric.

I think we have both types now, just as we always did. The difference is that wimpier guys have an easier time with girls.

As JT mentoned, you still have your gym rats, with their bulked-up muscles and macho toughness. Many women still like those guys. But, girls like my daughter, find guys like Pete Wentz attractive, and he's a total wimp, with his eyeliner and mussed hair. Almost androgynous.

Of course, I liked Sean Cassidy at her age, and he wasn't the epitomy of manliness either. It seems that singers and musicians can get away with wimpiness more than the average guy.

But it goes beyond looks. There's wimpy behavior, like being openly afraid of stuff. On "The Bachelor" the other night, the guy was freaking out in fear of bungy-jumping, and the girl had to comfort him. He said, "I'm looking for a nurturing woman" as he quivered in her arms. I doubt John Wayne would've done that.

Just like George Clooney makes my "Real Women" list.

George is trying hard to fill the Cary Grant mold, but Archie had that undefinable something that George lacks. Maybe it was the blue-collar background.

@Radwaste

I agree about the carbs. I've noticed a huge difference in my mood and confidence since I went low carb.

> the Baroness of a failed Socialist society

Thatcher had her problems, but that's still a wildly inaccurate characterization.

"Margaret Thatcher made no secret of her contempt for the wimpish men around her."... "Are men at their wimpiest these days?"

Well, we are talking about Margaret Thatcher here. Most people I know consider me extremely masculine, sometimes way too masculine, but I don't know that I would be tough enough for the Iron Lady.

"Thatcher had her problems, "

Crid, we all love that photo -- but that is NOT Thatcher.

>>I mean seriously now, Maggie Thatcher, the Baroness of a failed Socialist society, is going to tell us what it means to be a man? Spare us the bitter old woman's rhetoric.

She's not telling anyone anything much these days, Gog. Her Alzheimer's fog is fairly advanced.

Hell, forget Thatcher, go back further to Elizabeth II, asked why she didn't allow her diplomats to recieve foreign honors she replied, "My dogs wear my collars."

Personally, I think she and Thatcher would have gotten along infamously. But that is another subject.

The truth is that yes, on the whole men have gotten a bit "wimpier", not all, but enough.

The reason could be laid on hormone levels, diet, feminism, and all of those probably have some validity, but the root of the problem is that a man who behaves in a strong & assertive manner, could all to easily go to jail.

Crazy woman hits man: "Wow she's a firecracker!"
Man so much as touches same crazy woman: Man meets warden.

Its not that we've forgotten how to be men, its that if we do so we're presumed to be abusive criminal types.

> that is NOT Thatcher.

I meant the Dalrymple review of Berlinski. Sheesh, youse guys is so literal.... Wutarya, UNDERGRADS!?!?!.

>>Hell, forget Thatcher, go back further to Elizabeth II, asked why she didn't allow her diplomats to recieve foreign honors she replied, "My dogs wear my collars."

It was Liz the First (7 September 1533 – 24 March 1603) with the dog collars quote, Robert.

wiki
Elizabeth II (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary; born 21 April 1926) is the Queen regnant of sixteen independent sovereign states known informally as the Commonwealth realms...

Yes and no.

I think it has to do with how internalized our culture has become. We're no longer a society that values action half as much as we value thought. As a society, we've become sedentary, with a lot of our physical labors eliminated. We've become more forward-thinking than present-thinking. ("If I hit this dude, there's a chance for a lawsuit" type stuff; more thought about consequences).

I think that this has eliminated a lot of male outlets for aggression (who are usually more physically inclined than women; please forgive the generalization). You can't go around and fight your enemies or buddies. You're discouraged from doing stuff like working on your own car or being a fixit man. There are few adult groups for sports. As a result, I think that we've seen a growing backlash.

Guys who lose themselves in video games, channeling their efforts into fictional worlds. Guys who are so afraid of the future that they become afraid to act. Some guys spend their free time get drunk and belligerent because there's nothing for them to DO. Guys who would normally go into fields like auto repair, plumbing, carpentry are discouraged by their parents early on because "it doesn't make enough" or "the only way to get a good job is to go to college" and other bullshit. No military for you, because your mother is afraid you'll go to Iraq or you were raised a hard-core liberal who sees the military as an evil American thing. (Forgive the generalizations; you see where I'm going).

A few people have made some other really awesome comments like changes in diet, single parenting, and etc. I also like the comment that "Men are wimps because they aren't required to grow up." I think this is very true of my generation in particular, because most of the guys I know are fast approaching thirty (or above it) with no career, no goals, and live check-to-check or from handouts from Mom & Dad. I'll be interested to see what my generation looks like when we hit our 40's...

Fun thread!

You're right, cornerdemon. A lot of the masculine jobs have been replaced by machines and computers, or they're not encouraged any longer.

There are a lot fisherman, divers, and boat captains where I live, and these are manly men, still making their living in a physical way - out in the sun, weatherbeaten. We have a whole industry here devoted to happy hour, when the clock hits 5 and they all come in from sea wanting a ice-cold beer served by a cute barmaid.

Yet, in most of the country, particularly urban areas, men work in high-rises and do nothing particularly physical, unless they go to the gym.

> wiki Elizabeth II (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary;
> born 21 April 1926) is the Queen regnant

You cite that as if were important... I mean, we don't have to worry about these people anymore until they drunkenly block the subterranean thoroughfares of Paris, right? I'm trying to get into the 'literal' thing, but in Fiji, Elisabeth 2's 'reign' consists mostly of being the silly white woman whose face shows up on coins.

>>I'm trying to get into the 'literal' thing, but in Fiji, Elisabeth 2's 'reign' consists mostly of being the silly white woman whose face shows up on coins.

Sayeth some ignorant twit who once passed through Fiji on a diving holiday!

You don't know much about the specific legacy of end-of-empire colonialism in Fiji - and the resulting ugly socio-economic rifts still affecting the post-independence island today, do you Crid?

Who told you that Elizabeth - she spells with a 'z' actually - now represents just a silly face on the Fijian dollar to certain vocal factions within its ethnically diverse population?

Was it your burly speedo-wearing diving instructor?

Or was it a nice couple from Indiana on their retirement cruise?

Family of mine were in the colonial service in Fiji. (Subversive branch!) My mother was brought up in Suva.

So DO give it your best answer.

Crid, the book looks awesome! I will check it out next time I'm in Borders!

Actually, Crid.
Forget it.

You've been a total boring pill in this thread.

Outta here, Vinaka vaka levu

I got that.

I think it's less about gender roles and more about a loser chic that has appeared in our culture. Movies glamorize slackers. There are a lot of movies where the hero is a guy who is unemployed or working at a McDonalds or Video Store type situation, and the villain is a guy who dresses well and has an actual career. It's been going on for the last 15 years or so.

Guys who refuse to grow up are portrayed as cool rebels, where as guys who have families are portrayed as losers.

Now that I have had a good cry over being called wimpy, let me throw down my hankie, and firmly declare I am not!
I am sensitive, I am clean shaven. I defer to women. So what?
Seriously, do women ever shut up? The woman's role as critic is really old and tired. Spread you legs and shut up already. If you open your mouth, be prepared to use it.

I don't think men are at their wimpiest these days; my sense is that was probably some time in the 80s, and the feminism of the day probably had something to do with that. Which is not really surprising, since one of the things we do is try really hard to please our mates or potential mates. If women want more sensitive, less overtly masculine men, that's what they are going to get.

In my cohort, who grew into adulthood since then, I don't see wimpiness celebrated in any way. The guys I hang with are very comfortable doing typically macho guy things - working with their hands, launching companies, drinking scotch, etc. The difference between us and the guys of the 50s are that we tend to share decision making with our mates, help care for our homes, and cook meals sometimes because pretty much everybody works outside the home.

The feminism is different, too. My wife talks about how she and her friends don't have the same hard edge that some of the older professional women do, because it's now assumed that they are judged by their work and not by their gender. The older women, that wasn't the case. My wife and her peers work hard, bring a lot to the table, expect to be treated as equals in decision making and don't need to be taken care of. But they don't think they're men with breasts, they enjoy looking good and being treated to a nice meal, and they certainly don't take their cues to relationships from Dworkin.

There was a lot of reactionary stuff that went on between the 60s and now in terms of gender roles and relations between the sexes. But I sense, at least in the people I know, that we've reached a pretty comfortable equilibrium, where men are definitely men, and the women, women. It's not our grandparents' flavor of very traditional, defined gender roles; nor is it the boomers' version of aggressive feminism and diminished masculinity.

Men are pretty bad these days, but not as bad as women are.

Men are pathetic when they try to contort themselves into what women demand. Instead, give women what they want. Which, at some point, involves stress positions.

"And Another Thing: TV again. All in the Family. Working man who supports his family is also a racist, uneducated asshole. Traditional wife is an airhead."

Actually, I rather admire Edith. She stood up to Archie when she felt he was wrong, but remained fiercely loyal to him. Archie married way, way, way, way above him. A shame Edith had to die before he realized that.

Sorry, missed the other part, was at work—

> You've been a total boring pill

No, this my usual enchanting stuff. I'd just hate to see this blog turn into a smoking lounge for ex-Brits who want to exchange koans about the Boar War and the importance of wearing whites at Wimbledon. (Or use words like "pill" in 2010.)

> My mother was brought up in Suva

I don't care if she was brought up in Buckingham Palace. My point didn't concern "the specific legacy of end-of-empire colonialism"; my point was that there's no reason for anyone on the surface of the globe, especially outside of Britain, to take much note of what the Queen of England is up to these days. I remember being pleased when she sang our anthem after the attacks of 9/11... But the presence of these people in modern public life is worthless when Hollywood (etc.) so better serves the human need for gossip and dreamy personal affiliation (and at much lower public cost). Political correctness has blunted whatever leadership such a family could offer in matters of civic responsibility; the typicality of their personal foibles has fatally impugned the power of their example as well. Let's not pretend they matter.

As regards Fiji— I remember when our boat stopped in at some remote island for a visit on one of the last evenings at the trip. We were, as "rich" white American tourists often are, paraded through the village and shown quaint handicrafts and told tales of the integrity of the commonfolk. And then to community center, for a forgotten local snack, unlistenable folk music, and dances with the most attractive young women from the island. (I peeked out the back door: All the really FUN looking girls were out there, waiting for this weekly ritual to be over, so that the town could get on with it's business once we'd been shaken down for donations to the community kitty.)

And I remember being shown the cabin of the Village Big Man after a flyby handshake with the exalted personage himself. On the wall was a black and white photo of some military regiment from somewhere in the first half of the century. Most of the faces were obviously Fijian, and one of the white figures was said to be British royalty; We were told that the VBM had been proud to serve alongside this blueblood. So I asked which of these strapping young soldiers had grown into the aging man I'd met a few minutes earlier. The tour leader, a warm and sincere-looking girl of about twenty, pointed to the ONE face in the photo that had been coarsely rubbed away, as if with a pencil eraser. I look at her again, and she said "The photo was damaged", as if asking, without shame, to cluck at the sorrow of the irony. I'm not sure I've ever faced a moment of greater pathos, and I've been to poorer countries than Fiji.

Also, those animals drive on the left.... And that's only for the parts that have roads! Did I ever mention my nightmare at this roundabout? Yes? OK, then.

Nicest people in the world, both the aboriginals and the Indian immigrants... But bad times are ahead as the average guy on the street (or on the island) continues to learn that there's nothing special about royalty, neither in London nor in his own village.

Yes, and yes.

"I agree about the carbs. I've noticed a huge difference in my mood and confidence since I went low carb."

I've been trying it too, and definitely feel better.

""Men are wimps because they aren't required to grow up." I think this is very true of my generation in particular, because most of the guys I know are fast approaching thirty (or above it) with no career, no goals, and live check-to-check or from handouts from Mom & Dad."

Also true indeed, though this then comes down to a parenting problem.

no and yes...

firstly the thing about wimpy men not growing up and playing games all day is an utter crock of sh*t.
If you don't HAVE to grow up, why would you? That is complete self interest, it isn't wimpyness.

But why did we ever grow up in the past? Why didn't we have a choice?

This is where feminism comes in. In the olden days there were rules about getting access to women and it was usually bound up in a tradition of not gettin' any until you were well on your way to marriage. In turn the marriage tradition was about locking a guy into a mono relationship, where he would provide as expected for the woman and children.
So? You make it so that women are empowered to not withold sex, or indeed wish to be in a long term relationship at all, and then?

Why should a guy grow up, if he can hookup when he wants, and the rest of the time do what he wants?

WHY would a guy want to have all the other responsibilities when there is no payoff? It's not like when married he suddenly gets new and interesting things he didn't have before, except for the unhindered access to a woman. That isn't really true so much now, and he has been told it exhaustively. 'After you are married, she'll own you, and so she'll stop puttin out' Since she no longer needs to entice, this is a statement with some truth to it.

But, before 'free love' it was worth it to him to get involved because he would have a harder time finding imterested parties. Now because there are plenty of interested women around that want their own fun, there is no need for him to take on those responsibilities.

Wimpy? Hardly. Looking out for #1 definitely. If it appears that he isn't being a manly man, is it because he has made his decision? Never to forget that humans are very inventive, to find the best way to procreate. If the gender roles alter, you can bet that will still be true. The definition of manly hasn't really changed. It is all about deciding what needs to be done and doing it. Including doing nothing. I think what has really changed is the value supposition in relationship, and what women expect men to be. We are still responding in a time honered way, by figuring out how to get past your defenses.

Non-bungee jumping guy in the bachelor? Heh, what're the odds that he got closer to the chica? If there was no girl involved, what would he have done. Maybe he wouldn't have been interested in jumping at all. Maybe that isn't his idea of fun. Maybe his idea of fun is a little sympathy. Or maybe he was actually afraid? How is it wimpy to be afraid of jumping off a cliff? Only somebody utterly insane wouldn't be. The Q? is do you want to conquer the fear? Or is a soft and nurturing chest your goal?

>>...the cabin of the Village Big Man...dances with the most attractive young women from the island...Nicest people in the world..etc etc

Cringe on a cracker, Crid!

Maybe you could send it to the 'Readers Share Their Cherished Holiday Memories' section of some inflight mag?

Not to disagree with you Swiss, but in my all-time favorite film "REDS", Henry Miller has a brief interview scene where he says "People fucked back then just as much as they do now. We just didn't talk about it as much."

I've always wondered why the interviewing of old people fom the time hasn't been more utilized in film making. It was brillant.

anyhoo, back to the discussion...

But there aren't enough Henry Millers!

heh, I went and looked up his bio, not having that great a memory for the particulars of the movie [I was in high school and all I remember was that it was too long... ]

er, Hank was married 5 times and had numerous other lovers while travelling the world... I'm not sure he would have counted for average in the early 20th cent. But you should ask yourself what forced him to get married all those times, when he apparently didn't have to. Was it legitimacy, were they supporting his writing? Do you think he'd bother now?

Alot of masculine qualities and activities are now frowned on.

I hear storied of kids getting in fights from my parents. When I was in school, if you threw a punch it was automatically suspended for 10 days... and if it really became a fight or a second time and you were expelled. A scuffle at bar, you a probably facing jail time (both parties).

Women seem to want a man to be a man but only in how and when it suits them.

So now guys play video games? My grandfathers used to play cards. I think that is just peoples biases regarding the activities.

"Where have all the good men gone...?"

Wasn't that a pop song lyric a few years ago?

I cannot speak to what men were like a few generations ago, but I tell young men who ask the following:

Avoid college programs that do not involve LOTS of math and hard data pulls. Non-math, non-data manipulation majors will be much emoting, garnished with occasional marginally relevant "facts." Liberal arts and social sciences are now wastelands and prepare people for little in life. Even most business degrees are a joke, with the exception--maybe--of the better finance programs.

While in college, work out, work hard, stay out of debt, don't get crazy in love, don't spend you time getting bombed, and don't marry.

Wait until you are older and established to marry. And then, only after you date the woman you want to marry for at least 3-4 years and seen up close how she treats her close friends and relatives; you will *not* be treated any better than them in 99% of the cases. In fact, you will likely be treated worse, even if she is a pretty good gal.

If you work for a large organization at some point during your younger career years, pretend to be less masculine for the time you are there, as being a man--especially a young one--in such places is no help. You will be held to higher standards, receive lower award goodies, and find yourself carrying a shocking number of unproductive people at every turn. The more masculine you are there, the more people will impose those higher standards while still pushing down on your advancement. Never say anything to a coworker you would not say to your sweet, bible-toting, kindly grandmother: anything more may get you sued or fired, even if you thought you were safe and everyone knew you were kidding.

Learn to fight. Not Fifth Degree Black Belt YMCA-kuhrotty "fight", really fight (wrestling, juijitsu, full contact striking arts, etc.). If you are learning to fight, your nose must be bloody at times, and the resulting bruises must be real and frequent. For most people, it takes years to learn to fight well, so get used to bruises and injuries. Teach any sons and daughters you have how to fight before they leave your house as adults.

Learn to shoot guns, even if you don't intend to own one. They are not scary, and it will innoculate you against the fear of Men! With Guns! too many people have.

Spend time in strange, distant places where you don't know anyone and no one cares about you. It sobers you to life's realities.

Remember that most "friends" are not that at all. In life, if you are very, very luck, you will have a few family members and and even fewer number of friends that you can count on. Everyone else is just passing through. Treat them all well, but don't expect any favors or help at all from most people.

Thanks Jody! :)

>>Thanks Jody! :)

You're welcome, Robert.

A misplaced monarchical ordinal is nothing between chums:)

Methinks Spartee must have raised (be raising?) some good people.

"But why did we ever grow up in the past? Why didn't we have a choice?"

Much of America was until fairly recently in history a frontier society; men 'grew up' because if they didn't, they'd quite possibly die.

Henry Miller and friend. I aspire to have the strength for ping pong at that age.

Yes and yes.
I blame 'sensitive' singers like Dan Folgelberg and Kenny Rankin. Men listening to that crap in 70's shriveled up their cojones.
(Kidding.)

"Is there anything wimpier than blaming women for your wimpiness?"

Hear, hear!

> "Is there anything wimpier than blaming
> women for your wimpiness?"

> Hear, hear!

There's a concern that women who bitch about the girliness of their surrounding fellows will, when their mood changes in a couple weeks, be moaning about masculine boorishness....

Like I said earlier, all this stuff works itself out... Women who really like manly men get what they ask for, as do those who don't.

>>There's a concern that women who bitch about the girliness of their surrounding fellows will, when their mood changes in a couple weeks, be moaning about masculine boorishness....

This concern you have so carefully noted, Crid - is it anything to do with Fiji?

You hate it so much when I make myself clear.

TestyTommy said: "And no matter what we do, women will complain and criticize -- it's pretty much all they know how to do."

I spend most of my time designing and synthesizing novel molecules for cancer treatment. I published about 10 articles on this topic in the peer reviewed literature last year. Having a couple of patents on this work, I am currently looking into the legal construction of a start up company.

What do you do? Besides bitch, I mean.

I'm not convinced that feminism is causing wimpiness...I think that women are just calling out complaining, criticizing men more often, and you show yourselves for who you are. (Directed at the Testy one, not the rest of the fine masculine commentators here.)

>>You hate it so much when I make myself clear.

Not so, Crid.

Though I am contemptuous when you write crap, because you are so much better than that.

I think men act like wimps because that is the only way we can get laid these days. Women mistakenly believe that they want a man more like them....well, to get laid you give them what they want.

I don't agree that men are wimpier these days. They still do the same things and hang out at the same places.

Feminism can be blamed for alot of things, but changing men into wimps is not one of them. To bed the feminist woman you have to think like a feminist...

> when you write crap, because

Don't read... Spare yourself the heartache. The Internet, America's gift to lovers of information worldwide, ought not cause you such distress

I feel feminism (not the good stuff like giving women the vote, and equal pay for equal work) is an enabling force for wimpy men.

I could agree with that, mostly because 'enabling' means that it is behavior in men that previously existed, but is encouraged by the behavior and tolerance of others.

In the end strong women want strong men (and vise versa). Very often people get the type of relationship they feel they deserve.

-Julie

I think a lot of factors stated here are involved, though in the end they are all linked to feminism, or at least coexistent.

In the early days of the US, there was a lot of talk about effeminate luxury for men. Men tend to be more effeminate with luxury. This was known thousands of years ago.

In modern society, everything has been done to provide maximum luxury and comfort. In part, because women demand it, and men, especially raised by their mommies, don't know any other way of life.

Tongue in cheek, I must theorize if the Spartans slept on rocks, it was only because they didn't have a good source of nails, heh, heh. There were only a few thousand Spartans soldiers, and smart people shivered with fear if they heard those rascals were coming.

I am on a low carb diet. I live in rural Mexico, and we would not be described as living in luxury, though perhaps compared to our neighbors, we do. I chop trees, with ax; chain saw; and hand saw. In the coldest part of the winter, I carry in logs, and run the fireplace, shouting as I do, "This is for Algore!"

I dig holes in the ground. If we are doing construction, I help carry around 110 pound bags of cement. I go for four or five hour walks across the mountains, and come back with sore feet. I feel great, and yes, I feel like a man, and I am 67 years old.

I have been communicating with an old high school classmate. He is on heart medicine and has arthritis. I thought, Omigod, he is an old man already and he is only 67 years old. WTF?

I am not a life-long strong man. In fact, in my youth, I was considered weak. But, this life here has been good for me in my maturity -- I refuse to say old-age, because I do not feel old, and I certainly do not feel feminine. Come on down, guys!

But, to put things in perspective, I am in about the same condition as my 75 year old neighbors!

I think it's because Women don't need Men anymore.

You don't don't have a high divorce rate when you're actually *needed*.

Women wanted emasculated men, and got them.

Now they complain about getting their own way. So it has always been. So it shall always be.