Also, she can’t dunk. She has good fundamentals though.
Almost, but not quite.
[spoiler]The women put David Keith’s character back into cold sleep. So they didn’t kill him, they just returned him to limbo, basically.
And it was more nuanced. His presence basically caused a love triangle that went bad, and he started an armed rebellion of sabotage because he was annoyed at the passivity of the women. It was strongly implied, though, that the central women’s group really was screwing over the outlying groups as he’d thought. And, of course, his presence in the first place was because the central women’s group was playing experiments by releasing him to see what happened to the outlying settlement. It was revealed that the other cold-sleep men they’d released had been killed.
Basically, in the absence of men, the women had become dicks.[/spoiler]
Also not on point, but also bothering me. And using an Outer Limits episode to argue the point is more basis of support than given in the OP, I suppose.
Why should we fix men? Instead, we should fix everybody else, so that they accept men for who we are. 
And maybe more importantly, fix them so that they enjoy the same stuff we do. Fighting and sexing is fun! 
Is there a way to fix men?
“Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Can’t remember who said it, but it’s true. For every despicable man, there are 10 adoring women standing in line to marry him.
I literally LOL.
The OP makes a number of generalisations backed up with hyperbole and inflammatory language, which would not be acceptable if we were talking about race, the disabled, or even women instead of men.
But I agree in a sense that there’s a male problem. Men are more aggressive than women, as a generalisation, and there was a time when that aggression was of vital importance to our species. But in the modern world, it doesn’t have much of a place.
However, men are still expected (by both men and women) to display “manliness” when the situation demands it. And it can be a tough balance to find.
I’m not saying that all violence is rooted to the need to prove manliness…some guys do just seem to have a lot of bottled up aggression.
Band name?
Well, if the OP is saying men are solely responsible for gay porn, I can’t argue with that.
Other than that, yes, it’s a load of prejudiced garbage. Does male-bashing still go on like this? I thought it mostly was restricted to “Men are such jerks!” (until I whip my guy into shape), not generalizations about sexual inferiority. I almost said “broad-based generalizations,” but I realized that would be offensive.
Women are responsible for a significant share of horrors in the world even if men are the ones with the most power to do so; I like to mention Indira Gandhi’s forcible sterilizations during The Emergency when people insist women are innately more peaceful and less nasty. Or we could talk about the greed of Imelda Marcos, the bloodthirstiness of Ilse Koch or Elisabeth Bathory, and then there were no shortage of imperialist queens in days gone by.
Men are aggressive for sure. This causes problems, but if it had no benefits the trait would probably not exist.
Has it been pointed out that chemical castration isn’t very effective on unwilling subjects? Because it isn’t, and that’s assuming we can overlook the inhumanity of such a proposal. Which we can’t.
15 whole hours and there isn’t a corresponding Is there a way to fix women? thread?
I’m surprised.
There’s the rub.
To “fix” men is to fix an evolutionary trait that had distinct advantages.
It was not so long ago, evolutionary speaking, when we were still hanging out in trees. If the Genghis Khan monkey tribe rolled into the Mahatma Gandhi monkey tribe territory the Gandhi monkey tribe was toast. Aggression is selected for.
Only 6,000 or so years that civilization has existed and even during most of that time aggression was a winning strategy strongly selected for.
Even today, in a modern western society, aggression is still favored albeit a bit more cloaked in “ok” things rather than rape-and-pillage things.
Note that females benefited from this too. They were more likely to survive and their offspring survive if they had the biggest, baddest guys in their group. Those guys could out compete others for resources and protect the women from those who would take from them.
A brutal system? Yep but one seen all over the animal world and seems Mother Nature’s preferred MO.
This by no means is meant to excuse rape and abuse and murder and all that jazz. Unfortunately that seems part-and-parcel of gaining the benefits aggression granted.
How do we fix it? The only reasonable suggestion I can think of is better education of males to learn to control their aggression. Certainly we have strong societal prohibitions in place (e.g. “never hit a woman”) but clearly that only goes so far. Guys need better tools/training when growing up to manage themselves better and learn to seek other, non-violent options to perceived problems.
Other than that change the society. Get women to prefer the “nice” guys and shun the aggressive guys. Eventually you could breed it out of the population (and likely get steamrolled by some other society that still selects for aggressiveness). Get guys to shun sports stars and look up to Stephen Hawking types. Good luck with that though.
Somedays I feel like a chimp living in a society of bonobos.
It’s not inherent, it’s problems with society that cause certain negative issues with men and with black people and other groups. You can’t blame an individual man for it, and in some ways men are victimized by it too (for example, little boys often miss out on emotional nurturing that they need because it’s not recognized as a need), but the result is that, yes, men do some horrible things way out of proportion to women doing those things. Violent crime is a huge one and if you want to address that problem, you can’t disregard the fact that it’s mostly men doing it.
Did you read the op? Please explain why, I, as a male, need “fixed” because of those things? Keep in mind I’m a safe driver who hasn’t stabbed babies in the head, mutilated their genitals, caused a car accident, brutally beaten anyone, nor rapped or otherwise violated anyone. Should I have been chemically castrated, or aborted at birth, as the op suggests?
This thread is hateful drivel.
Yes, I read the OP, and yes it was inflammatory and those are not constructive solutions. You as an individual male don’t need to be fixed, but our collective notion of masculinity, in my opinion, does. I’m just responding to that topic in general, not really the specifics of the OP.
This thread reminds me of the S.C.U.M. Manifesto.
Well in my opinion feminine gender rolls need fixed as well, as both sides represent destructive extremes.
Maybe the topic would be better addressed in a less inflammatory place? Talking about it in this thread is about like about like discussing gay marriage in a thread asking “how can gays be fixed? they’re sexual deviants who pay each other to whore their bodies out of desperation”. Oh wait this thread does that as well.
I’d agree with that, but can we please, PLEASE agree to say “needs to be fixed” or “needs fixing”? Needs “blanked” grates one me so much.
Forget all this rubbish about males.
99% of all crime is committed by adults.
Therefore we should execute everyone as soon as they reach puberty.
:smack:
Yes, I agree that feminine gender roles have some issues as well. They’re connected anyway and if our concept of masculinity changed, so would our concept of femininity. Men as a group, though, are the ones who have historically been dominant and oppressive to women and to an extent still are, not vice versa, so I see that as a more pressing problem.
Yeah, we could talk about this somewhere else. If someone makes another thread on the topic, I’ll post there.
I started a new one here.
There’s a great noninflammatory thread in the pit. Today is opposites day.