~Why it is Wise to Worship your Woman~

No. I don't think men and women have the same "heart." Mens are probably much simpler and easier to get at. The question of what makes a man a man has been clouded by specious feminist theory over the years, but most women want a man who is protective and trustworthy. Friendships among males tend also to value trustworthiness and mutual respect, but don't go much deeper than that.

I'd like to propose that what makes a man and what makes a woman have been clouded for centuries for specious social theory. I've noticed that some of the great thinkers throughout human existence don't divide thought into male and female.

It's intersting that you think a males heart is easier to get at. From what I hear men are perceived to be quite stoic and reluctant to express their innermost feelings almost as if it were a sign of weakness.

I think you seriously understimate the depth at which a man can love a man. They have shown over and over that they are willing to die for each other.

I can think of a buddy or two I've known for awhile for whom I would sacrifice, sure. We all can.

I just mean men understand other men more easily than they understand women, and women understand men more easily as well. That's all. We're simpler. In a good way.

I wouldn't say men are simple. But I see them as less inherently contradictory - and maybe less able to understand let alone accept the contradictions in a lot of women. Whereas we're so used to it, we rarely even see it consciously. It's just the whole linear vs. circular thing.
 
I'd like to propose that what makes a man and what makes a woman have been clouded for centuries for specious social theory. I've noticed that some of the great thinkers throughout human existence don't divide thought into male and female.

It's intersting that you think a males heart is easier to get at. From what I hear men are perceived to be quite stoic and reluctant to express their innermost feelings almost as if it were a sign of weakness.

I think you seriously understimate the depth at which a man can love a man. They have shown over and over that they are willing to die for each other.

I can think of a buddy or two I've known for awhile for whom I would sacrifice, sure. We all can.

I just mean men understand other men more easily than they understand women, and women understand men more easily as well. That's all. We're simpler. In a good way.

I wouldn't say men are simple. But I see them as less inherently contradictory - and maybe less able to understand let alone accept the contradictions in a lot of women. Whereas we're so used to it, we rarely even see it consciously. It's just the whole linear vs. circular thing.

Simpler. Not simple.

And yes, less inherently contradictary, at least if we know ourselves a little bit. Linear vs circular is a good way to put it. Take the different ways we use speech, for example. Men use speech to exchange info. ("I'll be there at 4. You bring the beer, I'll bring the barbecue. Bye.")

Women use it to explore feelings and flesh out ideas, and to express emotion, far more than men do. Women can chatter about multiple topics at the same time. That drives men nuts!
 
This seems fitting for this thread:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZCtgFmQvjQ]YouTube - bee gees - more than a woman[/ame]

:lol:
 
I can think of a buddy or two I've known for awhile for whom I would sacrifice, sure. We all can.

I just mean men understand other men more easily than they understand women, and women understand men more easily as well. That's all. We're simpler. In a good way.

I wouldn't say men are simple. But I see them as less inherently contradictory - and maybe less able to understand let alone accept the contradictions in a lot of women. Whereas we're so used to it, we rarely even see it consciously. It's just the whole linear vs. circular thing.

Simpler. Not simple.

And yes, less inherently contradictary, at least if we know ourselves a little bit. Linear vs circular is a good way to put it. Take the different ways we use speech, for example. Men use speech to exchange info. ("I'll be there at 4. You bring the beer, I'll bring the barbecue. Bye.")

Women use it to explore feelings and flesh out ideas, and to express emotion, far more than men do. Women can chatter about multiple topics at the same time. That drives men nuts!

Y'all just can't multitask. :D

But seriously, you're right about language. And there are a lot more differences in the way men and women use both verbal and nonverbal expression. It only makes sense. What is language but symbolism for thought? I don't think anybody has argued men and women in general think the same way. Our brains aren't even built the same. Why wouldn't our verbal expression of that thought pattern follow suit? Or our emotions, for that matter? We are, after all, talking about the "heart".

These are broad generalities, but you can look at the overall picture as us vs. them and argue over who is better or who is weak or simple or any of the other stuff.....or as complimentary pieces of the puzzle. I'm a half full kinda gal. :lol:
 
Is John Travolta linear or circular ? :lol:

:lol: These are the kind questions that keep people up at night I'm sure.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyUWkQj0Q_U]YouTube - Grease - You're The One That I Want [ HQ + subtitle][/ame]
 
I wouldn't say men are simple. But I see them as less inherently contradictory - and maybe less able to understand let alone accept the contradictions in a lot of women. Whereas we're so used to it, we rarely even see it consciously. It's just the whole linear vs. circular thing.

Simpler. Not simple.

And yes, less inherently contradictary, at least if we know ourselves a little bit. Linear vs circular is a good way to put it. Take the different ways we use speech, for example. Men use speech to exchange info. ("I'll be there at 4. You bring the beer, I'll bring the barbecue. Bye.")

Women use it to explore feelings and flesh out ideas, and to express emotion, far more than men do. Women can chatter about multiple topics at the same time. That drives men nuts!

Y'all just can't multitask. :D

But seriously, you're right about language. And there are a lot more differences in the way men and women use both verbal and nonverbal expression. It only makes sense. What is language but symbolism for thought? I don't think anybody has argued men and women in general think the same way. Our brains aren't even built the same. Why wouldn't our verbal expression of that thought pattern follow suit? Or our emotions, for that matter? We are, after all, talking about the "heart".

These are broad generalities, but you can look at the overall picture as us vs. them and argue over who is better or who is weak or simple or any of the other stuff.....or as complimentary pieces of the puzzle. I'm a half full kinda gal. :lol:

Can't add a thing to that.

yin-yang-symbol-blue-flare-thumb3277201.jpg
 
Women are wonderful people as long as they are not romantically (i.e. emotionally) aroused. Once the red light comes on their brains SHUT DOWN. Completely and absolutely.

The problem with this is that once that red light comes on they are entirely driven by instincts - instincts formed during the million years or so that the human race lived as hunter gatherers.

Whenever a women seems to be irrational, just try to image living in a primitive, polygamist tribe where men bonded with men as hunters and women bonded with women to care for the camp and children. Tribal pecking order becomes essential to the survival of any women's children - males did not identify with children. Suddenly, female motivations become understandable.

Historically, female worshipping soceities have been failures. Not that there is a lack of intelligence or ability of women in general, but that societies that put women on a pedestal do so because of their excusively feminine characteristics, not their brains. Meaning that the worst sort of women were idolized.

Male dominated sexually repressed soceities are the societies that flourished and evolved. The Judaic, Greco-Roman culture is the greatest example (And yes, the Athenians and Romans were male dominated, sexually repressed - until just before their downfall.)

However, because ancient societies required that beauty & feminity be the prerequieste to female leadership, the emergence of women as in equals in our society is very much different. A new sociological paradigm.

After all, isn't the feminist movement really all about women having both the opportunity and responsibilty historically retained only by men? A adoption of the male psychic.

So worshipping the feminine in the sense promoted by this article is very very dangerous. It will cause the de evolution of society.

The one saving grace is the when the female brain turns back on, the red light is completely off, and women become the most rational of the sexes (Men's brains are never fully on, nor are they ever fully off).

In short, women can be at least, if not more, primitive than they accuse men of being - just in feminine ways. What makes matter worse is that little switch in their brains keeps going on-off-on-off-on-off-on-off-on-off-off-on-on-off-on-on-on-off-off-on-on-on-off-on-on-off-off-off. NON STOP!

Ugh! Drives me CRAZY!
 

Forum List

Back
Top