What's up with nice guys and jerks?!

reply to post by Frankidealist35


You know, it's probably more about a person's personality-type than the idea that one way is the only right way in any given situation. I would say, do what works for you.

reply to post by dr_strangecraft


I would agree, but what advice would you give to people who are slightly paranoid about other people? I used to have a lot of trust issues with other people because I've been burned and had bad experiences with other people in the past so I naturally sometimes become highly suspicious of others. If I were in a crisis (I am not now) what advice would you give? I guess what I'm saying is that it's all too easy to just tell other people that they should manage themselves in a crisis, but, when they're actually in one, it's tough. Then, on top of that there's the whole deal about real versus perceived crisis (ones that are all in your head) which adds on another layer of complexity to the whole thing.

reply to post by Frankidealist35


Well, I'm not sure how useful I am. I got burned a LOT when I was younger. A lot of my current attitude comes from that. I am happily married for a decade and a half now.

The women I hung out with in college encouraged me to "open up" and "be honest" about my feelings---yet when those feeling included being sexually enamoured of them, they always rebuffed me. They wanted me for a friend, not a lover. And yet I took their advice, when they wouldn't sleep with me anyway. (Not that sex was my only goal; but, well, it was in the mix. Things got better after I went with the old fashioned, 'no sex before marriage' program.)

Look, I think that gender roles are a social construct--they are not innate, since they vary by culture. And yet there are is a short list of gender prototypes that cultures choose, over and over again. I think that parhaps this is because it's what works.

People are fundamentally illogical. We can all wish that we would be completely honest with each other. But the truth is that we as individuals are hardly ever honest with ourselves. I think there is something in the feminine social construct that enjoys flirting, enjoys the construction of a facade, etc. In the vast majority of cultures, it is females who use make-up, not men (there ARE exceptions, as always.) You could argue that it is part of the feminine mystique, in western Europe as well as east asia. Greco-islamic culture rejected that part of feminine gender as wicked and evil, and took on overtones that seem frankly mysogenistic to westerners. Part of the the Burka (which existed before mohammed, and was common in Corinth before Christianity arrived), was forcing women NOT to wear makeup, and pretend to be prettier than they physically were. The problem is, now women in that culture have to wear a towel over their faces, in order to be 'honest!'

Part of what is making modern society so dysfunctional, is that we have de-constructed all the traditional mores, without completing a new set of functional rules. We have told "today's woman" that she can be anything she wants (but she must be "Strong Woman" and a "Leader for tomorrow.").

On the other hand, we've told boys that they must not be rude, or so smart that they become geeks; but they mustn't pursue a woman, because that is putting her on a pedastal. Besides; just having sex is a lot less work.

Yet as a society, we've quit teaching boys how to be men. Peublo Indians initiated their boys in a Kiva Lodge. Medieval europeans initiated their sons into guilds or orders of chivalry. Plains indians had warrior societies, as did Kalahari bushmen and the classical Chinese. Greece and Rome had the mystery religions with their secret initiations. The Aztecs had the cheetah and eagle warrior cults. But not in the modern West. Male organizations are laughed at or sued for being chauvanistic old-boy netwworks. From the Freemasons to the Boy scouts are culture is actively demolishing the last remnants of male initiation.

So, violence is illegal, and initiatiory societies are anti-feminist. And many little boys don't even have a father present to tell them what it means to be a man. So all they are left with is TV images.

The reason for this rant is just to point out to you that many men today don't really have any idea of what it means to be a man; just as many women today don't know what kind of man they want, and would not want to admit that what they want might not be exactly what the culture tells them to want.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
reply to post by Frankidealist35

 

Well, I'm not sure how useful I am. I got burned a LOT when I was younger. A lot of my current attitude comes from that. I am happily married for a decade and a half now.

That's good to hear. I however disagree with you on a number of issues with your post and I would like to continue this conversation about ethics or about how people should act.

The women I hung out with in college encouraged me to "open up" and "be honest" about my feelings---yet when those feeling included being sexually enamoured of them, they always rebuffed me. They wanted me for a friend, not a lover. And yet I took their advice, when they wouldn't sleep with me anyway. (Not that sex was my only goal; but, well, it was in the mix. Things got better after I went with the old fashioned, 'no sex before marriage' program.)

Look, I think that gender roles are a social construct--they are not innate, since they vary by culture. And yet there are is a short list of gender prototypes that cultures choose, over and over again. I think that parhaps this is because it's what works.

Okay, but why should opening up about one's feeling be a gender construct? Shouldn't guys talk about their feelings too? I think society focuses too much about gender and not about the people that you're with or about who you are and the values you pick up from those people.

Now here is the question

People are fundamentally illogical. We can all wish that we would be completely honest with each other. But the truth is that we as individuals are hardly ever honest with ourselves. I think there is something in the feminine social construct that enjoys flirting, enjoys the construction of a facade, etc. In the vast majority of cultures, it is females who use make-up, not men (there ARE exceptions, as always.)

Is this really about covering up appearances or is it about looking nice? Don't most of us want to look nice in front of other people and to be that attractive person that everyone wants?

#1- Part of what is making modern society so dysfunctional, is that we have de-constructed all the traditional mores, without completing a new set of functional rules. We have told "today's woman" that she can be anything she wants (but she must be "Strong Woman" and a "Leader for tomorrow.").

#2- On the other hand, we've told boys that they must not be rude, or so smart that they become geeks; but they mustn't pursue a woman, because that is putting her on a pedastal. Besides; just having sex is a lot less work.

#1- I see nothing wrong with this. Why shouldn't women be as capable leaders just like us men?

#2- I would completely agree with you that some of the things that we are told as boys is ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with being somewhat nerdy. Hey, a lot of people might consider me a nerd :p. I don't mind if they do. It's not about what you are or what you like, but, how people like you or how you are remembered.

As far as pursuing a women-- I agree that society has taken somewhat more of a conservative belief with regards to sex. What has caused this?

Yet as a society, we've quit teaching boys how to be men. Peublo Indians initiated their boys in a Kiva Lodge. Medieval europeans initiated their sons into guilds or orders of chivalry. Plains indians had warrior societies, as did Kalahari bushmen and the classical Chinese. Greece and Rome had the mystery religions with their secret initiations. The Aztecs had the cheetah and eagle warrior cults. But not in the modern West. Male organizations are laughed at or sued for being chauvanistic old-boy netwworks. From the Freemasons to the Boy scouts are culture is actively demolishing the last remnants of male initiation.

I really fail to see what the Boy Scouts is demolishing the last remnants of male initiations. Both the boy scouts and cub scouts organizations has helped make me who I am today. I didn't get very far in the Boy Scouts but I learned a lot about personal responsibility, being prepared, and about life just from their motto and being in the wilderness. What's more manly than being around a bunch of other guys around camp and trying to go out in the woods to get merit badges? I actually think that Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts teaches people to become men more than you think it does. But, with regards to gender roles-- again-- I think that society places too much emphasis on them and less on the individual. We regard the individual with all its glory but when it comes down to it people segregate other people based on their gender. It sickens me.

So, violence is illegal, and initiatiory societies are anti-feminist. And many little boys don't even have a father present to tell them what it means to be a man. So all they are left with is TV images.

I'm glad violence is illegal. I think rather than live through gender codes people should live through value codes and use them as a manner of their living. It might be hard to actually uphold them but it would be worth a shot!

The reason for this rant is just to point out to you that many men today don't really have any idea of what it means to be a man; just as many women today don't know what kind of man they want, and would not want to admit that what they want might not be exactly what the culture tells them to want.

I agree completely. Nowadays being a man means that you need to be a jerk to other people as much as possible and only be mature in public. I guess I will agree to disagree with you on this one.

Originally posted by Frankidealist35

Okay, but why should opening up about one's feeling be a gender construct? Shouldn't guys talk about their feelings too? I think society focuses too much about gender and not about the people that you're with or about who you are and the values you pick up from those people.

I'm not saying opening up about your feelings "should be" a gender construct. however, I believe it is in fact tied to ideas of gender in our culture. If you say it isn't, then that's fine. Personally, I believe it IS a facet of gender, but one which is implicit and which is not talked about. Like many parts of the gender issue, it is one we are generally dishonest about, even when (or especially when) we SAY we are being honest.

#1- I see nothing wrong with this. Why shouldn't women be as capable leaders just like us men?

It's fine, if that's what the individual wants for herself. Our society is busy telling women they MUST be "strong" women leaders, even if it is not what they feel suited for. A young woman (like one of my daughters, for example) will get more attention for being good at math than she will for being good at literature. Math skills are prized in female students in public schools. That is my whole point, which I think you missed; girls today are not "free-er" than their mothers---they are just given a different set of hoops to jump through.

As far as pursuing a women-- I agree that society has taken somewhat more of a conservative belief with regards to sex. What has caused this?

I don't know, but it's practically universal across cultures. Even in west Africa, among matriarchal societies, the male is expected to pursue the female. I don't know why; , but coming up with an explanation which holds predictive value will get you an endowed anthropology chair in the university of your choice.

I really fail to see what the Boy Scouts is demolishing the last remnants of male initiations. Both the boy scouts and cub scouts organizations has helped make me who I am today.

That's not what I said. I was saying the opposite. I was a boy scout, myself, and am a Freemason now. I think they are both fine institutions that try to teach morals and ethics to men. I don't know whether you've noticed, but both organizations have been ostracized by charitable givers like United Way, for being sexist.....and teaching "religious values."

I actually think that Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts teaches people to become men more than you think it does.

Please, please, PLEASE go back and re-read what I wrote. You completely mis-understood me.

I'm glad violence is illegal. I think rather than live through gender codes people should live through value codes and use them as a manner of their living. It might be hard to actually uphold them but it would be worth a shot!

Things like gender-codes are a double edged sword. All traditions are. At times they seem like a prison; but they also tell us what to do when we are not certain of the right way to behave. The traditional rituals of grief for example, can be a place for a lot of healing when you've lost a loved one. But they also can make people feel like they are "supposed" to spend money at a difficult time in life.

Nowadays being a man means that you need to be a jerk to other people as much as possible and only be mature in public.

I am a man. More specifically, I'm a gentleman.


.

Are you really speaking about being a nice guy or having manners. It is okay not to be a nice guy sometimes cause you can still have manners. It is when you throw away who you really are that you should be worried.

reply to post by Conclusion1


I was taking about being a nice guy or being a jerk, or, being so one-dimensional that you could practically fit into one of these stereotypes! I think that people with this kind of one-dimensional attitude towards other people think mainly about who they are and how they are acting towards other people and like you've said they make the mistake about throwing away their true selves too often.

reply to post by Frankidealist35


I agree. Then the question that really needs to be answered is Who am I? That is a big question which takes some people all their lives to figure out and then some still don't know.

reply to post by Conclusion1


You can't be too hard on them. There are still some times where I pull back and look at myself and wonder what the hell I am doing and what I really want out of life. Sometimes I'll be stuck in one mode of linear thinking that I'll fail to see alternatives to my courses of actions and I'll wonder whether the way that I am currently acting towards other people is a result of honest intentions, or, a result of one action, or certain set of actions, that made me this way. I think it's okay for people to not be completely sure of themselves, that way, when they call themselves into focus, their judgments about themselves won't be so clouded by the idealistic visions they hold of themselves. At the same time...

I agree, that, people should try to be more honest, and, be who they are. Then again, I guess that's hard for some people, and that's why a lot of people go to self-help books, or have a prescribed personality, for guidance, since they need a script to do things. Maybe the issue isn't so much knowing who you are, but, for some people, it's hard for them to act any other way since they don't know how to.

reply to post by Frankidealist35


Everything you have said shows signs of a people who just don't know. Ya know? It is as if there is a big cloud over the world that clouds judgment. But being here on ATS most of us have our own speculations about that. What ever it is, it is starting to understand that time is running out.

reply to post by Conclusion1


I've been thinking about moral clarity and I've come to the conclusion that the reason why it's hard to have any sense of moral clarity is because what's good and what's bad changes all the time. There used to be a time when people trusted bankers to handle their money and handle the economy. Now people don't like bankers. There used to be a time when people looked up to authority. Now we mistrust authority because we know that they aren't perfect and they have done bad things and they can be corrupt. People used to think patriotism was a good thing. Now most people consider some sense of patriotism to be healthy, but, are historically aware of what happens when there is too much patriotism. I am guessing with relating this to politics... is that over time our values change, before people used to think of women as just plain sex objects, but in reality they're thinking people, much like you and I. I guess, in short-- moral clarity is hard to come by in a world that is it is becoming increasingly hard to know who to trust or who not to trust, which is why, people don't really know that much.

reply to post by Frankidealist35


I definitely agree with that.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

Honestly, I think most of the trouble is all the psychobabble that showed up in our society in the wake of WWI.

No one wants to see a man cry. Just ask Ed Muskie.

No one wants to hear a man complain about suffering from personal injustice, or physical pain. So don't waste your breath. The people who tell you that these things are important are simply trying to control your responses, and get you to emasculate yourself so they don't have to.

You don't telegraph your feelings or plans, except to your wife---and then only what matters to her.

Otherwise, you are simply showing your cards.

No one will ever love you for being weak; anyone who says they do is merely trying to make you dependent upon their approval. Women (probably men as well, but I'm only interested in the female) want a lover they can respect. Being strong and helpful will get you that respect. There's no reason to act like a caveman. But people can withhold love; while they will respect you whether they like you or not.

Jerks still breed. Whiners often don't. What else do you need to know?

If 2 million years of evolution have only produced a backwards sociopathic species, maybe TPTB are right to want to wipe most of us out. Because it is not a matter of weakness, it is a matter of rights. Any man who suffers abuse or injustice and just "takes it" in order to be a Man, is already emasculated beyond repair.