You are completely brilliant.

@KKGator Shoosh--you'll make my head swell...bigger than it already is

What she said.

Keep in mind the poster is only 19 and we all struggle to make sense of the world. Categorizing is what humans do.

Stellar

This wasn't the point of the post.

The conclusion was "different women in different situations will generally prefer different men who can meet their different needs and wants"

Also what's wrong with classifying men into categories? We do it all the time, it's called statistical data collection. We look to see if there is a pattern.

I'm not talking about looks, I'm talking about physical ability and a mans morals and values. In the way that I think a man should focus on improving his mind and body in equal proportion. Aiming for the group 2. However this is not the case in the world.

Having and expressing feelings is fine, but we must also value the idea that controlling ones feelings must take priority. This usually gets women in trouble more than men. Controlling emotions is difficult for normal people, I understand that. But if we all thought using emotion first then we wouldn't get anywhere.

Those who think only with emotion will certainly repeat the mistakes of their predecessors. Only logical thought will result in success.

Also this is about "Needs" vs "wants". Some people in less fortunate countries don't have the luxury that 1st world women have at the moment. They need men to protect them from others because they don't have a natural advantage at defending themselves. Only through training or instruction can women have an advantage over men in a fight. Unless of course the man was a weakling.

Ramen!

All I'm saying is that some qualities of people benefit society and others weaken it's foundations. Strong leadership has always been predominately a masculine quality. If we lose qualities like these (which we have) then our society and our leaders will not be able to make decision with integrity and honor (which they can't)

I would have to disagree. Masculinity leadership is cultural conditioning. This belief is not found in all cultures. Take native Americans for instance. I believe that the idea that there has to be centralized concentration of power such as a head of household all the way up to a ruler or even leading military force in the world is a idea brought about by religion and used by those whom want to rule others they feel superior over. It is their way or punishment. Real progress will only ever be obtained when we together. All sexes and all ethnics working as one race. The human race.

I never said anything was wrong with it and I agree with what you say.

I was just saying that in the future there may come a time when certain qualities are thought to be more important than others and when that time comes, society may be in trouble.

As long as there are masculine qualities, regardless of if men or women have them. Then society will be fine. But if not, then history will repeat

@Lancer I think the point that you're missing is that your "masculine" and "feminine" categories are arbitrary. They have no basis in fact. Being aggressive,or sensitive or vain or smart aren't feminine or masculine,they're traits that exist in all humans to varying degrees and there is a lot more variability between individuals than between sexes. Your basic premise is faulty.

Sorry--I''m seeing now that you're just 19. Please look into learning more about gender roles--it will help you in pondering these questions and in seeking relationships, too.

I am not saying dressing up is wrong or that adopting different gender roles is wrong. What I'm saying is that different women from different parts of the world will have different qualities that they will look for in a man.

If you live in a war zone. Would you want a beautiful woman with zero combat experience as your wife or would you want a female soldier (very rare indeed) as your wife to help protect you and your children?

It is a simple and logical pros/cons process of selecting what you need over what you want. Needs are primary and wants are secondary. That's how things work.

So just think logically about this. Many species like deer, goats, kangaroos, snakes, rhinos, etc. Fight for dominance for the right to breed with females. They are usually the top of their respective food chains (relatively). They demonstrate their strength and earn the right to breed with the females. So your example on birds is the same as my example on other mammals. Different species look for different qualities, like different women look for different qualities. This is fact.

Humans are vastly more diverse and adaptable than "snakes and kangaroos". Your model is badly oversimplified.

@Atheopagan It's the same type of model you used.

Anyway I don't really mind this change. I'll still raise my kids to be strong humans, regardless of their gender. Because weakness only breeds weakness, and I will not allow my children to grow up to become victims.

All I was asking with this question was "do different situational problems require different solutions" to which most people have said "No, there is no different situation where a woman needs a man" in which they are wrong.

"In which they are wrong"? That's a lot of certainty and hubris for a 19-year-old. Perhaps you can be open to the idea that people with more experience than you have may know something you don't?

Lancer, you right that you didn't say guys dressing nice is wrong, but in actuality you DID say these guys you see dressing up are stupid, or at least act stupid, so you absolutely implied what you have just denied. I shudder to think what you mean by planning to raise your kids strong. Strong does not mean insensitive, but too many seem to think that being sensitive to other people's feelings and being able to express oneself genuinely, without copping a mask of adopted "tough-guy"image is somehow weak. That is a very unfortunate perspective.

When my son was in pre school, I helped out at a party with my wife there also. If I was not the only Dad, i was certainly the only involved one ( with the kids). It was weird tho....the moms just gave me bad vibes.......what was I doing there?

Buzz off mommas, I'm hanging out with my son. Go crawl back into your caves Bitch Moms!

You make a good point.
My greatest teacher was a man who changed me from an isolated loner into one of the most intelligent and disciplined students in his class. So I can wholeheartedly say that being a teacher is one of the most important roles in society. It sets kids on the path to either success or failure.

Have a look at Bear Grylls The island. It shows what really happens to men and women when you leave them alone to fend for themselves.

Strength is only masculine in the sense that historically men would fight and die trying to protect their wives and children. Only recently have women begun to embrace this masculine quality.

If strength is subjective then why do people laugh when a woman abuses a man and they are angry when a man abuses a women for doing the exact same thing? They think the woman is weaker and therefore is the victim, but when the reverse occurs people assume the man is aggressive and undisciplined.

All I'm saying is that different women have different priorities when it comes to selecting a partner. Women are selective and they think about what they want. For women who need protection it is a strong man, for women who have protection and want economic security it is an intelligent hardworking man and for women who have both protection and economic security, they want a physically attractive man.

That is how different women in different countries think.

Strength is subjective in the sense that there is more than just physical strength. There is stength of character. Wisdom is a strength. Skill at diplomacy and empathy and ease at relating to people with different needs are strengths. In a modern civilization, the notion that physical strength is still the primary trait to be valued is obsolete.

You are absolutely right about women looking for various things in prospective mates. But that is also because of varied life experiences and most certainly varied socialization. The fact of a particular woman being attracted to a certain kind of man does NOT mean that is a good, or even a safe choice for her. I have talked to many women who chose "macho protector" men, only to find themselves controlled, denigrated, and sometimes abused by those same men.

If women are raised to encourage confidence in their abilities and are given equal opportunities by society to choose their own careers and to make their own choices, then they will have little reason to feel a need for anyone else to be their protector. The fact that many still feel that insecurity is a sexist black mark on society. What a refreshing concept! To think: Men and women as companions rather than meat market commodities!

@Lancer kid. That's a TV show. You know that's made to generate interest,ratings and revenue,right? Don't believe everything you see on TV.

@Blindbird I know it is. But when I was an army cadet I also saw how girls couldn't physically do the same as men.

When I was in school I found that most girls would choose art over materials (metal work and wood work). So they are naturally going to be reliant on a man to survive in a situation like that of Bear Grylls "the island".

Just saying, the island is a bunch of regular people. Showing how different they are.

Not even borderline, ...but agreed.

So if I you were in a hostile country where you could be attacked at any moment would you rather
A) a Ferrari with a nice spoiler and under chassis fluro lights
B) a Land rover with a .50 cal machine gun
C) an armored tank with .50 cal machine gun and 50mm main cannon

Because I suppose if it looks good then get the Ferrari right?
Decisions are made based on the situation. Many women live in different situations which is why they have different needs.

Lancer, your scenarios are ridiculous. Those aren't real-world situations for the vast majority of people. Your macho, paranoid frame of the world is just toxic masculinity: a term you really should familiarize yourself with.

If your friend wants women to be empowered then she would want to become stronger. Learning self defense, becoming aware of her surroundings, fighting back and winning. Those were masculine qualities, now they are more unisex qualities.

I'm assuming that your friend decided to do something about this, like self defense or personal non-lethal deterrents?

When I used to do karate, the junior class would be full of girls. Girls of Eastern European parents, because they knew that the world is a dangerous place and they wanted their girls to learn how to be strong enough to go through life with ease. Strength can be attained by women, it is there, as the saying goes. You can lead a horse to water but you can't force it to drink.

Women shouldn't be worrying about things like this, they should see it as a problem and find a solution. Rise to the challenge and succeed. That is also a unisex quality.

My big sister was scared of the same things happening to her, so I offered to teach her self defense. She declined because she wanted to learn krav maga with her female friend. I saw it as more of a social thing than a self defense type training. Every night when she came home she would demonstrate a new move on me but she had no idea how a real fight worked because they didn't want the girls sparring and possibly getting injured. Even though the men fought all the time in training. This is the problem. Women aren't serious about defending themselves. They've been told that they are victims for so long that now they believe it.

I know 2 girls who are sisters. Their dad raised them like boys, they're basically tomboys but both of them are extremely intelligent and beautiful women. They also know how to defend themselves well. That's a quality I look for in a woman, strength. Intelligence and strength are the 2 most important things I would want in a partner, looks are secondary. This is my main point. We as a society have our priorities mixed up, we are concerned with looks rather than character.

@Lancer Well since you told me what she should do without knowing her or asking me about her, let me explain.

She is in her early fifties now, an activist, and she still takes self-defense classes mostly for the exercise now.

She had a traumatizing experience when we were in our early teens in jr. high that makes her very wary of authority figures still to this day.

Here is an excerpt from the story if you care to read it. In the late seventies, our school was illegally raided by police that were searching for drugs.

This is her story.

...The dogs were led up and down each aisle of the classroom, from desk to desk, and from student to student. Each student was probed, sniffed, and inspected by at least 1 of the 14 German shepherds detailed to the school. When the search team assigned to petitioner's classroom reached petitioner, the police dog pressed forward, sniffed at her body, and repeatedly pushed its nose and muzzle into her legs. The uniformed officer then ordered the petitioner to stand and empty her pockets, apparently because the dog "alerted" to the presence of drugs. However, no drugs were found. After petitioner emptied her pockets, the dog again sniffed her body and again it apparently "alerted." Petitioner was then escorted to the nurse's office for a more thorough physical inspection.

Petitioner was met at the nurse's office by two adult women, one a uniformed police officer. After denying that she had ever used marihuana, petitioner was ordered to strip. She did so, removing her clothing in the presence of the two women. The women then looked over petitioner's body, inspected her clothing, and touched and examined the hair on her head. Again, no drugs were found. 1 Petitioner was subsequently allowed to dress and was escorted back to her classroom.

If you care to read the entire story. go here.
[law.cornell.edu]

In your friends case I agree that the police did not have the authority to conduct the search. However I do understand their reasons for doing so.

I'm a bit more liberal on drugs and alcohol in the way that I believe they are bad and kids should be informed of all the risks and shown the result of using certain substances. But ultimately, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else I believe individual drug use is alright. I'd never do it myself though.

Also I can see why she would be embarrassed and uncomfortable with her situation. The police seemed to have acted in a less than sensible manner. But I can't have an opinion on it since I wasn't there and I didn't witness anything first hand.

I am also very sceptical of authority figures. Governments and police are probably 2 things I fear the most apart from regular people. I respect police officers but I can't say I am fond of them or their work. I've generally had good experiences with police officers however I have heard of many instances where they overstep their bounds.

I concede that your friend had a traumatic experience however I don't quite see how this links to feminism. I understand she was traumatised and embarrassed but could you please explain further how this links to the topic of the post.

If not that's fine. I understand this may be a delicate issue that you may not want to discuss.

@Lancer "I concede that your friend had a traumatic experience however I don't quite see how this links to feminism. I understand she was traumatised and embarrassed but could you please explain further how this links to the topic of the post."

You understand?! Come back after strangers make you strip off your clothes in front of them so they can stick their fingers inside of you

As far as your not understanding how this links to feminism, go to my first comment where you told me how my friend should live her life.

I see from the comments that you're only 19 but being young isn't an excuse to be ignorant and backward. I'm 22. Age has nothing to do with it. You're backward and ignorant because you're choosing to be. "God fearing" really? On a site literally called "agnostic"? Shut up.

Just relax there amigo, If you re read my post with objectivity then you might understand the point I'm trying to make.

Women in certain countries have different needs to women in other countries.
These needs determine the type of man they are attracted to out of necessity, not out of personal preference.

Gender only has 3 physical genders. Man, Woman and Hermaphrodite. That is how they are born. I have no problem with men becoming women or women becoming men. But to suggest that you can change the laws of biology to suit your preference is utterly absurd. Do you have a degree in human biology with any legitimate sources of evidence to back up your claim?

Also God fearing had nothing to do with it. The fact he was a christian has nothing to do with his opinion. This just shows that instead of reading and understanding the point of this post, you resorted to the childish tactic of name calling, finding the weakness in a persons character and not their argument. Attack the argument and not the person, if you can't then please refrain from insulting my teacher, he is a good man and I respect him.

Well said, and "about damned time"!

Okay here is where I draw the line.

You have obviously shown how you dislike this person. Without even talking to them or seeing them in person. That is he height of arrogance and I will not allow a petty emotional human to insult someone who is a great teacher, man and father.

The god fearing part was a joke. Does being Christian automatically make you bad? I've met Muslims, Christians, Hindu's, etc. Yet none of them have been as judgemental as you have here today.

The whole purpose of the class was to tell us that different women generally don't all go after the same guy. Why is this so hard to understand?

If you think this is irresponsible then I challenge you to go live in South Africa for 30 years and see what it's really like. Then come back with your opinion on how you don't have to be strong to live in some of the worst places in SA. don't bother living in a walled compound, don't even touch a gun. Just live in a suburban house long enough and you'll probably be robbed. But that'd be the least of your worries.

So don't assume you know this man. By the looks of it he sounds much more reasonable than you.

Reading the whole thread and biting my tongue.I like the part where he said he know what women in other countries want

Lancer, to be fair, I do not hate this man I have never met. I am only responding to your characterization of him, which obviously is not complete. What I strongly disapprove of is specific teachings and actions as you have relayed them on this forum. That is all you have given us to go by. I recognize that people are far more complex than any one issue or opinion.

What drew my aggravation most was two-fold: Your wording repeatedly appears to imply the notion that masculine equals strength and feminine is the opposite of strength and therefore lesser, and the emphasis on broad generalizations of entire groups of people even by continent. The only way you can accurately say that men are more masculine in one country than another, even ignoring individual variance, is if you believe masculinity is a fixed, specific set of qualities that applies universally. It isn't, and it doesn't. Masculinity and Femininity are always going to be interpreted through culturally determined expectations and values. European men as a whole are not more or less masculine than American men, or South African men, for that matter. Their accepted templates for what masculinity is are just different.

Again, at a personal, an individual level, none of this should matter much. If you strive to reshape yourself to attract a mate, you may end up with someone who will not respect us for being yourself. That is a very unfortunate bargain to strike.

@Gwendolyn2018 Life experience and observations. He said "generally" so your idea that he stereotyped all women in all countries is incorrect. Generally means "most not all" people.

Let's just use an example. In Somalia would you rather

1. a good looking man who works out, looks after his hair and cares about your feelings
2. a rich man who can somewhat defend himself and can support you financially
3. a strong man who can physically defend you from the hordes of angry, armed, raping, terrorist extremist cannibals?

I would prefer someone who could keep me alive but that's just me.

You don't need a study to know the basic idea of "I want to be safe, who can keep me safe" or the concept of economics where NEEDS come before WANTS.

Of course they are generalizations. When you see a pattern you generalize in order to rationalize the data and come to a conclusion.

@Gwendolyn2018 My point is that the male isn't just the provider. Also you've missed the point. If you think this is a fallacy then I guess the economic model of "needs and wants" is a fallacy too.

As for the rich man, rich is relative. If an average somali man earns $2 a day and the other earns $5 then the 2nd man is rich relative to the first one. Unfortunately there are not many rich men in Somalia, just look at it. There are more strong men than there are rich men and there are no feminine men. Do you understand? There is low supply of rich men in Somalia and if they're rich, it's likely they are strong since they have to protect the wealth that they have stolen from others or accumulated by their hard work.

Most Africans and people who have been to Africa have observed this. It's not a trend, it is reality. Are you saying that men must live like women to understand women? If that's the case then women must live like men to understand men. Which they don't, because life as a man is hard. We have a much higher workplace death rate, suicide rate, injury from violent crimes, etc. The list goes on, men work like dogs to build up the world we live in and women should work on some of the high risk countries too, all for equality's sake.

Point is, we need strong men to protect not just women but the children of our societies. The weaker men become, the weaker society becomes.

The whole point of this is that women DON'T want the same thing.

It is an example of the Needs vs Wants economic model applied to relationships. There are some things you need from a relationship and some things you want.

Why is this so hard for people to understand. It's not about gender or "male privilege" it is about the idea that people should improve who they are mentally before improving themselves physically. The idea is to become a balanced person.

@Gwendolyn2018 No. I said due to women living in different circumstances which are predominant in similar social situations in certain countries, what they look for in a man will change based on those needs.

I don't want the same type of man in every country. I'm just discussing how due to the feminine nature of the modern western man, it's no wonder why men from other nations think we are weak.

As I said. It doesn't matter if a woman or man has masculine qualities, all that matters is that we have them so that we can have a balanced society. If we all become feminine then we throw society into an imbalance which we are in the process of doing.

Also the fact that you just used a JOKE as evidence is pretty poor form to be honest, I give that an intellectual score of 0.0

@Gwendolyn2018 did you seriously miss the close bracket ) in your comment?

Also trusting an untrustworthy news source is not normal. Because we should all listen to what everyone says and believe them no matter what. When has the media ever lied to the public?

As far as "vague claims" goes. I mentioned a perfect example of blatant corruption and censorship yet you persist in believing that the ABC has the "truth" as one of its highest priorities.

Didn't your parents ever teach you how to think for yourself?

I've seen too many people with all kinds of personality traits to think that assertive, passive, nurturing, strict, emotional, stoic, etc. et al has anything to do with being born XX or XY!

I found my inner woman, as suspected, she is a lesbian.

That's fine. But would you maybe agree that there are some traditional masculine qualities that we need as a society? Like leadership, strength and integrity?

It doesn't have to be a man, it can be a woman who has these qualities. I just think they are important.

@Lancer I don't think any of those is a masculine quality. I do believe that there are different societal expectations for men and women.
It's pathetic that women who exhibit leadership, show strength, or tell it like it is without pulling punches are "bitches," while men are admired for those traits. I had thought that was improving, but I am not so sure now.

@Gwendolyn2018 Well history says otherwise. Although there were sexist men in the past and currently at present. Men were ultimately the ones that took long sea voyages to explore unknown lands and push forward the age of colonial expansion. Women came afterwards when it was deemed "safe". This is natural for any society, send the men into danger and protect the women. The men exhibited strength, leadership and integrity in this sense.

They are masculine traits because more men exhibit them than women and they come more naturally to men than women. The reverse is true for feminine traits.

Also don't bring patriarchy into this. It's like a person who maxed out their credit card blaming the banks for their excessive spending and lack of self control.

Responsible and respectable women who exhibit these traits are commendable, the problem is that there aren't very many out there. There are some I have met and I respect them immensely, however there are many women who don't exhibit even one of these traits, on the contrary we can see many men who do have strength and leadership qualities, integrity is a rare quality regardless of gender so I will concede that point to you.

Nice to see another person with a good head on their shoulders.

That is a nice sentiment and I agree with it.

I acknowledge that there are many different men and women in the world with different qualities that they would find attractive in their ideal partner.

I was mainly discussing how some people will want a partner who satisfies their needs before their wants.

I also think that as a society, we need to preserve some masculine qualities like leadership, integrity, self sacrifice, etc. If we do not, then society will not be able to function very effectively.

Haha. It's the hormones in the meat... must she mcdonalds.

Just jokes.

But it might be true. Since it even affects women. Girls have been having earlier periods and it's odd.

There are only 3 genders. Physical genders.

Men and women can be whatever they want. I'm talking about the qualities that they prioritise in their lives being a possible problem. As in a person needs morals and values before they try improving their looks.

Gender is very important in modern society. It will never "have its day"

Gender isn't physical. Are you sure you're not confusing it with sex?

To piggyback on Nicole's comment, gender is not biological sex. The two usually overlap extensively, but they are definitionally different. When you confuse the two, you leave no room for people don't fit neatly into just one box. Aside from transgendered and genderqueer folks, whom naysayers might dismiss as arguably choosing to be that way, don't forget there are various varieties of biologically intersex people. Hermaphrodites as well as anatomically single-sex but chromosomally mixed people. Yes, they are relatively rare, but not as rare as you might want to think, and they are people, too, not disposable. When anyone tries to teach that strongly defined and separated gender norms are desirable, they are basicly spitting in the face of the minority who can't simply choose to fit neatly into a pidgeonhole. No one should have to drastically twist their own natural identity to suit other people's preferences. It is not only unfair; it is unhealthy psychologically. Try to have a little respect for diversity.

So sex organs are modular are they? Just take one off and put another one on. Inject a few unnatural hormones and eat a few painkillers to numb the surgery which is essentially self mutilation.

I'm cool with it since people can do whatever they want to do to their bodies. I just find it a little unnatural is all.

@Lancer you are talking about biological sex. I am not.

Concepts of masculinity and femininity are socially constructed.

My bad. Sorry.

Fair comment. I agree that expressing emotion is a good thing, unfortunately for me I've been exposed to a lot of stressful and depressing emotions (Not from me but from others) because apparently I (a strong person) am the kind of guy that people turn to for advice and help when things get difficult. This is because I have what many people lack. Integrity, loyalty and discipline. Some uncommon qualities of a good strong person.

I believe men and women should be able to express their emotions. But they should also be able to control their emotions. Because we all think that all emotions are good, but when someone thinks with emotion rather than logic, they can cause irreparable damage to both themselves and others.