PDA

View Full Version : Ask Men Anything Thread


"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 08:17 AM
Not that we will all agree on the answers to your questions... But certainly SOME of the statements that have been made in "the man who got raped thread" reveal that many of you have very poor images of MOST or ALL men. Like women we come in all shapes and sizes. We have feelings. We love our mothers and sisters and friends (with perhaps a few exceptions) as much as women do. We want to be loved and we want to love just like all the other animals in the world. We cry when we let down our families or the community, we want to provide for ourselves and our families, and quite frankly, on the whole, we are doing a damn good job. Surely it is the 1% of the men who are ACTING poorly that taints it for the rest of us.

So do you have any questions, or do you already know everything? :) :fiery:

ampers&
Sep 1st, 2005, 08:18 AM
Why are you all such assholes???:dance:

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 08:27 AM
Why are you all such assholes???:dance:

so I take it you are a woman? Or are you another species that has no males?

The simple answer is we are not all such assholes. We all have the potential for tremendous good and tremendous bad, that being men and women, but we are not all such assholes.

Nicjac
Sep 1st, 2005, 09:26 AM
Well, I didn't participate in the other thread (hoax story anyway), but I have some questions, too.

Why do men commit almost 90% of all murders?

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 09:49 AM
Why do men commit almost 90% of all murders?

Fair question. I am not a criminologist so I do not know the answer. What do you think the answer is? The obvious answer that would be understandable to most people is that men commit a greater percent of the murders because we are generally larger, stronger and more likely to actually kill a person that we fight with. :) Boys and men may also have greater tendencies to be violent. In history, men fight the wars, are expected to physically protect thier family, thier honour, their possessions. It's masculine to do so, and cowardly not to. We are supposed to be tough and sometimes our cups runuth over.

I think what you are tyring to bear out is that men are much more frequently the perpetrator of violent acts. That is unquestionable. I think what is more important is to ask yourself this. of the men you know, and the men you may have gone to school with, how many of them are violent criminals or murderers. I would guess that of the men that I have ever known, say that i graduated school with 500 men, and college with 1500 men and worked with maybe 1000, that brings me to knowing about 3000 men....(give me a second and i'll take this to a close) my guess is only 2 or 3 of them have actually ever killed anyone. So that is much less than 1% of the men i know, in fact 2 or 3 men out of 3000 is 1/10th of 1%. so basically, very few men are violent enuf to kill a person. And, of those men that have killed people, probably only in rare cases is the violence indisriminate, random or without justification of some kind.

Further, Men are generally larger and stronger, so that when a men wields his force, it is likely to do more damage than when a woman, lets say, wields a casserole. So many murders are just fistfights that get out of hand. Another factor is crimes of passion. Women may be angry at their X boyfriends and provoke a male friend to violence in defense of her honour. I have seen that in highschool, where a guy feels forced to punch another guy out because a girl is mad at him. Crimes of passion might also mean a man enters his house to find another men making love to his wife. that is a crime of passion, and the law ascribes to it a lower standard of responsibility. Also many murders are drug related. And seeing that most men deal drugs in order to have wives and children, and that part of drug dealing and other crimes requires "hits" on people who betray the drug ring, many murders of this nature are non-haphazard and rather "necessary" in the eyes of many, this is also explainable.

But if you are trying to say that ALL MEN ARE BAD and cant be trusted because a select few of men are violent murderers, NO SALE, show some respect for the rest of us that are not that bad. :(

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 09:58 AM
From a FAST
issue January 5, 1995

END THE BIAS
By Armin A. Brott


In a society conditioned to believe that women are the only victims of bias, the idea that men frequently are as well may come as quite a shock. We're all keenly aware of the pervasive discrimination that exists against women and minorities in the workplace and in many other ares of their lives. But, when we turn our attention to the criminal justice system, it's obvious that there is an equally shocking level of bias. This time, however, men are the unquestioned victims.

On average, American men commit a disproportionate number of most types of felony crimes. It's not surprising then, that seven times more men are arrested than women. What is surprising, however, is that after all these accused criminals have had trials, nineteen men are imprisoned for every woman.

For burglary, while nine men are arrested for every woman, thirty are imprisoned for every woman. For aggravated assault, 10 men are arrested for every woman, but seventy-nine times more men are incarcerated. Even when it comes to white-collar crimes such as fraud -- where more women than men are arrested -- nine men are jailed for every woman.
Some who attempt to explain away men's disproportional likelihood to wind up in jail claim that the "real" problem is racism -- that the percentage of African-American men processed by the criminal justice system is so high that it skews the figures. While few would dispute that racism in the courts is rampant, that alone is not enough. Five African-Americans are arrested -- and six are jailed -- for every Caucasian. That's a difference of about 20 percent. For men and women, however, the difference is closer to 70 percent.

The increased likelihood of doing time isn't all men have to worry about. On average, men receive prison sentences that are 40 percent longer than those of women convicted of the SAME crime, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. One might argue that men's longer prison terms are the result of the severity of their crimes and their longer criminal records.

But studies that control for these factors prove otherwise. "Women and men with comparable backgrounds do not receive comparable sentence lengths for felony crimes," write researchers Mathew Zingraff and Randall Thomson in "THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE SOCIOLOGY OF LAW." "Women are given shorter sentence lengths." Overall, Zingraff and Thomson found that gender contributed more to the determination of sentence length than any other variable they investigated. These findings were confirmed in a recent Los Angeles Times article quoting Department of Justice sources which reported that women convicted of killing their husbands receive an average sentence of only six years, while male spousal killers got 17 years.

So why is there such strong anti-male bias in the courts? Gender bias researchers Jon Ryan and Ian Wilson, suggest that the answer is based on three ancient stereotypes.

First, women are born more innocent than men (so judges -- who are predominantly male -- see women as less capable of committing criminal acts);

Second, women are more reformable than men (and thus less punishment is necessary to straighten them out);

Third, women are less dangerous than men (and are therefore less of a threat to society).

For more than 20 years, women have complained about similar stereotypes that have been used to keep them out of the board room, the Senate, and even combat. They rightfully resent being treated as children who don't know how to take care of themselves. But when it comes to taking responsibility for their behavior, women seem perfectly content to allow law enforcement officials and judges to gallantly rescue damsels in distress.

Unfortunately, such well-intentioned chivalry usually turns out to be nothing more than paternalism that demeans and oppresses the very people it seeks to protect.

As women have struggled for equality, feminists of both sexes have fought to break down all types of gender-based discrimination and have demanded that women be treated the same way men are. In some areas, that's a goal we should all be striving for. But in the case of our criminal justice system, it's time we started treating men the same way we treat women.

@m@nd@
Sep 1st, 2005, 09:58 AM
why are men so concerned about a woman's bra size?

Avid Merrion
Sep 1st, 2005, 10:05 AM
Why are you all such assholes???:dance:
we're not, it's just the ones that are assholes give the rest of us a bad reputation :)

why are men so concerned about a woman's bra size?
same reason women are concerned with mens penis size i guess :)

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 10:07 AM
Here is a study that reveals that women hit thier males spouses more often then they themselves are hit:

News: After 20 years of domestic violence research, scientists can't avoid hard facts

By Nancy Updike

May/June 1999 Issue



In the Garden of Armageddon
They were Iraq's only real WMDs. The U.S. refused to secure them. Now Saddam's nuclear and bioweapons scientists are dispersed and more dangerous than ever.

----Advertisements----


ADVOCATE CLEMENCY FOR MELISSA

Unjustly imprisoned for protecting her own life


Your Ad Here Endless Pools

Swim at Home Year Round - Free DVD


Your Ad Here
Your Permanent Record Is Open!

See what employers, the gov, & ID thieves can see.


Your Ad Here Arts and Letters Mag

Politics Art Literature -The Thinking


Your Ad Here

----Advertisements----


A surprising fact has turned up in the grimly familiar world of domestic violence: Women report using violence in their relationships more often than men. This is not a crack by some antifeminist cad; the information will soon be published by the Justice Department in a report summarizing the results of in-depth, face-to-face interviews with a representative sample of 860 men and women whom researchers have been following since birth. Conducted in New Zealand by Terrie Moffitt, a University of Wisconsin psychology professor, the study supports data published in 1980 indicating that wives hit their husbands at least as often as husbands hit their wives.

When the 1980 study was released, it was so controversial that some of the researchers received death threats. Advocates for battered women were outraged because the data seemed to suggest that the risk of injury from domestic violence is as high for men as it is for women, which isn't true. Whether or not women are violent themselves, they are much more likely to be severely injured or killed by domestic violence, so activists dismissed the findings as meaningless.

But Moffitt's research emerges in a very different context -- namely, that of a movement that is older, wiser, and ready to begin making sense of uncomfortable truths. Twenty years ago, "domestic violence" meant men hitting women. Period. That was the only way to understand it or to talk about it. But today, after decades of research and activism predicated on that assumption, the number of women killed each year in domestic violence incidents remains distressingly high: a sobering 1,326 in 1996, compared with 1,600 two decades earlier. In light of the persistence of domestic violence, researchers are beginning to consider a broader range of data, including the possible significance of women's violence. This willingness to pay attention to what was once considered reactionary nonsense signals a fundamental conceptual shift in how domestic violence is being studied.

Violence in the home has never been easy to research. Even the way we measure it reflects the kind of murky data that has plagued the field. For instance, one could argue that the number of fatalities resulting from domestic violence is not the best measure of the problem, as not all acts of brutality end in death. It is, however, one of the few reliable statistics in a field where concrete numbers are difficult to come by. Many nonlethal domestic violence incidents go unreported or are categorized as something else -- aggravated assault, simple assault -- when they are reported. But another reason we haven't been able to effectively measure domestic violence is that we don't understand it, and, because we don't understand it, we haven't been able to stop it. Money and ideology are at the heart of the problem.

For years, domestic violence research was underfunded and conducted piecemeal, sometimes by researchers with more zeal for the cause of battered women than training in research methodology. The results were often ideology-driven "statistics," such as the notorious (and false) claim that more men beat their wives on Super Bowl Sunday, which dramatized the cause of domestic violence victims but further confused an already intricate issue. In 1994, Congress asked the National Research Council, an independent Washington, D.C., think tank, to evaluate the state of knowledge about domestic abuse. The NRC report concluded that "this field of research is characterized by the absence of clear conceptual models, large-scale databases, longitudinal research, and reliable instrumentation."

Moffitt is part of a new wave of domestic violence researchers who are bringing expertise from other areas of study, and her work is symbolic of the way scientists are changing their conception of the roots of domestic violence.

"[She] is taking domestic violence out of its standard intellectual confines and putting it into a much larger context, that of violence in general," says Daniel Nagin, a crime researcher and the Theresa and H. John Heinz III Professor of Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University.

Moffitt is a developmental psychologist who has spent most of her career studying juvenile delinquency, which was the original focus of her research. She started interviewing her subjects about violence in their relationships after 20 years of research into other, seemingly unrelated aspects of their lives: sex and drug-use habits, criminal activities, social networks and family ties, and signs of mental illness.

"I had looked at other studies of juvenile delinquency," Moffitt says, "and saw that people in their 20s were dropping out of street crime, and I wondered, 'Are all of these miraculous recoveries where they're just reforming and giving up crime? Or are they getting out of their parents' home and moving in with a girlfriend and finding victims who are more easily accessible?' So I decided we'd better not just ask them about street violence, but also about violence within the home, with a partner."

What she found was that the women in her study who were in violent relationships were more like their partners, in many ways, than they were like the other women in the study. Both the victims and the aggressors in violent relationships, Moffitt found, were more likely to be unemployed and less educated than couples in nonviolent relationships. Moffitt also found that "female perpetrators of partner violence differed from nonviolent women with respect to factors that could not be solely the result of being in a violent relationship." Her research disputes a long-held belief about the nature of domestic violence: If a woman hits, it's only in response to her partner's attacks. The study suggests that some women may simply be prone to violence -- by nature or circumstance -- just as some men may be.

Moffitt's findings don't change the fact that women are much more at risk in domestic violence, but they do suggest new ways to search for the origins of violence in the home. And once we know which early experiences can lead to domestic violence, we can start to find ways to intervene before the problem begins.

Prevention is a controversial goal, however, because it often calls for changes in the behavior of the victim as well as the batterer, and for decades activists have been promoting the seemingly opposite view. And even though it is possible to talk about prevention without blaming victims or excusing abusers, the issue is a minefield of preconceived ideas about gender, violence, and relationships, and new approaches may seem too scary to contemplate.

In domestic violence research, it seems, the meaning of any new data is predetermined by ideological agendas set a long time ago, and the fear that new information can be misinterpreted can lead to a rejection of the information itself. In preparing this column, I called a well-known women's research organization and asked scientists there about new FBI statistics indicating a substantial recent increase in violent crime committed by girls ages 12 to 18. The media contact told me the organization had decided not to collect any information about those statistics and that it didn't think it was a fruitful area of research, because girls are still much more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators.

It's impossible to know yet whether such numbers are useful, whether they're a statistical blip or a trend, or whether the girls committing violent crimes now are more likely to end up in violent relationships. But to ignore them on principle -- as activists and researchers ignored the data about women's violence years ago -- is to give up on determining the roots of violence, which seem to be much more complicated than whether a person is born with a Y chromosome.

What's clear is that women's and girls' violence is not meaningless, either for researchers or for the women themselves. It turns out that teenage girls who commit violent crimes "are two times more likely than juvenile male offenders to become victims themselves in the course of the offending incident," according to an FBI report. I'd like to hear more about that, please, not less. Moffitt's findings about women's violence and the FBI statistics are invitations to further research -- not in spite of the fact that so many women are being beaten and killed every year, but because of it.

Josh B.
Sep 1st, 2005, 10:08 AM
not all men are concerned about a womans bra size, just the ones who think they are gods gift!:p

i dont care about the size of my gf breasts, i love her for who she is

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 10:24 AM
why are men so concerned about a woman's bra size?

Personally I find small and large breasts equally attractive. I cant speak for other men. I have noticed that full breasts often have the power to seduce a lot of men. I believe it is because they are soft and nice to touch and make us feel safe and secure. So when men are curious about a woman's bra size, I assume it is because the men would like some affection, finds the woman attractive and would like to touch her breasts. Or maybe he would just like to see them. It may be surprising to many women, but most of us have not seen many breasts. Some of us see breasts on tv sometimes or at the occasional bachelor party, but many many men, Gorgeous and average alike, may be surprisingly naive and have seen sexy breast that are clothed but never get to see them live or touch them. If the woman is smart, carries herself in a way attractive to a particular man, and in many cases fits a description that his family would find attractive, then the guy might be interested in her. but Breasts alone do not save the day.

In a group, if every person has physical traits that are attractive to at least a few people. Imagine a young man of 13... he may have biceps that are starting to develop, pretty eyes or nice hair, or a nice tush and sexy front. so... in a group of people, in this case young people, thier peers are gonna be interested. straight boys might be curious for comparison purposes, gay boys might be excited by him, gay girls might just be curious or not at all, and straight girls might find him quite exciting. Whatever the case, a full set of boobs or erect nipples will gain the curiousity of the peers. Like when TVs came out, everybody on the block flocked to the new tvs owners to watch, til eventually, everybody got one. So my simple answer is that guys speak about bra size because they are attracted to women and to womens breasts and would like to get a close look. :) ;)

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 10:24 AM
not all men are concerned about a womans bra size, just the ones who think they are gods gift!:p

i dont care about the size of my gf breasts, i love her for who she is

Your answer is too short. :lol:

Nicjac
Sep 1st, 2005, 12:08 PM
Oh Slugpiss - my question unsettled you, didn't it ... ;)

But thanks for the effort you went through to try to answer my question.

Some remarks to that:

I never said all men are bad - I just asked why almost 90% of all murders are committed by men. I know that there are a lot of men out there not murdering anyone. Still it is stunning that – in comparison - so many murders are committed by men. A lot of psychologist try to answer this question - there are theories about killer instincts, society pressures, and 'fitness issues’, meaning men need a) to reproduce and, therefore, sometimes have to kill their opponents, b) have to support their families and in case of a lower education do more dangerous business (e.g. dealing drugs). Regarding the first one: did you know that children have a much higher rate of being murdered if they have a stepfather? That doesn't mean all stepfather are bad (there are millions of good ones out there!), but still stepfathers statistically kill the offspring of other men more often. Why? Women tend to be more willing to 'reproduce' if no other kids are around (anymore) is one explanation.

"Women and men with comparable backgrounds do not receive comparable sentence lengths for felony crimes," - what's that supposed to mean? Well, we kill more but at least you don't have to go to jail as long as we do? That's fairness? That’s stupid. To raise some genders reputation in putting the other down is a rather weak and inefficient method.

BTW if women kill their punishment is the same as for men (if both don’t have children). And we were talking murder not fraud or assault. Otherwise - hey, let's talk about why black people - compared to white people – get eight times more often prison sentences for the same offences. Let's compare death row statistics about how many black people vs white people (or men vs women) are on death row - you will find shocking differences. We’ll be here all night – but that was not my question.

And - again - if women raised their count of violence in relationships as the article suggests doesn't mean that they are equally bad - or equally wrong than men. They are probably equally stupid or are equally involved in their romance which suddenly is bashed with an affair and they react to that, or the task of protecting their children. And domestic violence is a chapter for itself. That study really has nothing to do with my question.

Can I still ask something else?

controlfreak
Sep 1st, 2005, 12:27 PM
Why do men commit almost 90% of all murders?

That is a lie, shut the fuck up or I'll knife you good, missy!! :mad:








:p

Helen Lawson
Sep 1st, 2005, 12:30 PM
Well, I didn't participate in the other thread (hoax story anyway), but I have some questions, too.

Why do men commit almost 90% of all murders?

Women are more clever and don't get caught as often.

timray
Sep 1st, 2005, 12:32 PM
why are men so concerned about a woman's bra size?

Oh duh, because it is important to know what to expect.

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 12:33 PM
Oh Slugpiss - my question unsettled you, didn't it ... ;)

No. but i find it upsetting that so many people on this board, and in general, have such a dim view of men. And the fact of the matter is, that on the whole, we have just as good character as women, and i dont feel the need to qualify the statement. i know it is true.





Still it is stunning that – in comparison - so many murders are committed by men.

Again, we are larger and stronger as a whole. many murders would not have occurred if we were smaller and weaker. Many deaths are unintentional, when we merely wanted to wound a person, but kill them by accident. Do you remember Bam Bam from the Flinstones? There are a lot of Bam Bam murders out there. 2ndly, i think you need to ask, who is it being murdered. Many people who are killed either entirely "deserve" to be hurt, or partially "deserve" to be hurt. Many of the people being killed are being killed because the WOMEN request it. Im sure many men are murdered for, for instance, raping someones relative. Thus the murder statistics you are looking out dont necessarily reperesent "innocent" people being killed at random. Nor do they represent MALE rage. There are many "revenge" killings. I've heard of actual teachers telling another student to "kick another kids ass" because they have a bad attitude. The teacher could be a woman, but she gets the man to do the dirty work. IMO, a great percentage of violent crimes of are this nature, you just get the men to take out the garbage.

Women tend to be more willing to 'reproduce' if no other kids are around (anymore) is one explanation.

Not a really plausible explanation as to why step-father's kill thier partner's kids, certainly more applicable to lions.

"Women and men with comparable backgrounds do not receive comparable sentence lengths for felony crimes," - what's that supposed to mean? Well, we kill more but at least you don't have to go to jail as long as we do? That's fairness? That’s stupid. To raise some genders reputation in putting the other down is a rather weak and inefficient method.

I am not sure what you mean here Nicjac. The article was only stating that women who commit say Murder 1, have much lighter punishments than men who commit the same crimes. We punish women much much lighter. Probably that is the case because we just cut women slack and "assume", correctly or incorrectly, that if a woman commited a serious crime, it is because she was in the company of some BAD GUY. I am not questioning this convention, clearly men SHOULD cover for the sisters, but lets be honest, we blame the men and pity the women. :)

Otherwise - hey, let's talk about why black people - compared to white people – get eight times more often prison sentences for the same offences. Let's compare death row statistics about how many black people vs white people (or men vs women) are on death row - you will find shocking differences. We’ll be here all night – but that was not my question.

Again I am not a criminologist. I dont know if that is true, and if so, i dont know why that is true. The point of this thread is to answer questions about men, and find common ground amongst white, black, hispanic, gay, straight, Bi and whatever men. We all share some things and there are some common knowledge and perspectives, just like women, that just about all of us share. ;)

- again - if women raised their count of violence in relationships as the article suggests doesn't mean that they are equally bad - or equally wrong than men. They are probably equally stupid or are equally involved in their romance which suddenly is bashed with an affair and they react to that, or the task of protecting their children. And domestic violence is a chapter for itself. That study really has nothing to do with my question.

Yes, if women are hitting their SO's as much or more than the men, then yes, you are just as bad or worse than us. But if i get your drift (see what ive put in bold)... Women who strike their SO's are just doing that because they've been cheated on? or disrespected in another way? NOT FAIR. I'm partially tempted to agree with you. I believe that a woman who is hitting her man usually has terrible self image problems, low self esteem etc.. which may have been partially caused by the man. or it may not have been. It might be that the poor woman was teased incessently by her GFs in school, sees her highschool rival just got a new diamond ring and she got nothing, or something of that matter. I can assure you that not all wounds women have are caused by men. And not all wounds we have are caused by women. :) I only posted the article on spousal violence because in doing a google search, i found no other articles that address why men are more prone to violence than women.

Nicjac
Sep 1st, 2005, 01:34 PM
I do agree with a lot of your points.

Women are still considered to be the “weaker sex”, so we tend to do not blame them as harshly for wrong doing as men. And women are physically weaker and men will always have more muscles as women. So they differ – in this point and zillion other points - it doesn’t really make sense to try to equal the two gender.

Another example - men have more means to support families as they get bigger salaries than women with the same job skills (and that is a known fact), but so women who don’t work getting more and more dependent on their guy (or meal ticket). This is a pretty dangerous situation for women as men realize their influence and might raise their demands.

Some women get men to take the blame for their mistakes or make them take revenge on her part. In a lot of trials concerning murdered kids women blame their (new) boyfriend or spouse (he would have left me, so I didn’t care anymore what he did to my child, I am so dependent), using that “weaker sex approach”. And they get through with that receiving lighter sentences - and I would call their behaviour brutal neglect on every count.

There are lot of statistics out their to stress differences between men and women, e.g. my murder statistic. Sure there are a lot of revenge killing if someone was raped or cheated or otherwise mistreated, but in Western countries our law is supposed to take over … we are no Neanderthals anymore – well, in some respects we still are. Anger management techniques are really up and coming …

But I do believe that men are capable of loving their siblings or mothers or spouses as much as women do, but maybe for other reasons. Just a small part of our love is unconditional – loving someone just because that person exists regardless of their actions – we mainly love because of what that person does for us. Men have different needs than women and some motives are more distinct than others, and motives initiate behaviour.

So could we agree on differences exist, but that doesn’t mean that men are always the bad guys (even if they keep murdering all day long ;) )?

I still have another question …

SelesFan70
Sep 1st, 2005, 01:58 PM
At what point did men decide that an average 6" is now 8" and thick? :haha:

Pengwin
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:04 PM
Why do men have nipples?

!<blocparty>!
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:09 PM
I can't be bothered to read all these long posts. Short and to the point please :worship:

Josh B.
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:33 PM
Why do men have nipples?

cos all babies start off as females in the mothers womb, the nipples are made before the sex of the child is decided

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:34 PM
I do agree with a lot of your points.

Thank you, I am glad.


Another example - men have more means to support families as they get bigger salaries than women with the same job skills (and that is a known fact), but so women who don’t work getting more and more dependent on their guy (or meal ticket). This is a pretty dangerous situation for women as men realize their influence and might raise their demands.

In many cases it is a misperception that men get larger salaries. You have an elite and very small group of men at the very top that scue the statistics. I am speaking for the United States. But yes, i see your point, and i largely agree. Women need to have their independence.

But I do believe that men are capable of loving their siblings or mothers or spouses as much as women do, but maybe for other reasons.

Not only are we capable, but we are love them just as much or more. How dare anyone dare to differ. When i see the kind of petty competitiveness ive seen between sisters, infighting in women in families and in schools, im convinced that females may be even more angry, more bitter and disrespectful then men on the whole.

Just a small part of our love is unconditional – loving someone just because that person exists regardless of their actions – we mainly love because of what that person does for us. Men have different needs than women and some motives are more distinct than others, and motives initiate behaviour.

So could we agree on differences exist, but that doesn’t mean that men are always the bad guys (even if they keep murdering all day long ;) )?

Oh I see. That makes sense. Absolutely :) :wavey:

Josh B.
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:37 PM
Your answer is too short. :lol:

hehe, ive never posted long posts before haha, i cant do it

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:39 PM
At what point did men decide that an average 6" is now 8" and thick? :haha:

You live in the states, you know about inches.. i live in france, we deal in centimeters... and let me tell you something, I've never heard anyone in France measuring penises. Thats an American thing.

I think what you are asking is why was it decided to go ahead and publish what the average size of penises was? Or who gives a fuck about penis size?

Both are good questions. In speaking to mental health people, I believe that mostly boys were curious because they wanted to know if they were "normal". After seeing a documentary about a person who was born with hermaphradite genetalia, I'm convinced that if you have a healthy and working penis, that you have a good start in life and a serious advantage in feeling good about yourself than if you dont. As for who cares about penis size: I think men, straight and gay alike are more interested than women are. I think that on the whole, women are pleased if a man is "eager to see" to women he loves but not devastated if he isnt large. Though there is a woman i know who is quite interested in large penises, complains about being frustrated with her current bf and talks about large black men that she used to know. I find her quite vulgar but we are still friends nonetheless. :rolleyes:

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:40 PM
Why do men have nipples?

I dont really have any idea?

alfajeffster
Sep 1st, 2005, 02:42 PM
Vel dahlings- my qvestion for men is simple: vere is my next husband? I'm an emotionally wreck, and need a man to help me with my fishnet stockings, feed my poodle fifi, and bring me my slippers and fur in the morning. Also, dahling, make sure you add to my diamond collection on a regular basis.



http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a223/alfajeffster/ZsaZsaboobs.jpg

"Sluggy"
Sep 1st, 2005, 03:29 PM
hehe, ive never posted long posts before haha, i cant do it

Ive finally found my opposite. didnt you know that verbosity is the spice of life? :)

Josh B.
Sep 2nd, 2005, 10:18 AM
oh man, i could take for england, just not type!! :lol: