Scottie wrote:Soooo....in your definition here, a "good guy" isn't someone that works hard to provide for his family, loves his wife and kids, but might have an off-color sense of humor?
It's the romantic that woos you endlessly with chocolates and poetry and long walks on the beach, and never has an impure thought or speaks raucously???
Yeeeeeeah....and the perfect woman has 34-28-32 dimensions, thick dark curly hair and smooth supple skin.
Methinks you all watch a bit too much Hollywood...
Who are you talking to? Me?
A good guy is a man that doesn't intentionally cause harm to people just because he can. It's fairly simple, to me.
An impure thought? What the hell is an impure thought? Sex?
I don't want a man that doesn't have impure thoughts! It's the way he treats me that will determine if he gets to see my impure thoughts.
To quote you earlier...
Yet, when men have ever courted me they were GENTLEMAN. They read poetry to me, they walked around the parks with me, swung on swings (STEUSS!!:), stared at me and listened to me blather... NEVER was I approached with a man making a sexualized comment to me that I would become interested in. That's not what does it for me, I recoil, actually. The men that hooted and hollered at me (in whatever way) were the ones I ran from.
So which is it?? I'm confused here.
It's both. It can't be that black and white for you, is it? Wow, Scottie. If a man shrieks at me from a moving car I'm not going to jump into bed with him. If a man walks up to me and tries out a vulgar line I walk away. If a man walked up to me and said a joke with the word cunt in it I'd move away, also. Now, a man that shows me he thinks enough of me as a woman to treat me with respect will then be the man that may get the green light.
You think women are attracted to men that say lewd things to us? Well, some women may be. I'm certainly not. You can speak dirty whatever to me when we're intimate -- yet, until you get the green light you need to watch it. Surely you know this is the same with most women?
Scottie wrote:Soooo....in your definition here, a "good guy" isn't someone that works hard to provide for his family, loves his wife and kids, but might have an off-color sense of humor?
It's the romantic that woos you endlessly with chocolates and poetry and long walks on the beach, and never has an impure thought or speaks raucously???
Yeeeeeeah....and the perfect woman has 34-28-32 dimensions, thick dark curly hair and smooth supple skin.
Methinks you all watch a bit too much Hollywood...
Who are you talking to? Me?
A good guy is a man that doesn't intentionally cause harm to people just because he can. It's fairly simple, to me.
An impure thought? What the hell is an impure thought? Sex?
I don't want a man that doesn't have impure thoughts! It's the way he treats me that will determine if he gets to see my impure thoughts.
To quote you earlier...
Yet, when men have ever courted me they were GENTLEMAN. They read poetry to me, they walked around the parks with me, swung on swings (STEUSS!!:), stared at me and listened to me blather... NEVER was I approached with a man making a sexualized comment to me that I would become interested in. That's not what does it for me, I recoil, actually. The men that hooted and hollered at me (in whatever way) were the ones I ran from.
So which is it?? I'm confused here.
It's both. It can't be that black and white for you, is it? Wow, Scottie. If a man shrieks at me from a moving car I'm not going to jump into bed with him. If a man walks up to me and tries out a vulgar line I walk away. If a man walked up to me and said a joke with the word c*** in it I'd move away, also. Now, a man that shows me he thinks enough of me as a woman to treat me with respect will then be the man that may get the green light.
You think women are attracted to men that say lewd things to us? Well, some women may be. I'm certainly not. You can speak dirty whatever to me when we're intimate -- yet, until you get the green light you need to watch it. Surely you know this is the same with most women?
I see what you're saying. Yes, I agree that the cat calling construction worker probably isn't going to get very far.
However, this concept of all women wanting "the perfect gentleman" to come in and sweep her off her feet is just as unrealistic as every guy wanting the perfect 10 buxom bimbo. Don't you agree?
I'm trying to say that you can still be a typical guy (if there is such a thing) without automatically being a jerk. The attitude present here is that typical guys are crude, lewd, obnoxious idiots. The REAL men you guys are describing are unrealistic.
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman
I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
Scottie wrote:Soooo....in your definition here, a "good guy" isn't someone that works hard to provide for his family, loves his wife and kids, but might have an off-color sense of humor?
It's the romantic that woos you endlessly with chocolates and poetry and long walks on the beach, and never has an impure thought or speaks raucously???
Yeeeeeeah....and the perfect woman has 34-28-32 dimensions, thick dark curly hair and smooth supple skin.
Methinks you all watch a bit too much Hollywood...
Who are you talking to? Me?
A good guy is a man that doesn't intentionally cause harm to people just because he can. It's fairly simple, to me.
An impure thought? What the hell is an impure thought? Sex?
I don't want a man that doesn't have impure thoughts! It's the way he treats me that will determine if he gets to see my impure thoughts.
To quote you earlier...
Yet, when men have ever courted me they were GENTLEMAN. They read poetry to me, they walked around the parks with me, swung on swings (STEUSS!!:), stared at me and listened to me blather... NEVER was I approached with a man making a sexualized comment to me that I would become interested in. That's not what does it for me, I recoil, actually. The men that hooted and hollered at me (in whatever way) were the ones I ran from.
So which is it?? I'm confused here.
It's both. It can't be that black and white for you, is it? Wow, Scottie. If a man shrieks at me from a moving car I'm not going to jump into bed with him. If a man walks up to me and tries out a vulgar line I walk away. If a man walked up to me and said a joke with the word c*** in it I'd move away, also. Now, a man that shows me he thinks enough of me as a woman to treat me with respect will then be the man that may get the green light.
You think women are attracted to men that say lewd things to us? Well, some women may be. I'm certainly not. You can speak dirty whatever to me when we're intimate -- yet, until you get the green light you need to watch it. Surely you know this is the same with most women?
I see what you're saying. Yes, I agree that the cat calling construction worker probably isn't going to get very far.
However, this concept of all women wanting "the perfect gentleman" to come in and sweep her off her feet is just as unrealistic as every guy wanting the perfect 10 buxom bimbo. Don't you agree?
I'm trying to say that you can still be a typical guy (if there is such a thing) without automatically being a jerk. The attitude present here is that typical guys are crude, lewd, obnoxious idiots. The REAL men you guys are describing are unrealistic.
I don't think the typical guys are crude, lewd, obnoxious idiots -- if I DID think that I wouldn't be so shocked all the time with what I see on this board. :)
I don't expect a perfect gentleman -- I don't mind flirting (I actually am a pro at it and enjoy doing it -- just not the way seen on this board, usually) and can find out QUITE a bit about a man from doing so. Maybe he's a bit wicked -- a bit of an evil sense of humor... that's a bit different than blunt "Hey baby you're hot and I want to pork you." I hope that makes sense.
I don't think what I'm describing is unrealistic, at all. I've met plenty of them, actually.
Speaking of speaking up, I do recall trying to explain to antishock why I thought some of his comments were misogynistic as well as trying to figure out what possible misunderstanding started him down the warpath.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
asbestosman wrote:Speaking of speaking up, I do recall trying to explain to antishock why I thought some of his comments were misogynistic as well as trying to figure out what possible misunderstanding started him down the warpath.
I don't like guys like that - they hurt girls in the long run. That's TV land and then cognitive dissonance. All men eventually show they are just like any other guy - a primate with computer skills.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Absolutely NOT!
There are some fabulous, amazing, wonderful, incredible men... I know a bunch of them! ;-)
I think some guys go with the "all men are like this" idea to excuse their behavior... it just isn't so.
:-)
~dancer~
yea - I agree as maybe I spoke to soon. It's just I'm the only boy in the family with four sisters and three out of four have been hurt by weasels.
If it’s any consolation, a few women have gotten their revenge on the male species. Unfortunately, sometimes retaliatory tactics inevitably lead to the wounding of innocent bystanders.
My grandfather continued to write my grandmother poems after she passed away. In his Will, he asked that a box of letters they had written to each other be burned (without anyone looking at them) as they were “theirs” and they needed to remain “theirs.” I think it’s sad that my generation doesn’t seem to believe in the “TV land” any more. As my (close) friend often tells me when I lament about the inability to find a gal, “Chivalry is dead, and it wasn’t men that killed it.” Or, as his wife says: “No one wants a knight anymore, they want an ass.”
I feel for you, as I have a sister that I constantly worry about (although she has recently started dating a guy that I haven’t felt the necessity to wear a sleeveless shirt around yet). Perhaps it’s best to think guys are nothing more than primates with computer skills, and it’s most likely more advantageous in the long run for a guy to self-fulfill that role. Hope seems to be an antiquated emotion. Gone with men who carried handkerchiefs and women who waited by a door for a man to open it for them.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
wenglund wrote:I think it a good thing to remind ourselves of the value of treating others with respect, and this whether it be in discussions with the opposite sex or with people of differing political views or diverse religious views.
I have found that those online discussion boards that foster a general culture of respect, tend not to have a need for threads such as this.
On those boards where disrespect towards one group or another is allowed or encouraged, eventually the disrespect becomes indiscriminate and all parties may at times be the object of offense.
However, I have found that even with boards that attempt to foster a culture of respect, that different people will have different ideas of what is respectful and disrespectful, particularly in matters of humor. In such cases it helps when each party develops a healthy sensitivity towards negative affects on others and a healthy insensativety in letting things negatively affect themselves.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
Balderdash. ZLMB fostered nothing but respect for allsides, and that's where that thread came from.
Actually, I saw quite a bit of disrespect on ZLMB, not the least of which was directed at my faith from critics like you.
But, perhaps for you and others, disrespect is only something you detect when it is directed your way. Even my use of the textual mirror failed to clue some people in. The mass exodus from ZLMB failed to clue some people in. Bannishment from various boards has failed to clue some people in.
And, so here we all find ourselves on a board that is relatively wide open, populated mostly with people banned from other boards (often for lacking respect in one way or another), and so it should come as little surprise if one finds a measure of disrespect extended towards one or all groups represented here.
What is that old Chinese proverb about whatever one puts out into the world tends to return back tenfold (or something along those likes)? If we want respect, then it is in our interest to be respectful. Right?
What are you saying, wade? That this board is nothing more than the Island of Misfit Toys?
One moment in annihilation's waste, one moment, of the well of life to taste- The stars are setting and the caravan starts for the dawn of nothing; Oh, make haste! -Omar Khayaam
Trinity wrote: What I have noticed is that the males tend to take cues from the females in sexual dialogue. The female can also control the tone of the discussion more easily than the male. If the female is going to talk about scrappy parts of sex, well, then so is the guy, and that range of discussion is going to vary based on personality or level of sexual frustration.
This is exactly what I have found.
I've seen it often on boards that had nothing to do with LDS or non-LDS. It's male/female interactions.
Even on the MADB board where it's pretty tame compared to here--there are a couple of female posters who'll inject flirtatiousness or enuendo into a thread and there are plenty of male posters who are eager to join in.
