The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Carl on February 15, 2014, 06:01:54 PM

Title: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: Carl on February 15, 2014, 06:01:54 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024505801

First a stupid op  :yawn:

Quote
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 05:32 PM

HockeyMom (11,757 posts)

Gender roles

 I have been seeing a load of crap recently about gender roles and how boys should be taught to be boys and girls taught to be girls. What the hell does that even mean?

I worked in a Pre-K class which had "Centers" for Free Time. The kids could choose where they wanted to go. There were Arts and Crafts and Reading types that were gender neutral, but many would be considered in the past as gender oriented: Housekeeping and Care Care, Building, Cars and Trucks, Dress up (Police, Firefighters, Disney Princess).

The boys only went went to the "boy" Centers? The girls only went to the "girl" centers? Absolutely, not. Both genders switched all around. Boys would race cars and build, but they would also put on aprons, cook dinner, feed and diaper the babies. Girls did that too, but they played Demolition Derby, built a fort, or put on police uniforms to catch the "bad guys". There was a 5 year old boy who had 5 brothers and recently a baby sister. He always wanted to go the Housekeeping and Child Care Center. He told me that his Mom said he and all his brothers had to help around the house. He said he wanted to learn how to diaper and feed his baby sister because he LOVED her. Not "manly"? I told him someday he would make a very good DADDY. What the hell is wrong with that? No male is EVER going to have to cook (Chef Ramsey hear that?), clean a floor, or do dishes? No Daddy is ever going to feed or diaper his baby? No woman is ever going to have to drive a car (lol), cannot work in construction, or join the police force, or the military? Yes, some boys DID put on the Disney Princess costumes. So what? The girls also put on "male" dress up costumes too.

I was born in 1948 back in the good old days when "men were men and women were women". Not for me. While my Dad was a Longshoreman, my Mom also worked full time (NOOOOO). Since Dad got home earlier than Mom, HE did most of the cooking and cleaning back in the 50s. Tell him he wasn't a "man" for doing that? Um, I don't think anyone would want to do that. Grandma (born 1900) lived with us. There was not an electrical appliance in the house that she could not take apart and fix. Womanly? lol All Dad would do was shrug, and say, "If she doesn't blow up the house, and saves money hiring repairmen, so what?"

No Gender Roles does not exist, and NEVER HAS.

Whatever

Then this demented what the???

Quote
Response to HockeyMom (Original post)

Sat Feb 15, 2014, 05:39 PM

 seabeyond (92,243 posts)
1. exactly hockey it is bullshit. and it is being sung loudly in every corner. all the time media

defining the separation of what is manly defining men thru their contorted definition and men buying the bullshit.

the advancement of evo psychology to establish once in for all, the manly man, in all his refinement in the cave man days in the name of faux science, rolling eyes.

and why.... ? backlash.

women are doing to well, looks like we might get along and somewhere along the way, they baulked.

ask for the definition of masculinity that is suppose to separate the genders.

courage
strength
honesty
integrity

this is gender specific?

today, it is merely defined in sex. on and on and on and on.

and how well they can degrade, demean, humiliate a woman. call out the c word, fine. progressive board? fine. THAT... is being a man.

If anyone can decipher that they deserve an award.

Uglier than the wrath of God weighs in and makes no sense either.

Quote
Response to seabeyond (Reply #1)

Sat Feb 15, 2014, 06:56 PM

 Warpy (74,298 posts)
4. And the backlash is getting stronger

Look at the way they posed those thong clad women on the cover of SI. There had to be some serious photoshopping going on, that degree of lordosis is life threatening. The cover, with the models thong clad and topless, was porn. Soft porn, yes, but porn.

The better we do at being fully human, the more they try to objectify us into adolescent fantasy comic book women, Photoshopped into contortions the human body does not do while enlarging tits and especially ass and narrowing the waist to the point that internal organs would be bruised by it in real life.

At least there are real world men who get the point. If you know them, treasure them.

A rubber room has both your names on it.


Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: Skul on February 15, 2014, 06:06:07 PM
In a nut shell...."I ain't getting any, and nobody else should, too". :bawl: :bawl: :bawl:
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: franksolich on February 15, 2014, 06:09:04 PM
Oh, I can promise Ms. Hindenberg there ain't nothing of this going on in this mind, insofar as the defrocked warped primitive's concerned:

Quote
they try to objectify us into adolescent fantasy comic book women.....
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: JohnnyReb on February 15, 2014, 06:13:21 PM
In a nut shell...."I ain't getting any, and nobody else should, too". :bawl: :bawl: :bawl:
PerZactly.
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: thundley4 on February 15, 2014, 06:48:39 PM
The DUmmie trying to compare what 5 year olds do is very misleading. They are still learning their rightful place in the real male dominated patriarchal society.

Those boys playing with girls things, likely grew up to be neutered liberal males.
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on February 15, 2014, 11:51:59 PM
They can't make-up their addled minds.

One moment women are empowered and encroaching on traditional male roles thus disproving evo(lutionary) psychology.

The next minute they're powerless waifs oppressed by a rape culture born from male aggressive tendencies.

One minute women are to be sexually empowered.

The next minute any man that sees women as potential sex attractive is an objectifying Neanderthal.
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: Revolution on February 16, 2014, 12:01:57 AM
Let's see ANY of those liberal DUmp sluts pass the written AND physical test to become FDNY, and then they can talk their shit.
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: Big Dog on February 16, 2014, 07:29:04 AM
Quote
they try to objectify us into adolescent fantasy comic book women

I will admit, the thought of PhDD in a Wonder Woman costume has crossed my mind...
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: Dori on February 16, 2014, 09:08:42 AM
I will admit, the thought of PhDD in a Wonder Woman costume has crossed my mind...

 :lol:

We need a photoshop here.

Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on February 16, 2014, 10:16:23 AM
:lol:

We need a photoshop here.


(http://d2el4marpcphqf.cloudfront.net/36175.jpg)
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: JohnnyReb on February 16, 2014, 10:36:16 AM

(http://d2el4marpcphqf.cloudfront.net/36175.jpg)
You should see her when she dresses up for the Code Pink Halloween party.
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: GOBUCKS on February 16, 2014, 11:42:04 AM

(http://d2el4marpcphqf.cloudfront.net/36175.jpg)
Tits too small.
Title: Re: seabeyond still a lunatic
Post by: JohnnyReb on February 16, 2014, 11:47:00 AM
Tits too small.
....but get a load of those nipples.......uh......nevermind, my cataract got in the way there for a moment.