Comments on: Never submit, ye ladies

By: Tololy

Tololy — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:23:24 +0000

No, it’s not quite like that Devil’s Mind. I refuted his points as you can very well see above, deprived him of a link on my blog because he does not merit it, but clued you to where you may find the article.

By: Devil's Mind

Devil's Mind — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:04:49 +0000

So, you are attacking the guy’s point of view without giving him the chance to explain himself (through his documented article)… Do I smell cheating?!

By: Tololy

Tololy — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:57:26 +0000

Why you’re most welcome, Nas .

By: Nas

Nas — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:19:07 +0000

Tololy thanks i just read it.

well suffice to say every husband and wife has a dynamic that works for them. the dominant male does not constitute a submissive wife. nor does a dominant male dominate through sex or abuse. i dont agree with anything he’s said but for sure feminism has changed things and many western societies are in a state of flux or confusion about defing these neo-male-female roles.

in jordan the man is always dominant but its different from one marriage to another. ive seen marriages where the male excercises dominance through abuse and ive seen dominance excercise by "being a man": one who treats his wife with the ultimate respect but remains protective of her.

everyone has their roles to play.

our side of the world is still dominated by tradition and religion, the former more prevailing whislt the latter misapplied. when the west looks in on our world they fail to differentiate between the two, but come to think of it so do many of our own people.

By: Tololy

Tololy — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 10:52:19 +0000

Well this person who wrote the article used Hugh Grant as an example for the sensitive male. I would not know where he got that idea from!
For what it’s worth, I think his views are pathetic, repulsive, and strange to human rights in general. I am sure this stand of mine was clear in what I wrote.

It’s one thing to be dominant and to have a submissive partner who enjoys this, and another to be dominant and generalize that every woman would respect/crave your "masculine" attributes because you’re dominant (and consequently more of a man every time you tell her to shut up and every time you emotionally abuse her) and to go so far as to solemnly preach that. This person needs professional help, and his wife could use some self respect.

The article was published in the Daily Mail on August 4th,2006. You may wish to look it up if you desire, but it will not get a link from me.

By: Nas

Nas — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 10:19:11 +0000

see now we all want to know who wrote this article :-D

and hugh grant? wasnt he busted for soliciting a prostitute a few years back?

anyways men dont know what women want and i think we men are easier to figure out. every women requires something different, some do like to be dominated and some like to dominate. some women want their man to "be a man" and some women struggle to be on top (bala gafyeh). its a matter of personality and preference. the problem arises when the choice is absent, when men feel they have the inherent right to dominate and women become submissive or even the other way around.

in my opinion relationships that last are more about push and pull from either end, like a tug of war but in an infinte timeline of detant. it doesnt work if one person pulls or one person pushes…because the other will fall.

By: Peter S

Peter S — Sat, 12 Aug 2006 02:42:34 +0000

"At one point of his article this person admits that his wife is more successful than he is, and older than he is."

Paging Dr. Freud. This man-boy’s assertiveness is likely needed to compensate his ego for his wife’s success.

I question though whether he is an actual member of this "man first" tribe & not just a wannabe. Men of this ilk rarely tolerate a woman’s successes. One women who I know was once married to such a throwback. She said that he made her quit her job since he could not tolerate her making more money than he was.

This is another example of simplistic dichtomies when it comes to gender roles. Men obviously<b>have</B> to be overbearingly aggressive or they risk becoming emasculated "sensitive" types. Apparently there is no room for a man who is genuinely respectful, empathetic, but maintains a healthy assertiveness (i.e., doesn’t let people walk all over him).

This is the flip side of the "whore/madonna" roles which women are told they must choose between. In this view, a woman who likes sex and has a healthy regard for her sexuality must be a prostitute, Conversely a "moral" woman is one who submits to sex only to have children and gratify her husband ("Just lay back my dear daughters," said Queen Victoria, "and think of England."). Absurd.

BTW–why is Hugh Grant a model for sensitive males? Didn’t you see "About a Boy" and "Bridget Jones’s Diary"? He specializes in playing jerks these days.