Bromance
Here is an interesting article in the Seattle Times about guys forming deeper bonds due to the delay in marriage (Hat Tip: Instapundit):
No mention of a marriage strike as the reason for this, just that men are delaying adulthood, whatever that means. Oh well, it's nice to have friends along the way.
In a 2007 episode of NBC's hospital-based comedy "Scrubs," the show's two main characters, J.D. and Turk, break into a musical duet proclaiming their mutual affection. "Guy love. That's all it is," the song goes. "Guy love, he's mine, I'm his. There's nothing gay about it in our eyes."
Turk and J.D. are two straight male doctors who are, without a doubt, in a bromance, a relationship defined as "the complicated love and affection shared by two straight males," according to urbandictionary.com....
Experts say the prevalence of these friendships can in part be explained by the delay in major life milestones. Fifty years ago, a man could graduate from college, get a job and get married all within a couple of months. But today's men are drifting, as opposed to jumping, into the traditional notion of adulthood.
"The transition to adulthood is now taking about a decade longer than it used to," said Michael Kimmel, a sociology professor at Stony Brook University in New York whose upcoming book is called "Guy Land: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men." One set of men Kimmel interviewed for the book were fraternity brothers at Dartmouth College. Following graduation, seven of them squeezed into a two-bedroom apartment in Boston.
No mention of a marriage strike as the reason for this, just that men are delaying adulthood, whatever that means. Oh well, it's nice to have friends along the way.
posted by Helen at 6:01 AM
59 Comments:
TO: Dr. Helen
RE: It's a Guy Think
"Following graduation, seven of them squeezed into a two-bedroom apartment in Boston." -- Dr. Kimmel, as cited by Dr. Helen
I'd rather see them squeezed into an M2 Bradley IFV, with a mature squad leader.
All humor aside, there is some truth to this business of male bonding. However, I don't think that men are taking a decade longer to 'mature'; vis-a-vis marriage. Rather, I think it is they are seeing the carnage being wrecked in divorce courts.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[You haven't lived, until you've almost died.]
I love this knee jerk assumption that if there is a trend in men, it is something bad, like they can't grow up. When its a trend in women, it's something good, like they're liberated.
Marriage is a scary prospect for men. I met my wife when I was 28, married her when I was 30. At 22, when I graduated college, I know how risky a proposition it was. So I went to school until I was 25, then over the next couple years I picked a few designations behind my name and worked for a hefty income. Then I finally met a woman I thought was mature enough to marry. It wasn't my "waiting a decade to grow up," it was a keen knowledge of how marriage often turns out for men, both during and after in the so-called family courts, and it was a decision I didn't take lightly. I gurantee if divorce was as ugly for women as it was for men, they'd be a little skeptical too (and no one would say it is because they weren't grown up.)
And frankly, and I don't mean this isn't a blow to women, but can we really say with honesty that it is only the men who aren't maturing as fast? I agree that men often do not grow up fast enough, but its not like the young women are reputed to make the most mature dating choices either.
Men are growing increasingly tired of this woman good, man bad, theme.
Men need other men. People who share passions. Its different when its with a woman, the whole dynamic changes.
But as you notice there are women only gyms, women only courses, women only.. Yet if there was a mans only club, man only course, that would be called sex discrimination.
Women have more chances to bond with their own sex, men have little chance. (the army is different). Men are not getting married partly because they cant see any benefits. if you marry she can divorce you for the reason of being bored, and you are screwed in the courts (even with a prenup you can still be screwed).
Might as well stay carefree, than get married. Live at home, rather than lose your house to money grabbing bitches.
I wonder if this writer ever heard the term "Buddies"? Are only women allowed good friends without being labeled as odd?
"the complicated love and affection shared by two straight males" is called FRIENDSHIP.
Sheesh, there is nothing complicate about having friends that you love. I love my friends Tom and Chris and Craig and Bill and John. They are great friends, we have shared lots of laughs together, comforted each other through marital difficulties, shared many a brew and cigar.
What is so weird about nonsexual love for modern culture? Why are some people so mystified that sex is not a part of everything? Are we so afraid of faggotry (NTTIAWWT) that we think being a man and having a best friend is complicated?
Sheesh.
Trey
Well, I find it strange to associate "bromance" (what a horrible word!) with male bonding. There is absolutely nothing romantic about male bonding, which realistically only occurs in the best of friendships, certain team sports, and the military.
It is a phenomenon unique to the male sex. And it happens when men, whether in a pair or group or team, act as one, when the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. It is an emergent phenomenon.
Take football, eleven men acting as one unit. Each player knows exactly where every other is going to be and what they're going to be doing on the field in any given play. But nothing is preset; everything is adaptable. Plays break down, and it is then that improvisation takes over. The teams that are successful are those which can improvise as one, with one mind as it were. A player who was going to run a route may instead have to make a block. But each player knows that every other will take a hit for him so he can make a play, because every other player knows that he will take a hit for them so they can make a play. That is love at a much higher level than any woman can understand.
I really do not believe that females are capable of bonding in the way males are. I do believe that a male and female can bond together in a way that males, and females, cannot. But that is another phenomenon, because it is primarily sexual. It's also more glorious because it brings forth new life.
I really don't have many true friends. But the very few men whom I do consider true friends have my unconditional love, as I do theirs. In a time of need or crisis, there is no sacrifice I would not make for any of them, because I know each of them would do the same for me.
I would not extend the same courtesy to any woman I know or have met, because it goes without saying she wouldn't do the same for me.
This thing called "bromance" is really just some guys rooming together to cut expenses. A roommate will not take a hit, make a sacrifice, for you. He will not look out for you, any more than you'll look out for him. This much is obvious.
Thus "bromance" is in the end, like so much else in contemorary culture, a sad joke.
I tend to agree both with Trust and Mercurior. I have significant health issues to deal with, and have no time and energy to be the husband of some woman with an attitude, where the man is only a paycheck and a servant her ladyship to be used and abused.
It is amazing how "feminism' seems to have fostered this "woman good, men bad" mindset - to the point that most women and also a lot of men accept this as the truth.
I'd rather play read, write, work, and golf,and deal with the curveballs that life has thown at me, by myself. And and I WILL NOT ALLOW MYSELF TO BE USED AND ABUSED by some women who think it is OK to do so.
TO: gawainsghost, et al.
RE: Bromance, Anyone?
I agree. It's an atrocious term. Right down there with meterosexual.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[No matter how bad things are, there's always someone who can make them worse.]
Scrubs rocks. Turk and JD are the best depiction of an actual friendship on TV.
Took me an extra decade to grow up because nothing in my upbringing or schooling actually prepared me to be an adult. More like they delayed the inevitable as long as possible, then dumped me on the street with the expectation that I would magically be a mature person. Stupid. Married at 26, mainly because I didn't know what else to do.
I have no close male friends at the moment, mainly because my previous male friends treated women with contempt if not outright abuse. This was not an error of perception on my part - it was an essential component of their version of being guys. They were fun to be around as long as no women were involved. Looking at girls and flirting could be fun, too. As soon as a girlfriend got into the mix, however, it was like they became different people. Friends who would do anything for each other routinely subjected their current romantic partners to petty cruelty and humiliation. I couldn't understand it. I wasn't sure if they were showing off for each other or just had a problem with women. They seemed quite aware of what they were doing, but always had an excuse - past relationships, their damaged psyches, or they and their partners were "having problems."
Strictly speaking, none of this was any of my business. Trouble is, it was always around, always in front of me and it was pissing me off. I found myself feeling protective toward the women and angry at my friends. This seemed like a really unhealthy way to feel - in fact, a creepy and possibly dangerous way to feel about someone else's girlfriend. I didn't like where my own mind was taking me. Eventually, I had to withdraw from that situation.
It may mean something that none of those men has had a successful relationship, much less a marriage, since I hung out with them. They don't hate women as far as I know - they just deal with them in a counterproductive way. And they repeat the same pattern with every relationship and they know it. It's almost compulsive behavior.
Now I'm always watching myself for signs of getting "hooked" by other people's problems. I try to distance myself from people who are having relationship difficulties, especially if their anger towards each other causes them to do or say hurtful things. On one hand, this is unfortunate because just being there, talking, taking peoples' minds off things can really help. On the other, I'm afraid the "rescuer" impulse will kick in and I'll find myself taking the side of one "injured" partner against the other. And it's unfortunate because these situations are not the same as the apparently gratuitous behavior I saw my male friends engage in.
I don't know why I just wrote all this. Probably the former situation and its outcome still bugs me. I failed to figure out a mature way to deal with an unpleasant situation and it cost me some relationships. On the other hand, I didn't want to encourage what my friends were doing. One more reason why I think I'm crazy.
Maybe the Doc can figure this out. I have no idea...
I see friends shaking hands,
saying, "how do you do?"
They're really saying,
"I love you." ♫
I have two friends who have been there every time I needed them -- and I them.
My ex, on the other hand. When I was contracting on the east coast at 9/11 I asked her to "be an anchor for me" because I thought I'd lost two business friends in the towers. She went on a new-age religious retreat that weekend and then called me up to whine all Sunday night that she was having a "spiritual crisis".
Bromance, feh. A concept as utterly repulsive as it is inaccurate. It reminds me far too much of a friend of mine (a woman) who inSISTED there was gay subtext between Frodo and Sam. I maintain she simply has no other way to frame off that kind of a friendship. It didn't really occur to me that it might be a fundamental gender issue. But the more I think about it, the more it rings true.
I have to chime in with ... I'm too lazy to scroll up... on "growing up 10 years later."
1) I was thoroughly unprepared as a child for what I would face. I've had to figure this all out on my own and it's a damn pain in the ass I don't mind saying.
2) There's almost zero forward momentum for me to grow up. It's entirely based on my internal bearing. Society offers me nothing for "straightening up and flying right." So why possible reason should I not enjoy tequila on Wednesdays and video games? (There are reasons, but I've had to figure them out on my own.)
3) Now that my own compass DOES ask that I get with the damn program, I'm waking up as a late 30's male, disgusted with his surroundings who now feels like he's pretty much missed the boat.
To one again quote Fight Club "Get Married? I can't get married. I'm a 30 year old boy."
chuck: I agree that "metrosexual" is a horrid term. But there ARE metrosexuals out there. It's a real thing. I'm not sure I believe there's such a thing as a bromance.
Isn't there a similar relationship on Boston Legal? It seems weird to me.
Mad: I was listening to Glenn Beck yesterday and he believes it is natural for a guy to want to be lazy, but it takes a woman to prevent it. I don't need that encouragement, I believe that bad things would happen if a person quit working and taking care of themself.
Bugs,
It sounds like you were involved with some pretty immature guys if they were contemptuous of women or liked to humiliate them. I think we all have some friends that we wonder why we were friends with but at the time, it made sense for whatever reason--lonliness, they were fun to go out with, hang out with, whatever. Maybe their problems were with women but did not extend to men -- but you had a hard time seeing yourself as someone who would hang out with such people and the relationships ended. It sounds like you just needed to sound off about it because you have not resolved what happened and why.
Doc,
Thanks for reading all that. It was just weird. Fact is, despite any second-guessing I'm much happier away from that situation. And I'm in a contented marriage and my relationships with other men and women are fairly normal. Just avoiding a specific set of conditions.
Serket - Alan and Denny certainly have something going, much less than gay love but much more than just pals. Not sure it can be defined at all - their characters are too unique to generalize about.
I like what Cathy Young wrote in the Boston Globe:
"In the age of feminism, we have paid a lot of attention to women's complaints about men and criticized men for not meeting women's needs--but we've forgotten that men too have needs and women too have faults. Somehow, we've even developed the notion that a woman who seeks to meet her husband's needs is subservient (but a husband who fails to meet his wife's needs is a pig)."
Amen to that.
So, while it had suited the Gay Agenda proponents to portray the biblical "bromance" of David and Jonathan as gay-- in fact, they've appropriated almost every legendary male friendship to bolster their numbers-- we see now that maybe it isn't teh gay after all?
Is this the comeback of the hetero-male?
TO: Joan of Arrgghh
RE: Heh
"Is this the comeback of the hetero-male?" -- Joan of Arrgghh
To take a line from Ambassador Kosh in Babylon 5...
We have always been here.
It's just that you (occasionally) don't care for it. [Note: Remember our resent discussion over Vodka?]
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Consistency is the hobgoblin of political blogging.]
TO: Mad William Flint
RE: The Creation of Words...
....or English Devolution.
"I agree that "metrosexual" is a horrid term. But there ARE metrosexuals out there. It's a real thing." -- Mad William Flint
Yeah. But, as we agree, it's horrid.
"I'm not sure I believe there's such a thing as a bromance." -- Mad William Flint
Oh. I'm sure someone can point it out. Probably on something like Queer Eye....maybe with something involving someone like the character played by Damon [Banana Man] Wayans in Beverly Hills Cop.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Gay is a one-word oxymoron.]
TO: serket
RE: Glenn Beck?
"....he [Glenn Beck] believes it is natural for a guy to want to be lazy, but it takes a woman to prevent it." -- serket
I suspect he's projecting.
I've always been of an MBTI form that appreciates living in an orderly manner. Based on your report, I suspect Mr. Beck is of a different MBTI persuasion.
And, indeed, many people are; women as well as men. I know cause I've seen phenomenal demonstrations of how members of either gender can be 'lazy' beyond belief. Or it might be a genetic thing. I know one brother-sister pair who live apart, but both are, in my honest opinion, 'lazy' about their living quarters. And both are very 'smart'.
It's something that maybe Dr. Helen could recommend to an aspiring psychologist to consider for a paper.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[This isn't a mess. I know where everything is....right under foot.]
Sometimes we over think things.
Dr. Helen.
"Bromance" to me seems classic substitution, not a marriage strike.
What is interesting is the article points out that "bromances" tend to end or peter off once a serious girlfriend enters the picture. Not even a wife. A girlfriend.
Men (straight ones anyway) naturally want intimacy of all kinds, physical and emotional, with women. However, many men get priced out of the market.
A good fictional example is "Chuck" on NBC. The lead Chuck and his pal Morgan have endless 4 hour discussions about sandwiches and video games. It's a pattern he fell into after he was dumped by his one serious girlfriend and became downwardly mobile, unable to attract any other girl.
Such bromances can work for a while. Along with endless distractions of video games, the like. But they are only a distraction.
We have created IMHO a society where women chase the Alpha Male until they are mid thirties (or later depending on attractiveness and their surroundings). Then look around and wonder why they don't have the dating opportunities they did before and must lower their standards considerably. Meanwhile the guys who sat around watching a few Alphas have all the relationships end up in terminal bromance mode, or simply totally unpracticed in relationships, resentful as well at being passed over.
It is not healthy for either sex. It explains the lower marriage rate, fertility rate (marriage and kids much later) and so on.
I don't see it as a marriage strike. IMHO the bromances are guys priced out of the relationship market with not enough status.
Regardless of what word is used to describe it, the phenomenon has the following features:
1. There is no sex;
2. There are no financial obligations to the other person;
3. There is no looming threat of possible divorce, nor any worry about paying alimony.
In a marriage, only feature 1 is present. But there's no guarantee that even that will last.
Under the circumstances, I think it's understandable that some men would want to postpone adulthood (if not circumvent it entirely).
Are they being immature? Yes, but should that be discouraged? If so, how? By stern lectures delivered by certified adults? I doubt that would work. It might only encourage further adolescent rebellion. After all, these are fully grown immature men, aren't they?
The interesting thing about all this "bromance" mess is that until WWII that kind of close male relationship was extremely common. It got subverted in our society and culture and now is returning as a result of a whole host of issues. It has nothing to do with homosexuality or men feeling comfortable with expressions of affection. It really is just men gravitating back to what is typical of most cultures and what was typical of our own for quite some time.
Funny, my son just recently descibed his relationship with his college roomate as "like JD and Turk" - they're as close as brothers, which is wonderful, and they have good humor about it.
Curious.
If what whiskey_199 says is correct, and my experience does not counter it,nor does what I've seen and heard, then what happens when conclusions begin to be made?
IF money and status (and being a bad boy)are what define being an "Alpha" male, and are what the girls prefer, what gets them all bouncy and jiggly; then why should the decent men, the "Beta" males, whose character and intelligence are not in service to their wallets or groins, give a damn about what happens to such women?
You cannot appeal to chivalry; all you're demanding at that point is that the "Betas" to protect what is basically the "Alpha's" livestock. You cannot appeal to morals; again we have no portion in it.
Let's take Art. Most straight, male artists are not married; on the other hand, the the situation is reversed for female artists. There is no one helping the men: no one helps provide time and space needed to create: I am describing a help meet -- the reason God created woman. A female artist needs but marry well enough: don't marry the redneck. This condition has resulted in Art being dominated by women and homosexuals: I frequently run across gays of both sexes who have partners supporting them.
One also finds art groups being run by such women. So, I ask: Why should a straight, male artist, let alone any man, support with time and money such institutions?
"I really do not believe that females are capable of bonding in the way males are."
This comment certainly had me blinking. What a weird assumption.
Of course, the phenomenon as described is not necessarily as visible for women— perhaps you are looking in the wrong place? My first thought is theater; watch a good comedienne and you'll see some of the attributes you describe. (And the reverse is also true. Last year a Clueless Cast Member managed to throw the whole chorus off; the women were of one mind in regards to her: Oh God, what is she going to screw up today? :p )
"Bromance" is the attempt at a metrosexualisation of regular guy friendships and bonding. The Scrubs parody is funny, but the attempt to make it into a serious social phenomenon is really ignorant and sexist.
About the Alpha Male thing, that is just one way of succesfully mating nowadays. While the Alpha males get a lot of attention, and have a large number of sexual partners, (that is the point of being an Alpha Male,) some of us have a different strategy that suits us just fine.
We are solid, steady, emotionally available men. We are kind of like the Pluggers cartoons. We are not flashy, we are committed to our families, work hard, have a few intense interests, do not cheat on our wives, and marry above ourselves! That is because we tend to find intelligent, beautiful women who can see through style to find substance. Or they find us and let us think we found them!
We are low on style, and high on substance! We tend to not care what other people think and are comfortable with ourselves. We are not neurotic and will wear a pink shirt wihtout hesitation. Well, some of us will, down here in the South there is a Bubba contingent that steers more toward cammo and Nascar than pinot and Firefly.
I bet Glen is like that, Fred Thompson had a bit of it, so does Governor Phil Bredesen (though he pushes the nerd envelope a bit far.) Tom Hanks, Tom Selleck, and Harrison Ford either have it or are good at pretending to. There is nobody like us on Friends or Seinfeld, even if some of us like the show. Woody on Cheers was one of us, and Norm was close.
And our type has good, close male friendships. We don't want to hop into bed together, cepting when we are gay, and find words like Bromance and Metrosexual tedious and boring.
The smart women scoop us up quickly though, so we tend to be married. Happily!
Trey
Ha! This all makes me think there should be a "Dr. Helen Readers" category on meetup.com
;)
Mad William Flint,
For who, those interested in a bromance?
TO: TMink
RE: Thanks for the Memories
"We are kind of like the Pluggers cartoons." -- TMink
I read that and immediately flash-backed to my favorite Pluggers cartoon.
Two dog-faced grunts, in helmets, looking up a rope dangling from a cliff face.
The caption read...
CHAOS, the Commander Has Another Outstanding Suggestion
Thanks!
Chuck(le)
[Never share a fox-hole with a man braver than you.]
yeesh, no. Not what I meant at all.
Just seems like a fair amount of good discussion that would translate well to a group of people sharing a beer.
I find it continually amazing, living in NYC, how tough it is to conquer the small-talk level of conversation with people without it being a bunch of inebriated philosophizing. I think it's largely a result of the population density / personal space curve.
Mad William Flint,
Dr. Helen Readers sharing a beer, that sounds like fun. I was kidding about the bromance. That has to be the dumbest word on record. I do think the commenters here are especially funny and smart. Another blogger once commented to me that my readers were an interesting and intelligent bunch. I just smiled and said, "I know."
Phew. I was thinkin' "yeah, she's been pretty quiet. I wonder if she takes this thing that seriously... o...kay... I guess."
Well I'm in NYC, happy to plan, etc.
TO: Mad William Flint, et al.
RE: NYC????!?!????
"Well I'm in NYC, happy to plan, etc." -- MWF
Fugghetaboutit.
Been there. Done that. No need to go back.
I recommend someplace like the Wyncoop or Phantom Canyon Brewers. Or the Buckhorn...all in Colorado.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Alcohol! The last gift of the relenting gods. The simple word that makes life's crossword puzzle easier to elucidate. - Lennie Lower]
P.S. If I could only REMEMBER what the answer was....
P.P.S. Then again, there's the apres-party for the Renaissance Festival in Larkspur. Although it would be something of a distraction, but it certainly would be fun.....
Heh.
Its been over eight hours since I posed my hard questions: no one deigned to offer hard answers.
Dilettantes in their sinecures: ideas are but baubles.
I think a NY City meeting of Dr. Helen fans would be fun.
I would take anything Michael Kimmel says about men with a truckload of skepticism. I have read several things by him over the years - he is, or was, a male gender feminist. Sort of a Dworkin with balls. Actually scratch that part about the balls - Dworkin told a bunch of us at a speech in the 80's that we should have our balls surgically removed and given to our girlfriends or wives to symbolize our shame for being men. Based on what I have read of his work I wouldn't be surprised if Kimmel has taken care of that already.
Will
TO: NJArtist
RE: Q&A
"Why should a straight, male artist, let alone any man, support with time and money such institutions?" -- NJArtist
I'm not an artist—except in the sense of Sun Tzu—so I can't speak to the question from that perspective.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[It is good that war is so horrible, lest we become too fond of it. -- General Robert E. Lee]
ok B. Durbin, i dont know if you meant your comment in sarcastic way. if you did great, if you didnt heres my answer.
If you read it, you will see that it doesnt say women dont do it, its just that men do it differently.
I have had a few physical fights with friends over certain things, but afterwards, we are friends again. Men can nod to each other and have complete conversations, with just a look to other men.
The defining term was "in the way". Men do things differently, men dont go to the bathroom together, or if they do its an accident, we dont talk in there, one or 2 words are ok but nothing more.
We have a companiable silence going, some of the time. Its the true definition of frienship giving the other person time and space. but knowing they will be there when needed. Thats the true male bonding. Its what male only clubs are there for. in those clubs women dont exist. we can be men around men.
nja, because a good marriage increases your ability to create through the peace and harmony (I mistyped hormony, which is also accurate) it brings to your life. Then there is the perspective that progeny bring!
Or, from the other side, a bad marriege makes you so miserable you have plenty of raw emotions to drive your art.
I find that my creativity comes in waves and seems to have nothing to do with my life circumstances. It is more a clarity of vision, but then I am a photographer.
Trey
The whole tone of the Seattle Times article is "They're fags! Ha, ha!" That is, unfortunately, very common when women are mad at men for not behaving exactly as they want them to. After all, "women are smarter and better" and men should do what they're told - provide sperm for babies, turn over their paycheck, and sit there and watch "Desperate Housewives" like trained poodles.
TO: All
RE: [OT] Marriage and the Single Guy....
"....men should do what they're told - provide sperm for babies, turn over their paycheck, and sit there and watch "Desperate Housewives" like trained poodles." -- tweedburst
....the Christian Perspective
I think it would behoove us all if the good doctor would do an analysis on the concept of the good woman; as espoused in the latter part of Proverbs 31 of that old Book.
Having gone through two previous women, or rather the reverse—they having gone through me (as tweedburst describes)—and my finally finding a woman who is best described in the reference (above), I've got to say that old Book has a solid lock on what a good woman should be. And the description is hardly that of a mindless sex-object. Nor is it a casterating b----.
I'd like to see Dr. Helen do a 'compare and contrast' on what is in that old Book and what she so frequently touches on in her bloggings; the rabid feminist.
Then, I'd like to see her identify where men, I mean REAL men, can find women of that caliber.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband: but she that maketh ashamed is as rottenness in his bones. -- Proverbs]
What's up now?
I grew up in a large single family home neighborhood. It was very stable. I had friends from elementary school through high school. We hung around for years after graduation. Some went to college at local schools, some went away to school. That is when the posse began to break up. As young adults we started a city league softball team, playing together well into our 30's. As some married, one by one, they left the picture. But even then, until children entered the picture for them, we still got together for ball practice and ball games.
Even at 55, I still see or at least speak with many of them. I'm a loner type most of the time, but the guys I grew up with won't hear of it. To have life long friends is a rare and beautiful blessing.
People who wish to pick that apart and analyze it in an effort to find something wrong with it are themselves the ones who have something wrong with them. Perhaps they are even jealous of those who have had life long friends.
TO: All
RE: [OT] On the Other Hand
I stumbled across this during my morning readings of the blogosphere....
"I was aghast to hear my four year old daughter playing with her dolls the other day. The dolls are not the problem; the story line was. Tuning in and out while she nattered on, I suddenly realized the dialogue went something like this:
First Princess: "Oh no! The evil witch is coming. We need Prince Sean!" (Sean is the boy she's all but stalking at preschool).
Second Princess: "Oh! She'll cut our guts out. Where are the boys? We need boys."
FP: "Girls aren't strongly brave. We shall die! Who will save us? Oh! It's the prince. He'll save us."
All in a high-pitched and annoying ditzy soprano. It got so much worse than this, I had to sit her down for a chat. Where on earth was she getting this stuff?
I pummel her and her 7-year-old brother with feminist analysis of every medium they encounter, from billboards to story books to cereal boxes. I'm a single mom with a freelance career; they watch me struggle and kick ass everyday, all without help from a 'prince.' Yet, my daughter argues furiously with me that only boys are strong and brave and tough.She was actually offended when I called her a tough cookie after she'd done something cool. "I'm not tough, Mom! I'm a girl."" -- Debra Dickerson, via MotherJones Blog; http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/04/7888_a-feminist-hears-horton-hears-a-who.html
Even little children recognize the truth of the world. It seems much better than many of us [alleged] grown-ups.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[From the mouths of babes.....babe.]
You know, I remember reading a few years back where women were putting off marriage and children. Some opting to never have children. Career aspirations were a higher priority.
I never followed the trend to see what changes, if any, have transpired. Who do they hang with, if anyone, when a life long relationship is not in their foreseeable future? And how come there seems to be nothing wrong with that?
TO: br549
RE: What's Happened?
"I remember reading a few years back where women were putting off marriage and children. Some opting to never have children. Career aspirations were a higher priority.
I never followed the trend to see what changes, if any, have transpired." -- br549
The result is that they have removed their genes from the proverbial gene-pool. For many of them, they are no longer able to bear children; something about 'old eggs'.
Regards,
Chuck
[Look upon it as evolution inaction. -- Niven and Pournelle, Oath of Fealty]
I'm "putting off marriage", if by "putting off" you mean "planning to never take part in".
I can't rule it out, of course, but there's nothing in it for me. I lose most of my freedom and money and get... nothing. I can get sex without being married, and other men are better for companionship anyway.
Mercurior, I said it baffled me— but that was because there seemed, when I read the comment, to be an implication that that sort of interaction coulldn't happen between females. I've seen it.
I also recognize that men interact with only men in different ways than they react with women, no matter how tomboyish the woman in question. It's the reason I won't become a Boy Scout leader when the time comes— much as I'd enjoy it. I worked as a summer camp counselor at a Boy Scout camp and the troops I saw with female leadership had a different dynamic than those with exclusively male leadership. (This annoys me, because I could otherwise do a pretty good job, building on experience. But the psychological issues trump my abilities in this case.)
I also have to admit that the so-called "normal" interaction of women baffles me too, so the interaction that you describe above might be limited to a subset of the female population. Possibly the subset that were tomboys of a sort. :)
The term bromance is stupid (like Brangelina or some other lazy concatenation), but the concept is nothing new. It used to be called "best friends".
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
Hawkeye and Trapper John
Hawkeye and BJ Honeycutt
Richie Cunningham and the Fonz
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
C3PO and R2D2
Han Solo and Chewbacca
Frodo Baggins and Sam Gamgee
Maverick and Goose
For group sex, we have:
Mannie, Moe, and Jack
Frank Sinatra, Joey Bishop, Dean Martin, and Sammy Davis Jr.
The Brat Pack
Frick and Frack
How about:
The Indigo Girls
Bananarama
Trio (Dolly Parton, Linda Ronstadt, and Emmy Lou Harris)
Cagney and Lacy
Britney Spears and Madonna
The Bangles
The Witches of Eastwick
Amazons - a big group
The drift has been captured, hopefully
徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 外遇沖開, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信, 徵信社
A片-無碼援交東京熱一本道aaa免費看影片免費視訊聊天室微風成人ut聊天室av1688影音視訊天堂85cc免費影城亞洲禁果影城微風成人av論壇sex520免費影片JP成人網免費成人視訊aaa影片下載城免費a片 ut交友成人視訊85cc成人影城免費Ａ片aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片小魔女免費影城免費看 aa的滿18歲影片sex383線上娛樂場kk777視訊俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片a片免費看A片-sex520視訊做愛聊天室plus論壇sex520免費影片avdvd-情色網qq美美色網ut13077視訊聊天85cc免費影片aaa片免費看短片aa影片下載城aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部aa的滿18歲影片小魔女免費影片台灣論壇免費影片後宮0204movie免費影片免費卡通影片線上觀看線上免費a片觀看85cc免費影片免費Ａ片aa影片下載城ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 日本免費視訊aaaa 片俱樂部aaa片免費看短片aaaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看短片免費視訊78論壇情色偷拍免費Ａ片免費aaaaa片俱樂部影片av俱樂部aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片 杜蕾斯成人免費卡通影片線上觀看85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費線上歐美A片觀看免費a片卡通aaa的滿18歲卡通影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片
成人變態系列成人美腿系列成人美腿系列成人多P系列成人多P系列25xxx成人影城25xxx成人影城sod 藝能人sod 藝能人sod 藝能人女子校生女子校生女子校生成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人近親相X癡女系‧若妻‧美臀‧激幹‧處女‧癡漢成人聊天室
Post a Comment
<< Home