Stuart Schneiderman: "There is barely a man alive who does not dread the moment when he hears these words: 'We need to talk about our relationship.'"
posted by Helen at 5:57 AM
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Contributors
Previous Posts
- "...when it comes to men, you may be better off no...
- Knoxnews.com: The Tea Party: Brewing up a movement.
- "Much of this is motivated by congressional defens...
- Shrinkwrapped: The FDA Is Going to Kill Us All!!
- "Forty-four percent (44%) of all adults say the In...
- Random thought of the day
- Treating Erectile Dysfunction
- Carpe Diem blog: Your Pants are Lying to You: "Va...
- How Rich People Think
- "...even at a time when psychoanalysis as a practi...
47 Comments:
Until very recently women were considered the personal property of their fathers or husbands. That attitude hasn't changed much in many areas of America.
Slaves and other low status individuals are not allowed to be direct. They are forced to speak indirectly if they want to stay healthy. This is why women take three days to say something that most men could say in three minutes.
Problems are caused by those who are most powerful and least accountable. Treat females like equals from a very early age and they'll stop being afraid to speak their minds efficiently.
"Until very recently women were considered the personal property of their fathers or husbands."
---
Absolute baloney. That's put out by feminists to increase the victimhood status of women. It increases the feeling that men "owe" women something.
There was the concept of "coverture" in law: Long ago a man was RESPONSIBLE for all of the shit that a wife pulled. Men were actually held liable to pay her fines if she shoplifted something for instance. The man was responsible for any debts in the marriage. From that point of view, the quid pro quo was that married women had to get their husband to agree before taking out large debts (because it.was.going.to.be.his.debt). That ONLY applied to married women. Don't like it? Don't get married (kind of like the reverse today for men).
That was twisted around by feminists to mean that men held women as chattel and all the other crap they come up with.
Feminists are absolutely effective at spreading misrepresentations and outright lies. They are brilliant at it.
I've even seen some mesmerized young college women say things like: Women were the property of men up until around the 1970s or so. They actually believe it. They have no experience in the real world, and no experience of what life was like in the 1960s or 1970s, so they just swallow all the victimhood tales hook, line and sinker.
The best one is: "I've been oppressed for 1000s of years, and I'm only 19 years old".
God of Bacon,
The problem here is that women speak their minds from an early age too efficiently. This is not one of power, but of women not understanding that men (and some women) do not want to blather on about the "significance" of their relationship. As women gain more power, they do not seem to "speak their minds" more effectively, they use their verbal skills to persuade men (and Congress) that men are wrong, emotionally stilted, and at times, dangerous, even if they are not. I see no evidence that "women are personal property in many areas of America." If anything, the laws are such that men's Constitutional rights have been stripped when it comes to relationships and they are the ones who pay the price if the relationship goes south. Maybe this is why men are silent. They have become the very slaves you suggest women are...
God of Bacon
Please explain how this is consistent with your thesis:
http://www.sptimes.com/News/061800/Perspective/Can_it_truly_be_Fathe.shtml
It's been over 10 years since that column came out! Yikes!
When I utter the words "We need to talk about our relationship" there is a very good reason to become concerned. That is the line I use right before I dump a boyfriend.
That is the line I use right before I dump a boyfriend.
Exactly. 20 years ago a woman I worked with was "unhappy" with her marriage and basically used this line and said she wanted a divorce. Her husband said fine, see ya later. They're still married and have two kids now.
Nowadays, responsibility for debt goes both ways if both are employed equally, but I guarantee you the husband still gets saddled with it if she charges up the credit cards but doesn't work.
Problems are caused by those who are most powerful and least accountable.
Are you talking about the feminist here? Andrea Yates drowns her kids in the bathtub. Feminists blame her husband. Mary Winkler shoots her sleeping husband in the back with a shotgun. Feminists blame him. And so it goes.
"Slaves and other low status individuals are not allowed to be direct. They are forced to speak indirectly if they want to stay healthy. This is why women take three days to say something that most men could say in three minutes."
----
Are you posting from some kind of anti-matter parallel universe where everything is the opposite to what it is here?
I find that fascinating.
Maybe Helen and Mr.Schneiderman could address this. If someone wanted to have a discussion making a change to the status of of a relationship as in considering getting married, ending the relationship, discussing cohabitation or opening it up so they can date other people, how would partners begin the conversation? I have found that ESP doesn't work all that well and making a change in status without discussing it first leads to negative consequences. Anyone with any thoughts on the matter is welcome to comment.
They are forced to speak indirectly if they want to stay healthy. This is why women take three days to say something that most men could say in three minutes.
Try answering "Does this dress make my butt look big?" directly. LOL.
Cham,
I think what many guys (and some women) resent is the feeling of pressure about the relationship, as if it is an outside thing not about themselves, but about how it makes the woman "feel." The relationship is about two people, not just the one who wants to talk about it 24/7.
I think that if you discuss the issues of marriage, breaking up etc. in a mature and non-accusing, non-pressure way, you will get some answers, maybe even more sincere ones. Two adults are going to address these issues at some point in a relationship. However, talking incessantly about the relationship or asking a guy constantly what he is thinking is a recipe for resentment, annoyance, or non-compliance or even later passive-aggressive behavior.
Correct response: "You bet your ass we do. I have some issues. Let's go to the coffee shop and sit."
Helen,
"Two adults are going to address these issues at some point in a relationship."
The fundamental problem is that there are not two adults in a 'relationship'. (Unless it is two gay men.)
I stand by my opinion, backed with a mountain of evidence, that women are of the intellectual capacity of boys in the range of 7-10 years of age in the areas of 'logic and reason'. Hence in a heterosexual 'relationship' there is only one person who remotely resembles an adult. The woman is pretty much a manipulative child and in the west they are truely horrible now. If women had kept their mouths shut they might have been thought wise. But no man can browse over feministing.com without coming to the conclusion that women are massively underpowered in the logic and reason department. Men think "Oh, it's just this one woman I am talking to." Nope. It is ALL of them. As I awoke to this I was truely amazed.
So now I am 'alpha' (but with my training wheels on) I treat women exactly like I used to treat my children. It works MUCH better. I recommend to the men I talk to that they treat women like children. Alphas them and put them in their place or walk away and dump them.
I will soon be releasing draft chapters of my book which will include things like bonded affidavits. Let's see how many women want to be 'equal' when they have to write down on an affidavit what that actually means and bond it with a sum of gold as the guarantee for their word should they break it. Women's privilege is coming to a crashing end. And it is my pleasure to do so! LOL!
"... when they have to write down on an affidavit what that actually means and bond it with a sum of gold as the guarantee for their word should they break it."
------
How are you going to make them sign something like that.
I don't think that plan's going to work.
Helen,
"However, talking incessantly about the relationship or asking a guy constantly what he is thinking is a recipe for resentment, annoyance, or non-compliance or even later passive-aggressive behavior."
Oh...and let's not forget the truely outrageous and stupid.
As we were breaking up we had this conversation:
Ex: "I don't trust you."
GM:"Why might be since I had not lied to you in 32 years. How long must I be honest before you trust me?"
Ex: "There are things you don't tell me."
GM: "Sure, when I go to the toilet I don't tell you what my shit looks like because you don't need to know and it's not important."
To which she triumphantly replies. "See, I told you there are things you don't tell me, THATS why I don't trust you."
I swear that's EXACTLY what a supposedly 'intelligent' woman of 44 years of age said. Who the hell wants to live with cow-shit like that?
JG,
"How are you going to make them sign something like that?"
I am not going to 'make' any woman do anything. As my ex said "You can't make me do anything."
I have a very 'grand' plan JG. The destruction of 'wimminz privilege' is not done by attacking women. It is done by attacking the man-hating, white-knighting, mangina apologists. Two of the many affidavits that are templates will be:
1. Women signing an affidavit claiming 'equality before the law' to men and waiving 'wimminz privileges'.
2. Women signing an affidavit claiming 'chattel property of a man' and maintaining 'wimminz privilges'.
The MEN will be asking the women to sign one or the other. ANY MAN who allows his woman to refuse to sign one or the other and who does NOT walk away? HE will be attacked and denounced as the man-hating, white-kniting, mangina apologist he is. Why? Because his woman has just demonstrated what a liar and hypocrite she is to his face and he will do nothing about it. So it is proposed the MEN attack the MEN who are willing to be slaves to women. There is a LOT of area being covered. It should be fun.
Example? ALL men in former british colonies like the US (ex-LA) will be offered the opportunity to unilaterally rescind their marriage contract from the beginning such that it never existed. They can then refuse the jurisdiction of the courts. Once a few hundred thousand men have done this and the women realise they can not rely on 'big daddy state' to arse rape men in the FC they might be a bit more inclined to sign a lawful contract. The marriage contract is unlawful.
We are just preparing to put Judge Griffin of the family court in Ireland on trial for his crimes against me. Should we be successful in taking his house off him I think a strong message will be sent to the other judges. Not to mention the wimminz. At one time I was amazed how little men cared about being made slaves. Now I realise most love their servitude.
I think a lot of the problem comes from times when "we need to talk about the relationship" is code for "you are too male like and I want to feminize you."
Trey
I think a lot of the problem comes from times when "we need to talk about the relationship" is code for "you are too male like and I want to feminize you."
Or, "I'm not happy and it's your fault. The fairy tales promised me happy ever after and I deserve that. So, we're going to talk about your faults until your ears bleed."
There's only so much of that any man wants to listen to. After that point, it's just whinning.
I suppose O.J.'s dead ex-wife and George Huguely's dead girlfriend held all the good cards. America loves violent, male sociopaths and always has. Only when they become an embarrassment are they punished.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Not any more than Mary Winkler's husband held the good cards.
God of Bacon, you are just stuck on either victimhood or man-hatred.
Or both.
For those of you who don't know: Mary Winkler shot her sleeping husband in the back, killing him.
She made up a story about him getting up, but a great deal of evidence, for instance the amount of urine in his bladder, offered a conclusion that he had simply been sleeping.
She claimed abuse, of course, and as evidence offered up a claim that once he made her wear a wig and high heels in sex play.
Keep in mind that none of her assertions were backed up by anyone else, or any physical evidence or any police records. Keep in mind that she wanted to be acquitted and would say anything, and he was no longer around to dispute it.
Keep in mind that there WAS evidence that she had lost most or all of the "family money" (meaning money he earned, since she was a sit-at-home) on a Nigerian scam and a check-kiting scheme. Keep in mind that it was unavoidable that she would have to tell him that in the near future.
So what did she get? Something like two months in jail. And then her church community bought her an expensive car (that she cashed in for the money), among lots of other financial help.
America loves violent, male sociopaths and always has. Only when they become an embarrassment are they punished.
Are you jealous of their athletic skill, good looks, money or all three? Only when they break the law are they punished, just like everyone else. Imagine that.
You seem to have a rather serious problem about this with a total lack of objectivity.
Another point, God of Bacon:
Society today worships plenty of morons, male and female.
OJ Simpson was worshiped, but so is Paris Hilton today.
50 or 100 years ago, society looked up to people like Albert Einstein, John Glenn and Amelia Earhart; today it's Kim Kardashian, Snooky and the Real Housewives of New Jersey.
TO: TMink, et al.
RE: I....
I think a lot of the problem comes from times when "we need to talk about the relationship" is code for "you are too male like and I want to feminize you." -- TMink
....don't think so.
My experience has been that when women say that, they're looking (1) to leverage in the relationship or (2) for justification to 'kill' it. And if they can't gain better control, they want YOU to provide the 'ammunition' for the second option.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Discussion of a relationship is like performing a vivisection on it.]
Helen,
"America loves violent, male sociopaths and always has"
You wonder why I have no respect for western women? Well? They let women say things like this and they don't condemn such hateful statements. Western women are totally pathetic when compared to western men. Women wanted to be 'equal'? Well I judge them on the same basis I judge men. And when women allow women to say things like this and do not challenge them? Well? Western women are a disgrace. A total, utter and complete disgrace. Eastern women don't let women say cow-shit like this.
"Could you please..." or "it really makes me happy when you . . ." seem to me to be much better ways to start a relationship talk. Asking for what you want and need seem more to the point than a more generic relationship discussion.
And JG is spot on about Miss Winkler. An embarassing moment in Tennessee so called jurisprudence.
Trey
Globalman100,
Isn't God of Bacon a guy? He sure looks like it from his profile and comments.
Hi Helen,
"Isn't God of Bacon a guy?"
Wimminz come in both sexes. Many men are man-hating, white knighting, mangina apologists. Those men disgust me even more than the wimminz. We will end wimminz privileges by attacking these manginas. When real men attack and humilate the manginas they will stop dishing out the 'wimminz privileges'. It's called 'strategic thinking'. Wimminz don't do anything for themselves. They get their mangina lackeys to do it. What is the percentage of flat tyres changed by women vs men? Do women even change 1% of flat car tyres? Not likely. When it is the case that a man being seen changing a car tyre for a woman will have his own car tyres slashed for being a mangina we might see men a little less willing to be white-knights. ;-)
Further, all over the web, women are pretending to be men and putting the 'view of a man' as a lie. The very fact that western women feel compelled to lie and decieve pretty much all the time shows you that they have no argument. Eastern women don't do this.
America loves violent, male sociopaths and always has. Only when they become an embarrassment are they punished.
Does your definition of violent, male sociopaths include men who engage in competition to impress females and, consequently, gain sexual access, something that males do in lots of different species? Does it include men who put themselves at risk to enrich society (i.e., ingroup) as a whole and protect it from external threats (i.e., outgroups), to gain social status within the in-group, something that has been done throughout human history.
Frankly you sound like one of the stupider sociology and anthropology professors that I have had.
"50 or 100 years ago, society looked up to people like Albert Einstein, John Glenn and Amelia Earhart; today it's Kim Kardashian, Snooky and the Real Housewives of New Jersey."
I'm not sure this is the whole truth; certainly people knew who they were, but society has always had socialite celebrities in the spotlight. It's just that they fade from view while real producers get in history books. Glenn was obviously a national hero, but people liked Kim Novak too.
Nobody listened to Mozart in his day; now nobody knows the names of his contemporaries.
Hi Helen,
In the type of work you do and the things you are interested in, I'd suggest you take a browse over here.
http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/lifematters/blogs/ask-sam/sexism-still-affecting-our-careers-and-our-love-lives/20100927-15tch.html
This latest blog entry, and the previous one, is showing you just how blunt the men are getting now when they speak to women. Such entries as this were unknown two years ago when I first started on this blog. But guys like Karma and I have hammered home the message by spending hundreds of hours posting to such blogs. The SMH is 'the newspaper of the year' in Australia, Illuminati mouthpiece as it is.
But it is worth noting that all over the world in newspaper blogs and similar places men are now 'telling it like it is' and they are no longer taking any crap from women. I warned women two years ago the backlash was coming. Well? It's about 2% on the way so far. It's going to get really nasty. Men are about to treat women like men. And the women are not going to like it.
globalman100,
Thanks for the link. I'll take a look. I agree that men are just starting to fight back. I see men now "telling it like it is" a lot more often in blog comments and on the web. I hope this will translate into fighting for changes at the legislative level also.
The fundamental problem is that there are not two adults in a 'relationship'. (Unless it is two gay men.) - globalman1100
LOL! But seriously, not to sound like a fat head here, but I've ended up being the only adult in a relationship too - it's not as if every man is wonderfully mature and no woman is capable of logic. I think most people in general are not fit for relationships these days, myself included probably.
I saw that post on the spearhead from the married guy who hadn't had sex in 10 years (I post as Thag Jones over there, to out myself - now you can go and vote down all my comments, lol) and I just found that incredibly sad. The state of relationships these days.... But honestly, I don't even want to be married again either - why bother? That ship's sailed for me.
And yeah, "we need to talk about our relationship" is usually a sign you're about to be dumped is a passive sort of way. Probably next out of her mouth is "I love you, but I'm not in love with you..."
Re: link provided by globalman100
I clicked through to "Are Alpha Men a Dying Breed?" and found this near the end:
Yes, I want an alpha male to look after me, protect me, provide for me, be strong when times are tough and be the man around the house. But I also want a man who isn't afraid to cook, watch Eat, Pray, Love, talk about his feelings and not be afraid to be a Mister Mom in the future.
LOL! Good luck with that! Even I don't want to watch nauseating bullshit like "Eat Pray Barf" so I can't imagine any "alpha" male wanting to sit through that tripe. What man is "afraid" to cook anyway? Jesus. I wonder if she's given any thought about how she'll service this perfect blend of alpha and beta that she wants. If she finds him, I hope she's willing to cook for him and screw him silly, but I think this might be a mythical creature she's looking for.
No wonder women are never happy!
In America there's an almost universal hatred of the man who's least likely to behave like George Hughley. Referring to men who don't react to every breath of wind by beating someone senseless as "manginas" only reinforces my belief that terrorists aren't insane. They just find it easy to rationalize killing people in a culture that worships violent sociopaths and despises those who are least antisocial.
BobH,
"Violent, male sociopaths" can be found on my weblog or by googling names like Ryan Tucker and Christian Peter.
Those who find their behavior tolerable should stop whining about terrorism.
Eleanor,
So YOU'RE Thag Jones? I like your posts, keep posting.
"Probably next out of her mouth is "I love you, but I'm not in love with you...""
While I agree that's a passive aggressive way to dump somebody, and my best friend got that speech from a tart he had gotten too far involved with, I actually don't have a problem with the premise. If someone has lost their attraction for someone else in a meaningful, non-transient way, I don't see why they should be bound to continue dating that person. Then again, a lot of immature daters are addicted to the butterflies and as soon as they are gone they move on to the next thrill. As Dan Savage says about them, "YOU are the problem with you."
"But I also want a man who isn't afraid to cook, watch Eat, Pray, Love, talk about his feelings and not be afraid to be a Mister Mom in the future."
First, any man who watches EPL without uttering deep rumblings of sarcasm or contempt deserves to get a "we need to talk" dump speech which would probably do him some good.
Interesting what she identifies as non-masculine - parenting and cooking. Since when is parenting "Mr Mom?" She's already bought into sexist language. PARENTS take care of their kids. It's not "mothers take care of them and dads babysit them while mom's out with the girls."
I agree with Eleanor that she hasn't the foggiest idea what she will do to match this fantastically awesome man's dossier of skills. Entitled, she probably thinks "she" is enough.
Read globalman's link. Hysterical; how the hell did this stuff get through an editor?
"According to a recent Harris Interactive poll, over half of the blokes surveyed said they believed things were equal in the workplace, which either proves that women are blowing steam over nothing, or the men simply don't give a toss.
Ask the women and it's a very different response: 32 per cent said they feel they're often treated unfairly in the workplace, don't receive the same pay as men and are discriminated against when it comes to getting a promotion."
Actually, it's not a "very different response." She is drawing a completely false contrast. A neutral way to say it is that a sizeable minority of both men and women claim the office is a sexist environment.
One third of women make the claim
"Over half" is not very specific, but it implies somewhere between 50 and 66% (two thirds). So if anything MORE men than women claim the office is sexist! How can she write this with a straight face?
Then we have this crap: "I promised I wouldn't bring in the paying scenario yet again, but seriously – on the weekend one dude made my friend pay half the cab ride, another made me pay for dinner on our first date and a third insisted my girlfriend pay for the hotel room they were sharing for a dirty weekend away."
No one can "make" you do anything. What's really going on is that you are simply paying for what you used - he's simply refusing to pick up your part of the tab.
Maybe the article is tongue in cheek? "No wonder the poor blokes are confused. They think we don't need them and then they wonder why the heck we still want them to open doors, pay for our dinners, buy us cocktails and bring home the bacon when we decide we don't want to work any more."
It appears western women reserve the right to not work? How noble of them.
So YOU'RE Thag Jones? I like your posts, keep posting.
I feel like that guy in that Far Side cartoon, "So you, Bob Henderson (or whatever it was), you're the 'they' in 'that's what they say'!"
lol
Yeah, I got that on the Mr Mom bit too - wtf!
Eleanor,
yep....western women are demanding waaaaay too much of men while offering NOTHING in return. On that blog I asked the women to name ONE thing they could offer a man like me. 18 months later I'm still waiting.
If you look at the difference between western and eastern women? My ex was perfectly 'happy' with her life. But she was very expensive to keep and totally ungrateful for what she got. Hell, she even stole EUR18,000 from our company. How ungrateful can you get?
Compare that with eastern european women? My fav#4 and I stayed here http://www.villakennedy.com/ for the may day weekend. She had never stayed in a place like this before. I just wanted to give her a 'nice gift' for the May Day. She had been ill and in hospital a bit. I wanted to 'do something nice' for her to 'cheer her up'. She was very, very happy to be given such a 'treat'. She thanked me profusely and we stayed here a number of times over the summer. Now she thinks it's 'too expensive' and wants to move downmarket a bit.
My wife stayed in places like this all over the world. I can't remember her saying 'thank you' ever for that. Once we were married it was all an 'entitlement'. On that blog I once talked about how I used to take my wife around the world with me on business trips. How she didn't have to work. Got world travel. Hobnobbed with the 'rich and famous' because of my profession and where we could live. The women on the blog said words to the effect 'just because you gave your wife all that does not mean she is obliged to give you sex'. So I turned that around to the young men and told them "make sure you don't give your wife a life of luxury because, as the women say, they won't give anything back just because you do." The average western woman is not thankful for a life of luxury. Your average eastern woman is delighted to stay at a nice hotel for a few days. BIG difference.
Topher,
Sam Brett and Sam deBritto are nothing but mouthpieces for the PTB to stir up more trouble between the sexes. Sam Brett makes extensive use of what is called 'conversational hypnosis' in manipulating the women and manginas who fall for it. 'Conversational hypnosis' is something I am quit expert in. I learned it many years ago and I occasionally use it when I see it is needed in a conversation.
Two years ago I went there to see if I could start a public debate on the issue of women being given the 'pussy pass' for crimes in the family court. The SMH has all the evidence it needs of the murder of many Australians and refuses to publish this evidence. ALL the newspapers are crooked my friend.
Topher/Helen,
just in case you have an interest. I was asked by 'Blue' on the freeman OZ site to reference back my early posts on promoting discussion re the FCs. This was my reply to Blue. You can see on that blog entry there were 440 comments so it was a VERY hot topic. But the women AND men simply refused to engage in any discussion as to a remedy for the blatant bias in the courts. I then spent the best part of 12 months pinging that place to get conversation going. No use. Men don't want to talk about being victims of crime.
http://freemenofaustralia.ning.com/forum/topics/globalmans-early-posts-to
'We need to talk about our relationship.'"
translated from wife (or general female) to plain English
I want to talk about our relationship.
(implied: now shut up because you're gonna listen to me talk about our relationship.)
I always hated the formulation "we NEED to talk." The presumption of that was always grating. Eventually I would say, "Maybe we don't NEED to talk at all, but if you'd like to say something, go right ahead."
I think this "relationship talk" stuff also springs from a false worldview that the "relationship" (and by extension your partner) is somehow responsible for your personal state.
Allow me to quote famous philosopher Winnie the Pooh:
"Wherever you go, there you are."
Modern people, and modern women in particular, seem unusually adept at projecting their satisfaction issues onto other people or things. They start to rationalize away their intrinsic, woke up on the wrong side of the bed feelings as the nefarious work of someone else. (I hear a lot of this from pissed-off wives, who project that their husband is doing things to try to make them mad.)
Kinda like how when you're late and stuck in traffic, you start raging and things around you as if it's their fault you didn't leave early enough.
Topher,
"Modern people, and modern women in particular, seem unusually adept at projecting their satisfaction issues onto other people or things."
Yep...wimminz now think it is a mans job to 'make them happy' and when they are 'not happy' then they attack the man ferociously. In my case, my ex even sounded me out about staying married after she has made her decision to take one of the divorce options. After that, she attacked relentlessly purely for money. And she was supported by ALL the women around her. Yep. Making princess happy is the role of men now. But making men happy is not on their agenda. Totally and utterly selfish.
Post a Comment
<< Home