Page 6 of 9
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:41 am
by sv-wolf
shane-o wrote:
Its not about being gay a sook or a girly man, its about maintaining the idea of what it is to be a man

so when other men see us they automatically know, "now there is a man". You dont want other men confused or force them to think or consider any other possibilities other then "your a man"
Sounds like a hell of a lot of work to me! At 50, being a man is largely a matter of anatomy - which fortunately takes care of itself! Phew!
shane-o wrote:As the peacock has brilliant feathers to demonstrate his coolness, real men control the bike, whilst their darlings get in nice and close behind...its the way it was intended to be

thats why all pillion seats are smaller than the riders seats, cause they not meant for men to sit on

Er... Shane-o. In my part of the world women's bottoms are larger than men's. Are you sure of your logic there? Or maybe things are the other way round down under?
Just curious.
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:35 pm
by Marx
I don't follow the logic behind those who make statments about 'security' in their 'maleness'. It's odd, do women go around (or rather, do men try shaming women into saying) about being 'secure in their feminity'? No.
It often comes across to me that guys and women who use such language are effectively trying to imply that people who do not follow their line of though must be 'insecure'. Why is a person 'insecure' just because they do not like something, or, shock - horror, don't think the same way as you?
Can someone answer this for me? Or am I to assume I'm right, it is nothing more than an attempt to shame others into towing a line?
ETA: As I said earlier, I am ok with riding pillion to a man or a woman, but it sure as heck has nothing whatsoever to do with being 'secure enough in my manliness'... it has to do with whether my trust in the driver is 'secure enough'. See the difference?
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:19 pm
by shane-o
Marx wrote:I don't follow the logic behind those who make statments about 'security' in their 'maleness'. It's odd, do women go around (or rather, do men try shaming women into saying) about being 'secure in their feminity'? No.
It often comes across to me that guys and women who use such language are effectively trying to imply that people who do not follow their line of though must be 'insecure'. Why is a person 'insecure' just because they do not like something, or, shock - horror, don't think the same way as you?
Can someone answer this for me? Or am I to assume I'm right, it is nothing more than an attempt to shame others into towing a line?
ETA: As I said earlier, I am ok with riding pillion to a man or a woman, but it sure as heck has nothing whatsoever to do with being 'secure enough in my manliness'... it has to do with whether my trust in the driver is 'secure enough'. See the difference?
nope
.
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:24 pm
by shane-o
sv-wolf wrote:shane-o wrote:
Its not about being gay a sook or a girly man, its about maintaining the idea of what it is to be a man

so when other men see us they automatically know, "now there is a man". You dont want other men confused or force them to think or consider any other possibilities other then "your a man"
Sounds like a hell of a lot of work to me! At 50, being a man is largely a matter of anatomy - which fortunately takes care of itself! Phew!
shane-o wrote:As the peacock has brilliant feathers to demonstrate his coolness, real men control the bike, whilst their darlings get in nice and close behind...its the way it was intended to be

thats why all pillion seats are smaller than the riders seats, cause they not meant for men to sit on

Er... Shane-o. In my part of the world women's bottoms are larger than men's. Are you sure of your logic there? Or maybe things are the other way round down under?
Just curious.
ah you see Mr Wolf (note that level of respect shown here for my elders), your never to old to do anything !!!!!!
and these days, there is all kinds of men ie. hetro, metro, asexual, milk, bisexual and trisexual (trisexual= try anything once). One needs to affirm which they belong to
And as for large bottom girls, I must admit im sucker for the female bum no what shape or size it is, BUT, its well known fact that UK babes have bigger bums than most

lucky bugger !!!!
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:31 pm
by sv-wolf
Marx wrote:I don't follow the logic behind those who make statments about 'security' in their 'maleness'. It's odd, do women go around (or rather, do men try shaming women into saying) about being 'secure in their feminity'? No.
It often comes across to me that guys and women who use such language are effectively trying to imply that people who do not follow their line of though must be 'insecure'. Why is a person 'insecure' just because they do not like something, or, shock - horror, don't think the same way as you?
This is foolish. We are all insecure - very - all of the time! It is just a matter of degree and how easily we are prepared to admit it. Insecurity is a reality in a world where nobody can can predict anything with certainty - ever. We might get cancer tomorrow. Or we might drop our bikes in front of our friends who will laugh to try and make us feel insecure as a way of covering up their own insecurity.
All men are insecure in their 'manhood'. Manhood is not something natural; it is an image that society constructs for us and tells us that we have to live up to. And it is a hard call because part of the image demands that we pretend we are not insecure. Big double bind.
You see the telltale signs of crumbling male egos everywhere, particularly in those who have bought into the image wholesale. Women are just as insecure as we are, but on the whole that is not so much a problem for them. Society does not demand they hide it so thoroughly.
It's simple: People get stressed, not because they are insecure - that's universal - but because they go round trying to pretend that they're not. And the fact is, they fail abysmally.
So Marx. My advice would be, forget other people's name calling. Just accept you feel insecure and realise that everyone else feels the same way as you do.
I charge $60 an hour. I'll send you my bill. My secretary will give you a prescription on the way out.

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:52 pm
by dr_bar
jstark47 wrote:
I still think it's better if the passenger (me) doesn't outweigh the rider (her) by 2-to-1.
I know the real reason you won't ride pillion with your better half...
She rides faster than you and you're too scared... lol
(Remember the Adirondack stretch... lol???)
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:11 pm
by Marx
sv-wolf wrote:Marx wrote:I don't follow the logic behind those who make statments about 'security' in their 'maleness'. It's odd, do women go around (or rather, do men try shaming women into saying) about being 'secure in their feminity'? No.
It often comes across to me that guys and women who use such language are effectively trying to imply that people who do not follow their line of though must be 'insecure'. Why is a person 'insecure' just because they do not like something, or, shock - horror, don't think the same way as you?
This is foolish. We are all insecure - very - all of the time! It is just a matter of degree and how easily we are prepared to admit it. Insecurity is a reality in a world where nobody can can predict anything with certainty - ever. We might get cancer tomorrow. Or we might drop our bikes in front of our friends who will laugh to try and make us feel insecure as a way of covering up their own insecurity.
All men are insecure in their 'manhood'. Manhood is not something natural; it is an image that society constructs for us and tells us that we have to live up to. And it is a hard call because part of the image demands that we pretend we are not insecure. Big double bind.
You see the telltale signs of crumbling male egos everywhere, particularly in those who have bought into the image wholesale. Women are just as insecure as we are, but on the whole that is not so much a problem for them. Society does not demand they hide it so thoroughly.
It's simple: People get stressed, not because they are insecure - that's universal - but because they go round trying to pretend that they're not. And the fact is, they fail abysmally.
So Marx. My advice would be, forget other people's name calling. Just accept you feel insecure and realise that everyone else feels the same way as you do.
I charge $60 an hour. I'll send you my bill. My secretary will give you a prescription on the way out.

Yes, SV-Wolf, I think for the most part you're right... But, there are natural elements (behaviours) that seperate men and women. For example, women tend to be more cautious whereas men are more likely to jump into something head first. However, society highlights these behaviours and dwells on them, making them more than they really are through television and other media. Being a weak man isn't allowed, but being a strong woman is promoted as 'normal' even though nature says otherwise.
Even when experiments on live humans have been performed, differences between men & women still shine though. For example, a botched circumcision resulted in a male baby being brought up as a female, dressed in female attire, female toys and behaviours being promoted over traditionally male toys & behaviours. The child was not told it had originally been male and grew up in the belief 'she' was 100% female. Nonetheless, she did all boy stuff. By her early 30s, she committed suicide because she couldn't handle being a man inside a woman's body with no possibility of corrective surgery. Initially, feminists and the pyschology fields had hailed this a success, continually lying by saying everyone was happy with the results. Clearly, not everyone was happy.
Namecalling doesn't upset me per se, I just don't understand why some need to make ludicrous statements of superiority over others who might not agree with them. Sounds like they have a serious personality flaw if you ask me.
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:37 pm
by High_Side
The hillarity of this all is that there are so many single guys on here looking for that elusive girl who is in to bikes and CAN RIDE. What could be better for a single guy than to meet a girl who can ride.....and who cares if she can ride better than you??? Grasp on to the opportunity with both hands

and ride with it!
Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:02 pm
by Nibblet99
High_Side wrote:The hillarity of this all is that there are so many single guys on here looking for that elusive girl who is in to bikes and CAN RIDE. What could be better for a single guy than to meet a girl who can ride.....and who cares if she can ride better than you??? Grasp on to the opportunity with both hands

and ride with it!
Now thats a philosopy I can understand... got space on the band wagon for me?

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:21 am
by Kal
Are sure thats a good idea Nibblet, after the strippers???
