Some years ago the roles of the male and the female were very well defined. Most married women had children and unless they were professionals, eg., doctor, solicitor, etc., and could afford to employ a nanny, they gave-up work and stayed at home (for some years at least) to bring-up their children. Most women who set their hearts on a real career, usually sacrificed marriage and children and stayed single. Either way, women didn't behave like men and they perceived themselves as feminine - the weaker sex. (Ah! ah! they always knew they weren't really, but it was prudent to pretend to be!). The man on the other hand was the provider and protector, and this was seen as a very masculine role. As years have passed, women have demanded and received more equality and a better education. Whilst this is a woman's right, it has brought its downside. Women are still expected to look after husband, children and house, but they're also expected to work in order to supplement the income. There's only 24 hours in a day though, so something has to give, and everyone will have their own ideas as to what that is! So, 2 incomes may provide a better home, car, holidays, etc., but at what cost to the actual quality of life? It's' even true to say that a lot of women realise they don't necessarily need a man - they're capable of going it alone, even with children to support. As women take-on more of the man's role, however, many lose their femininity and actually adopt the more aggressive and competitive traits normally associated with men. Men, on the other hand, seem to have 'lost their way' as the two roles have become blurred. So the man is no longer the protector and sole provider, and in losing his role, or at least having it diminished, he's been stripped of his masculinity. 'Vive le difference', I've always said, but the difference is now barely discernable thanks to society in today's developed countries!
2006-11-28 02:13:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by uknative 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
WOW, She, did you ever hit the nail on the proverbial head!!!
All I know is that a man seeks a woman because he thinks she will never change.
A woman, on the other hand wants a man she can change.
Not exactly a happy existence in the making and I know I did not really answer the question. But, again, I must say I do like your analysis.
My only other thoughts are that since we unfortunately live in the Age of the Common Man, we can only expect common (albeit, bad) behavior amongst the sexes.
2006-11-28 01:35:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by dragunov 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I know what you mean.
I cant speak for females but I see so many tossers who are supposed to be "real men" walking about and they are really the dregs of society.
A real man in my opinion is
Have good manners eg Opening a door for a lady,giving up your seat on a bus etc etc
Having a sense of common decency and standing up for what you think is right.
Not being a so called modern man eg Not being a bit of a nancy ,using moisturiser and the like ,shaving your chest and that.
And last of all be a bit rough and ready!
Those trees wont cut themselves down you know =)
2006-11-28 01:43:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think both men and have suffered from the changes to what was a clear cut role in our society. Sticking my neck out here, but where men have had their role eroded, and seem to find it hard to adapt to new ones, women have been expected to shoulder both roles to their detriment. Perhaps women have been more successful in adapting to change.
I work for a parenting charity and hear from partnered women who are in effect like single parents, because dad has sort of opted out On the other hand, I also hear from marvellous dads who have been cut out of the equation by divorce, causing distress to both them and the kids.
Part of it is the way society has changed. There really is not much need for John Wayne men in Western civilisation - they have got left behind. Who are they supposed to be defending us women from? and bringing home the bacon sadly often means the drudgery you describe for both sexes. Marilyn Monroe women frankly make me feel ill with their helpless need for a big strong man to fix things and infantile behaviour.
Manly behaviour for me is strength of character - the ability to accept responsibility for your own actions - not how many muscles you have. Also, you guys are just as important to how your kids turn out as we are.
Womanly behaviour is not just about nurturing, but also accepting your share (and I do mean share) in doing what is needed to keep the place going.
I will be really interested in what other people have to say.
2006-11-28 01:54:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by tagette 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think you have some valid points. So many men are wimping about, brooding and lost in themselves. Too many women are vapid and centred on being sexy with no goals or intellect. I blame parents (no strong examples and moral values in so many homes), permissive and lackadaisical society, the media... My husband says that all the strong, courageous, moral men have been wiped out over the last century in wars and those who were left were weak. Women had to be strong and started to take over the traditional male responsibilities and in trying to prove themselves, emasculated the men. His views may be a little extreme, but there may be some substance in his opinions.
Good thought-provoking question!
2006-11-28 01:38:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Lydia C 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
Alright, I'm just going to have to ask you "Edward Cullen!"s--when the hell does Edward do anything romantic? He never really takes his girlfriend out on dates. I'm sorry, *not* kissing your girlfriend doesn't constitute romantic to me. I understand that he didn't want to hurt her, but that's not really romantic so much as pragmatic. Why is willing to kill yourself over your girlfriend romantic? How is obsession? He never really *romances* Bella--in fact, he's quite distant. On those terms, I argue that Edward Cullen isn't romantic. To answer the question...well, it's hard to say. Usually the most famous people in romantic stories, like Heathcliff or Mr. Rochester, Romeo or Mr. Darcy, aren't all that romantic. "Romance" in terms of wooing a girl and really going out of your way to make sure she knows he loves her doesn't happen all that often in literature. I can't recall any classic examples that are always deflecting a man's genuine romantic attention, not mutual conflict. There's a reason I say only "he". Generally, when you say a girl is romantic, it's not that she does romantic things, but she wants guys to be romantic.
2016-05-22 22:05:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A real man ought to be defined as someone with a sense of responsibility and should always do the right thing. This also applies to women.
2006-11-28 01:52:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Eddie 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I agree... you might be exposed to these specific people. There are guys/gals out there who don't have that type of attitude. I've come to meet some very down to earth people. Some turnoned to be not so down after getting to know them... But definately expand your horizons and you shall find what you seek.
2006-11-28 01:35:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by nutfunny4u 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I totally agree with you...and blame the wars and the government for the way society has changed.
2006-11-28 01:35:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by shez_a_maneater 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is not my experience of either men or women. You do have a low opinion of both sexes! I think you should try going to a different venue to meet different people who will change your opinion, they are out there!
2006-11-28 01:34:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Social Science Lady 7
·
1⤊
1⤋