Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 75

Thread: Don't Click Unless Your a Christian!

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    A$$hole detector RoidRage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    469

    Don't Click Unless You're a Christian!

    Heh. I thought that would get some peoples attention. Anyways.

    I've noticed something and it bothers me. Society's demand for the pussafication of the human male. I was watching a program late one night this weekend about some study how video games make children aggressive. They showed kids outside kinda scuffling around (they were like 5 year boys). Why is it wrong to be aggressive? All these women and some males strung out on Oprah and Lifetime are trying to rid the world of testostrone. They treat it as if it were a horrible disease (think leapracy(sp?)). Picture a male dog (pre-neutered) king of his domain then one day the powers that be take him to the vet and get him neutered. Now the dog just lays around all day and becomes useless, a bitch to his owner.

    It seems every year there doing more and more to decrease the level of testosterone around the world. No longer making play guns, trying to ban violent video games, wal-mart pulling FHM and Maxium (but its ok for 11 and 12 year old girls how to give good BJ's in some of the other mags).

    Well I did some research and this guy does a MUCH better job than I can at describing how I feel. This is a MUST read!!

    http://t-mag.com/html/13ki.html
    Last edited by RoidRage; 09-02-2003 at 12:51 AM.

  2. #2
    One crazy MOFO/Mail man
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    T dot
    Posts
    2,295
    Video games can make people more aggressive esspecially young impressionable minds. With that said I think it is because the long standing Alpha male sterotype that has caused so much pain in suffering in this world that there is a backlash against it. But society is taking it to an extreme... an extreme that I don't like.
    w00t

  3. #3
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    67
    This is all a load of media bull**** trying to find new "problems" in society that in fact have always been present, are we getting less masculine? are we getting less caring? is there more violence? blah blah blah, people think that in the "old days" people were different but these same people weren't alive then so how the **** would they know . If you have a dick then you are a man if you don't then you are a woman, it doesn't have to be anymore complicated than that

  4. #4
    II MrWebb78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Big Sac
    Posts
    5,954
    you can take away all the material objects you want to stop violence, but until you take away bad parenting, nothing will change.
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. - Edward Abbey

    There is a wide difference between speaking to deceive, and being silent to be impenetrable. - Voltaire

    If it can be imagined, it can be done. - Me

    6'2"
    273 lbs.

  5. #5
    Country Boy
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    CenLa.
    Posts
    424

    Re: Don't Click Unless You're a Christian!

    [QUOTE] I've noticed something and it bothers me. Society's demand for the pussafication of the human male. [QUOTE]

    Amen to that brother.I think this is a perfect example of what your talking about

    The WWE was recently in town and there was a group of parents {femal & male} that was protesting and threating to boycott the venue.Saying how this was a bad influence on the children and would only lead to violence.

    It's only natural for men to be aggressive regardless of outside influences.
    Last edited by APE.; 09-02-2003 at 06:47 AM.

  6. #6
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    You should talk to rock he agrees fanatically and has all these theories about it and everything.

    I have an article for you


    The Feminization of American Culture
    How Modern Chemicals May Be Changing Human Biology
    Leonard Sax, M.D.


    In ancient times--by which I mean, before 1950--most scholars
    agreed that women were, as a rule, not quite equal to men. Women
    were charming but mildly defective. Many (male) writers viewed
    women as perpetual teenagers, stuck in an awkward place between
    childhood and adulthood. German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer,
    for example, wrote that women are "childish, silly and
    short-sighted, really nothing more than overgrown children, all
    their life long. Women are a kind of intermediate stage between
    the child and the man." 1

    Psychologists in that bygone era devoted considerable
    time and energy to the question of why women couldn't outgrow
    their childish ways. The Freudians said it was because they were
    trapped in the pre-Oedipal stage, tortured by penis envy.
    Followers of Abraham Maslow claimed that women were fearful of
    self-actualization. Jungians insisted that women were born with a
    deficiency of imprinted archetypes. Back then, of course, almost
    all the psychologists were men
    .
    Things are different now. Male psychologists today are so
    rare that Ilene Philipson--author of On the Shoulders of Women:
    The Feminization of Psychotherapy--speaks of "the vanishing male
    therapist as a species soon to be extinct.2 the gender of the
    modal psychotherapist has changed from male to female, the
    standard of mental health has changed along with it. Today, Dr.
    Philipson observes, the badge of emotional maturity is no longer
    the ability to control or sublimate your feelings but rather the
    ability to express them. A mature adult nowadays is someone who
    is comfortable talking about her inner conflicts, someone who
    values personal relationships above abstract goals, someone who
    isn't afraid to cry. In other words: a mature adult is a woman.


    It is now the men who are thought to be stuck halfway between
    childhood and adulthood, incapable of articulating their inner
    selves. Whereas psychologists fifty years ago amused themselves
    by cataloging women's (supposed) deficiencies, psychologists
    today devote themselves to demonstrating "the natural superiority
    of women."3 Psychologists report that women are better able to
    understand nonverbal communication and are more expressive of
    emotion.4 ,5Quantitative personality inventories reveal that the
    average woman is more trusting, nurturing, and outgoing than the
    average man.6 The average eighth-grade girl has a command of
    language and writing skills equal to that of the average
    eleventh-grade boy.7

    As the influence of the new psychology permeates our culture,
    women have understandably begun to wonder whether men are really,
    well, human. "What if these women are right?" wonders one writer
    in an article for Marie Claire, a national woman's magazine.
    "What if it's true that some men don't possess, or at least can't
    express, nuanced emotions?"8 More than a few contemporary
    psychologists have come to regard the male of our species as a
    coarsened, more violent edition of the normal, female, human. Not
    surprisingly, they have begun to question whether having a man in
    the house is desirable or even safe.

    Eleven years ago, scholar Sara Ruddick expressed her concern
    about "the extent and variety of the psychological, sexual, and
    physical battery suffered by women and children of all classes
    and social groups ... at the hands of fathers, their mothers'
    male lovers, or male relatives. If putative fathers are absent or
    perpetually disappearing and actual fathers are controlling or
    abusive, who needs a father? What mother would want to live with
    one or wish one on her children?"9 Nancy Polikoff, former counsel
    to the Women's Legal Defense Fund, said that "it is no tragedy,
    either on a national scale or in an individual family, for
    children to be raised without fathers."10

    The feminization of psychology manifests itself in myriad ways.
    Consider child discipline. Seventy years ago, doctors agreed that
    the best way to discipline your child was to punish the little
    criminal. ("Spare the rod, spoil the child.") Today, spanking is
    considered child abuse.11 You're supposed to talk with your kid.
    Spanking sends all the wrong messages, we are told, and may have
    stupendously horrible consequences. Psychoanalyst Alice Miller
    confidently informed us, in her book For Your Own Good, that
    Adolf Hitler's evil can be traced to the spankings his father
    inflicted on him in childhood.12

    THE NEW MEN'S MAGAZINES

    It isn't only psychology that has undergone a process of
    feminization over the past fifty years, and it isn't only women
    whose attitudes have changed. Take a stroll to your neighborhood
    bookstore or newsstand. You'll find magazines such as Men's
    Health, MH-18, Men's Fitness, Gear, and others devoted to men's
    pursuit of a better body, a better self-image. None of them
    existed fifteen years ago. The paid circulation of Men's Health
    has risen from 250,000 to more than 1.5 million in less than ten
    years.13 Many of the articles in these magazines are reminiscent
    of those to be found in women's magazines such as Glamour,
    Mademoiselle, and Cosmopolitan: "The Ten Secrets of Better Sex,"
    "The New Diet Pills--Can They Work For You?" or "Bigger Biceps in
    Five Minutes a Day." (The women's magazine equivalent might be
    something like "slimmer thighs in five minutes a day.")

    Men didn't use to care so much about their appearance.
    Psychiatrists Harrison Pope and Katharine Phillips report that in
    American culture today, "Men of all ages, in unprecedented
    numbers, are preoccupied with the appearance of their bodies."14
    They document that "men's dissatisfaction with body appearance
    has nearly tripled in less than thirty years--from 15 percent in
    1972, to 34 percent in 1985, to 43 percent in 1997."15 Cosmetic
    plastic surgery, once marketed exclusively to women, has found a
    rapidly growing male clientele. The number of men undergoing
    liposuction, for instance, quadrupled between 1990 and 2000.16

    THE FEMINIZATION OF ENTERTAINMENT AND POLITICS

    This process of femininization manifests itself, though somewhat
    differently, when you turn on the TV or watch a movie. Throughout
    the mid-twentieth century, leading men were, as a rule,
    infallible: think of Clark Gable in Gone With the Wind, Cary
    Grant in North by Northwest, or Fred McMurray in My Three Sons.
    But no longer. In family comedy, the father figure has
    metamorphosed from the all-knowing, all-wise Robert Young of
    Father Knows Best to the occasional bumbling of Bill Cosby and
    the consistent stupidity of Homer Simpson. Commercially
    successful movies now often feature women who are physically
    aggressive, who dominate or at least upstage the men. This
    description applies to movies as diverse as Charlie's Angels and
    Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. In today's cinema, to paraphrase
    Garrison Keillor, all the leading women are strong and all the
    leading men are good-looking.

    A transformation of comparable magnitude seems to be under way
    in the political arena. Military command used to be considered
    the best qualification for leadership--as it was with Ulysses
    Grant, Theodore Roosevelt, Charles de Gaulle, and Dwight
    Eisenhower, to name only a few. Today, the best qualification for
    leadership may be the ability to listen. The feminine way of
    seeing the world and its problems is, arguably, becoming the
    mainstream way.

    In 1992, Bill Clinton ran against George Bush p?e for the
    presidency. Clinton was an acknowledged draft evader. Bush, the
    incumbent, was a World War II hero who had just led the United
    States to military success in Operation Desert Storm. Clinton
    won. In 1996, Clinton was challenged by Bob Dole, another
    decorated World War II veteran. Once again, the man who had
    evaded military service defeated the combat veteran. In 2000,
    Gov. George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain competed for the
    Republican presidential nomination.

    McCain was a genuine war hero whose courageous actions as a
    prisoner of war in Vietnam had won him well-deserved honors and
    praise. Bush, on the other hand, was alleged to have used family
    influence to obtain a position in the Texas National Guard, in
    order to avoid service in Vietnam. Once again, the man who had
    never experienced combat defeated the military veteran. Moral of
    the story: It's all very well to be a war hero, but in our
    modern, feminized society, being a war hero won't get you elected
    president. Conversely, being a draft dodger isn't as bad as it
    used to be.

    A number of authors have recognized the increasing feminization
    of American society. With few exceptions, most of those
    acknowledging this process have welcomed it.17 As Elinor Lenz and
    Barbara Myerhoff wrote in their 1985 book The Feminization of
    America, "The feminizing influence is moving [American society]
    away from many archaic
    ways of thinking and behaving, toward the promise of a saner and
    more humanistic future.... Feminine culture, with its commitment
    to creating and protecting life, is our best and brightest hope
    for overcoming the destructive, life-threatening forces of the
    nuclear age."18

    I think we can all agree on one point: there have been
    fundamental changes in American culture over the past fifty
    years, changes that indicate a shift from a male-dominated
    culture to a feminine or at least an androgynous society. The
    question is, what's causing this shift? Some might argue that the
    changes I've described are simply a matter of better education,
    progressive laws, and two generations of consciousness-raising:
    an evolution from a patriarchal Dark Ages to a unisex, or
    feminine, Enlightenment. I'm willing to consider that hypothesis.
    But before we accept that conclusion, we should ask whether there
    are any other possibilities.

    FEMINIZED WILDLIFE

    We have to make a big jump now, a journey that will begin at the
    Columbia River in Washington, near the Oregon border. James
    Nagler, assistant professor of zoology at the University of
    Idaho, recently noticed something funny about the salmon he
    observed in the Columbia. Almost all of them were--or appeared to
    be--female. But when he caught a few and analyzed their DNA, he
    found that many of the "female" fish actually were male: their
    chromosomes were XY instead of XX.19

    Nagler's findings echo a recent report from England, where
    government scientists have found some pretty bizarre fish. In two
    polluted rivers, half the fish are female, and the other half are
    ... something else. Not female but not male either. The English
    scientists call these bizarre fish "intersex": their gonads are
    not quite ovaries, not quite testicles, but some weird thing in
    between, making neither eggs nor sperm. In both rivers, the
    intersex fish are found
    downstream of sites where treated sewage is discharged into the
    river. Upstream from the sewer effluent, the incidence of
    intersex is dramatically lower. The relationship between the
    concentration of sewer effluent and the incidence of intersex is
    so close that "the proportion of intersex fish in any sample of
    fish could perhaps be predicted, using a linear equation, from
    the average concentration of effluent constituents in the
    river."20

    It's something in the water. Something in the water is causing
    feminization of male fish.

    And it's not just fish. In Lake Apopka, in central Florida, Dr.
    Louis Guillette and his associates have found male alligators
    with abnormally small penises; in the blood of these alligators,
    female hormone levels are abnormally high and male hormone levels
    abnormally low.21 Male Florida panthers have become infertile;
    the levels of male sex hormones in their blood are much lower
    (and the levels of female hormones higher) than those found in
    panthers in less-polluted environments.22

    WHAT'S GOING ON?

    Our modern society generates a number of chemicals that never
    existed before about fifty years ago. Many of these chemicals, it
    turns out, mimic the action of female sex hormones called
    estrogens. Plastics--including a plasticizer called phthalate,
    used in making flexible plastic for bottles of Coke, Pepsi,
    Sprite, Evian water, and so forth--are known to have estrogenic
    effects.23 Many commonly used pesticides have estrogenlike
    actions on human cells.24 Estrogenic chemicals ooze out of the
    synthetic lacquer that lines the inside of soup cans.25 These
    chemicals and others find their way into sewage and enter the
    rivers and lakes. Hence the effects on fish, alligators, and
    other wildlife.

    EFFECTS ON HUMANS?

    Modern chemicals may have a feminizing effect on wildlife. That's
    certainly cause for concern in its own right. But is there any
    evidence that a similar process of feminization is occurring in
    humans?

    Answer: there may be. Just like the Florida panther, human males
    are experiencing a rapid decline in fertility and sperm count.
    The sperm count of the average American or European man has
    declined continuously over the past four decades, to the point
    where today it is less than 50 percent of what it was forty years
    ago.26 This downward trend is seen only in industrialized regions
    of North America and western Europe. Lower sperm counts are being
    reported in urban Denmark but not in rural Finland, for
    example.27 Of course, that's precisely the pattern one would
    expect, if the lower sperm counts are an effect of "modern"
    materials such as plastic water bottles.

    Male infertility, one result of that lower count, is now the
    single most common cause of infertility in our species.28The rate
    of infertility itself has quadrupled in the past forty years,
    from 4 percent in 1965 to 10 percent in 1982 to at least 16
    percent today.29

    WHAT ABOUT GIRLS?

    So far we've talked mainly about the effect of environmental
    estrogens on males. What about girls and women? What
    physiological effects might excess environmental estrogens have
    on them? Giving estrogens to young girls would, in theory,
    trigger the onset of puberty at an earlier than expected age. In
    fact, in the past few years doctors have noticed that girls are
    beginning puberty earlier than ever before. Just as the
    environmental-estrogen hypothesis would predict, this phenomenon
    is seen only in girls, not in boys. Dr. Marcia Herman-Giddens,
    studying over seventeen thousand American girls, found that this
    trend to earlier puberty is widespread. "Girls across the United
    States are developing pubertal characteristics at younger ages
    than currently used norms," she concluded.30

    Rather than labeling all these pubescent eight-year-olds as
    "abnormal," Dr. Paul Kaplowitz and his associates recently
    recommended that the earliest age for "normal" onset of puberty
    simply be redefined as age seven in Caucasian girls and age six
    in African-American girls.31 Dr. Kaplowitz is trying, valiantly,
    to define this problem outof existence. If you insist that normal
    puberty begins at age six or age seven, then all these
    eight-year-old girls with well-filled bras suddenly become
    "normal."

    But saying so doesn't make it so. Last year, doctors in Puerto
    Rico reported that most young girls with premature breast
    development have toxic levels of phthalates in their blood; those
    phthalates appear to have seeped out of plastic food and beverage
    containers. The authors noted that Puerto Rico is a warm island.
    Plastic containers that become warm are more likely to ooze
    phthalate molecules into the food or beverages they contain.32
    These authors, led by Dr. Ivelisse Col?, reported their findings
    in Environmental Health Perspectives, the official journal of the
    National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (a branch of
    the National Institutes of Health). On the cover of the issue in
    which the report appeared, the editors chose to feature the
    picture of a young woman drinking water from a plastic bottle.

    Premature puberty in girls has become so widespread that it has
    begun to attract the attention of major media. This topic made
    the cover of Time magazine on October 30, 2000. Unfortunately,
    few of these high-profile articles show any understanding of the
    possible role of environmental estrogens. The Time article barely
    mentioned the Environmental Health Perspectives study, nor did it
    link the phenomenon of early puberty in girls with declining
    sperm counts, intersex fish, or tiny penises in alligators.
    Instead, it featured a picture of a short boy staring at a taller
    girl's breasts.

    What effect might extra estrogen have on adult women? Many
    scientists have expressed concern that exposure to excessive
    environmental estrogens may lead to breast cancer. The rate of
    breast cancer has risen dramatically over the past fifty years.
    Today, one in every nine American women can expect to develop
    breast cancer at some point in her life. But this increase is
    seen only in industrialized countries,33 where plastics and other
    products of modern chemistry are widely used. Women born in Third
    World countries are at substantially lower risk. When they move
    from a Third World country to the United States, their risk soon
    increases to that seen in other women living here, clearly
    demonstrating that the increased risk is an environmental, not a
    genetic, factor.34

    CONNECTION?

    At this point, you may feel that you've been reading two
    completely disconnected essays: one about the feminization of
    American culture, and the second about the effects of
    environmental estrogens. Could there be any connection between
    the two?

    There may be. If human physiology and endocrinology are being
    affected by environmental estrogens--as suggested by lower sperm
    counts, increasing infertility, earlier onset of puberty in
    girls, and rising rates of breast cancer--then there is no reason
    in principle why human psychology and sexuality should be exempt.
    If we accept the possibility that environmental estrogens are
    affecting human physiology and endocrinology, then we must also
    consider the possibility that the feminization of American
    culture may, conceivably, reflect the influence of environmental
    estrogens.

    The phenomena we have considered show a remarkable synchrony.
    Many of the cultural trends discussed in the first half of the
    article began to take shape in the 1950s and '60s, just as
    plastics and other modern chemicals began to be widely introduced
    into American life. There are, of course, many difficulties in
    attempting to measure any correlation between an endocrine
    variable--such as a decline in sperm counts--and a cultural
    variable, such as cultural feminization. One of many problems is
    that no single quantitative variable accurately and reliably
    measures the degree to which a culture is becoming feminized.
    However, we can get some feeling for the synchrony of the
    cultural process with the endocrine process by considering the
    correlation of the decline in sperm counts with the decline in
    male college enrollment.

    We've already mentioned how sperm counts have declined steadily
    and continuously in industrialized areas of North America and
    western Europe since about 1950. Let's use that decline as our
    endocrine variable. As the cultural variable, let's look at
    college graduation rates. Since 1950, the proportion of men among
    college graduates has been steadily declining. In 1950, 70
    percent of college graduates were men; today, that number is
    about 43 percent and falling. Judy Mohraz, president of Goucher
    College, warned not long ago that if present trends continue,
    "the last man to graduate from college will receive his
    baccalaureate in the year 2067.... Daughters not only have
    leveled the playing field in most college classrooms, but they
    are exceeding their brothers in school success across the
    board."35

    Plot these two phenomena on the same graph. Use no statistical
    tricks, no manipulation of the data--simply use best-fit trend
    lines, plotted on linear coordinates--and the two lines
    practically coincide. The graph of declining sperm density
    perfectly parallels the decline in male college graduation rates.

    Of course, the correlation between these phenomena--one
    endocrine, one cultural--doesn't prove that they must derive from
    the same underlying source. But such a strong correlation
    certainly provides some evidence that the endocrine phenomenon of
    declining sperm counts may derive from the same source as the
    cultural phenomenon of declining male college enrollment (as a
    percentage of total enrollment).

    THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE MALE AMERICAN EMPIRE?

    I have suggested that the feminization of American culture and
    endocrine phenomena such as declining sperm counts are both
    manifestations of the effects of environmental estrogens. To the
    best of my knowledge, no other author has yet made such a
    suggestion. If this hypothesis is ultimately shown to be at least
    partly correct, it would not be the first time that items of
    daily household life contributed to the transformation of a
    mighty civilization. A number of scientists, most notably
    toxicologist Jerome Nriagu, have suggested that one factor
    leading to the decline and fall of the Roman Empire was the lead
    glaze popular among the Roman aristocracy after about 36 Bowls
    and dishes were glazed with lead, which was also widely used in
    household plumbing. (Our word plumbing comes from the Latin
    plumbum, which means lead.) The neurological symptoms of lead
    toxicity--mania, difficulty concentrating, and mood swings--were
    not recognized as manifestations of poisoning. No Roman scientist
    conducted the necessary controlled experiment: a comparison of
    families that used lead-glazed pottery with families that did
    not. The scientific worldview necessary for such an experiment
    did not exist at the time. It is thought-provoking to consider
    that something as insignificant as pottery glazing may have
    brought down the Roman Empire.

    Could anything of comparable magnitude be happening right now, in
    our own culture? Testing the hypothesis I have proposed will be
    difficult. It is probably not possible to randomize humans to a
    "modern, plasticized" environment versus a "primitive,
    no-plastics, no-cans, no-pesticide" environment--and even it were
    possible, it would not be ethical to do so. (It should be noted,
    however, that one careful study has already been published
    demonstrating that men who consumed only organic produce had
    higher sperm counts than men eating regular, pesticide-treated
    produce.37 Measures of the degree to which a culture is
    "feminized" would be controversial, and only seldom would such
    measures be objectively quantifiable.

    Nevertheless, the world around us is changing in ways that have
    never occurred in the history of our species. It is possible that
    some of these changes in our culture may reflect the influence of
    environmental estrogens, an influence whose effects are subtle
    and incremental. To the extent that human dignity means being in
    control of one's destiny, we should explore the possibility that
    our minds and bodies are being affected by environmental
    estrogens in ways that we do not, as yet, fully understand.


  7. #7
    A$$hole detector RoidRage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    469
    Very interesting article!!! Excellent post Reiner!

  8. #8
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    This article pisses me off so bad. Read it well.
    see those numbers?

    50% lower sperm count than 40 years ago in the most industrialised nations

    50% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    HElloooOo

  9. #9
    Simplistic
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,179
    Interesting article.

  10. #10
    A$$hole detector RoidRage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    469
    I'll have to read the other half after I get back from class. But the first half was extremely interesting. This whole topic I find disturbing.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Wizard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Basingstoke
    Posts
    2,240
    Originally posted by Reinier
    This article pisses me off so bad. Read it well.
    see those numbers?

    50% lower sperm count than 40 years ago in the most industrialised nations

    50% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    HElloooOo
    50%???!!!!


  12. #12
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    England
    Posts
    67
    Those original sperm count tests were not scientifically conducted using a big enough sample of the population, I think they used a sample of 100 males which basically means the results don't prove a thing, you would need a sample of at least 10000 to 100000 and would need to specificaly sample different groups of the population inorder to get any significantly accurate data. These results are often quoted not knowing that they are completely unsubstantiated.
    Last edited by Maccer101; 09-02-2003 at 10:41 AM.

  13. #13
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    I never really agree with that idea in science. a 100 guys randomly picked from the population are going to have an average sperm count pretty damn close to the average sperm count of the population

  14. #14
    Jack's Utter Surprise Saturday Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chico
    Posts
    3,691
    Originally posted by MrWebb78
    you can take away all the material objects you want to stop violence, but until you take away bad parenting, nothing will change.
    You guys can bitch and moan and gripe about things in the world, but this about it sums it up perfectly.

    The problems are american problems. When was the last time a kid in Spain broguth an AR15 to school and wasted everyone? This is not a problem with men or women or medias, this is an american problem. A vast majority of parents in America are useless, and THAT is the problem.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Wizard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Basingstoke
    Posts
    2,240
    You can find useless parents everywhere, not only in america.
    What you described, happened to a school in Germany, a year ago.

  16. #16
    Jack's Utter Surprise Saturday Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chico
    Posts
    3,691
    In Germany, eh? Would this be a country still heavily populated by the US military/influence?

    Thanks.

  17. #17
    What ChrisH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Wilmslow, nr. Manchester
    Posts
    1,075
    Just checked t-mag after reading the article and theres another on the same topic.
    http://t-mag.com/nation_articles/276tc.jsp
    It is so true though
    "I'm gonna die with a dumbell in my hand." - stpatrick44


    Age: 18 | Height: 5'10" | Weight: 80kgs (176lbs) | BF%: dunno
    --
    BB Bench 1 x 110kgs (242lbs) | Deadlift: 135kgs (300lbs) x 2 | Current Routine: Bodybuilding

  18. #18
    What ChrisH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Wilmslow, nr. Manchester
    Posts
    1,075
    How is germany heavily populated with the US military? I don't know what you mean ;/
    As fpr the shooting thing, there are pissed off kids all over the world, I think the only difference is the availability of guns how accepted they are. If i wanted to go to high school tomorrow and blow everyone away, i'd end up using a stick because the only person I know with a gun is some guy who hunts game. He has a shotgun and a rifle, locked up in a safe :o
    "I'm gonna die with a dumbell in my hand." - stpatrick44


    Age: 18 | Height: 5'10" | Weight: 80kgs (176lbs) | BF%: dunno
    --
    BB Bench 1 x 110kgs (242lbs) | Deadlift: 135kgs (300lbs) x 2 | Current Routine: Bodybuilding

  19. #19
    Jack's Utter Surprise Saturday Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chico
    Posts
    3,691
    Germany has had a huge US military presence/influence since the end of WW2. That's what I mean.

  20. #20
    A$$hole detector RoidRage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    469
    Parents are part of the problem as more and more children are raised by single moms.

  21. #21
    Bulking Sith Knight Stephen Riddington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    4,202
    Violent video games causes kid to be violent??? That's BS because we males have violent tendacies from the moment we hit puberty. I have played violent games, movies and etc. I had violent tendacies and acted them out but not to the extreme point it becomes reality; because I have great parents, who taught me from right to wrong, and what are the consequences are. They punished me when I acted out violently because they know its wrong. I never got into a real fistfight or a brawl, because I avoided all situations that leads to it, at all cost. I'm 22, and I won't deny that I have tendacies of violence, it's a matter of what button you push. I will get violent, but not to the point where life or death is concerned.

    The key to preventing kids turning violent fastasies to realities is great parenting.
    Last edited by CanadianHomer; 09-02-2003 at 12:12 PM.
    You tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is 'never try'-Homer Simpson
    My brother always said that drowning in beer would be like heaven. Well, my brother's not here and I have two soakers... This sucks!!!-Bob McKenzie
    Hockey is murder on ice-Jim Murray
    Give a guy a gun, he thinks he's Superman. Give him two and he thinks he's God.-Superintendent Pang (Hard Boiled)

  22. #22
    The English Teacher steveo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    So. Cal
    Posts
    1,409
    Originally posted by Reinier
    You should talk to rock he agrees fanatically and has all these theories about it and everything.

    I have an article for you


    The Feminization of American Culture
    How Modern Chemicals May Be Changing Human Biology
    Leonard Sax, M.D.


    In ancient times--by which I mean, before 1950--most scholars
    agreed that women were, as a rule, not quite equal to men. Women
    were charming but mildly defective. Many (male) writers viewed
    women as perpetual teenagers, stuck in an awkward place between
    childhood and adulthood. German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer,
    for example, wrote that women are "childish, silly and
    short-sighted, really nothing more than overgrown children, all
    their life long. Women are a kind of intermediate stage between
    the child and the man." 1

    Psychologists in that bygone era devoted considerable
    time and energy to the question of why women couldn't outgrow
    their childish ways. The Freudians said it was because they were
    trapped in the pre-Oedipal stage, tortured by penis envy.
    Followers of Abraham Maslow claimed that women were fearful of
    self-actualization. Jungians insisted that women were born with a
    deficiency of imprinted archetypes. Back then, of course, almost
    all the psychologists were men
    .
    Things are different now. Male psychologists today are so
    rare that Ilene Philipson--author of On the Shoulders of Women:
    The Feminization of Psychotherapy--speaks of "the vanishing male
    therapist as a species soon to be extinct.2 the gender of the
    modal psychotherapist has changed from male to female, the
    standard of mental health has changed along with it. Today, Dr.
    Philipson observes, the badge of emotional maturity is no longer
    the ability to control or sublimate your feelings but rather the
    ability to express them. A mature adult nowadays is someone who
    is comfortable talking about her inner conflicts, someone who
    values personal relationships above abstract goals, someone who
    isn't afraid to cry. In other words: a mature adult is a woman.


    It is now the men who are thought to be stuck halfway between
    childhood and adulthood, incapable of articulating their inner
    selves. Whereas psychologists fifty years ago amused themselves
    by cataloging women's (supposed) deficiencies, psychologists
    today devote themselves to demonstrating "the natural superiority
    of women."3 Psychologists report that women are better able to
    understand nonverbal communication and are more expressive of
    emotion.4 ,5Quantitative personality inventories reveal that the
    average woman is more trusting, nurturing, and outgoing than the
    average man.6 The average eighth-grade girl has a command of
    language and writing skills equal to that of the average
    eleventh-grade boy.7

    As the influence of the new psychology permeates our culture,
    women have understandably begun to wonder whether men are really,
    well, human. "What if these women are right?" wonders one writer
    in an article for Marie Claire, a national woman's magazine.
    "What if it's true that some men don't possess, or at least can't
    express, nuanced emotions?"8 More than a few contemporary
    psychologists have come to regard the male of our species as a
    coarsened, more violent edition of the normal, female, human. Not
    surprisingly, they have begun to question whether having a man in
    the house is desirable or even safe.

    Eleven years ago, scholar Sara Ruddick expressed her concern
    about "the extent and variety of the psychological, sexual, and
    physical battery suffered by women and children of all classes
    and social groups ... at the hands of fathers, their mothers'
    male lovers, or male relatives. If putative fathers are absent or
    perpetually disappearing and actual fathers are controlling or
    abusive, who needs a father? What mother would want to live with
    one or wish one on her children?"9 Nancy Polikoff, former counsel
    to the Women's Legal Defense Fund, said that "it is no tragedy,
    either on a national scale or in an individual family, for
    children to be raised without fathers."10

    The feminization of psychology manifests itself in myriad ways.
    Consider child discipline. Seventy years ago, doctors agreed that
    the best way to discipline your child was to punish the little
    criminal. ("Spare the rod, spoil the child.") Today, spanking is
    considered child abuse.11 You're supposed to talk with your kid.
    Spanking sends all the wrong messages, we are told, and may have
    stupendously horrible consequences. Psychoanalyst Alice Miller
    confidently informed us, in her book For Your Own Good, that
    Adolf Hitler's evil can be traced to the spankings his father
    inflicted on him in childhood.12

    THE NEW MEN'S MAGAZINES

    It isn't only psychology that has undergone a process of
    feminization over the past fifty years, and it isn't only women
    whose attitudes have changed. Take a stroll to your neighborhood
    bookstore or newsstand. You'll find magazines such as Men's
    Health, MH-18, Men's Fitness, Gear, and others devoted to men's
    pursuit of a better body, a better self-image. None of them
    existed fifteen years ago. The paid circulation of Men's Health
    has risen from 250,000 to more than 1.5 million in less than ten
    years.13 Many of the articles in these magazines are reminiscent
    of those to be found in women's magazines such as Glamour,
    Mademoiselle, and Cosmopolitan: "The Ten Secrets of Better Sex,"
    "The New Diet Pills--Can They Work For You?" or "Bigger Biceps in
    Five Minutes a Day." (The women's magazine equivalent might be
    something like "slimmer thighs in five minutes a day.")

    Men didn't use to care so much about their appearance.
    Psychiatrists Harrison Pope and Katharine Phillips report that in
    American culture today, "Men of all ages, in unprecedented
    numbers, are preoccupied with the appearance of their bodies."14
    They document that "men's dissatisfaction with body appearance
    has nearly tripled in less than thirty years--from 15 percent in
    1972, to 34 percent in 1985, to 43 percent in 1997."15 Cosmetic
    plastic surgery, once marketed exclusively to women, has found a
    rapidly growing male clientele. The number of men undergoing
    liposuction, for instance, quadrupled between 1990 and 2000.16

    THE FEMINIZATION OF ENTERTAINMENT AND POLITICS

    This process of femininization manifests itself, though somewhat
    differently, when you turn on the TV or watch a movie. Throughout
    the mid-twentieth century, leading men were, as a rule,
    infallible: think of Clark Gable in Gone With the Wind, Cary
    Grant in North by Northwest, or Fred McMurray in My Three Sons.
    But no longer. In family comedy, the father figure has
    metamorphosed from the all-knowing, all-wise Robert Young of
    Father Knows Best to the occasional bumbling of Bill Cosby and
    the consistent stupidity of Homer Simpson. Commercially
    successful movies now often feature women who are physically
    aggressive, who dominate or at least upstage the men. This
    description applies to movies as diverse as Charlie's Angels and
    Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. In today's cinema, to paraphrase
    Garrison Keillor, all the leading women are strong and all the
    leading men are good-looking.

    A transformation of comparable magnitude seems to be under way
    in the political arena. Military command used to be considered
    the best qualification for leadership--as it was with Ulysses
    Grant, Theodore Roosevelt, Charles de Gaulle, and Dwight
    Eisenhower, to name only a few. Today, the best qualification for
    leadership may be the ability to listen. The feminine way of
    seeing the world and its problems is, arguably, becoming the
    mainstream way.

    In 1992, Bill Clinton ran against George Bush p?e for the
    presidency. Clinton was an acknowledged draft evader. Bush, the
    incumbent, was a World War II hero who had just led the United
    States to military success in Operation Desert Storm. Clinton
    won. In 1996, Clinton was challenged by Bob Dole, another
    decorated World War II veteran. Once again, the man who had
    evaded military service defeated the combat veteran. In 2000,
    Gov. George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain competed for the
    Republican presidential nomination.

    McCain was a genuine war hero whose courageous actions as a
    prisoner of war in Vietnam had won him well-deserved honors and
    praise. Bush, on the other hand, was alleged to have used family
    influence to obtain a position in the Texas National Guard, in
    order to avoid service in Vietnam. Once again, the man who had
    never experienced combat defeated the military veteran. Moral of
    the story: It's all very well to be a war hero, but in our
    modern, feminized society, being a war hero won't get you elected
    president. Conversely, being a draft dodger isn't as bad as it
    used to be.

    A number of authors have recognized the increasing feminization
    of American society. With few exceptions, most of those
    acknowledging this process have welcomed it.17 As Elinor Lenz and
    Barbara Myerhoff wrote in their 1985 book The Feminization of
    America, "The feminizing influence is moving [American society]
    away from many archaic
    ways of thinking and behaving, toward the promise of a saner and
    more humanistic future.... Feminine culture, with its commitment
    to creating and protecting life, is our best and brightest hope
    for overcoming the destructive, life-threatening forces of the
    nuclear age."18

    I think we can all agree on one point: there have been
    fundamental changes in American culture over the past fifty
    years, changes that indicate a shift from a male-dominated
    culture to a feminine or at least an androgynous society. The
    question is, what's causing this shift? Some might argue that the
    changes I've described are simply a matter of better education,
    progressive laws, and two generations of consciousness-raising:
    an evolution from a patriarchal Dark Ages to a unisex, or
    feminine, Enlightenment. I'm willing to consider that hypothesis.
    But before we accept that conclusion, we should ask whether there
    are any other possibilities.

    FEMINIZED WILDLIFE

    We have to make a big jump now, a journey that will begin at the
    Columbia River in Washington, near the Oregon border. James
    Nagler, assistant professor of zoology at the University of
    Idaho, recently noticed something funny about the salmon he
    observed in the Columbia. Almost all of them were--or appeared to
    be--female. But when he caught a few and analyzed their DNA, he
    found that many of the "female" fish actually were male: their
    chromosomes were XY instead of XX.19

    Nagler's findings echo a recent report from England, where
    government scientists have found some pretty bizarre fish. In two
    polluted rivers, half the fish are female, and the other half are
    ... something else. Not female but not male either. The English
    scientists call these bizarre fish "intersex": their gonads are
    not quite ovaries, not quite testicles, but some weird thing in
    between, making neither eggs nor sperm. In both rivers, the
    intersex fish are found
    downstream of sites where treated sewage is discharged into the
    river. Upstream from the sewer effluent, the incidence of
    intersex is dramatically lower. The relationship between the
    concentration of sewer effluent and the incidence of intersex is
    so close that "the proportion of intersex fish in any sample of
    fish could perhaps be predicted, using a linear equation, from
    the average concentration of effluent constituents in the
    river."20

    It's something in the water. Something in the water is causing
    feminization of male fish.

    And it's not just fish. In Lake Apopka, in central Florida, Dr.
    Louis Guillette and his associates have found male alligators
    with abnormally small penises; in the blood of these alligators,
    female hormone levels are abnormally high and male hormone levels
    abnormally low.21 Male Florida panthers have become infertile;
    the levels of male sex hormones in their blood are much lower
    (and the levels of female hormones higher) than those found in
    panthers in less-polluted environments.22

    WHAT'S GOING ON?

    Our modern society generates a number of chemicals that never
    existed before about fifty years ago. Many of these chemicals, it
    turns out, mimic the action of female sex hormones called
    estrogens. Plastics--including a plasticizer called phthalate,
    used in making flexible plastic for bottles of Coke, Pepsi,
    Sprite, Evian water, and so forth--are known to have estrogenic
    effects.23 Many commonly used pesticides have estrogenlike
    actions on human cells.24 Estrogenic chemicals ooze out of the
    synthetic lacquer that lines the inside of soup cans.25 These
    chemicals and others find their way into sewage and enter the
    rivers and lakes. Hence the effects on fish, alligators, and
    other wildlife.

    EFFECTS ON HUMANS?

    Modern chemicals may have a feminizing effect on wildlife. That's
    certainly cause for concern in its own right. But is there any
    evidence that a similar process of feminization is occurring in
    humans?

    Answer: there may be. Just like the Florida panther, human males
    are experiencing a rapid decline in fertility and sperm count.
    The sperm count of the average American or European man has
    declined continuously over the past four decades, to the point
    where today it is less than 50 percent of what it was forty years
    ago.26 This downward trend is seen only in industrialized regions
    of North America and western Europe. Lower sperm counts are being
    reported in urban Denmark but not in rural Finland, for
    example.27 Of course, that's precisely the pattern one would
    expect, if the lower sperm counts are an effect of "modern"
    materials such as plastic water bottles.

    Male infertility, one result of that lower count, is now the
    single most common cause of infertility in our species.28The rate
    of infertility itself has quadrupled in the past forty years,
    from 4 percent in 1965 to 10 percent in 1982 to at least 16
    percent today.29

    WHAT ABOUT GIRLS?

    So far we've talked mainly about the effect of environmental
    estrogens on males. What about girls and women? What
    physiological effects might excess environmental estrogens have
    on them? Giving estrogens to young girls would, in theory,
    trigger the onset of puberty at an earlier than expected age. In
    fact, in the past few years doctors have noticed that girls are
    beginning puberty earlier than ever before. Just as the
    environmental-estrogen hypothesis would predict, this phenomenon
    is seen only in girls, not in boys. Dr. Marcia Herman-Giddens,
    studying over seventeen thousand American girls, found that this
    trend to earlier puberty is widespread. "Girls across the United
    States are developing pubertal characteristics at younger ages
    than currently used norms," she concluded.30

    Rather than labeling all these pubescent eight-year-olds as
    "abnormal," Dr. Paul Kaplowitz and his associates recently
    recommended that the earliest age for "normal" onset of puberty
    simply be redefined as age seven in Caucasian girls and age six
    in African-American girls.31 Dr. Kaplowitz is trying, valiantly,
    to define this problem outof existence. If you insist that normal
    puberty begins at age six or age seven, then all these
    eight-year-old girls with well-filled bras suddenly become
    "normal."

    But saying so doesn't make it so. Last year, doctors in Puerto
    Rico reported that most young girls with premature breast
    development have toxic levels of phthalates in their blood; those
    phthalates appear to have seeped out of plastic food and beverage
    containers. The authors noted that Puerto Rico is a warm island.
    Plastic containers that become warm are more likely to ooze
    phthalate molecules into the food or beverages they contain.32
    These authors, led by Dr. Ivelisse Col?, reported their findings
    in Environmental Health Perspectives, the official journal of the
    National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (a branch of
    the National Institutes of Health). On the cover of the issue in
    which the report appeared, the editors chose to feature the
    picture of a young woman drinking water from a plastic bottle.

    Premature puberty in girls has become so widespread that it has
    begun to attract the attention of major media. This topic made
    the cover of Time magazine on October 30, 2000. Unfortunately,
    few of these high-profile articles show any understanding of the
    possible role of environmental estrogens. The Time article barely
    mentioned the Environmental Health Perspectives study, nor did it
    link the phenomenon of early puberty in girls with declining
    sperm counts, intersex fish, or tiny penises in alligators.
    Instead, it featured a picture of a short boy staring at a taller
    girl's breasts.

    What effect might extra estrogen have on adult women? Many
    scientists have expressed concern that exposure to excessive
    environmental estrogens may lead to breast cancer. The rate of
    breast cancer has risen dramatically over the past fifty years.
    Today, one in every nine American women can expect to develop
    breast cancer at some point in her life. But this increase is
    seen only in industrialized countries,33 where plastics and other
    products of modern chemistry are widely used. Women born in Third
    World countries are at substantially lower risk. When they move
    from a Third World country to the United States, their risk soon
    increases to that seen in other women living here, clearly
    demonstrating that the increased risk is an environmental, not a
    genetic, factor.34

    CONNECTION?

    At this point, you may feel that you've been reading two
    completely disconnected essays: one about the feminization of
    American culture, and the second about the effects of
    environmental estrogens. Could there be any connection between
    the two?

    There may be. If human physiology and endocrinology are being
    affected by environmental estrogens--as suggested by lower sperm
    counts, increasing infertility, earlier onset of puberty in
    girls, and rising rates of breast cancer--then there is no reason
    in principle why human psychology and sexuality should be exempt.
    If we accept the possibility that environmental estrogens are
    affecting human physiology and endocrinology, then we must also
    consider the possibility that the feminization of American
    culture may, conceivably, reflect the influence of environmental
    estrogens.

    The phenomena we have considered show a remarkable synchrony.
    Many of the cultural trends discussed in the first half of the
    article began to take shape in the 1950s and '60s, just as
    plastics and other modern chemicals began to be widely introduced
    into American life. There are, of course, many difficulties in
    attempting to measure any correlation between an endocrine
    variable--such as a decline in sperm counts--and a cultural
    variable, such as cultural feminization. One of many problems is
    that no single quantitative variable accurately and reliably
    measures the degree to which a culture is becoming feminized.
    However, we can get some feeling for the synchrony of the
    cultural process with the endocrine process by considering the
    correlation of the decline in sperm counts with the decline in
    male college enrollment.

    We've already mentioned how sperm counts have declined steadily
    and continuously in industrialized areas of North America and
    western Europe since about 1950. Let's use that decline as our
    endocrine variable. As the cultural variable, let's look at
    college graduation rates. Since 1950, the proportion of men among
    college graduates has been steadily declining. In 1950, 70
    percent of college graduates were men; today, that number is
    about 43 percent and falling. Judy Mohraz, president of Goucher
    College, warned not long ago that if present trends continue,
    "the last man to graduate from college will receive his
    baccalaureate in the year 2067.... Daughters not only have
    leveled the playing field in most college classrooms, but they
    are exceeding their brothers in school success across the
    board."35

    Plot these two phenomena on the same graph. Use no statistical
    tricks, no manipulation of the data--simply use best-fit trend
    lines, plotted on linear coordinates--and the two lines
    practically coincide. The graph of declining sperm density
    perfectly parallels the decline in male college graduation rates.

    Of course, the correlation between these phenomena--one
    endocrine, one cultural--doesn't prove that they must derive from
    the same underlying source. But such a strong correlation
    certainly provides some evidence that the endocrine phenomenon of
    declining sperm counts may derive from the same source as the
    cultural phenomenon of declining male college enrollment (as a
    percentage of total enrollment).

    THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE MALE AMERICAN EMPIRE?

    I have suggested that the feminization of American culture and
    endocrine phenomena such as declining sperm counts are both
    manifestations of the effects of environmental estrogens. To the
    best of my knowledge, no other author has yet made such a
    suggestion. If this hypothesis is ultimately shown to be at least
    partly correct, it would not be the first time that items of
    daily household life contributed to the transformation of a
    mighty civilization. A number of scientists, most notably
    toxicologist Jerome Nriagu, have suggested that one factor
    leading to the decline and fall of the Roman Empire was the lead
    glaze popular among the Roman aristocracy after about 36 Bowls
    and dishes were glazed with lead, which was also widely used in
    household plumbing. (Our word plumbing comes from the Latin
    plumbum, which means lead.) The neurological symptoms of lead
    toxicity--mania, difficulty concentrating, and mood swings--were
    not recognized as manifestations of poisoning. No Roman scientist
    conducted the necessary controlled experiment: a comparison of
    families that used lead-glazed pottery with families that did
    not. The scientific worldview necessary for such an experiment
    did not exist at the time. It is thought-provoking to consider
    that something as insignificant as pottery glazing may have
    brought down the Roman Empire.

    Could anything of comparable magnitude be happening right now, in
    our own culture? Testing the hypothesis I have proposed will be
    difficult. It is probably not possible to randomize humans to a
    "modern, plasticized" environment versus a "primitive,
    no-plastics, no-cans, no-pesticide" environment--and even it were
    possible, it would not be ethical to do so. (It should be noted,
    however, that one careful study has already been published
    demonstrating that men who consumed only organic produce had
    higher sperm counts than men eating regular, pesticide-treated
    produce.37 Measures of the degree to which a culture is
    "feminized" would be controversial, and only seldom would such
    measures be objectively quantifiable.

    Nevertheless, the world around us is changing in ways that have
    never occurred in the history of our species. It is possible that
    some of these changes in our culture may reflect the influence of
    environmental estrogens, an influence whose effects are subtle
    and incremental. To the extent that human dignity means being in
    control of one's destiny, we should explore the possibility that
    our minds and bodies are being affected by environmental
    estrogens in ways that we do not, as yet, fully understand.

    :withstupi
    "The only good race pace is suicide pace, and today looks like a good day to die." -Steve Prefontaine

    Motivate a fatty here.

  23. #23
    A$$hole detector RoidRage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    469
    Originally posted by ChrisH
    Just checked t-mag after reading the article and theres another on the same topic.
    http://t-mag.com/nation_articles/276tc.jsp
    It is so true though
    excellent article. As are ALL of the Atomic Dog articles. It is all so true and sad.

    sat, so in Canada and Europe there are absoultly no "worthless" parents? Only America has "worthless" parents? Thats a pretty narrow view point. This isn't necessarily a parenting issue. Hell it happens most often to married guys, or guys in long term relationships (e.g. whipped).

    The whole point of the articles is that males are becoming more and more feminized as soceity deems manhood evil and corrupting.

  24. #24
    Jack's Utter Surprise Saturday Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chico
    Posts
    3,691
    Well, the violence bit was more for the parents.

    The "manhood is evil" is a pretty american problem as well, based on my experience. I traveled in Europe for a while early this year and the problems just weren't there like they are here. No psycho kids, no wanting men to act like women, no major push for women to be given a stronger role. No "we hate blacks" or "immigrants are evil". Americans just have issues. It doesn't make us lesser people. We just need to realize we have issues and start working on them.

  25. #25
    MulletII - AKA Ninja Boner Gyno Rhino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    FFFA Headquarters
    Posts
    11,468
    I think a large part of those issues comes from the fact that we have more personal freedoms than other countries.

    When you let people go free and live free, one of two things will happen:

    1) They live their life as they see fit, being a productive member of society. Reponsibility, pride, and the Golden Rule reign supreme.

    2) They live their life as they see fit, being a disruption to society, exploting the system that is there to let them lead a good life.

    I think 99.9% of the problem in American society come from the second group.
    Founding Member and CEO of the FFFA

    "All that matters is beauty on the inside! Outside beauty doesn't matter!"
    ~This is something ugly people say to feel better about themselves...

    "Strength and size don't matter! It's not fair to judge training knowledge based on strength and size!"
    ~This is something wussy people say to feel better about themselves...

    Pearls of Wisdom...


    Resident Ninja Demon (with a pet Radioactive Sloth) and SchlonkeyMaster of WBB!

    Rock is my 'Big Viking Brother', and not in a homo-esque way.

    And no COLON jokes, bastards!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •