Are Men The New Women?

Subject: Are Men The New Women?
From: Peter T.
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 09:53 AM

This seemed to me to be the perfect thread title -- I stole it from an article on the trend in Men's magazines towards dieting, plastic surgery on your behind, abdominals like a washboard (hands up all the 19 year olds who have ever seen a washboard?), and so on.

yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 10:19 AM

And all the "get in touch with your feelings" crap. Eyuck !!! Don't get me wrong... compassion is good. Good manners are a necessity. I still believe in being a gentleman until pushed the wrong way. But all this nancy boy crap, well ! And I don't mean homosexual. I'm not homophobic and I really don't care what anybody else does. Just don't tell me I have to march in your parade.

Too bad Spaw is laid up. I'm sure there would be a good comment on "PLASTIC surgery to your behind"... do batteries come with that ?

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 10:20 AM

Fire In The Belly, guys!

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: RichM
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 10:51 AM

Most men shave. This is for vanity, yes? It's obvious the comparison to women is meant as a slur.

Let's not be too quick to judge.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:10 AM

I shave my face so that my hazardous materials mask will fit properly. I don't shave anything else. I keep my hair short (even before most of it WENT short naturally) cause I'm lazy and it's easier to sit in a barber's chair once a month than to dry it every shower.

Slur ? Not to the women.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: JedMarum
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:10 AM

My son once said to me, "It's a good thing women don't have beards!" I asked him why and he said, "Just imagine all the weird shapes and twists, and all the time they'd spend shaping them!"

I had to laugh. He was right! Thank God for our differences.

As for the article? Hogwash! Like most men, I comb my hair once a day, whether it needs it or not. That and maybe a toothbrush or two is as much preening as my genetic code will support - in spite of years of careful training. As my wife would say, "Men are pigs!" ... and I remind her we had to work hard to get that far!

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:20 AM

Vive la difference !!!

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:27 AM

Peter - Given the usual process of reincarnation that most souls seem to engage in, I think it more than likely that some men are the new women...and vice versa! :-)

Variety, after all, is the spice of life, and after you've bitched about the opposite sex long enough, it's only fitting that you should get to be in their shoes yourself and find out what it's really like...

If anyone's in fear of losing touch with their masculine side, I recommend repeated viewings of John Wayne, Charles Bronson, and Sylvester Stallone movies, and a steady diet of cold beer. That'll get you right back on track, toot sweet!

- LH

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Peter T.
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:36 AM

I don't know, I think it is sort of sweet. yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:42 AM

Jed, that made me laugh, because over the years I have said that if I were a man, I would carve intricate patterns in my beard. Things like the pips on playing cards, and stars, and exclamation marks and so on. I'll never understand men, I guess. :)

Ebbie

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: wdyat12
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 11:43 AM

I Like to shave. I cut my throat on a daily basis as a religeous experience not for vanity.

wdyat12

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:04 PM

Trying to ignore the difference is trying to ignore the universe. I recall the most vivid example of difference I have ever seen as when my Mum and Dad were about to go grocery shopping one Saturday morning years ago. It was a matter of deportment. It was a nasty winter day and Dad had a felt hat, plaid doeskin shirt, plaid wool jacket, wool pants, and gum rubber boots. Mum had a fit. Dad enjoyed his morning out and Mum and I cleaned house - vigorously.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:07 PM

Ha, who needs "Washboard Abs"? I've got "WashTUB" abs. I like the sleek well rounded look. The only decoration I ever affected was a small ear-ring, which I removed a few years ago when it became clear that I looked more like a rebellious accountant than a Pirate.

As far as personal vanity goes, you kind of have to be careful. It's been said of Joan Rivers that if she has one more facelift she'll have a beard! Me? I cut my beard off about ten years ago when it looked like I was gonna have one of those "Two-tone heads"...Brown hair and white beard. Not vanity, I just figured I was too immature for white "anything" yet.

Rick

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:32 PM

I have filed an application to live my next life as a woman. I'll let you all know how it worked out in a hundred years or so.

(why?...I'm curious)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Justa Picker
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:34 PM

Why wait till the next life, Bill? *BG*

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 12:47 PM

Reincarnation... ha!

I better not have to come back to this sh!t hole of a planet!!! Especially not as a human!

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Joe_F
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:04 PM

ObFolk: Last I heard, washboards were still in use as musical instruments. Washtubs too, come to think.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 01:15 PM

Just say no to testosterone, eh? What do we care if there are no future generations?!

Alex

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 02:09 PM

What does ObFolk: stand for?

You guys are forgetting Louie the 14th and all of the men of his time (at least those who could afford to be pouffy). And then there are all of the intricately waxed moustaches and beards of the men of the Civil War and Victorian eras. Face it... throughout history, men have been a bunch of peacocks. They may have had a recent, brief period of being slobs, but they're just reverting back to type now.

Most of the men I know these days wear hair spray or mousse instead of the ornate wigs of the eighteenth century, but a 'do is a 'do no matter what you call it.

('do = hairdo... coiffure)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 02:35 PM

Clinton:

With that attiude you can almost guarantee showing up again on the human side of the ledger, unless you get so spun up about the whole thing you throw yourself into some alley-cat uterus by accident!!! :>)

The karmic mechanism has this little trick in it -- the hearder you resist some part of reality, the more you have to put it there in order to identify it as the target of all your resistance; and by consequence the more likely you are to "pull it in" to your life. So if you really prefer to migrate off-planet and out-of-species next life, I recommend you start pursuing a level of deep compassion and insite. When all your resistance becomes transformed into understanding,t hen the thing becomes optional instead of just a torrent of reactionary mechanisms, if you see what I mean.

As for whether Men are the New Women, as far as I know there are certain fundamentals that aren't going to change, based on biochemical archetypes.

I am inclined to believe that growing up with breasts, a vagina, a uterus, a monthly cycle and the functional implications of all that equipment actually predisposes a person to emphasize what we think of as feminine principles -- generally seeking nest- and group-based priorities as distinguished from mechanical and conquest oriented priorities.

But the fact that this may be generally true is absolutely no reason to ignore the individual power of decision, which clearly shows that SOME men can end up being more "feminine" than SOME women, and vice-versa. (I'm talking about those who stick with their original physical equiopment here). In other words the predisposition is not a hard and fast categorization and it gets modified by cultural biases, by emotional and physical traumas, and by good or bad education including the presentation of true or false data.

So the question is meaningless, and obviously just meant to sell someone's schlock copy. 'Nuff said.

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 02:35 PM

ObFolk: obligatory [mention of] folk

Alex

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: chip a
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 02:50 PM

In the rest of nature, when there is a significant difference in the appearance of male and female the male seems to be the one with all the showy plumage. I think we're supposed to use it to attract the attention of predators or other threats, while mom gets the kids hidden in the weeds.

:) Chip A.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 03:07 PM

Chip:

Good guess. The hardest part of being an actor in this flick is trying to figure out what the scriptwriter was thinking of!!!

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 03:26 PM

Rick, you PRICK. Joan Rivers !!! Please start your next post with, "Don't drink anything while you read this post." if you are going to do that. I have tea all over my keyboard. I'm going to use that one at tonight's session, but I'm going to stand a bit back if anyone's taking a drink.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 03:57 PM

Men are merely exploring possibilities that were unavailable to them for hundreds of years. Women are, as well. What's wrong with that?

And as for breats, vagina, and monthly cycle predisposing one to emphasizing the "feminine principle" - the Amazons thought that the "feminine principle" WAS the way of the warrior, and left the men at home to look after the kids. Too bad they were outnumbered by the patriarchial male armies. It would have been interesting.

I would much rather live in a society where people can follow and develop the character traits which interest them, and not worry about how others judge them for it.

People are people. They have all possibilities within them.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: JedMarum
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:05 PM

CarolC - I have a friend who used to date younger women (he was 40 his taste in women was early twenties). He dated several in a row from (as we call them in Texas) "titty bars" (dancers or waitresses). One day he was lamenting that "all these girls now-a-days have money problems, former boyfriend problems, car problems," etc - and I said to him, "Charles you shop at the dump then complain about the merchandise!"

Your comment about men being peacocks made me think, of course there are such men, but it seems to me in very small numbers. I think most men could give a sh*t about how they look, and probably only dress decently because of years and years of careful training from Moms who think their sons are defective in the 'care about looks' department. I think the male peacocks are the exception, rather then the rule. Maybe you've just been choosing the wrong ones!

;-)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Justa Picker
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:13 PM

There's a very funny commerical currently running on tv in the Toronto area. It starts off where you see a guy wrapping duct tape around some object over and over again (but the object is out of the camera's cropped image). Finally after about 40 seconds of his repeated wrapping around of the duct tape he stands back.

We then see an image of a toilet with the toilet seat up, and taped around the tank. The caption at the bottom of the screen reads "It's okay to be a guy again."

(It's a promotion for a new all male, phone, talk radio show.)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:18 PM

Actually, Jed, I was just having a little fun. I've known men of all types.

But if you take a look at men's fashions throughout history, I think you'll see that there have been many historical periods when men dressed as elaborately and with as much vanity as women. There are lots of books on the subject complete with illustrations in the library.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: JedMarum
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:18 PM

Great ad, JP! I understand. At our home in Dallas we have a boy's bathroom and a girl's bathroom. The boy's room has the lid normally in the UP position!

It was great having three sons. It was like living in the locker room. My poor wife seemed to manage OK through most of it, though!

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:22 PM

Well said, Hesperis. But I still think men should put shoulder to wheel, axe to stone... it's just our way, our calling.

I just had a jar in the pub with a Newfoundlander who was espousing to all within earshot that his sister was raising a faggot (HIS WORDS) and that he took the boy of three and a half years old and played with him in a mud puddle in the ditch out front of the house to attepmt to toughen up his immune system. They played "boats" and he and the lad LAID in the puddle with his uncle. She was livid ! She brought the lad in, washed him and changed him because he was dirty. He went back out and played in the puddle with his uncle. Men are men. If there are some who want to explore other possibilities, fine. But I don't want nancy boys on my construction crew or in my army.... or nancy girls, either.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:30 PM

Oh, yeah. I forgot about this one. I think it's a riot, myself.

I heard somewhere that the expression "put your best foot forward" came from the practice, some centuries ago, of men extending the more attractive of their two stockinged legs in front of the other in order to enhance their attractiveness.

On the other hand, my Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins gives another history of the phrase. Anyone else heard the above explanation?

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:30 PM

CarolC --

Well the problem with these large generalizations is you can always find exceptions; but I think 'what the Amazons thought would come under the heading of cultural and educational overlay'. I see no reason to assume that in the absence of the network of expectations and training given to young members of the community to identify the warrior way with femininity, it would surface as an inherent choice.

I agree that people contain all possibilities. I think I made that perfectly clear!

Of course, I often make things perfectly clear to me and then ollox them up roundly asd far as anyone else is concerned! :>)

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 04:58 PM

These Amazons... forgive my ignorance... where can I read up on their society ? When did they rule the males ? Seriously, I am uneducated as to their history and always thought it was just cheap porn for B movies... SERIOUSLY - I AM NOT POKING FUN HERE. I want to learn.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:04 PM

Amos, I think you're confusing me with hesperis. I haven't said anything about Amazons. Primarily because I don't know anything about them.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:07 PM

However, a 45 year old woman generally doesn't mind being confused with an intelligent and talented twenty-something woman. ;-)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:08 PM

If the Amazon way is a cultural overlay, then why do you consider the opposite to not be a cultural overlay? (Or did I read that wrong?)

All people, (whatever their equipment!) should be strong, able to change their own tires, able to protect themselves physically, able to go after their dreams, etc. Anything else is probably a cultural overlay. People were designed to be radiantly healthy, strong, determined and interconnected individuals.

Many women in this society, myself included, were trained to be dependent on men for their needs. It is very insidious training. And the men were trained to believe that they didn't have any need for intimacy, or that it is a bad thing. That's just unnatural. And it is a cultural overlay. And it causes great anguish to people who don't "fit the mould". As if any individual really can fit a mould made by someone else!

I have done my share of playing in puddles. Love of playing in dirt is not just a guy thing. Though I am glad that the kid got a healthy connection with his uncle! His mother should lighten up. But she's not like that because she's a woman!

I was playing basketball in a park when I was 11 years old. There weren't very many other girls my age in the area, so the court was always full of guys. All the guys assumed that I was pretending to like the game in order to get a guy. They just couldn't understand that a woman would enjoy playing the sport, and want to play it because she enjoyed it. That's pathetic! (And I eventually stopped playing because I was being sexually harrased every time I tried to play. That's what I mean by "insidious training".)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:17 PM

gnu - You will find virtually no references in any of the conventional history books, except some ancient unconfirmed legends about Amazons.

However, there is a great deal of alternative literature which is very interesting. Try looking up books by Jessica Amanda Salmonson, Starhawk (Spiral Dance was her first book), and various authors in the "Goddess" traditions. You will generally find these books in "New Age" or "religion" or some section like that, but they kind of defy normal categorization.

It is a consensus among the community interested in this subject that:

The entire planet Earth went through a lengthy matriarchal stage (of many thousands of years) prior to the onset of the patriarchal era. All of our present history books and all of our holy scriptures date from the later patriarchal period.

The matriarchal period featured a society where women held the positions of authority. There was warfare, but a lot less than came under the patriarchy. The priesthood were female, as were the political and military leaders. Family lineage was traced through the mothers, not the fathers. This was a world society at one time.

Personally, I believe we as a race tried letting women run the show (worked out pretty well), then tried letting men run the show (worked out a whole lot worse), and are now on the verge of creating...for the first time...a society in which both men and women run the show on an equal and cooperative basis.

I certainly hope so, anyway.

- LH

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:19 PM

The Amazons were mentioned in the Trojan War, I believe. That war was itself considered to be legend until the city was found.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:46 PM

Correct. The Amazons were described in the Iliad as a tribe of female warriors who lived by the river Thermodon. They were thought by many to be the daughters of Ares, the god of war.

After the death of the great Trojan hero, Hector, the Amazons came from some considerable distance to help the Trojans against the Greeks. They fought a big battle outside the city walls, and were eventually defeated by Achilles, who slew the Amazon queen Penthesilea.

The Greeks admired her and her female soldiers greatly, and regretted her death. It was generally agreed that without their warriors Achilles and Ajax on the battlefield the Greeks would have been defeated that day.

Too bad they weren't as far as I'm concerned.

- LH

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 05:57 PM

Sorry about the mix up. Hasperis, I'm with you. Training anyone to cultivate dependence on others is corrosive and a disservice. And I applaud the self-determrination of life and overcoming obstacles wherever found. That said, I think there is an inherent "radar" which comes with growing up female, which possibly gets tuned down or off by the Y chromosome, or its concomitant equipment, which tends to make women empathic and by extension capable of compassion and skills that require it more than men. But I cannot say with any certainty where the line for such talents is between cultural bias or training and genetic structure. I do not think it is meaningless to grow with one or the other body type, especially given the strong tendency on this planet to identify people as their bodies. But for such facts to be turned into a class of constrasint on the individual is just sheer stupid in my book.

I do have one malke chauvinistic pigly-wiggly thought about all this though: I personally would hate to see women en masse turn their back on the nurturing and caring roles because they are so damn good at it!!! And I think it would be a real disservice to children and to the future to raise a generation under the charge of a bunch of androidal competitive pushy yuppie types, who have forgotten the imprtance of silence, affection, comfort, love, and other skills of the nurturing soul -- it is a priceless human ability that should not be "thrown out with the bathwater", for the sake of those who most need it, namely the very young.

Regards,

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: GUEST,Joe
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:22 PM

Hmm well lets see I have 3 sisters and my dad made sure all of them could change thier own tires and check fluids in the car as far as he was concerned if you drive a car you should know these things. My older sister and youngest one have no problem with this but my middle sister does because she says it is not a womanly thing to do.I was told by my old high school I could not take sewing because I was a male,funny when some of the best tailors and fashion designers are men.I don't know much about the AMAZONS but I do know some about Boudicca she was a Celt who tried to lead the rest of the Celtic tribes against the romans she was unsuccessful in defeating the romans for all the tribes fought seperately and would not listen to one central leader not because she was a woman but because it was the way they did things.I have read the Iliad but don't remember to much of it besides that the trojans were backed by ares the god of war and the Greeks were backed by Athena the goddess of wisdom. I also remember the Trojans did not listen to Helen when she told them to burn the wooden horse so they deserved to be defeated.CarolC is right thru out the ages men of status have done as much preening as the women of the time simply because their station allowed them to sort of like medevial GQ.I feel that no one should be kept from doing what they want simply because of thier sex I do however feel that there should not be double standards such as to be qaulified for the job a man has to do 100 pushups and a woman only 60 or so it should be the same for both.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:41 PM

The warrior women known to ancient Greek authors as Amazons were long thought to be creatures of myth. Now 50 ancient burial mounds near the town of Pokrovka, Russia, near the Kazakhstan border, have yielded skeletons of women buried with weapons, suggesting the Greek tales may have had some basis in fact. Nomads known as the Sauromatians buried their dead here beginning ca. 600 B.C.; according to Herodotus the Sauromatians were descendants of the Amazons and the Scythians, who lived north of the Sea of Azov. After ca. 400 B.C. the Pokrovka mounds were reused by the Sarmatians, another nomadic tribe possibly related to the Sauromatians.

In general, females were buried with a wider variety and larger quantity of artifacts than males, and seven female graves contained iron swords or daggers, bronze arrowheads, and whetstones to sharpen the weapons. Some scholars have argued that weapons found in female burials served a purely ritual purpose, but the bones tell a different story. The bowed leg bones of one 13- or 14-year-old girl attest a life on horseback, and a bent arrowhead found in the body cavity of another woman suggested that she had been killed in battle. The Pokrovka women cannot have been the Amazons of Greek myth--who were said to have lived far to the west--but they may have been one of many similar nomadic tribes who occupied the Eurasian steppes in the Early Iron Age.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 06:47 PM

For an interesting exposition on the legends of the Amazona, see this page.

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 01 - 07:05 PM

The ancient Roman chronicler Herodotus reports the following tale regarding these warrior women:

t is reported of the Sauromatae, that when the Greeks fought with the Amazons, whom the Scythians call Oior-pata or "man-slayers," as it may be rendered, Oior being Scythic for "man," and pata for "to slay"- It is reported, I say, that the Greeks after gaining the battle of the Thermodon, put to sea, taking with them on board three of their vessels all the Amazons whom they had made prisoners; and that these women upon the voyage rose up against the crews, and massacred them to a man. As however they were quite strange to ships, and did not know how to use either rudder, sails, or oars, they were carried, after the death of the men, where the winds and the waves listed. At last they reached the shores of the Palus Maeotis and came to a place called Cremni or "the Cliffs," which is in the country of the free Scythians. Here they went ashore, and proceeded by land towards the inhabited regions; the first herd of horses which they fell in with they seized, and mounting upon their backs, fell to plundering the Scythian territory.

The Scyths could not tell what to make of the attack upon them- the dress, the language, the nation itself, were alike unknown whence the enemy had come even, was a marvel. Imagining, however, that they were all men of about the same age, they went out against them, and fought a battle. Some of the bodies of the slain fell into their hands, whereby they discovered the truth. Hereupon they deliberated, and made a resolve to kill no more of them, but to send against them a detachment of their youngest men, as near as they could guess equal to the women in number, with orders to encamp in their neighbourhood, and do as they saw them do- when the Amazons advanced against them, they were to retire, and avoid a fight- when they halted, the young men were to approach and pitch their camp near the camp of the enemy. All this they did on account of their strong desire to obtain children from so notable a race.

So the youths departed, and obeyed the orders which had been given them. The Amazons soon found out that they had not come to do them any harm; and so they on their part ceased to offer the Scythians any molestation. And now day after day the camps approached nearer to one another; both parties led the same life, neither having anything but their arms and horses, so that they were forced to support themselves by hunting and pillage.

At last an incident brought two of them together- the man easily gained the good graces of the woman, who bade him by signs (for they did not understand each other's language) to bring a friend the next day to the spot where they had met- promising on her part to bring with her another woman. He did so, and the woman kept her word. When the rest of the youths heard what had taken place, they also sought and gained the favour of the other Amazons.

The two camps were then joined in one, the Scythians living with the Amazons as their wives; and the men were unable to learn the tongue of the women, but the women soon caught up the tongue of the men. When they could thus understand one another, the Scyths addressed the Amazons in these words- "We have parents, and properties, let us therefore give up this mode of life, and return to our nation, and live with them. You shall be our wives there no less than here, and we promise you to have no others." But the Amazons said- "We could not live with your women- our customs are quite different from theirs. To draw the bow, to hurl the javelin, to bestride the horse, these are our arts of womanly employments we know nothing. Your women, on the contrary, do none of these things; but stay at home in their waggons, engaged in womanish tasks, and never go out to hunt, or to do anything. We should never agree together. But if you truly wish to keep us as your wives, and would conduct yourselves with strict justice towards us, go you home to your parents, bid them give you your inheritance, and then come back to us, and let us and you live together by ourselves."

The youths approved of the advice, and followed it. They went and got the portion of goods which fell to them, returned with it, and rejoined their wives, who then addressed them in these words following:- "We are ashamed, and afraid to live in the country where we now are. Not only have we stolen you from your fathers, but we have done great damage to Scythia by our ravages. As you like us for wives, grant the request we make of you. Let us leave this country together, and go and dwell beyond the Tanais." Again the youths complied.

Crossing the Tanais they journeyed eastward a distance of three days' march from that stream, and again northward a distance of three days' march from the Palus Maeotis. Here they came to the country where they now live, and took up their abode in it. The women of the Sauromatae have continued from that day to the present to observe their ancient customs, frequently hunting on horseback with their husbands, sometimes even unaccompanied; in war taking the field; and wearing the very same dress as the men.

The Sauromatae speak the language of Scythia, but have never talked it correctly, because the Amazons learnt it imperfectly at the first. Their marriage-law lays it down that no girl shall wed till she has killed a man in battle. Sometimes it happens that a woman dies unmarried at an advanced age, having never been able in her whole lifetime to fulfil the condition.

From Book IV, The History of Herodotus

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: sophocleese
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 10:46 AM

FAscinating stuff on the Amazons, almost none of which is ever used in Hollywood movies. How many actresses are going to cut off their right breast so that it doesn't impeded the drawind of the bow?

Just saw Laura Croft:Tomb Raider last night. Great fun but my husband and I were the only ones laughing in some places. Why is it that when all the men around her are wearing heavy coats and fur hats she's wearing some lightweight floaty coat that's always open so that you can see her tits in a t-shirt? Finally I realized she's either got a fur-lined bra or battery operated heated coils in the underwiring.

A couple of years ago I had a great conversation with a man almost 30 years older than me. We were talking about characteristics that are labelled as either male or female. With the generation gap between us we discovered that we were labelling different traits. Its a fun game looking at where different times and cultures have placed the labels but its useless to attempt to place them accurately for everybody at once.

Men and women in many places and times have preened to attract mates. When what is fashionable is an "I don't care, I'm a natural girl/guy" more people will dress that way. And no matter how much you say you don't care about your appearance man or woman you're not going to go on a date looking and smelling as if you had just climbed out of a mud puddle after a furious game of soccer.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: sophocleese
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 10:54 AM

"doesn't impeded the drawind of the bow?" Oops!

doesn't impede the drawing of the bow.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 10:58 AM

"you're not going to go on a date looking and smelling as if you had just climbed out of a mud puddle after a furious game of soccer"

I know some people who have! (But fortunately very few of them...!)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 11:00 AM

a woman is perfectly capable of riding, shooting, fighting...and can be just as clever a warrior/leader. But men can't have babies, so no matter what local customs are created, women eventually 'tend' toward occupations which allow child-bearing and raising in a way which gives the society the most flexibility.

It makes me wonder whether the Amazon women pursued the warrior life only before or after prime child-bearing age. Perhaps for a brief period, women from other grops were captured to bear children, while the 'true' member-women were out fighting? Stranger things have happened.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 24 Jun 01 - 11:21 AM

The site that Amos linked to stated that the Amazons were warriors before having children, and that after their fighting years were over, they retired to take up governing positions instead of war positions.

Interesting stuff.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: LR Mole
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 12:22 PM

Well, what a cheery day on the old Mudcat.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 12:30 PM

LH, the great thing about that Matriarchal Period is that it's prehistorical, so one can say anything one wants about it without fear of contradiction. And if anyone gainsays you, you can call them a product of the Patriarchy, and no-one will listen to them. Very handy.

alex

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: MMario
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 12:35 PM

If you start looking at the history of costume (that's costume as in clothing - not theatrical costuming) it's interesting that men's clothing was for the most part as colorful and varied as womens - or more so until the late Victorian era. so it's really only been a few generations.

I've seen speculation that the trend towards monotony and less flamboyance was more due to the widespread involvement of men in the military for the first half of the 20th century.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: MMario
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 12:45 PM

tho there were (not sure if there still are) societies within just the "recent" historical period that were matriachal - at least in inheritance and tracing of lineage.

My mother grew up in Japan and China - and said one of the strongest dichotomies observed in both cultures was that publicly women had no power or respect - but within homes and families it was the eldest woman who had the last say, the most respect, and always the final word.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Midchuck
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 01:05 PM

I've seen speculation that the trend towards monotony and less flamboyance was more due to the widespread involvement of men in the military for the first half of the 20th century.

I also read somewhere that, before the revolution in France, the nobility dressed very colorfully and flamboyantly, but the lower classes were required to wear plain drab clothes. After the revolution, during the terror, it was very dangerous to wear colorful or elaborate clothes - if anyone got the idea you were of the nobility, you were dead. So everyone dressed drably. Supposedly the practice caught on all over Europe, because even then France set the fashion; and the habit stuck with men, but not women.

Peter.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Marion
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 05:00 PM

I've always thought it interesting that among humans (in our culture and time, anyway) flamboyancy in appearance is largely a female thing (jewellery, makeup, long hair, clothes with loud prints and colours and swishy skirts).

Among most other animals, when there's a difference in appearance between genders, it's the other way around. It's the lions that have manes, the peacocks that have plumage, the male robins that have red breasts, the male lightning bugs that light up. In many kinds of birds and bugs and reptiles, it's the males that get to wear the poufy wedding dresses while the females get the plain black suits.

Marion

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: sophocleese
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 05:39 PM

I seem to remember hearing ages ago that Beau Brummel was responsible for removing colour from gentlemen's wardrobes. He thought black and white more elgant and deplored the flashy use of colour.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Peter T.
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 05:48 PM

And what of Queen Calif of California, home of many of today's Amazonians?
yours, Peter T.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 06:16 PM

I would just like to say
that it is my conviction
That longer hair and other flamboyant
Affectations of appearance are nothing more
Than the male's emergence
From his drab camouflage
Into the gaudy plumage
That is the birthright of his sex
There is a peculiar notion that
Elegant plumage and fine feathers are not proper for the man
But actually, that is the way things are in most species.
---Ragni & Rado (from memory; sorry if I goofed)

Alex

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 09:32 PM

This is an interesting comment on market trends. In basic economics it is usually the rule that if you haven't got enough demand for your product you have to promote madly to drum up business. If word-of-mouth is flooding your capacity to deliver with orders, this becomes a less pressing concern. Large companies keep it up anyway, though, just to ensure future traffic.

This suggests that whenever men stopped wearing brilliant clothes -- oh, say, during the advent of Calvinism, for example.... it is either because they were in a supply side market, or the natural market dynamics were being interfered with. This could be because demand was artificially suppressed (product is made illegal, excessive cost of locating product, social censure, etc.) OR because the capacity to supply product was interfered with (for example, shortage of parts or raw material, unreasonable cost of export, or the manipulation into belief in limiting supply for some arbitrary political reason). Consider the Middle Agers, for example, when initiative on the part of the ordinary man was discouraged because the benefit of the innovation would never be experienced by the innovator under feudal control.

I think it would be reasonable in Anglo Saxon circles to say that the post-Elizabethan dark-spirited conservatism actually damaged the flow of natural economic transactions and reduced the use of "advertising" in males by:

(a)persuading them they should not serve more than one customer
(b)persuading them that evcen thinking about economies of scale was criminal and
(c) establishing a conspiracy among potential customers against accepting reduced prices, improved packaging, special offers, rebates and other incentives to a naturally prosperous economy.

The ultimate extension of this trend can be found in the suburbs around New York in the Fifties, where all the fathers went to work in gray, dull flannel suits wearing precisely matched dull colored fedoras, averaged 2.25 children, Doris Day reigned on AM Radio, and the men were constrained by extreme censure if they tried normal promotional techniques. Sigh. And they thought Reagonomics was bad!!!

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 10:27 PM

Um... do I have my mind in the gutter, Amos, or are you saying that what the men were constrained against promoting was their sexuality?

(Sorry. I'm easily confused these days.)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 10:39 PM

Probably both, dear lady! :>))!!

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 11:26 PM

Ok. I can live with that. ;-)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: ddw
Date: 25 Jun 01 - 11:45 PM

MMario — your mother was right about the eldest woman having the last word in the home.

But the key words there are "in the home," which is the place of women's responsibility. They are left there to raise the MEN's sons while the men go galavanting as they choose.

I was in Japan for two years in the early days of the transition, when the first post-war generation was reaching university age, and it was very interesting to watch the clash of the generations. Some of the adults who had fought in WWII wanted desperately to westernize their society and many of their kids agreed — but a lot of others reacted against what they saw as the loss of their cultural identity. Made for an interesting dynamic.

cheers,

david

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 02:49 AM

I think that in many societies where men can marry more than one woman, it came about because women's work is somewhat boring. Personally, I find household chores a lot easier to do when I am talking to someone, and even easier when I am working with someone else on it.

If the men are off hunting, or working the fields, or at war, then it would be very nice to have another person about the household. (I even told my mother once when I was much younger, that I wouldn't mind it if my future man was married to more than one woman, as long as I was "first wife" and hopefully the favorite wife as well!)

But unfortunately, that structure in a society, although it has its advantages, it also constrains people too much into certain patterns. There will always be some who just don't fit. If they have no choice but to fit or die, then they'll die. Or their gifts will not be given because they are not allowed to give them.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Lyndi-loo
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 05:11 AM

"Behind every succesful man there is a woman"
I think this is true to a large extent. Although women have the equipment and skills for child rearing, ever since neolithic times they've been goading men to go out and hunt the best meat. In nature the female will mate with the strongest and most succesful, so that all men do is geared up to getting the girl. WOmen are probably more ambitious too (cf Lady Macbeth, Eleanor of Aquitaine) and how many matriarchal societies are there? So yes men are trained (by their mothers) to be big and brave and not to cry, While girls are trained (albeit unconsciously) to be manipulative and with an eye to the long term

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:25 AM

All true, Lyndi-loo, but hopw does that account for wearing bright colored outfits? Oh, DARN!! I put on the wrong socks this morning. Now I'll have to go home and change into the electric blue ones!! Here, hold my spear....

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Lyndi-loo
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:31 AM

Because dye was expensive and the more richly embrodered and colourful the man's dress, the higher his status and the more likely he is to attract a mate. As for women and colours, make up attracts men in a sexual way rather than in a materialistic way. Lipstick enhances the lips and mimics (so Desmond Morris would have it) the labia in the full flush of sexual excitement

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Peg
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 10:29 AM

One thing to bear in mind: Post-war fashions in modern times (when society needs to replenish its deceased young men) are, generally speaking, geared towards accentuating the female form and thus inspiring reproductive activities and leading to child-bearing; I am thinking of the 'teens and the fifties especially; both eras in women's fashions featured a cinched waist (the circle skirts of the fifties and corsetted waist/tight-button blouses of teens), emphatic bosom (either low decollete and short jackets, or later the torpedo or push-up bra), bustle, peplum or crinoline to accentuate hip/bottom area, and shoes which lent height and propelled the buttocks back and the chest out...

Whether these fashion dictates were intentionally geared towards getting babies made is hard to say; but certainly after long years at war and lonely years t home both men and women were ready for some old-fashioned stay-at-home adventures...

Peg (who knows more about fashion than is perhaps healthy in a woman who mainly shops at the Salvation Army)

Oh, and as to whether men are the new women: sorry, that is just too insulting to even think about answering.

:)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 09:29 PM

Aw, Peg, you say the nicest things! :>) Thaks for really cutting through to core issue here!

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: sophocleese
Date: 26 Jun 01 - 10:08 PM

Lyndi Loo I have to say that I take exception to a lot of what you have written here. "Although women have the equipment and skills for child rearing, ever since neolithic times they've been goading men to go out and hunt the best meat. In nature the female will mate with the strongest and most succesful, so that all men do is geared up to getting the girl. WOmen are probably more ambitious too (cf Lady Macbeth, Eleanor of Aquitaine) and how many matriarchal societies are there? So yes men are trained (by their mothers) to be big and brave and not to cry, While girls are trained (albeit unconsciously) to be manipulative and with an eye to the long term "

Tamberlaine? I would hesitate to suggest that one gender is more ambitious than the other based on fictional representations of historic characters. Women do not always choose the strongest and the most successful, many women choose the exotic, the sensible, the artistic, the abusive or the sensitive. From personal knowledge I can tell you that I do not raise my son to be big and brave and not cry: I am attempting to raise an emotionally healthy child not a cripple. If I am unconsciously training my daughter to be manipulative I'm doing a bad job of it as I am a lousy manipulator.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 11:32 AM

Well said, Sophocleese!

Given the fact that human beings have neither the teeth nor the digestive tract of a carnivore....

I have always doubted that humanity began as the traditional cave man, armed with club or spear, trudging off into the wilderness to batter and stab large hairy animals, and drag the meat back home to their admiring womenfolk.

Phooey! I think that's just the prevailing mythology of our particular era.

I think it far more likely that humanity began as peaceful fruit and plant eaters, since our digestive system is admirably designed for that purpose, and who would not choose peace if conditions easily allowed it?

Later, when there was a severe climatic change (ice age), killing off much of the edible vegetation, people were forced to turn to eating meat (as has always been the case in the far northerly regions), and using weapons...then came the popularly conceived age of the "caveman". Then came war. Harsh conditions produce harsh people.

I also believe the earlier advanced civilizations were matriarchal...as has been touched on already in this thread.

- LH

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 04:18 PM

LH... I've got canine fangs at the upper third tooth on each side (from the front centre). These came in after the "regular" looking teeth came in and were pulled to allow them space. Many people with these canine teeth have the canines removed instead - depends on the dentist. So, I am allowed to kill and eat meat... just finished a deer burger and it was scrumpcious. And I shit just as well as anyone. Now, about my webbed toes... can you swim ?

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 06:46 PM

I was seeing on the box that current evidence seems to suggest that the meta in the diet of Paleolithic people wasn't big hairy animals, but rabbits. Easier and safer to catch, easier to carry around and cook, and tastier. Which all seems much more likely. They weren't stupid. (And it'd mean the women would as likely as not have been off hunting them with the kids, while the blokes hung around the cave singing songs and telling stories. Matriarchy's got a lot going for it. Just so long as women don't copy too many male ways, or we're really in deep trouble.)

Men are merely exploring possibilities that were unavailable to them for hundreds of years. Women are, as well. What's wrong with that? (hesperis)

Well, I don't know anyone, male or female, who has been around for hundreds of years. I'd have thought the more powerful thing might be people trying to be a bit different from your mother or father or both.

And I never understand this seat-up / seat-down bit either - don't most men leave the seat down anyway?

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 06:59 PM

I've got canine incisors too. And flat-topped molars. And only one stomach, which is just as effective at digesting meat as it is at digesting fruits and veggies. If I had to make a call, based just on science and not on unground axes, I'd probably say I'm an omnivore.

I've never understood the toilet thing. If men can lift it to piddle, why can't women lower it? What is it that causes a woman to go into the bathroom butt-first, never at any point looking at the toilet to determine the status of the seat? Never understood that one.

Good point, McG, about the mother/father (versus 100s of years) thing.

The real issue is that society at one time had strong ideas of what men and women were "supposed to" do based on gender. And those ideas have been discounted and/or discarded to a large extent, and society still doesn't have anything to fill the gap that is left. And we have people from varying generations, and/or in varying stages along this line from strict gender roles to no gender roles, and all the various points in between. So naturally there is some tension.

A large part of it comes down to the MYOB principle, and for heterosexual couples, talking out what each wants the relationship to be like in terms of who does what. Come to think of it homosexual couples have to have exactly the same sorts of discussions, although there is no gender-based expectations that cloud up the issue there. (Lesbians never have to touch the toilet seat (with hands) except to clean it -- lucky gals!)

Just some thoughts.

Alex

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 07:05 PM

"If men can lift it to piddle" - that's a big if...

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 07:11 PM

Sorry to be late to the party, but cold beer is manly? Warm bitter, please, not cold lager - that's for women.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Peg
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 07:12 PM

Men occasionally use the seat when it's down (at least once a day, let's hope). Women never use it when it's up (except when they clean it, and let's face it, women are usually the ones who clean it).

'Nuff said.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: hesperis
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 07:19 PM

Well, fung shui says that if you don't put the lid down, you are draining prosperity away...

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 09:03 PM

Actually, there are hygenic arguments for both the seat and the lid being kept down on the toilet. Every time the toilet is flushed, some of the contents (water as well as waste) become airborn particulate matter. You end up living with a residue of sewage on your stuff and in your lungs. I guess that thought doesn't bother some people. It kind of grosses me out, though.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: GUEST,blt
Date: 27 Jun 01 - 10:04 PM

Well, this certainly is a charming thread. My initial reaction was to be impressed by the number of assumptions, myths, and magical thinking that I was reading, beginning with the title.

IMHO, typecasting either gender gets tricky, because there's always, always an exception. For example, shaving--as a woman, facial hair can be a fact of life, and not due to hormonal changes at menopause. So some women have beards, some shave. Culturally, some males have no or very little facial hair, so shaving (or not) has no tie-in to virility. The importance of the public vs private domains of women's lives survives cross-culturally for several reasons: it works (in terms of how power is managed), it provides women respite from the demands of a male-dominate public setting, and, typically, when women are no longer able to bear children, their status increases. It goes without saying that this is not true in the US.

Amazons also lived in Africa, one group in particular earning a reputation as strong fighters. I don't believe that the word "amazon" was used to describe them, and I don't remember very much about their history. I believe their ruler, a woman, became very well-known for her intelligence and governing skills, but that's somewhat of a guess--she could easily have simply been a despot.

It's so interesting to me that gender seems to be perceived as a polarized issue, as if one either fits column A or column B. In my own experience, I can sense a range of body images and identities. Sometimes, these are related to outside appearances, such as haircuts, wearing a dress or jeans, assertiveness, eye contact--in my youth, I was often mistaken for a young man, now it happens less frequently but it still happens. Little kids will often ask me if I'm a boy or a girl. I think if anything I cultivated an androgenous look for the freedom of it, to not be typcast.

blt

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 04:18 PM

I like cold beer. I always put the seat AND the lid down after I inspect and clean it if required - every usage. I turn around and walk out when I enter my neighbourhood pub if the bartender is female and I don't know anyone in the pub. I am always courteous and would rather be friends with anyone than be overbearing or macho. Gee... I wonder if I do have a feminine side ? But, if I do, it must be lesbian, cause I sure like p... er, women.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 06:05 PM

Wal, gnu, this ol' Texas hand came to visit the Big Apple and ended up buying hisself a beer in one of the many bars therein, and struck up a conversation with a fine looking young woman. She asked hiom (because of his hat) if he was a REAL cowboy, and he allowed he was, and after a bit of chat he asked her what she did.

"Oh," she replied, "I'm a lesbian!"

"Oh, yeah? Well, what's that?"

"Well, it means I like making love to women!!"

"Oh, I get ya....hmmm....innerestin'!"

Well, by'n'by she wanders off and he's sittin' there nursing his beer and another nice looking lady comes up and asks him, "Are you a REAL cowboy??"

"Well, ma'a'm, I useta think that's what I wuz. But now I think I must be a lesbian!"

Whaddya mean, not funny!!!??

Whassamadda you?

Geeez, some folks got no sensa yewma!!

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: GUEST,blt
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 11:23 PM

Maybe the new women are lesbians--it wouldn't be the first time.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Jun 01 - 11:59 PM

I don't know... I think the whole point of being a new woman is that we get to be whatever we want.

(cause I sure like c..k er, men)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 05:47 AM

Well, I WAS going to say "pretty girls", but I thought it might offend, so I used the term "women".

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 07:36 AM

New Labour, New Country, New Women...

I don't trust anything that uses "New" as a positive buzz word. Or Old for that matter. Chronological snobbery.

Presumably if there's some change in the zeitgeist and it becomes intellectually in for women to go round being submissive and so forth, people will call that being a "New Women".

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jun 01 - 11:01 PM

Ouch! Touche, gnu.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: gnu
Date: 30 Jun 01 - 06:06 AM

Aw, Carol. Didn't mean to ouch you. Just teasing.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Jun 01 - 06:42 AM

Me too. ;-)

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 05 Jul 01 - 12:19 PM

OK, I'd been ignoring this thread, but then the conversation at the BBQ I went to yesterday brought this up for me. Imagine a bunch of restauranteurs, aged anywhere from early 20's to late 40's, it seemed, talking around a grill on which there was prime rib, among other things. And yummy sides (even an excellent avocado salad) and even yummier desserts... and men greatly outnumbered women. I'm new to the crowd, didn't know anybody but the person who brought me, so I'm being quiet and listening. And all the men are talking about is diet, nutrition, fat content versus sugar content and on and on, and I was thinking Wow, it's just like the thread said, when I realized an important and critical difference, wondering if y'all noticed this too:

When women (gross overgeneralizations and stereotyping follow) talk about nutrition, it all seems to be about LOOKS (oh, if I eat that cake, it'll go straight to my hips). None of these men were even slightly talking about their looks, they were talking about their HEALTH, predispositions to diabetes, etc. Not one of them ever mentioned how much SEXIER he is now that he's lost the 70 lbs, or whatever, they all talked about how much BETTER THEY FEEL. I found it very, very interesting. Men have taken over counting calories but not the reasons why?

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: MMario
Date: 05 Jul 01 - 12:30 PM

Mrzzy - according to my sisters -(whom I would NEVER - EVER - contridict) this is because men *assume* they are the Creator's gift to Women, no matter whether it's true.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: CarolC
Date: 05 Jul 01 - 06:23 PM

I've had different experiences of why women talk about nutrition and healthy food than you have, Mrrzy. Most of the women I know who talk about that sort of thing do it for reasons of being and feeling healthy.

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Amos
Date: 06 Jul 01 - 09:45 AM

Well, after exhaustive research I have some good news that can retire this perplexity and conundrum among us.

It has been definitively concluded by some very leading-edge researchers in an esteemed research university that in 98.32 per cent (a high enough figure to be statistically meaningful even on the most difficult issues) that once you compensate for purely semiotic obfuscation and a small outlying number of sexual conversions, the underlying pattern is unmistakeable:

New women are new WOMEN!!!! And men are MEN!!!

Tadaaaaaaaaaa!!

A

Subject: RE: Are Men The New Women?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 06 Jul 01 - 10:05 AM

Hey, even 99.99% isn't statistically significant till you see all 4 cells... (BG!)