The Role of the New Age Male

Men have no business in government
they have not the heart for it
and therefore not the head

Running the home
or the nation
and even the planet
is the prerogative of the female
for the simple reason their hearts
and by association
also their heads
are in the right place for the job

Queens make the best rulers

The ancient role of the warrior
is over
man has proved his courage
It is time to sheath his ego

The role of the New Age man
is to engineer new technologies
ones that bring comfort and security
to the home

Why, why should women rule? I don’t get it. There is no case here. Only a conclusion.

Every nation is bankrupt
all our infrastructures are crumbling
the entire planet is polluted
WMD’s are up for sale
Plagues, poverty and war abound

Have men not fucked up government enough?

Why not give women a shot at it?
This is a Mother planet.
Nature seems to favor it
This is not a conclusion.
What other option do we have?

Men are not going to change
Let them war on Mars. :mrgreen:

Sure there are problems. There will always be problems, but how would putting women in charge change anything? My take on women is that they don’t want to be in charge and that they don’t like making decisions. I don’t know why you would want to put them in a place they don’t want to be.

There do not always need to be basic house-keeping problems
like keeping food on the table
a roof overhead
and clothes on our backs

We have not solved those problems yet
on a global scale
and it is coming home to bite us
and they are getting worse as we get more crowded

If men continue to grapple with basic housekeeping problems
no real change for the better will ever happen
as as you say
those problems will always be with us

The role of the New Age man
is to let women run the house
and let him get on with new technologies
like solving the energy crisis for instance

You have a chauvinist take on women
I have a large home and family
and my daughters manage it perfectly
including the budget
and they enjoy the responsibility
leaving me and my sons free
to make repairs when needed
and to think of other things that need doing

Scale that up to national size
and then planet size
and you have a simple working model
of social efficiency
and gender compatibility

How would putting women in charge change anything? Why are women better than men?

Also, if you and your sons are deciding what needs doing, aren’t you in charge? Aren’t your daughters still in the traditional role? I mean, maybe they’re not cooking and cleaning, but If you are deciding what is and isn’t important you are still in the traditional male role and your daughters are still in a traditional female role, albiet not the old, old traditional role, but still in the role of completing tasks that you think are important. I’m not saying I don’t like women. I love women. I just don’t think being in charge is what they like. Heavy lays the crown. Being a leader is a blessing and a curse. I don’t know why you would want women to have that pressure.

Also, I could easily argue that your point of view is chauvinist. Just because all men want to be in charge, doesn’t mean that is what women want. And if women were so capable and desiring of being in charge, then why aren’t they?

My view is this. Women are capable of being leaders, but they don’t have any desire to be. It’s not in their nature to want to have control like it is for men. It isn’t that they can’t make decisions, it’s that they don’t want to, because making decisions is unpleasant, and you can’t blame them for not wanting to do that. It’s hard.

Women don’t have the same violent and brutal urges that men have. Most violent criminals are men. That makes women less capable to deal with violence because they don’t have those same urges to hurt people physically that men have. Women don’t get into fist fights. They can’t empathize and put them selves in the shoes of sick killers and that makes them as leaders weak in their ability to deal with them because in order to effectively deal with violence you need to be able to relate with it on some level and what drives people to it.

Government is about providing basic physical security. The reassurance that violence is not imminent and that people are safe. It’s not a woman’s realm no matter what you say.

You should accept the fact that women are not like men and no matter how much they want to be like men, they’re not, and that there is nothing wrong with not being a man.


[size=85][resisting urge to ask sdwilson2002 what century he’s living in][/size]

Interesting. Gee, maybe somebody’d better tell these women:
Patricia Woertz
Angela Braly
Lynn Elsenhans
Indra Nooyi
Irene Rosenfeld
Ellen Kullman
Mary Sammons
Carol Meyrowitz
Anne Mulcahy
Brenda Barnes
Andrea Jung
Laura Sen
Susan Ivey
Carol Bartz
Christina Gold
Borjana Kristo
Angela Merkel
Tarja Halonen
Mary McAleese
Cristina E. Fernández de Kirchner
Michelle Bachelet Jeria
Pratibha Patil
Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf
Luísa Días Diogo
Michaëlle Jean
Maria Macapagal-Arroyo
Helen Clark
Sheila Bair
Cynthia Carroll
Ho Ching
Anne Lauvergeon
Gail Kelly
Safra Catz
Carol Tome
Yulia Tymoshenko
Mary Sammons
Sri Mulyani Indrawati
Dr. Julie Gerberding
Ellen Alemany
Hynd Bouhia
Valentina Matviyenko
Nancy Tellem
Ann Livermore
Gloria Arroyo
Neelie Kroes
Amy Woods Brinkley

And that’s a bad thing why? :-k

Wouldn’t that make them more capable? They would be better able to calmly and rationally deal with volatile situations. I personally do not look for violent and brutal urges in a strong leader.

Oh trust me, it would change everything… :wink: [size=85]hehe[/size]

I don’t see it as anybody being better than another
or being in charge.

Adults are self-policed responsible beings who need nobody over-seeing their lives.

I simply believe that women are better home-makers than men.

Our gender roles are established in childhood
Girls play house
Boys smash down castles,
Girls nurture
Boys destroy

Civil government is about house-keeping and good home-making
about bringing new responsible citizens into the world
making sure they are well fed and well educated
We need people in government who naturally like to nurture such behavior.

Men got into the government business towards the end of the Bronze Age
when clans warred for hegemony in over-crowded territories
and survival depended on military might
walled villages and constant vigilance
against an enemy neighbor that lived right next door
and came cattle raiding and hostage-taking
Warrior chiefs were a survival necessity then

That era is long gone
Wars of national survival are basically push-button affairs
Only a small percentage of men need be in the army
We need nurturers in civil leadership now
not warriors.

Men are good at engineering
two million years of hunting, trapping, snaring, poisoning
taught us all about torque, tension, trajectory, leverage, chemistry, etc
war technology served to hone our design and mass manufacturing skills
Maths and engineering are in our genes
not budgeting the housekeeping money

We need to be involved in large-scale prjects
harnessing ocean energy
designing vertical cities
farming indoors
etc etc
not siting on our backsides in Congress
arguing over party politics
and pork-barreling the money

I agree that the head is lacking, but the heart? Those who seek power are passionate about their pursuit.

I agree - in this day in age - in any other age, it would take a man to rule the tribe in order that it stand strong against the conflicting menaces of other male-driven tribes. But today we live in a ‘global village’ in which case the woman’s roll is far exceding that of men by far. They are the care givers and the home makers. The world has become theirs’. It is their home and their family over which to care.

Maybe… but what is his roll now?

I don’t think this is it. I think we’ll see a torrent of women entering into the engineering industry as they feel more and more comfortable practicing the art. It isn’t so much that men are better at engineering than women, it’s that men take more pride in it because it is traditionally considered a male niche, but in the age of gender equallity, it matters less and less whether one is male or female, and more and more women are entering the field without a second thought.

No, I believe the roll of men will be to break the bonds of conformity. Men tend to be islands in the midst of a sea of community-bound individuals. They tend to stand out as examples of how one need not fear or submit to social pressures and trends. That’s not to say that women are incapable of doing the same, just that they focus more on observing social norms and standard - and for good reason: they have greater concern for social cohesion and community integrity - which is important - but I believe that in this day and age, when the global vollage overtakes the world and we become one community, there will be a danger: there will be the danger of the individual - that abberant who can’t quite find his niche - being drowned, being suffocated by the tyrrany of the community. It has typically been males who don’t care - who don’t give a shit - about what the community expects, what they believe and hold dear - such that he breaks free from the bonds of social conformity. It will be he who leads the way in those occasional cercumstances when the social pressure becomes so great that not a single soul save he himself dares to speak out against the trends, and risks his reputation and perhaps well-being, but stands to gain a small and humble following, in the hopes that he can shed light on the path out from the community’s mutual enslavement.

I am favourably disposed toward your poem up to this point. However, this is where I disagree—and disagree vehemently:

The object of man’s conquests has never been comfort and security. True, the will to comfort and security is of the essence of what drives him, but it is (or ought to be) secondary to the will to power (to growth, expansion, even annihilation). I say “ought to be” because the latter only preponderates over the former in ascending life; where life is in decay, the former tends to preponderate over the latter.

Also, queens may make the best rulers, but kings make the best conquerors! There is a fundamental difference between the tasks of the sovereign in times of crisis and in times of peace. Crisis however is the state of nature (and ought to be!).

[size=95]Ye shall love peace as a means to new wars—and the short peace more than the long.
[Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra, Of War and Warriors.][/size]

The Pharaohs who built pyramids
and the Emperors who built the Great Wall
will remain remembered
long after all the host of kings and warlords
who conquered legions of armies

The Pharaohs who built pyramids
and the Emperors who built the Great Wall
and employed great armies of men
in constructive effort
will remain remembered
long after all the host of kings and warlords
who conquered armies
and slaughtered legions of men
in their destructive hubris

They are the same dudes.

Cynical garbage. Life is better now than it’s ever been in the history of humanity.

And having women rule wouldn’t change anything except superficially. Women and men are different only in the way we express the human condition. The fundamental problem is the same.

Don’t know that I agree with him, but Diogenes begs to differ.

Diogenes would likely conclude that life is worse than it has ever been in the history of humanity.

That’s why MM’s a cynic.

Irony never ends
First I am laughed as as an idealist
then accused as a cynic

I never inferred that life is worse than ever
I enjoy the jet ride across the states
and sympathize with the ox-wagon pace of yore

My condemnation regarding current conditions stands
not a word is untrue
with every technological advantage money can buy
modern male government has screwed up
and the worst is yet to come

I don’t agree
women have a different mind-set to men
get pregnant
squeeze out a babe
with your life on the line
and then tell me different
they manage family matters better than men

MM never said that it is the worst it has ever been. I’m only assuming Diogenes would say that, I don’t know one way or another.

My post was meant to be taken completely seperate from anything involving MagnetMan.

Women are not driven to power. They don’t want it like men do. It’s not incapable, just not hungry for the role. A list of women leaders doesn’t prove anything.

On your second point, without a violent imagination, you cannot protect yourself from violent imaginations. Without the drive to conquer, you cannot protect yourself from being conquered.

Italian woman
at least
seem to disagree with you