# So what if more men are posting on TAM



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Seriously,

Is it not sexist to complain that there are more men posting on a public message board? Is it the members fault who joins and decides to post? 

Personaly i feel theres a pretty fair amount of men vers women posting.

Am I wrong ? I haven't actually counted do we have satistics?

Just trying to understand the though process.

A commet was made about men being harder on women than they are on men with similar circumstances.

I think the same could be said in reverse. 

I am not trying to be an asshat here. I just don't see it.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

I have been on several other forums where the females outnumbered the males.

What I read on TAM is if a W is having an affair, the men say leave her. The women on TAM are somewhat more likely to look to problem solving.

On another forum where 95% of the posters are female the advice between women is like it is here, with the D word is often the main advice.

Personally, I am surprised with the number of male posters here on TAM. It is a first for me.

On one female dominated forum, women that have been divorced for 5 to 10 years still talk about how awful the XH was and how the D ruined their life and they can't trust any man. A few men do the same thing but it usually is limited to 2 years post divorce.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Handy said:


> I have been on several other forums where the females outnumbered the males.
> 
> What I read on TAM is if a W is having an affair, the men say leave her. The women on TAM are somewhat more likely to look to problem solving.
> 
> ...


Interesting

Do you think the male to female ratio is unbalanced here?


----------



## Rick Blaine (Mar 27, 2017)

Handy said:


> I have been on several other forums where the females outnumbered the males.
> 
> What I read on TAM is if a W is having an affair, the men say leave her. The women on TAM are somewhat more likely to look to problem solving.
> 
> ...


That's because women don't forget.


----------



## WildMustang (Nov 7, 2017)

chillymorn69 said:


> Seriously,
> 
> Is it not sexist to complain that there are more men posting on a public message board? Is it the members fault who joins and decides to post?
> 
> ...



Well, I am a woman and I have been reading TAM on a pretty consistent basis for several years-about 6 years.

I enjoy both the women's and the men's perspectives, but I usually get the most out of the men's opinions.

I think that is because I have female friends and family in real life- I can ask and get their take on stuff easily at any time. And there are plenty of solid women on this forum who give awesome advice.

But I don't have many male friends and male family members in real life that I can go to and ask their opinions. So I also highly value the opinions of men on TAM, their perspectives, thoughts and advice.

And lets be real-men and women perceive things differently and think differently. 

I don't know the stats on TAM, but if there are more men than women, as a woman, I find that to be an asset, not a liability, for the above stated reason.

I am thankful for a forum that gives many different views and seems to be (to me) pretty balanced (with occasional exceptions).

Yes, I occasionally come across both misandry and misogyny and bitter folks, whether male or female, but on the whole, I find this forum to be very good. And balanced.


----------



## Herschel (Mar 27, 2016)

I will admit, I often tell men to gtfo when I tell women to GTFO.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

Rick Blaine said:


> That's because women don't forget.


Yeah just another unfounded generalisation. After being here for 7 years I would say that there are more men that are full of vitriol and hatred for their ex many years later than women. Overall this type of poster in in a small minority but while the women tend to reflect and give advice based on their experience many years ago, there are men here that go straight to the VAR, she's a cheater, get out and find sex blah blah blah 

TBH this type of incorrect gender stereotyping is what drives many women away from TAM


----------



## cma62 (Jul 31, 2010)

I think the men on TAM that consistently post and offer advice and perspectives are very insightful and their introspection is very refreshing
Men’s opinions and guidance on different situations are hard to come by.
There are always a few that ruin it for the rest....but for the most part ....they mean well.

The men that start threads or post to help other men and women here are caring, sympathetic individuals in touch with their feelings......not some macho version of men that think reaching out for help or to offer help is beneath them....so good on all you great TAM men....you’re all great representatives of your gender.


----------



## Rick Blaine (Mar 27, 2017)

MrsHolland said:


> Yeah just another unfounded generalisation. After being here for 7 years I would say that there are more men that are full of vitriol and hatred for their ex many years later than women. Overall this type of poster in in a small minority but while the women tend to reflect and give advice based on their experience many years ago, there are men here that go straight to the VAR, she's a cheater, get out and find sex blah blah blah
> 
> TBH this type of incorrect gender stereotyping is what drives many women away from TAM


That "generalization" is something that many women--not men--have shared with me in conversations. I didn't come to the conclusion on my own and it's not my own supposition. But I do believe it.

Men are from Mars, and women are from Venus. Each sex has different characteristics for better and for worse. They are not the same, and if that drives away people from TAM so be it, I guess.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Speaking purely as a poster on this...

I pride myself on being as fair and level headed as possible. I have had many posters here affirm such, via posts and PM's, both male and female. 

The bias is not overall based on male versus female, but more along the lines of this:

"There is NEVER a good reason to cheat, and it is NEVER okay, nor understandable...

...unless you are a female BS who did not give her husband enough sex."

Then starts the statements alluding to the wife deserving to be cheated on for denying the husband intimacy. Trust me that I can relate to being in a sexless marriage, considering that is initially what brought me to this site, but alluding to or even lightly suggesting it is a justifiable reason for the husband to cheat is dead wrong. There is ZERO justification for infidelity. 

It exists, and it is not okay.

There are biases that go the other way as well, but that is another topic for another day.


----------



## Don't Panic (Apr 2, 2017)

I'm appreciative of the up-close & personal view into the male mind, thanks guys. I'm impressed by the TAM men's honesty, openness, and level of self-awareness. Their contributions have educated me on key issues within marriage. The insights and advice I read from the men, AND the women, has made me a more thoughtful person. 

Reading extensively on this forum, I've come to learn the posters who have an outlook on life that resonates with my own. I respect and seriously consider their advice, it does not matter at all to me if they are male or female. 

The bitterness and vitriol is definitely present, and easy to spot. It serves as a cautionary mentality to avoid at all costs.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

Rick Blaine said:


> That "generalization" is something that many women--not men--have shared with me in conversations. I didn't come to the conclusion on my own and it's not my own supposition. But I do believe it.
> 
> *Men are from Mars, and women are from Venus.* Each sex has different characteristics for better and for worse. They are not the same, and if that drives away people from TAM so be it, I guess.


The worst relationship book I never finished. My ex went to a work conference and the author of that book was guest speaker, over half of the audience did not return after lunch in protest at what a terrible speaker he was with terrible content.

Any driving members away with false generalisations is poor form.


----------



## Satya (Jun 22, 2012)

Everyone here posts from a personal experience POV.

Some have had pretty disruptive experiences and are therefore more strongly opinionated about certain topics.

I never thought about the ratio of men to women here as I suppose I've always appreciated that it feels more balanced compared to other forums I've experienced.

I don't let opinions, even seemingly vitriolic ones, deter me from being here. I just think that I haven't been in their shoes, so it's not for me to really tell them they *shouldn't* be a certain way (that's for our mods to do) but I will make suggestions based on my own life experiences.

I value both male and female opinions and perspectives here. I regret we've had posters leave us who I thought were valuable in their own way, even those who received criticism for their brand of advice. I'm sure some day I'll feel ready to depart.

I came here at the start of my "breakthrough" period after my divorce and the collective wisdom here indirectly helped me to stay on track. I'd like to pay it forward, which is why I bring my perspective in everything I post.

Men and women, heck, people are going to see a topic or issue in many different ways. That's what makes us interesting. I don't have to agree with anything here and no one has to agree with me, but it behooves both of us to remain respectful of our respective viewpoints and that there is a reason they exist in the first place. There is no opinion here more "worthy" or "valuable" than another, although you may clearly really behind one or the other of it speaks to you. 

With that kind of attitude, I avoid unnecessary feelings that could take over my judgements, interfere with my rational efforts, and sour my introspection here.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

chillymorn69 said:


> Seriously,
> 
> Is it not sexist to complain that there are more men posting on a public message board? Is it the members fault who joins and decides to post?
> 
> ...


I always hear about this double standard but I don't really get it. EG even has FS believing it apparently. Personally, on the topic of infidelity, I react the same way whenever a betrayed who neglects their spouse sexually comes here looking for sympathy. Man or woman, doesn't matter. On the topic of sexless marriage, I generally only respond to men's posts because I can't really relate to or understand relationships where the man is withholding. Not saying it doesn't happen, just that I have no experience or advice in the matter. And those sexless men? Well I'm pretty hard on them, cause I think they need it. I'm way harder on sexless men than I ever am on women. But ya, people who get cheated on after withholding sex don't get a free pass from me. I'm not going to say they deserve it necessarily, but I will say they should have seen it coming. It's a predictable outcome and consequence of their actions. And THAT doesn't matter if they're the husband or wife.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

^^^ That pretty much sums up my approach on this as well.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Speaking purely as a poster on this...
> 
> I pride myself on being as fair and level headed as possible. I have had many posters here affirm such, via posts and PM's, both male and female.
> 
> ...


I've posted many times on betrayed men's threads that they were at fault (at least partially) for neglecting their wife. But that always seems to get ignored. The truth is, it's a valid logical opinion. It's not about deserving, it's about the natural consequences of a person's choices. I think it's naive to think you can treat your spouse any way you want and then get to be all indignant when you get cheated on.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

WorkingOnMe said:


> I think it's naive to think you can treat your spouse any way you want and then get to be all indignant when you get cheated on.


In any marriage sans sex, no one should expect or feel entitled to any sexual fidelity at all.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

WorkingOnMe said:


> I've posted many times on betrayed men's threads that they were at fault (at least partially) for neglecting their wife. But that always seems to get ignored. The truth is, it's a valid logical opinion. It's not about deserving, it's about the natural consequences of a person's choices. I think it's naive to think you can treat your spouse any way you want and then get to be all indignant when you get cheated on.


I don't think a person's (minor) children deserve the "natural consequences" of that choice.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

Red Sonja said:


> I don't think a person's (minor) children deserve the "natural consequences" of that choice.




I agree. Refuses should consider that their withholding doesn’t just affect themselves. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

chillymorn69 said:


> Seriously,
> 
> Is it not sexist to complain that there are more men posting on a public message board? Is it the members fault who joins and decides to post?
> 
> ...


I am pretty sure that this post is referring to my comments that there are more men who post on TAM than women. I want to clarify that the issue, IMO, is not that there are more men who post here. The issue that I see is that often women who post on TAM are often given input that leads to them leaving TAM pretty darn quickly, generally input blaming them for their spouses infidelity or other marital issues. And if a man were to do post the mirror story, the input is very different.

People can post whatever they want on TAM, within the posting guidelines. But I do think that sometimes open discussion about this can help all of us step back and do some internal processing.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> In any marriage sans sex, no one should expect or feel entitled to any sexual fidelity at all.



And that about sums it up for some of you.

What?

Let's talk about those Borderline Males.
Many of you poor, neglected husbands been subjected to being in a relationship with that man?

Of course not!

Do you have any idea the daily abuse that starts with coffee and proceeds the entire day until you get to hit the sheets with that man?

How bout that poor little wierdie "sexy addict"

The guy that prefers porn-I know frigid wife, fat wife, 
Mommy wife- fill in blank wife.

My poor unappreciated penis. Of course I'm "banging " a ho.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

sandcastle said:


> And that about sums it up for some of you.
> 
> What?
> 
> ...


Are you talking about husbands being married to men?



sandcastle said:


> Of course not!
> 
> Do you have any idea the daily abuse that starts with coffee and proceeds the entire day until you get to hit the sheets with that man?
> 
> ...


Your post doesn't seem to make any sense. Could you try again so I might have have an idea of what you're trying to say?


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> Are you talking about husbands being married to men?
> 
> 
> 
> Your post doesn't seem to make any sense. Could you try again so I might have have an idea of what you're trying to say?


Obviously no - I'm not talking about husbands being married to BDP men.
Nice try. Metaphor? 

But we hear plenty from Uptown about those BPD wives.



The fact that women are actually married to abusive men that ARE ABUSIVE - financially, sexually, emotionally, physically-PROBABLY affects how much WIFEY wants to "bang" her husband.

Do this make sense? Or is the husband abusive cause the wife is not @Banging"swallowing" engaging in husbands fantasy.?

So yes- plenty of women do not or refuse to "bang" their husbands - and for really deep and emotional reasons .

Women have a right to refuse entry to THEIR vagina.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Being married to a BPD man is a self solving problem generally. The woman leaves and that's it. 

The other way around is considerably more complicated.

In either case the reality of the family court system in many places has a serious anti male bias - not alimony per se but custody also and even getting a divorce to begin with - North Carolina anyone?


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

john117 said:


> Being married to a BPD man is a self solving problem generally. The woman leaves and that's it.



Really?

You seem to be a fairly objective poster but you get an F on this one.

The Borderline Male controls the money, the business, the kids and the wife.

Most cases the wife of a Borderline makes/ has ZERO access to money. The wife has no credit in her name, her name is not on any bank account.

She probably has been isolated from family and friends. Often times- the wife a Zero support system. She has been character assinated to all including her children. Any IC or MC husband has paid and charmed by the Borderline husband.

Ever hear of Battered Wife Syndrome?

The majority of these women have NOT had their facial features rearranged.

But you do get do hear about the entire family blown away by that upstanding and great husband and father.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

@sandcastle of course women have a right to refuse entry to their vagina, just as men also have a right to refuse the use of their penis.

That said I have never suggested any gender doesn't have a right to their own autonomy.

Perhaps you might consider tilting at the right windmill before you carry on.

Personally I've never experienced a sexless sexual relationship with anyone, and that includes being happily married for 18+ years to my terrific wife, who I have been with for over 21 years.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> @sandcastle of course women have a right to refuse entry to their vagina, just as men also have a right to refuse the use of their penis.
> 
> That said I have never suggested they don't have a right to their own autonomy.
> 
> ...


You totally skirted/Avoided Borderline husband issue.

And I'm still unclear about your sex edict.

So- does an abused wife still have to "Bang" the husband on demand?

Yes or no.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

No, it isn't sexist and complaint is an interpretation. It doesn't matter to me if at any given time more men than women are posting. Not sure if stats are even maintained on genders since it is the internet and all.


----------



## David51 (Sep 12, 2017)

chillymorn69 said:


> Seriously,
> 
> 
> 
> ...




We have all been betrayed or hurt by someone at some point in our lives. Maybe men are more open about this subject when writing it about it to strangers. It actually has helped me deal with issues in my marriage, both reading of other peoples experiences and also seeing the woman’s point of view.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

sandcastle said:


> You totally skirted/Avoided Borderline husband issue.
> 
> And I'm still unclear about your sex edict.
> 
> ...


At no point have I ever held the opinion that anyone is entitled to sex, or is obliged to proffer sex to anyone whether they are married or otherwise.

Likewise in any sexual relationship no one is entitled to sexual fidelity or obliged to prefer sexual fidelity to anyone whether they are married or otherwise. If their sexual partner/s do not afford them sexual fidelity and or sex in their sexual relationship.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> In any marriage sans sex, no one should expect or feel entitled to any sexual fidelity at all.



Absolute.

Child dies and wife goes into a deep, dark depression where just breathing is more than she can take.

Husband wants a BJ to quell his grief.

What now?


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

Handy said:


> I have been on several other forums where the females outnumbered the males.
> 
> What I read on TAM is if a W is having an affair, the men say leave her. The women on TAM are somewhat more likely to look to problem solving.
> 
> ...


Hate is contagious.

TAM is a rare collective of these bitter roots. And one Martian with a spock puppet Typist.

'Birds of a feather flock together'.

Wounded elephants go to the same species burial ground to die. Knowing that they are buried with their own kind.
Their own quirky ilk.

I believe most TAM members first read some similar posts of 'woe' before they unzip their pants and expose a similar prehensile tail. One nestled between their whipped, lashed butt cheeks. A little sometimes large tail [tale]. A tear soaked, painful tale that most sheepishly spoon feed our prurious hungry minds.

Divorce the hard azzed bum, divorce the curvy bum-ess are the easy answers. 

When you have a cancer, what do they do?
They cut it out, excise it. Burn it out of you, with focused energy. Give you a prescription for 'terrible' medicine [chemo].
Same with getting rid out a parasitic spouse.

It is hard to re-love, re-trust when your warm , still beating heart has been torn from your chest.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> Likewise in any sexual relationship no one is entitled to sexual fidelity



You bet your ass someone is- it is called MARRIAGE VOWS.

You don't like the rules than quit the game before you RUIN countless of innocent lives and PONY UP the monetary consequence according to the law.

Before you take care of that poor ignored Penis.

Super simple!


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

sandcastle said:


> Absolute.
> 
> Child dies and wife goes into a deep, dark depression where just breathing is more than she can take.
> 
> ...


Wife should get treatment for her mental illness and they should both attempt to work on reconnecting and or maintaining their emotional and sexual relationship.

If that proves untenable and one or both of them unilaterally withdraw sex from their sexual relationship. None of them should have any expectation or obligation to afford the other sexual fidelity.



> Child dies and husband goes into a deep, dark depression where just breathing is more than he can take.
> 
> Wife wants some oral sex to quell his grief.
> 
> What now?


Husband should get treatment for his mental illness and they should both attempt to work on reconnecting and or maintaining their emotional and sexual relationship.

If that proves untenable and one or both of them unilaterally withdraw sex from their sexual relationship. None of them should have any expectation or obligation to afford the other sexual fidelity.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> Wife should get treatment for her mental illness and they should both attempt to work on reconnecting and or maintaining their emotional and sexual relationship.
> 
> If that proves untenable and one or both of them unilaterally withdraw sex from their sexual relationship. None of them should have any expectation or obligation to afford the other sexual fidelity.
> 
> ...


Word salad.

How bout this-

EMPATHY?

Mean anything to you that has never been cheated on- supposedly- but you seem to be great at passing down the judgement" no sex in a relationship for whatever reason means the spouse who needs sexy time can do whatever to meet those sexy needs.

Has your SO got that message Over and over?


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

sandcastle said:


> Personal said:
> 
> 
> > Likewise in any sexual relationship no one is entitled to sexual fidelity
> ...





Personal said:


> Likewise in any sexual relationship no one is entitled to sexual fidelity or obliged to prefer sexual fidelity to anyone whether they are married or otherwise. *If their sexual partner/s do not afford them sexual fidelity and or sex in their sexual relationship*.


Strawman much?


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> Strawman much?



Carry on-


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

The problem isn't the ratio of men to women on this site. I would even say that the problem is not most of the forums on this site. The problem seems to be the double standard applied on threads started by women with regards to infidelity, where she admits that the sex had been lacking. In those cases she's told by many that she's to blame for her husband's affair. She's told she needs to meet her husband sexual needs for him to stop cheating.

I rarely see that same reaction when the OP is a man with a cheating wife who also admits to neglecting her emotional needs. And I have yet to see it on a thread where the husband was the withholder of sex. Most men call out the cheater woman as a liar and a cheat. They tell him she's "rewriting history" to suite her agenda. What they rarely, if ever say is that he needs to start meeting her needs if he want her to stop cheating.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

A woman posted a few weeks ago and said Hub was "banging" the nanny.

That thread disappeared with about 5 replies .


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

@Lila I've told plenty of men on these forums that they have no entitlement to sexual fidelity, when they unilaterally withdraw sex from their sexual relationships.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Personal said:


> In any marriage sans sex, no one should expect or feel entitled to any sexual fidelity at all.[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> PERSONAL- YOU SAID IT.
> ...


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Personal said:


> @Lila I've told plenty of men on these forums that they have no entitlement to sexual fidelity, when they unilaterally withdraw sex from their sexual relationships.


I know you have @Personal but you have to admit you are not the norm. It's also very uncommon to see a male OP called out for not meeting his WS emotional needs, whereas it is common to see a female OP called out for not meeting her WS sexual needs. That's the double standard I'm seeing. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

@Lila, okay I am not like most men. Yet I do try to share my perspective and call out anti female hysteria from time to time, when I have the time. And I know I am not the only male who does that here.

As to the double standards I have no answer for it, except to challenge nonsense when you find it if you have the time.

I do wonder if it is in some part, it is just the nature of the beast. Where there will always be a proportion of drive by and limited time posters both men and women. Who will leave regardless of how sugar coated a message may be, if it isn't what they were wanting to hear.

That said I do miss more women posting. And also miss some of the women who used to post frequently, who I enjoyed reading of their perspective and the banter that they shared.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Sandcastle 

You describe an ‘all powerful’ male partner who has isolated you socially and financially.

When he is sleeping with that ho you reference - why doesn’t that make you happy? 
- he isn’t with you
- isn’t trying to control you
- is giving you a cleaner path to divorce
- isn’t pressuring you for sex he is getting elsewhere 

To folks on the outside looking in, it’s a bit strange that you describe your spouse as so terrible while also being so agitated by their affair(s).





sandcastle said:


> Really?
> 
> You seem to be a fairly objective poster but you get an F on this one.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Sandcastle,

His wording was awkward. But what he said was: if you aren’t having sex with your partner in a marrriage or long term relationship, you cannot expect them to remain faithful. 






sandcastle said:


> Personal said:
> 
> 
> > In any marriage sans sex, no one should expect or feel entitled to any sexual fidelity at all.[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The first vow is to love your partner. In a marriage that has a specific meaning. 

If you don’t want to do that - and are filled with hate for your spouse - divorce or don’t divorce. Just don’t act surprised if your partner - who you clearly cannot stand - is laying with someone else. 






sandcastle said:


> You bet your ass someone is- it is called MARRIAGE VOWS.
> 
> You don't like the rules than quit the game before you RUIN countless of innocent lives and PONY UP the monetary consequence according to the law.
> 
> ...


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Sandcastle,
> 
> His wording was awkward. But what he said was: if you aren’t having sex with your partner in a marrriage or long term relationship, you cannot expect them to remain faithful.


Mem, do you think that the faithfulness clause extends to other needs (emotional one) besides sex?


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Sandcastle
> 
> You describe an ‘all powerful’ male partner who has isolated you socially and financially.
> 
> (s).


"All powerful male partner " 
I'm only describing a Male Boderline who has his victim. Wife, mother of kidlets- aged parent, fill in the blank.

Uptown? Calling Uptown.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Self solving problem as in, it's easy to detect, the outcome is more deterministic, and it's socially acceptable. Not to mention the legal system and support networks.

In other words, it's an easy determination and the path out is also clear assuming the wife doesn't dig herself into a hole.

Reverse the roles, and things are drastically different especially with a high functioning BPD. The legal system is of little help, it's not quite socially acceptable, the details are rarely in the open, etc.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

sandcastle said:


> Absolute.
> 
> Child dies and wife goes into a deep, dark depression where just breathing is more than she can take.
> 
> ...


In this case sex is the least of their concerns. But like everything else, they have to work thru it.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Sandcastle
> 
> You describe an ‘all powerful’ male partner who has isolated you socially and financially.
> 
> ...



Who knew that men abuse their wives and wives and their vagina do not get wet as a result.

Gosh- they hate BJs and swallowing.

You know why?

Cause that sweet little guy they married turned into a roly- poly, boring lD, porn sucking, small [email protected]


Does THAT Work?

Forget about the dead kid.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

john117 said:


> Self solving problem as in, it's easy to detect, the outcome is more deterministic, and it's socially acceptable. Not to mention the legal system and support networks.
> 
> In other words, it's an easy determination and the path out is also clear assuming the wife doesn't dig herself into a hole.
> 
> Reverse the roles, and things are drastically different especially with a high functioning BPD. The legal system is of little help, it's not quite socially acceptable, the details are rarely in the open, etc.



Male Borderlines are quite possibly the most dangerous of all Cluster B's. 

If they control the money business partnership you- wife, business partner , parent, child are absolutely Effed.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

People don't magically turn into losers, esp overnight. As the loserification process goes on, instead of clear and honest communication what generally happens?

- detach
- no communication
- no intimacy
- decreased tolerance
- etc

And all of a sudden blindside the newly minted loser with a divorce.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Calling Uptown! 

Need a breakdown on MALE BORDERLINES.

And their unknowing victims that have an ungodly suicide rate- pound for pound.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

sandcastle said:


> Male Borderlines are quite possibly the most dangerous of all Cluster B's.
> 
> If they control the money business partnership you- wife, business partner , parent, child are absolutely Effed.


Agreed. But warning signs are plenty ahead of time. 

Not quite as plenty with female BPD s


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

john117 said:


> Agreed. But warning signs are plenty ahead of time.
> 
> Not quite as plenty with female BPD s


John-
Please just say you MAY not know what you are talking about.

Please maybe just acknowledge that there are many women who come here daily- that ARE abused- and the very LAST thing they need to hear is" are you banging your husband twice a [email protected]?


There are countless WOMEN who need to hear something other than the **** reigns supreme,

You actually sound like an intelligent human being.


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

Most people are here because they've been done dirty in some fashion or another at some point in their life. We all carry that baggage which leads to generalizations and feelings of mistrust towards the opposite gender at some level. The women here have it against men, and the men here have it against women and that comes out in everyone's posts (some more than others along the spectrum). As long as it's civil and within the TOS I don't see it as a problem.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

marriageontherocks2; The women here have it against men said:


> Absolutely disagree and if that is true then they need to split the forum.


----------



## 3Xnocharm (Jun 22, 2012)

I think its awesome that so many men come here and post. I need to find myself THAT kind of man!


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

3Xnocharm said:


> I think its awesome that so many men come here and post. I need to find myself THAT kind of man!


Better make sure you "bang " twice a week.

No matter what!
Cancer! Bang
Chemo. Bang
Dead kid. Bang
No job! Bang
Sexting !

! Double bang.
Curious on Craggielust?
Double bang and swallow.

Double amputation- you are literally ****ed.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

This thread has certainly gotten derailed.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Lila said:


> I know you have @Personal but you have to admit you are not the norm. It's also very uncommon to see a male OP called out for not meeting his WS emotional needs, whereas it is common to see a female OP called out for not meeting her WS sexual needs. That's the double standard I'm seeing.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Get to the gym, date night, help out more around the house, 15 hours quality time, become more interesting, etc. Advice given to men all the time.

It does seem on the infidelity threads though that the men with a cheating wife are far more likely to have their heads buried in the sand as to what is going on. They are a lot more hesitant to even consider that their wife is cheating. The 2x4's come out early and often to kind of shock them into seeing what is actually going on. Threads started by women who have a cheating husband generally seem to start a bit farther along in that the woman knows her husband is cheating, and is not nearly in such denial.

I have seen some of the threads that have brought this issue to a head, and in defense of some of the regular posters here on TAM, the pertinent questions about the general state of the marriage including possible abuse, sexual state and all that are asked very early on and it is up to the OP to provide honest answers to those questions in order to get good feedback, and all too often, those questions are ignored, glossed over or sidestepped.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Lila,

That’s what I like about you Lila, that is a very smart way to look at this. 

In fact - most cheaters say - they reached the point where they felt unloved by their partner. 

Now - that said - cheaters run the spectrum from:
1. constantly and aggressively pursuing other sexual partners no matter what is happening at home 
2. thru the folks who were put in proximity to someone they found very attractive at work/neighborhood and only had a one time thing 
3. folks who literally said to their partner in a sexless marriage: your sex life might be over, but mine isn’t 

And fwiw for scenario (3), the LD person said - but I always thought they were ok with a sexless marriage because .... all my needs were being met....

And I give that LD person high marks for honesty on TAM. But the real issue was that their spouse wasn’t a great lover and it was easier to refuse them than confront that issue. 






Lila said:


> Mem, do you think that the faithfulness clause extends to other needs (emotional one) besides sex?


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

Blondilocks said:


> This thread has certainly gotten derailed.


Derailed? From what?

Funny that almost every thread gets "derailed" but you are the very first poster who has actually said " derailed"


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Lila,
> 
> That’s what I like about you Lila, that is a very smart way to look at this.
> 
> ...


How bout those cheaters that get pole- dancing , porn star sex every night of the week and still cheat and want 5 on ones just cause you would do that cause you love me.

Those women do exist and their husbands are still ho's. 

What to do?
Ramp it up, Gals! Your man is HD!!!!


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

sandcastle said:


> John-
> Please just say you MAY not know what you are talking about.
> 
> Please maybe just acknowledge that there are many women who come here daily- that ARE abused- and the very LAST thing they need to hear is" are you banging your husband twice a [email protected]?
> ...


Please point me to a thread where the OP presents the abuse and is directed to, in the case of a woman, bang her abusive husband more, or in the case of a man, nice his abusive wife more.

More often than not from what I have seen, the true state of the relationship takes sometimes pages of probing questions, and breadcrumb bits of information disclosed by the OP to finally get any kind of feel for what is going on, and advice can only be given based on what is known, and more often than not, the first several posts from the regulars here are asking for more information, and things only start to fall apart when that information is not forthcoming, and the speculation starts to run rampant.

Also, I would hold an NPD woman right up there with a BPD man on the scale of insideousness any day.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

sandcastle said:


> Derailed? From what?
> 
> Funny that almost every thread gets "derailed" but you are the very first poster who has actually said " derailed"


It's been derailed from the original post asking if men outnumber women on TAM and their respective perspectives and has morphed into a thread about sex and lack thereof.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

sandcastle said:


> How bout those cheaters that get pole- dancing , porn star sex every night of the week and still cheat and want 5 on ones just cause you would do that cause you love me.
> 
> Those women do exist and their husbands are still ho's.
> 
> ...


Nah. The advice is usually dump his cheating ass.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Sandcastle,

In the interest of brevity I compressed what you describe down to category (1) in my post. 

I hope there is either family or friend helping you. Most people find the combination of grief and anger debilitating.

And nothing is more sad than the loss of a child. 





sandcastle said:


> How bout those cheaters that get pole- dancing , porn star sex every night of the week and still cheat and want 5 on ones just cause you would do that cause you love me.
> 
> Those women do exist and their husbands are still ho's.
> 
> ...


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Lila,
> 
> That’s what I like about you Lila, that is a very smart way to look at this.
> 
> ...


Mem, you know I think you're pretty smart yourself ;-D

I agree with the three scenarios you wrote but my question pertains to your #3, and that is whether or not unmet non-sexual needs get a pass for cheating? 

My point about the double standard on TAM is that when a woman posts about their spouse cheating AND there is a history of a poor sex life, the blame for the infidelity gets shifted to the betrayed woman. When the scenario changes to a man being cheated AND there is a history of unmet *emotional* needs by the wife, the blame for the infidelity is placed on the wayward woman. I'm not saying blaming the wayward spouse for their partner's infidelity is right or wrong. What I am saying is that if it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander. 

One set of needs is not more important than another set of needs and if the "blame the betrayed spouse for not meeting those needs" card is played, then it should be played universally regardless of what those needs (and gender of the betrayed spouse) happens to be.


----------



## sandcastle (Sep 5, 2014)

samyeagar said:


> Please point me to a thread where the OP presents the abuse and is directed to, in the case of a woman, bang her abusive husband more, or in the case of a man, nice his abusive wife more.
> 
> More often than not from what I have seen, the true state of the relationship takes sometimes pages of probing questions, and breadcrumb bits of information disclosed by the OP to finally get any kind of feel for what is going on, and advice can only be given based on what is known, and more often than not, the first several posts from the regulars here are asking for more information, and things only start to fall apart when that information is not forthcoming, and the speculation starts to run rampant.
> 
> Also, I would hold an NPD woman rigiht up there with a BPD man on the scale of insideousness any day.


Yeah- I'm just making it up-
PAY no attention to the woman who buried her baby and her brother but Mr. UTAH HAD A RUB And TUG AT AN AmP and needed Cuddles and some poster was " well, duh- he ain't getting banged twice a week-"

Poor guy is grieving .


And your distinction between a female NPD and A male BPD just furthers proves your ignorant point.


Uptown? Oh- Uptown?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

samyeagar said:


> Get to the gym, date night, help out more around the house, 15 hours quality time, become more interesting, etc. Advice given to men all the time.
> 
> It does seem on the infidelity threads though that the men with a cheating wife are far more likely to have their heads buried in the sand as to what is going on. They are a lot more hesitant to even consider that their wife is cheating. The 2x4's come out early and often to kind of shock them into seeing what is actually going on. Threads started by women who have a cheating husband generally seem to start a bit farther along in that the woman knows her husband is cheating, and is not nearly in such denial.
> 
> I have seen some of the threads that have brought this issue to a head, and in defense of some of the regular posters here on TAM, the pertinent questions about the general state of the marriage including possible abuse, sexual state and all that are asked very early on and it is up to the OP to provide honest answers to those questions in order to get good feedback, and all too often, those questions are ignored, glossed over or sidestepped.



Can you point me to a thread involving infidelity where the OP is male, admits to not dating his wife or spending 15 hours together or is out of shape or is uninteresting, or not meeting any other of her emotional needs, and who was told (implied or otherwise) he was to blame for his wife's infidelity? I have examples of ones started by women where this happened but none started by men.


----------



## 3Xnocharm (Jun 22, 2012)

sandcastle said:


> Better make sure you "bang " twice a week.
> 
> No matter what!
> Cancer! Bang
> ...


Um...WHAT??


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

Cheating because your spouse gives you zero sex or pity sex once a month and shows no affection for you for a prolonged time, is a lot different than cheating because your spouse isn't vacuuming enough or taking you to Chili's every Tuesday.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> Cheating because your spouse gives you zero sex or pity sex once a month and shows no affection for you for a prolonged time, is a lot different than cheating because your spouse isn't vacuuming enough or taking you to Chili's every Tuesday.


{cough, cough} bull**** {cough, cough}

Call it love languages, call it emotional needs, call it "wants".....saying that your needs are more important that your spouses needs is a great way to crash your marriage.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Lila said:


> {cough, cough} bull**** {cough, cough}
> 
> Call it love languages, call it emotional needs, call it "wants".....saying that your needs are more important that your spouses needs is a great way to crash your marriage.


Quite true, and unmet needs, regardless of what they are help foster a marital environment where one or both spouses are at a higher risk of cheating.

Take my own marriage for instance. I know I am at risk because of my wife's inability to meet my need for affirmation of her physical and lustful attraction to me. We have had numerous conversations about this issue with no improvement. I have to accept it for what it is as it is not worth it to me to end the marriage over. That said, her inability to meet that need does create an environment of increased risk. I am in a better position than many others because I recognize this and am aware of it, and act accordingly to protect our marriage.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

samyeagar said:


> Quite true, and unmet needs, regardless of what they are help foster a marital environment where one or both spouses are at a higher risk of cheating.


I don't want to throw the thread off topic with a debate on whether the betrayed spouse is to be blamed for infidelity but I will say that cheaters are inherently selfish people who lack integrity, and that'll be the last thing I say about cheaters on this thread. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

samyeagar said:


> Take my own marriage for instance. I know I am at risk because of my wife's inability to meet my need for affirmation of her physical and lustful attraction to me. We have had numerous conversations about this issue with no improvement. I have to accept it for what it is as it is not worth it to me to end the marriage over.


What is there to protect? You're roommates and not really married at this point. I'm assuming you're not geriatric where sex isn't important at all.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> What is there to protect? You're roommates and not really married at this point. I'm assuming you're not geriatric where sex isn't important at all.


We actually have quite a robust sex life, and she does not find me repulsive, but I have come to the unavoidable conclusion that I just don't completely do it for her on a raw visceral level.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Duplicate...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

sandcastle said:


> John-
> Please just say you MAY not know what you are talking about.
> 
> Please maybe just acknowledge that there are many women who come here daily- that ARE abused- and the very LAST thing they need to hear is" are you banging your husband twice a [email protected]?
> ...


I'm afraid I do know something about psychology and something about BPD as well. 

I don't dispute the existence of battered women. Or the existence of emotionally abused people of both genders. 

Mental illnesses sometimes present differently in men and women, and some even occur at different frequency. It seems that much emphasis has been placed on abused women, and given the incidence rates justifiably so. But that doesn't make all men abusers. Or women.

I've spent time in BPD related forums and there men outnumbered women by a big margin. Not unlike here. But if I wanted to ascertain frequency of occurrence of BPD or any other mental health issue I would do my legwork like any other guy...

Sex amidst serious issues is irrelevant. If neither side understands the bigger picture then they deserve what they get sadly. Men AND women.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Lila,
Totally agree. In fact - a guy posted recently. He talks about how bad he treated his wife. He is addicted to video games and spent as little time with her and the kids as possible. When she pushed him to engage he would be grumpy - so he could get back to his games. Finally she had an affair. 

He got the mindless template response which goes like this: You are 50% responsible for the pre affair state of the marriage but the affair is all on her. 

I just said - dude you are way way more than 50% responsible for the state of your marriage. 

I didn’t tell him he deserved the affair because - he seems a bit beaten down. I do think that he deserved it though and in truth it woke him up. Years and years of asking, begging, nagging - did nothing. But banging another guy - that woke him up. 





Lila said:


> Mem, you know I think you're pretty smart yourself ;-D
> 
> I agree with the three scenarios you wrote but my question pertains to your #3, and that is whether or not unmet non-sexual needs get a pass for cheating?
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Lila,
None of this is simple or easy. I’m not gonna lie about something like that, but I get why other folks do. 

Plenty of folks post about partners engaging in what I call ‘intra marital cake eating. 

This is the whole: the marriage is overall really good for me - too bad if you’re unhappy 

If that’s the case than, as the LD partner, man or woman up and tell your spouse you either dislike sex or dislike it with them. 

Just sayin - there’s often as much lying in sexless marriages as cheating marriages. 







Lila said:


> Mem, do you think that the faithfulness clause extends to other needs (emotional one) besides sex?


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* chillymorn
Do you think the male to female ratio is unbalanced here? *

I do not have a solid answer for you Chilly. I know TAM is more to my liking than the forums where 95% of the posters are female. There it is like "what are you (males) doing wrong. It is OK for single women to be or have a FWB but if a man does the same thing he is called a player-scum bag, or he needs to realize he is going to break the woman's heart.

I tend to ignore die hard religious people's post. I skip over people that have the same advice to divorce at the drop of a hat, usually along the lines of D,D, D.

I relate to Young at Heart, Lonely husband 42301. I was reading a lot of post by Faithful Wife, Peacem, 

I read some of FeministInPink, I read some of SunCMars but skip over most of his posts. I like most of EleGirl posts but some go on to rare "what if" Territory, and I read many of the post from higher drive women like MJJEAN because I have been subject to so many low drive comments that I thought 95 % of the older women were low drive.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

*So what if more men are posting on TA*

Well I've been lurking and posting for many months. I absolutely see the imbalance. I know that sometimes I avoid posting on a thread because you can already tell it's going south. I stopped by for some sex ideas a while back but stayed to read. I find it fascinating how much men value sex and think spouses should never turn them down. 
Marriage has natural ebbs and flows. And many times sexuality is effected by kids, death, stress and emotional issues. Many women live through times when their emotional needs aren't being met by a spouse. Men sexual needs. But marriage is supposed to be a place where you want to be with the other person and be what they need. Sometimes you fall short, marriage is also supposed to be a safe place where that's ok. Granted continuously falling short needs to be addressed in either case. 
The other observation that I've come away with is many women aren't having good sex with men and they either don't know it or aren't sharing that information to save feelings.

Just my girly opinion.
But hey I don't know much cause I've never been cheated on and my hubby has been patient through the 24 years of ebbs and flows. From a most likely 6 month dry spell ( hard to remember so long ago) to 10 times a week.

I'll stick around though cause even though I sometimes find myself shaking my head it at least is great at giving me a male perspective. And an eye for what to 'watch out' for


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* anastasia6
I find it fascinating how much men value sex and think spouses should never turn them down. *

Maybe SOME men think they should never be turned down, but the above is not what most men that I know think.

I am on the list where my W usually has a negative comment and attitude towards sex and it has been a couple of years of no sex for me. Could I push for sex, yes but it would come with so much negativity, accusations, and expected pay offs, it isn't worth going there for a few bitter crumbs.

*I 've come away with is many women aren't having good sex with men and they either don't know it or aren't sharing that information to save feelings.*

Well, I get the idea my W thinks sex is only for men and I ask and ask if there is something I can do to make sex better for her. She tells me she doesn't want to put the energy into trying. What she used to ask for made her sleepy so I felt I was having sex with someone that was half asleep and not involved with me. When I did what she said she liked the encounter became more disconnected. I was there but she wasn't.

I can't be the only person in a relationship trying to make an emotional and physical connection. It was like playing normal tennis with a person on crutches.

You say "I stopped by for some sex ideas a while back" if I could help I can give it a try.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat. 

Does a woman whose husband is withholding sex have the right to cheat as well?

What about other needs? or is sex the only one that counts?

If a man withholds non-sexual intimacy, does a woman have the right to have an emotional affair? Or is sex the only thing that I important?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

sandcastle said:


> Yeah- I'm just making it up-
> PAY no attention to the woman who buried her baby and her brother but Mr. UTAH HAD A RUB And TUG AT AN AmP and needed Cuddles and some poster was " well, duh- he ain't getting banged twice a week-"
> 
> Poor guy is grieving .
> ...


If you want @Uptown to read this, you need to use the mention tags.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Handy said:


> * anastasia6
> I find it fascinating how much men value sex and think spouses should never turn them down. *
> 
> Maybe SOME men think they should never be turned down, but the above is not what most men that I know think.
> ...


Handy this isn't personal. Obviously a million men could give personally different stories. When you are talking about a whole community or forum there is always those who are different. I would say that there is most likely something that can be done in your situation but I've found so many people here are really not into anything other than well....,Let's just say I don't think I am qualified enough to pass out advice or strong enough for the backlash that always comes


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Lila,
> Totally agree. In fact - a guy posted recently. He talks about how bad he treated his wife. He is addicted to video games and spent as little time with her and the kids as possible. When she pushed him to engage he would be grumpy - so he could get back to his games. Finally she had an affair.
> 
> He got the mindless template response which goes like this: You are 50% responsible for the pre affair state of the marriage but the affair is all on her.
> ...


I saw that and found your post to be refreshing. Not because I necessarily agree with what you wrote (LOL, i'm complicated) but because you did nott apply the double standard approach we see so often on TAM.


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

Lila said:


> I rarely see that same reaction when the OP is a man with a cheating wife who also admits to neglecting her emotional needs. *And I have yet to see it on a thread where the husband was the withholder of sex.* Most men call out the cheater woman as a liar and a cheat. What they rarely, if ever say is that he needs to start meeting her needs if he want her to stop cheating.


I am that rare poster, that rare bird that has told men, has told readers this.

A women, too, needs love and intimacy.
Deny her this for long periods of time, she will become inured of her man.

She will seek that intimacy with another man.

Oh, I always try to add a disclaimer to the effect, divorce first, before seeking a new man, new men.

I mean, 'really', what do these men expect? 
These weak men, bitter men, angry men. Withholding any intimacy is a recipe for sex-saster. 
This is a catalyst for infidelity to strike, knocking the remaining asses out of the fireplace...between her legs.
Uh, put graphically...again'.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

MEM2020 said:


> Lila,
> None of this is simple or easy. I’m not gonna lie about something like that, but I get why other folks do.
> 
> Plenty of folks post about partners engaging in what I call ‘intra marital cake eating.
> ...


I understand what you are saying and even though your answer here didn't really address question about other emotional needs going unmet, your previous post did. 


Totally agree. In fact - a guy posted recently. He talks about how bad he treated his wife. He is addicted to video games and spent as little time with her and the kids as possible. When she pushed him to engage he would be grumpy - so he could get back to his games. Finally she had an affair. 

He got the mindless template response which goes like this: You are 50% responsible for the pre affair state of the marriage but the affair is all on her. 

I just said - dude you are way way more than 50% responsible for the state of your marriage. 

I didn’t tell him he deserved the affair because - he seems a bit beaten down. I do think that he deserved it though and in truth it woke him up. Years and years of asking, begging, nagging - did nothing. But banging another guy - that woke him up​.

Having gone through a very rough few years with my husband, where he failed to meet many of my emotional (then sexual) needs, and having threatened him with just about everything I could think of to motivate him to do something, anything, to improve the situation, I'm torn on which side of the argument I stand. I think that would make for an interesting debate for the purposes of this thread, I just ask that people examine the double standard applied to betrayed spouses who come here asking for support, regardless of gender.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

SunCMars said:


> I am that rare poster, that rare bird that has told men, has told readers this.
> 
> A women, too, needs love and intimacy.
> Deny her this for long periods of time, she will become inured of her man.
> ...


Yes, but would you say the same thing if the she had cheated "because her EMOTIONAL needs were going unmet "?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

EleGirl said:


> Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat.
> 
> Does a woman whose husband is withholding sex have the right to cheat as well?
> 
> ...


Yes to all of the above.

It's simply a good countermeasure when one takes their partner for granted.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Handy said:


> Well, I get the idea my W thinks sex is only for men and I ask and ask if there is something I can do to make sex better for her. She tells me she doesn't want to put the energy into trying. *What she used to ask for made her sleepy so I felt I was having sex with someone that was half asleep and not involved with me. When I did what she said she liked the encounter became more disconnected. I was there but she wasn't.
> 
> I can't be the only person in a relationship trying to make an emotional and physical connection. It was like playing normal tennis with a person on crutches.[/bo
> 
> You say "I stopped by for some sex ideas a while back" if I could help I can give it a try.*


*

Have you discussed a compromise with her where you have sex with her the way she likes it (sleepy) and mix in your kind of sex every other time (or whatever)? Have you read The Passionate Marriage by Schnarch?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk*


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

Lila said:


> Yes, but would you say the same thing if the she had cheated "because her EMOTIONAL needs were going unmet "?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Yes, Dear.

Yeppir, I would. :grin2:

Her cheating is not washed by his lacks, his slacks. Leaving her emotionally void.
It does make it 'understandable'. It does make something he could and should avoid.

In any future relationship.

If someone makes you really angry, really sad. And that someone is totally in the wrong, Ahem,
It does not excuse you in a court of law, in the court of public opinion to mortally wound them, Amen.


On this:
A women left dangling, unloved.
Should not, her problem remain unsolved.

On cheating in these specific cases?
*I have private opinions*, well, one third of the crew in my head does.. so.

Those opinions are not popular, on TAM, in the general public....
Nor in my head.

They remain unsaid, but not Un-thought.
Ask till you get blue in the face, SunCMars cannot be bought.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat.
> 
> Does a woman whose husband is withholding sex have the right to cheat as well?
> 
> ...



A right to cheat in any situation? No. However, these are two separate things...cheating, and the state of the marriage.

An affair is always 100% on the person who chose to have it. The state of the marriage, needs going unmet are often a contributing factor because that weakens the marriage, and leaves one or both partners in a more vulnerable state. These two things are often discussed in tandem on threads about infidelity, and things get muddy. It never makes the affair the correct thing to do, but affairs rarely happen in a vacuum.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

MrsHolland said:


> Yeah just another unfounded generalisation. After being here for 7 years I would say that there are more men that are full of vitriol and hatred for their ex many years later than women. Overall this type of poster in in a small minority but while the women tend to reflect and give advice based on their experience many years ago, there are men here that go straight to the VAR, she's a cheater, get out and find sex blah blah blah
> 
> TBH this type of incorrect gender stereotyping is what drives many women away from TAM


I've noticed this as well. What I can't believe is making fun of other forums regarding something like infidelity and not being a BS yourself. Does it make people feel better to kick others when they're down and they haven't even had the same experience?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

samyeagar said:


> A right to cheat in any situation? No. However, these are two separate things...cheating, and the state of the marriage.
> 
> An affair is always 100% on the person who chose to have it. The state of the marriage, needs going unmet are often a contributing factor because that weakens the marriage, and leaves one or both partners in a more vulnerable state. *These two things are often discussed in tandem on threads about infidelity*, and things get muddy. It never makes the affair the correct thing to do, but affairs rarely happen in a vacuum.


I have seen the state of the marriage and unmet needs topics brought up on threads started by female betrayed spouses but rarely on a thread started by a male betrayed spouse. And these things are typically brought up within the first 10 posts on a female betrayed spouse threads compared to 100 + posts, after everyone has gotten their 2 cents in on how to handle infidelity, with male betrayed spouse threads. 

Maybe I'm just not seeing what you are seeing Samyeager and if I am wrong, then I welcome any evidence to the contrary.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Lila said:


> I have seen the state of the marriage and unmet needs topics brought up on threads started by female betrayed spouses but rarely on a thread started by a male betrayed spouse. And these things are typically brought up within the first 10 posts on a female betrayed spouse threads compared to 100 + posts, after everyone has gotten their 2 cents in on how to handle infidelity, with male betrayed spouse threads.
> 
> Maybe I'm just not seeing what you are seeing Samyeager and if I am wrong, then I welcome any evidence to the contrary.


As many threads as I read on this site, both you and Sam are correct.

There is also some truth to the difference in sexes having a part to play. As an example, in the sexless marriage for men threads, all of the opening questions deal with what the man may or may not have been doing to lead to the situation.

Conversely, when a woman arrives on this site not having her needs met, most of the questions are about what the man may or may not be doing.

What it comes down to is there is inherent bias in all of us, whether we want to see it or not. I would love to think that I am not biased, but my rational mind tells me otherwise.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Lila,

I do think we have some gender skewed advice. 

In sexless marriages the man more often gets told to step up. The woman who is being refused sex, more often gets told that her H is defective and she should leave him.

Regarding affairs - I think women generally get harsher treatment here. 

And explicitly: if your emotional needs aren’t being met - and you’ve made that clear without seeing - than I understand why you’d have an affair. 





Lila said:


> I understand what you are saying and even though your answer here didn't really address question about other emotional needs going unmet, your previous post did.
> 
> 
> Totally agree. In fact - a guy posted recently. He talks about how bad he treated his wife. He is addicted to video games and spent as little time with her and the kids as possible. When she pushed him to engage he would be grumpy - so he could get back to his games. Finally she had an affair.
> ...


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> As many threads as I read on this site, both you and Sam are correct.
> 
> There is also some truth to the difference in sexes having a part to play. As an example, in the sexless marriage for men threads, all of the opening questions deal with what the man may or may not have been doing to lead to the situation.
> 
> ...


So my question to you is should we continue to accept biased responses as status quo? Should we warn betrayed women who post on TAM that the probability is high they will be blamed for their spouses affair? Should we warn men in sexless marriages that they should go somewhere else because the probability is high they will be blamed for the sexlessness in their relationship? Or do we challenge the status quo and say "stop! what you are doing is wrong".

I do understand what you are saying but I think bias should be called out when we see it. And it should not be written off as girls will be girls, boys will be boys.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Lila said:


> So my question to you is should we continue to accept biased responses as status quo? Should we warn betrayed women who post on TAM that the probability is high they will be blamed for their spouses affair? Should we warn men in sexless marriages that they should go somewhere else because the probability is high they will be blamed for the sexlessness in their relationship? Or do we challenge the status quo and say "stop! what you are doing is wrong".
> 
> I do understand what you are saying but I think bias should be called out when we see it. And it should not be written off as girls will be girls, boys will be boys.


Maybe not attributing bias where there is none would also be a good place to start. That starts with personal introspection and easing off personal defensiveness.

Affairs and sexless marriages are very complex situations with lots of moving parts and factors at play. Asking questions of the betrayed or sexually interested partner in a sexless marriage is not the same thing as blaming the victim. "This is your fault." and "What did you expect was going to happen?" are two totally different things.

Just as there is a cheaters script, there are also common themes, telltale signs in most marriages affected by affairs and sexlessness. Things that to an outside observer lead them to see the affair or sexlessness as an obvious possible outcome. That is not saying that the outcome is right, the victim is to blame, the perpetrator is blameless.

Again, in the case of an affair, having the affair is always the waywards fault, because they are the only one in control of their actions, but there are things that often lead to heightened risk. Books regularly recommended here on TAM such as His Needs, Her Needs, 5 Love languages, Not Just Friends, things like that are all about minimizing risk and keeping a strong marriage so things like affairs and sexlessness are less likely to happen.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

One thing here is that there are many "sides", not just two so there are lots of completely inconsistent positions. I happen to be male, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily support the opinions of most other men. In the same way I don't expect all women to support the opinions of other women. Any discussion needs to be with a specific person's opinions - if you try to discuss what "men" or "women" believe it will end up inconsistent. 

In this particular case:

I believe that if someone withholds sex their partner has a right to cheat. [OK, wait for the caveats]. 

1). By withhold I mean regularly turning down sex with a partner who is by some reasonable standard doing their part in the marriage, is generally desirable, is generally a good lover etc. In other words regularly turning down sex in a situation where most people would be happy to have sex.

2). I think that in general it is better to leave than to cheat, but life is very complex and I can see many valid reasons for staying in a sexless relationship.


I believe the same applies for turning down other *reasonable* needs. I can see a lot of potential arguments over *reasonable* but I have a pretty broad definition. I include being generally helpful, being romantic - going on dates, bringing flowers, love notes etc. 


In particular I would not fault someone in my situation for cheating. I haven't / won't but I will not blame someone who does. Marriage vows are not supposed to be a vow of celibacy. 


I see the situation as gender-symmetric. There may be statistical differences in what things men and women miss in relationships, but I think these needs all qualify. 







EleGirl said:


> Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat.
> 
> Does a woman whose husband is withholding sex have the right to cheat as well?
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The cheating part when needs are not met has a bigger implication - it helps make the institution of marriage more stable. 

Consider THE POSSIBILITY that cultures where cheating is more prevalent tend to not have as many marital issues? If the above is true, and I don't have evidence other than empirical from one culture, then the errant spouse knows they can be "informally replaced" so they may step up their own game to save the marriage, or ignore and still stay married.

That would be the ideal situation. Not sure it happens, but it could.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

john117 said:


> The cheating part when needs are not met has a bigger implication - it helps make the institution of marriage more stable.
> 
> *Consider THE POSSIBILITY that cultures where cheating is more prevalent tend to not have as many marital issues? *If the above is true, and I don't have evidence other than empirical from one culture, then the errant spouse knows they can be "informally replaced" so they may step up their own game to save the marriage, or ignore and still stay married.
> 
> That would be the ideal situation. Not sure it happens, but it could.


Do they have less marital problems OR do they just assume cheating is a part of life? My experience with European culture is the latter. The husband goes and gets his side jollies, the wife gets hers, and at the end of the day they sit together as a family for dinner smiling and laughing over a glass of wine. The marital problems still exist but they maintain " distractions" so as to stay married. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

EleGirl said:


> Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat.
> 
> Does a woman whose husband is withholding sex have the right to cheat as well?


IMO if a man withholds sex from his wife she doesn't necessarily have the right to cheat, but it's understandable. I don't see it any different for a man or a woman, it's just a lot more common for a woman to withhold sex from her husband, use it as reward/punishment, or as a means to control him than vice versa. But if he's doing it, then it's just as bad.

Sex isn't the only need that matters of course. But having sex outside marriage because you can't get sex inside marriage makes a lot more sense than having sex outside marriage because chores aren't getting done. If she hired a maid service without talking with him I would get it. But chores aren't getting done so I'm going to rabbit **** my co-worker?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The latter of course. But it doesn't create the misery you often see here in terms of parenting etc.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

farsidejunky said:


> As many threads as I read on this site, both you and Sam are correct.
> 
> There is also some truth to the difference in sexes having a part to play. As an example, in the sexless marriage for men threads, all of the opening questions deal with what the man may or may not have been doing to lead to the situation.
> 
> ...


That is why I refuse to do jury duty.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

EleGirl said:


> Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat.
> 
> Does a woman whose husband is withholding sex have the right to cheat as well?
> 
> ...


Well I'm even more basic. No one has a "right" to cheat. It is weak. 

Fix it or end it. 

I would say the same to a man or a woman.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

MrsHolland said:


> Well I'm even more basic. No one has a "right" to cheat. It is weak.
> 
> Fix it or end it.
> 
> I would say the same to a man or a woman.


That's what I have said every time too, man or woman, as well as if an affair has happened, I am one to recommend divorce. Getting past the affair is usually too difficult. Sure, things can go on for a while, years even, and there are a few success stories, but all too often, the marriage was already in bad shape, whether the husband and wife recognized it or not. Throw an affair in on top of it, and it's now totally broken.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> IMO if a man withholds sex from his wife she doesn't necessarily have the right to cheat, but it's understandable. I don't see it any different for a man or a woman, it's just a lot more common for a woman to withhold sex from her husband, use it as reward/punishment, or as a means to control him than vice versa. But if he's doing it, then it's just as bad.


Actually, no it is not more common for a woman to withhold sex. It turns out that men do it just as much as women do. The difference is that men talk/complain about it openly. While typically blame themselves if their husband withholds sex and do not openly talk about it. After all we are always told that men are always ready for sex all the time, so if a man does not want sex with his wife it's clearly that she is undesirable.. right? 

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/350970-sex-starved-wife.html



marriageontherocks2 said:


> EleGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Many here feel that a man whose wife is withholding sex has the right to cheat.
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Uh,
Since you love U2 you aren’t willing to coerce her via threats to divorce or outsource. 

Your remaining options are: 
- To tell her you are outsourcing which I think will cause her intense distress 
- Be mostly celibate or 
- Cheat 

That’s a tough call to make. You’ve let her slide for too long with this whole: sex isn’t important routine 

It is borderline cruel to run your marriage a certain way for many decades and then suddenly change the rules. 





uhtred said:


> One thing here is that there are many "sides", not just two so there are lots of completely inconsistent positions. I happen to be male, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily support the opinions of most other men. In the same way I don't expect all women to support the opinions of other women. Any discussion needs to be with a specific person's opinions - if you try to discuss what "men" or "women" believe it will end up inconsistent.
> 
> In this particular case:
> 
> ...


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> Cheating because your spouse gives you zero sex or pity sex once a month and shows no affection for you for a prolonged time, is a lot different than cheating because your spouse isn't vacuuming enough or taking you to Chili's every Tuesday.


There is never a "good" excuse for cheating. If a person is desperate for sex, and they are not getting it and have no hope of ever getting it from their spouse, then the mature and moral thing to do is figure out how to reduce your own libido, or get out of the marriage, THEN get your sex.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Maturity and morality are great for preparing for the afterlife. 

Put another way. Make divorce fair and affordable for both genders and see how many frigid wenches and passionless bozos play the withholding game.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

MrsHolland said:


> Well I'm even more basic. No one has a "right" to cheat. It is weak.
> 
> Fix it or end it.
> 
> I would say the same to a man or a woman.


Yep the advice is the same regardless of gender. Many marriages suck and people cheat. Many marriages are good and people cheat. The status of the marriage is one thing, cheating is another. Cheating is a character issue and people can rewrite history after to blame the bad marriage and I don’t buy it. Why? Because regardless how your marriage is you have a choice to cheat or not. You have a choice to stay or not. Because you have a choice the fallout of that is all you. I don’t see any difference offered here regardless of gender.


----------



## cma62 (Jul 31, 2010)

What about the men and women that have been abused in their marriages.

Marriage vows have been broken when spouses have been verbally, emotionally and physically abused ....but just because it doesn’t involve the intertwining of sex organs....doesn’t make it any less impactful than cheating.....either way ....the marriage vows have been severed.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

samyeagar said:


> *Maybe not attributing bias where there is none would also be a good place to start.* That starts with personal introspection and easing off personal defensiveness.
> 
> Affairs and sexless marriages are very complex situations with lots of moving parts and factors at play. Asking questions of the betrayed or sexually interested partner in a sexless marriage is not the same thing as blaming the victim. "This is your fault." and "What did you expect was going to happen?" are two totally different things.


You Win!

Perfectly observed and stated!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> So my question to you is should we continue to accept biased responses as status quo? Should we warn betrayed women who post on TAM that the probability is high they will be blamed for their spouses affair? *Should we warn men in sexless marriages that they should go somewhere else because the probability is high they will be blamed for the sexlessness in their relationship?*


No.

Because the purpose of this site is to give good advice.

The purpose of this site is not to give unbiased advice.

The two are not necessarily the same.

I don't think that a betrayed woman should be blamed for her spouse's affair.

However, I *DO* believe that men very often *DO* have some responsibility for the sexless state of their marriage. 

I'd hate to see them fail to get effective advice because we were more interested in virtue signalling to make ourselves feel good than in helping them.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Is it really fair to ask someone to reduce their own libido because their spouse won't have sex with them? 

Getting out of the marriage is great in some cases, in others it is much more complex.




Araucaria said:


> There is never a "good" excuse for cheating. If a person is desperate for sex, and they are not getting it and have no hope of ever getting it from their spouse, then the mature and moral thing to do is figure out how to reduce your own libido, or get out of the marriage, THEN get your sex.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Uhtred,
I will say that the real change in dynamic would come if - when U2 makes one of her dismissive, kind of mean spirited comments about you not getting a cookie, if you just smiled and said: If it’s only a cookie to you, than I am going on the record saying that you won’t mind me getting it from someone else’s jar.

And then shrug and say - fine by me. 






uhtred said:


> Is it really fair to ask someone to reduce their own libido because their spouse won't have sex with them?
> 
> Getting out of the marriage is great in some cases, in others it is much more complex.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* Lila
Have you discussed a compromise with her where you have sex with her the way she likes it (sleepy) and mix in your kind of sex every other time (or whatever)? Have you read The Passionate Marriage by Schnarch?*

I read The Passionate Marriage and even participated in a book discussion on the Internet. I have watched maybe 20 videos by Schnarch. I have 10+ other relationship improvement books and also discussed those books with Internet friends. I did an on-line "Improve your Marriage" thing. Mt W won't read or discuss any of the book topics. she just finds some thing to end the conversations. Her thing is shopping and pets. She did a "Co-Dependency" thing at work and believes people need to do their own thing and not suck-up to others or do things others want but she doesn't want to do.

I found it difficult to discuss a compromise with my W talking aboout sex being mostly for the mans pleasure. I have asked several times what she would like but I got a "I don't know" all of the time.

a couple of women in a forum similar to TAM said should try something bold and not ask or be wimpy. To just do some hot for-play and take her. I did. It worked 2 times and then it was back to what she wanted (something along the lines of gentile touching and caressing) but it put her to sleep.

And then there was her fear of UTI's (about 1 per year) but she didn't do much to prevent them. I bought her 2 UTI books but she didn't like one book. After I decided sex with her was a downer, I quit initiating. She still got UTIs. Then she decided she wants her own bed and bedroom (again, second go round) so now I don't spend any more time with her than I have to. One reason is she is a TV addict and watches HER shows ( FOX News) from the time she gets up in the morning until 11PM. I have things that need to get done so I am busy most of the day running the household, working some (mostly retired) and visiting with people outside the house OR participating on forums like TAM. I also read or watch videos related to science or how things work.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

john117 said:


> Maturity and morality are great for preparing for the afterlife.
> 
> Put another way. Make divorce fair and affordable for both genders and see how many frigid wenches and passionless bozos play the withholding game.


Divorce in my country is fair and equitable. Plenty of people still live is passionless/ sexless marriages or have partners that are bozos. 

People avoid divorce because they chose to avoid it.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

MrsHolland said:


> Divorce in my country is fair and equitable. Plenty of people still live is passionless/ sexless marriages or have partners that are bozos.
> 
> People avoid divorce because they chose to avoid it.


All people.

Thats a huge generalization .

I Think lots of people don't for different reasons.


Less involvment in their kids lives
Money the loss of assets

Fear .



Hope that things will get better.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MrsHolland said:


> Divorce in my country is fair and equitable. Plenty of people still live is passionless/ sexless marriages or have partners that are bozos.
> 
> People avoid divorce because they chose to avoid it.


I am all for moving to Australia but frankly speaking your booze is not to my liking .


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> You Win!
> 
> Perfectly observed and stated!


Lol. I didn't know we were debating to win. But even if I lost, I'm glad I got to speak my mind. I'm glad other people came out and expressed their opinions. It helped to know that I'm not alone in my beliefs and that I'm certainly not imagining things. 





Buddy400 said:


> No.
> 
> Because the purpose of this site is to give good advice.
> 
> ...


How do you know if your biased opinion is good? How do you know if your biased advice meets the standard for "good advice on TAM"?

I have no doubt that the people who post that a betrayed wife is responsible (partially or totally) for her husband's affair feel their biased advice is good, it's helpful. But yet we have women who have posted here and elsewhere who say that type of advice was anything but helpful. 

So is the biased advice "good" if it's not helpful? 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

MEM2020 said:


> Uhtred,
> I will say that the real change in dynamic would come if - when U2 makes one of her dismissive, kind of mean spirited comments about you not getting a cookie, if you just smiled and said: If it’s only a cookie to you, than I am going on the record saying that you won’t mind me getting it from someone else’s jar.
> 
> And then shrug and say - fine by me.


The sexless marriage, and how it is addressed by general consensus here is a closely related subject to infidelity. Do people perceive the same stark differences in advice given to women who's man will not have sex with her as opposed to men whose women will not have sex with them as some do when it comes to infidelity?


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

cma62 said:


> What about the men and women that have been abused in their marriages.
> 
> Marriage vows have been broken when spouses have been verbally, emotionally and physically abused ....but just because it doesn’t involve the intertwining of sex organs....doesn’t make it any less impactful than cheating.....either way ....the marriage vows have been severed.


Yes however two wrongs never make a right either. Just because a wife yells and degrades a husband doesn’t then entitle him to hit her. Same as if a man doesn’t support his wife emotionally does it make it ok for her to cheat.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I haven't kept careful track but the difference hasn't leapt out at me. OTOH I may tend to read more of one type of thread than the other. There may also be a difference in how men and women describe their situations. There are two sides (if maybe very unbalanced) to all of these and there be a statistical difference in how balanced a story men and women tell. 




samyeagar said:


> The sexless marriage, and how it is addressed by general consensus here is a closely related subject to infidelity. Do people perceive the same stark differences in advice given to women who's man will not have sex with her as opposed to men whose women will not have sex with them as some do when it comes to infidelity?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Her response would be to say "well go ahead then if I'm not good enough for you". (of course not meaning it). In response to my follow-up of "Its you I want, but you keep turning me down", I'd get "I'm sorry, I've been [sick / tired / not sleeping / some miscellaneous excuse for the last particular time she turned me down]

She doesn't want sex - nothing will change that. She doesn't think sex matters - nothing will change that. She believes it is a terrible thing to cheat - nothing will change that. 






MEM2020 said:


> Uhtred,
> I will say that the real change in dynamic would come if - when U2 makes one of her dismissive, kind of mean spirited comments about you not getting a cookie, if you just smiled and said: If it’s only a cookie to you, than I am going on the record saying that you won’t mind me getting it from someone else’s jar.
> 
> And then shrug and say - fine by me.


----------



## cma62 (Jul 31, 2010)

Wolf1974 said:


> Yes however two wrongs never make a right either. Just because a wife yells and degrades a husband doesn’t then entitle him to hit her. Same as if a man doesn’t support his wife emotionally does it make it ok for her to cheat.


I agree with your analogy to a point. 
There is a difference between supporting your spouse male or female emotionally and abuse.

However ...the point I was trying to make was....If either spouse strayed after being abused for so long..their vows are already broken.
You’re right ..2 wrongs never make a right.....but why is everybody so up in arms about cheating severing the marriage vows......but not abuse.
They are both so wrong in their own way.....
But because cheating involves sexual connection....mostly ( people are judged more for physically cheating)....Verbal and emotional abuse are just as insidious and detrimental to the marriage.


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

uhtred said:


> Is it really fair to ask someone to reduce their own libido because their spouse won't have sex with them?
> 
> Getting out of the marriage is great in some cases, in others it is much more complex.


Noone is asking OP to reduce their libido. I was just pointing out that it is an option. It may be a bad option, but it is an option.


----------



## TAMAT (Jun 20, 2015)

A poster wrote, *That's because women don't forget.*

Infidelity seems to be one of the most remembered events in many peoples lives, and the pain it causes seems to be independent of gender and sexual orientation. Perhaps it's just men are more likely to suffer in silence.

If TAM is indeed more of a male site it could be because the posters on the more female sites do not understand the male perspective on infidelity. 

Tamat


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* "That's because women don't forget."
TAMAT 
If TAM is indeed more of a male site it could be because the posters on the more female sites do not understand the male perspective on infidelity.*

I see the female not for getting more related to what Uhtred said, because the W thought the marriage was good and it didn't need to be sexual.

Uhtred said "She doesn't want sex - nothing will change that. She doesn't think sex matters - nothing will change that. She believes it is a terrible thing to cheat - nothing will change that. "

In other words she was happy with the the way things were because sex or some other thing the H wanted or needed weren't important to her. This goes for men that work too much or ignore the W's need for together time and attention.

In either case the LBS is surprised and trivializes the reasons for the spouse leaving. To her (in this case) "HOW COULD the WAH leave or chest when the M was so good.

I think if the LBS realizes something was missing in the relationship, then maybe she/he will not hold on to the anger or resentment for so long.

I say this with my usual qualifications that good people that try to stay married this applies and outright philanders my opinions do not apply. Philanders, serial cheaters, and narcissistic are in it for what they can get or what interests them for selfish reasons.

Any way I stillpost on the mostly female forum but I get a lot of flack saying I DON"T UNDERSTAND what it is like for women. Some of the women say they wished more men would post so they could understand men better, so that is what I do. The first couple of posts I make go OK but by the 5th post I make I have some women are telling me what I jerk I am and men just suck. There are a few women that seem to be able to discuss their feelings without finding fault with my comments. I do get nasty PMs asking me not to post on threads. I posted about my marriage issues and got mostly the do more be nicer and my issues would be resolved. I also got lots of "you are the problem" so quit complaining. OTH one woman that was in a sex starved M said she wanted to sext with me. I politely declined.

SO, there are pro female forums, pro male forums, and really all types of forums. To me TAM seems about equal gender wise considering in the real world there are gender differences. I also see TAM to be a little hard on cheaters especially if there are major issues in the M. I like the slightly pro sexual attitude most women have. I feel some emotional pain in regards to the female sex starved relationships (BTDT) so it hits home. I see way too much divorce advice, but maybe I tend to overlook some people's faults and want to save relationships too much.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

uhtred said:


> Her response would be to say "well go ahead then if I'm not good enough for you". (of course not meaning it). In response to my follow-up of "Its you I want, but you keep turning me down", I'd get "I'm sorry, I've been [sick / tired / not sleeping / some miscellaneous excuse for the last particular time she turned me down]
> 
> She doesn't want sex - nothing will change that. She doesn't think sex matters - nothing will change that. She believes it is a terrible thing to cheat - nothing will change that.


So in response, you allow her to gaslight you.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

cma62 said:


> I agree with your analogy to a point.
> There is a difference between supporting your spouse male or female emotionally and abuse.
> 
> However ...the point I was trying to make was....If either spouse strayed after being abused for so long..their vows are already broken.
> ...


Well people here are talking about cheating. If they were talking about physical abuse most would say the same thing to the victim..you don’t deserve this, no matter what you did, get out now. And that’s the correct advice.

My experience and years on tam has shown “generally speaking” a bad marriage generally has contributing factors of both parties. An affair is the choice of one and one alone


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

That’s a convenient belief set. 





uhtred said:


> Her response would be to say "well go ahead then if I'm not good enough for you". (of course not meaning it). In response to my follow-up of "Its you I want, but you keep turning me down", I'd get "I'm sorry, I've been [sick / tired / not sleeping / some miscellaneous excuse for the last particular time she turned me down]
> 
> She doesn't want sex - nothing will change that. She doesn't think sex matters - nothing will change that. She believes it is a terrible thing to cheat - nothing will change that.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Chilly,

Holland said: people

You changed that to: all people 

And then critiqued her statement. Why do you frequently misquote people in a substantive manner? 







chillymorn69 said:


> All people.
> 
> Thats a huge generalization .
> 
> ...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> Uhtred,
> I will say that the real change in dynamic would come if - when U2 makes one of her dismissive, kind of mean spirited comments about you not getting a cookie, if you just smiled and said: If it’s only a cookie to you, than I am going on the record saying that you won’t mind me getting it from someone else’s jar.
> 
> And then shrug and say - fine by me.


If one aspect in the marriage is missing (sex for example), I am not sure it is a good idea to get it (or threaten to get it) elsewhere to complement the existing marriage.
It is reasonable to make it clear that this issue might be a dealbreaker for the marriage or even *break* the 'deal' as far as it is possible and leave, if nothing changes but getting other cookies mixed up...might contaminate the whole jar for good.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> Chilly,
> 
> Holland said: people
> 
> ...



People avoid divorce because they chose to avoid it.


Mem2020,
human beings in general or considered collectively.

I took it as collectively.

Why do do quote only one word instead of the whole sentence which give the whole meaning?

I could consider your post as a mis quote also being as you only pulled one word out of the statement.

I don't claim to be an english major. But the statement reads to me as people collectively.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

john117 said:


> I am all for moving to Australia but frankly speaking your booze is not to my liking .


That's OK Mate we can lower our standards for you >


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

chillymorn69 said:


> People avoid divorce because they chose to avoid it.
> 
> 
> Mem2020,
> ...


When I wrote the post I did mean "general" but the reality is that to divorce or not is a choice regardless of the circumstances. 

I see my kids half the time I used to. Yes the financial situation took a hit. Yes divorce was a very hard choice but ultimately the best choice (for us).

People choose to stay even if they believe the con's outweigh the pro's but it is still a choice.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

MrsHolland said:


> When I wrote the post I did mean "general" but the reality is that to divorce or not is a choice regardless of the circumstances.
> 
> I see my kids half the time I used to. Yes the financial situation took a hit. Yes divorce was a very hard choice but ultimately the best choice (for us).
> 
> People choose to stay even if they believe the con's outweigh the pro's but it is still a choice.


I guess everything is a choice. And I respect people who make the hard/difficult choice. 

For too many hind sight is 20/20


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Lila said:


> Lol. I didn't know we were debating to win. But even if I lost, I'm glad I got to speak my mind. I'm glad other people came out and expressed their opinions. It helped to know that I'm not alone in my beliefs and that I'm certainly not imagining things.


I agree that there are clear biases on TAM. It isn't all because more men post here, but there is a distinct demographic that makes this place not particularly welcoming to women and definitely skews the advice that is given. 

I will never post a thread here because of it, and it will also probably be the reason I stop coming back.


----------



## Emerging Buddhist (Apr 7, 2016)

@wild jade, that's too bad because I like a lot of the balance brought in your postings.

I'm sure my posts may leave many types with rolling eyes, but if one was to meet and get to know me one might be surprised at the maneuverability of strengths and weaknesses, and it doesn't bother me in the end as I post trying to be congruent in heart and mind, to listen, to understand, and to choose what is shared in all threads.

What bothers me is if I close my heart or my mind to a single input.

I've found the hard questions here the best questions... not because they are right or wrong, fit or don't, but because it creates the potential openness in an art of all possibilities.

It's not the proven healthy's that make the difference, just pick a card for those... it's the unproven healthy's... those we dismiss too quickly that may also have a dynamic change, the cookie-cutter thrown away.

People like cookie-cutters, it is a comfort without gender bias, yet does seem applied to men more often and the expectations therein.

Nothing wrong with comfort mind you, and many men I know protect themselves in it but let there be no doubt you are restricted to it's shape.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Wild,

You often offer a unique viewpoint that is helpful and insightful. We would suffer from your absence. 






wild jade said:


> I agree that there are clear biases on TAM. It isn't all because more men post here, but there is a distinct demographic that makes this place not particularly welcoming to women and definitely skews the advice that is given.
> 
> I will never post a thread here because of it, and it will also probably be the reason I stop coming back.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Places like TAM are like Amazon reviews. I sign off on most HMI's of our products (human machine interface). Then I read the reviews and feel a bit like Wild Jade. 

You need to learn to treat TAM like raw data. Very useful but only after much analysis and introspection. Of course there's bias. But that's expected. But useful information nonetheless.

TAM is often brutal. But it does provide much useful information.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

FWIW, it isn't the brutality that gets to me. It's an overall worldview that pervades the site. it's so far removed from my own, I really can't imagine that any advice I might receive could possibly be relevant. It's also why I'm very cautious about suggesting anything to anyone else as well. 

Don't get me wrong. I think there are some wise and interesting people here. Some of you are why I keep reading! But the overall culture really isn't welcoming to a woman like me. (And is often actually downright hostile.)


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> FWIW, it isn't the brutality that gets to me. It's an overall worldview that pervades the site. it's so far removed from my own, I really can't imagine that any advice I might receive could possibly be relevant. It's also why I'm very cautious about suggesting anything to anyone else as well.
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I think there are some wise and interesting people here. Some of you are why I keep reading! But the overall culture really isn't welcoming to a woman like me. (And is often actually downright hostile.)



Are there any particular threads where you feel this way? Maybe I don’t read all the threads but I don’t see this bias so strongly where people are deliberately hostile to women. 
Things I see for example where female posters use violent language against men (where they say the guy deserves to be punched in the balls for thinking this or that). Even though I see it as figurative speech and don’t take it seriously (in most cases it's funny), it is still technically not something a man would ever be able to get away with and be permanently banned. If you wanted to be fair and have ‘no biases’, it should include moderation... It would also be interesting to see the ban ratio of men vs women. I think it might be quite an eye opener.
One thing to remember is that we also all have biases in what we read and how we interpret it. But there is always an odd ridiculous post or two in a thread - I wouldn't get too hung up on those. I see it not just towards women but a general lack of tact or limited comprehension skills...but I might be wrong.

It’s a longwinded way to say that I don’t think you or anyone should at all be afraid posting anything if it’s something that can be helped with (or even if it can’t be helped with, sometimes it’s useful to get things off the chest alone). And people that matter, will listen and try to help.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> Are there particular threads where you feel this way? Maybe I don’t read all the threads but I don’t see this bias so strongly where people are hostile to women.
> Things I see for example where female posters express violence against men (where they say the guy deserves to be punched in the balls for thinking doing this or that). Even though I see it as figurative speech and don’t take it too seriously, it is still kind of is hate speech, if you wanted to be fair with ‘no biases’. If a male poster made any hint (figuratively or literally): that’s something a they would get an immediate permanent ban for. And many other things I see women get away posting that men could never say - It would also be interesting to see the ban ratio of men vs women. I think it might be quite an eye opener.
> One thing to remember is that we also all have biases in what we read and how we interpret it. But there is always an odd ridiculous post or two. I see it not just towards women but I might be wrong.
> 
> ...




Agreed


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

@inmyprime

It isn't really a question of fear, it's a question of why set myself up for something that will be unproductive. It isn't even really a question of overt hostility, as for the most part people are mostly polite. 

It's about a certain sort of worldview that sees women in a very particular way. Imagine reading a whole series of threads where you're not even posting, but you can see from the way that people are talking that they would absolutely hate you if they ever knew you.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> @inmyprime
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Difficult to know which view it is without knowing what it is you mean. I have been reading threads and particularly paying attention whether comments are ‘fair’ with regards to people cheating: they are all over the place. Some threads have a few women siding with WS (when WS is female), some where they don’t. Haven’t seen yet a thread where men side with a cheating husband but there have been insensitive comments where not enough empathy is shown towards BS - that is true. But in general, there’s a bit of everything, slanted either way. Comments that matter (majority) seem to be sensible to me.

Are you referring to something else? Perhaps men are not understanding enough towards women who have higher drives such as yourself than guys? (Sorry if I got it wrong). I have not seen anyone making fun of such a situation. But it’s impossible to read everything so I may have missed it.
Or perhaps not understanding towards guys with ED? Can’t be - there are a lot around here.

In any case, what I think is most useful on TAM is for someone to read an analogous situation and suddenly your own perception of yourself may change because you see someone else in a similar situation and think to yourself “hold on a second, the problem could actually be partly me”. 
It works because hypocrisy resides in everyone to some extent (some more, some less) so the advise you’d give to someone else in a similar situation, may actually not be something you’d be doing yourself, strangely enough. 
I had a couple of lightbulb moments myself this way. This didn’t come from starting my own thread but by reading other people’s threads! Partly because you’d normally not concede an argument in public to save face and partly because you don’t actually realise it until you see someone else in that situation complaining about it.

But maybe you are talking about something different. Perhaps pm me if it’s not something you’d like to be known if you feel like it. And don’t worry if you don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

inmyprime said:


> Are there any particular threads where you feel this way? Maybe I don’t read all the threads but I don’t see this bias so strongly where people are deliberately hostile to women.
> Things I see for example where female posters use violent language against men (where they say the guy deserves to be punched in the balls for thinking this or that). Even though I see it as figurative speech and don’t take it seriously (in most cases it's funny), it is still technically not something a man would ever be able to get away with and be permanently banned. If you wanted to be fair and have ‘no biases’, it should include moderation... It would also be interesting to see the ban ratio of men vs women. I think it might be quite an eye opener.
> One thing to remember is that we also all have biases in what we read and how we interpret it. But there is always an odd ridiculous post or two in a thread - I wouldn't get too hung up on those. I see it not just towards women but a general lack of tact or limited comprehension skills...but I might be wrong.
> 
> ...


Two current male posters on this forum have unleashed a torrent of hateful swear-word laden tirades against me and are still posting. One was reminded of the 'rules' by a female moderator and not banned. The other one was given a 3 day ban. As was I; even though I didn't lower myself to his level. 

In my time here; I have never, and I mean never, seen a female poster go off on a male member in that fashion. You figure it out.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over. 

I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


----------



## Herschel (Mar 27, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


I can't disagree more. There is a subset here that feel that way, there is a subset on the other side as well. I barely see where you find people posting about submissive women and traditional gender roles. I find this more of a selection bias than anything. I am one of the most left leaning guys here and we have butted heads before because of what seems like your bias against men in general. I try to look at everything with an open mind and try to see where people are coming from and what they expect to get out of life. I think you may be too rigid to see the forest through the trees and I probably agree with you on 85% - 90% of things.

The most prevailing things I see here are:

1) it's almost impossible to come back from an affair (I agree)
2) that often men are not emotionally available to their wives (I agree)
3) that women often check out due to resentment and stop sexing (I agree)

The rest tend to be case by case. We often see one side of the issue and tend to give them the complete benefit of a doubt. I tend to think that the spouse who reaches out on a board like this is genuinely trying to fix something and needs help. Hell, even the cheaters who come here and talk about their side see what they did and even though they did bad, I have sympathy as they are trying to fix themselves. I think it's easy to claim that this board isn't what you believe it should be and instead of working to try to change the culture you back off. Remember, a lot of people here have gone through a lot, and even though you may not agree with them, there can be a lot of bitterness. You may not like it, but experience can really mess you up.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

@Herschel When did this conversation become only about how affairs and cheating are addressed? It's a big part of this site, but not everything. 

Yes, I realize that there's a lot of bitterness and anger here. But if you haven't seen, for example, the anti-feminist sentiment on this site, then you haven't been looking. It's even stronger than the overall conservative sentiment. And that I *know* you've seen.

And to my point, what exactly about me makes you think I'm anti-man in my bias??


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Let me just add that it's fine for TAM to position itself as whatever type of site it wants. Far be it for me to say that it should be this or that. I just don't think that anyone should be surprised that the established culture drives off those who do not or cannot find connections within that culture. 

That's true of any site, though.


----------



## Rick Blaine (Mar 27, 2017)

wild jade said:


> @Herschel When did this conversation become only about how affairs and cheating are addressed? It's a big part of this site, but not everything.
> 
> Yes, I realize that there's a lot of bitterness and anger here. But if you haven't seen, for example, the anti-feminist sentiment on this site, then you haven't been looking. It's even stronger than the overall conservative sentiment. And that I *know* you've seen.
> 
> And to my point, what exactly about me makes you think I'm anti-man in my bias??


I believe that some people read posts on sites like this and high-lite in their minds comments that run against their world view. Those high-lites become the prevalent text in their minds, even if they're not. There is a catholicity of views on this site, and there isn't a predominant culture here, although I do think that in his post above Herschel cited some of the more commonly held beliefs. 

I see a strong pattern of conservatism here as you do, but there are plenty who post from liberal or progressive views as well. In the final analysis does it really matter which view is predominant? The objective of these forums are for people to share insights and perspective on marriage. I find that most threads get advice from a readers who collectively offer a diversity of thought and opinion, and I have not seen one perspective censored. If one's opinion is in the minority or majority it matters not. The original posters of each thread are free to take whomever's advice they agree with, and we have seen some go with the majority and some go with the minority.


----------



## Uptown (Mar 27, 2010)

sandcastle said:


> We hear plenty from Uptown about those BPD wives.


Actually, @Sandcastle, I've written _"plenty" _about BPDer husbands as well. The lifetime prevalence of full-blown BPD is statistically the same (6%) for both men and women. Yet, as the title of this thread acknowledges, we all find more complaints about female behavior here at TAM because most threads are started by men. 

Nobody knows for sure why that is. Some of us believe that, because men are expected to always appear strong and confident in our culture, they are very reluctant to open up to close friends about emotional problems. Hence, unlike women who are able to rely on their friends, the men are more likely to regard anonymous forums as their only practical option for obtaining personal advice.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Jade,
For that to be true, almost 100% of the posters (both male and female) would need to be aligned with the viewpoint described below. I’m sure I miss some stuff - but....





wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Jade,

We would all benefit from some examples of threads that exemplify what you say. 

In a way this thread - is an example of bad behavior. But to me - it seems mostly gender neutral bad behavior. 





wild jade said:


> Let me just add that it's fine for TAM to position itself as whatever type of site it wants. Far be it for me to say that it should be this or that. I just don't think that anyone should be surprised that the established culture drives off those who do not or cannot find connections within that culture.
> 
> That's true of any site, though.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> Jade,
> For that to be true, almost 100% of the posters (both male and female) would need to be aligned with the viewpoint described below. I’m sure I miss some stuff - but....


Let me clarify -- I don't think almost 100% of people here hold all of the views. I do think almost 100% are anti-feminist though. Yes, this would include women as well.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

@Rick Blaine

No, it does not matter which view is predominant. As long as you aren't surprised that it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy, and those that don't fit into the predominant mindset are driven away. 

Of course, those that are well aligned with the prevailing culture will not see a problem with it. It's only those who are marginalized by it who notice. 

Again this is true for all sites. 

@MEM2020 Yes, I can see why you want specific examples to illustrate this. The trouble is that it isn't necessarily a particular thread, or even necessarily a post. It is the way problems are approached, what the perceived solutions are, where the emphasis is when assessing a situation. It is in the shared assumptions, the smiles and nods, and the back-slapping and camaraderie. The "of course it's this way, that's the way the world is". It is always very difficult for insiders to see their own culture. They are imbued in it. It's easy for those who come from a different one to spot the differences.

Let me think on it though, and I'll see what I can do.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

I've been reading TAM for about 6 or 7 years now. Historically, IMO, there has been a clear and persistent sexist, anti-female bias IMO by a subset of posters. Not all posters, of course, but a vocal subset who have been louder at some times than other times.

In some ways, I think TAM has become a less hostile place for women to post. For instance, as recently as 2-3 years ago, posters fairly regularly referred to some women- especially cheating women- in highly sexist and derogatory manners. It was pretty common to see women described as *****s, cum-guzzlers, more hands on her than a door knob, etc. I think at any given time, if one looked through the first one or pages of threads, you could find at least post using this kind of language describing a woman. When other posters called them out on it, often the OP and usually other posters would chime in "sorry, but that's what she is". Those posters didn't acknowledge, and probably just didn't believe, that that kind of language is sexist or anti-woman. Like one of my family members says, she"isn't racist, just factual." Factually speaking, she's pretty racist.

TAM has gotten a lot better about this and really any kind of personal, offensive language. 


TAM is especially hard on wayward wives. Personally, I feel that this is a huge weakness of TAM. There are a gazillion infidelity threads and very few successful reconciliation stories. If you remove the EAs you're looking at a very small percentage of successful reconciliation stories vs divorces. In real life, statistics tell us that most marriages tend to survive infidelity but it is not reflected here. I think that this is because TAM is strong at helping people find personal recovery, which generally leads to divorce. Sometimes that is the best outcome anyway, but people who do things that lead to secure and positive long-term recovery are generally not the people posting here.

Outside of infidelity, IMO TAM has a group of male posters who are very uncomfortable with modern marriage and specifically the changing roles of women and men in marriage. Some of the more recurrent themes: bread-winning wives are more likely to cheat/women can't respect men who earn less than them; SAHMs should do all the housework and especially should have sex with their husbands as they don't do much else, it's not that hard to run a household; if women loved their men they would have sex even when they didn't want to, while at the same time "pity sex" is not acceptable and is a divorcable offence. I'm not sure what these women, who aren't into their husbands but apparently aren't convincing enough for their husbands are supposed to do, but it is clearly the wives' fault in the land of some TAM posters.

Thankfully, TAM also had groups of people who are much more nuanced and adaptable. Both men and women will post against the more sexists threads, both anti-male and anti-female. If it didn't have these posters would not have stayed here. As is said, "take what you need and leave the rest."


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

What ever happened to the advice or "Take what you can use and leave the rest behind." This advice is popular on other forums.

Wild Jade, if you think this site is anti-feminine, I would invite you to read a forum that lists "mid life crisis" as the main topic, where 90% of the posters (complaintent's) are female. Men get ripped apart because the women are angry, left behind spouses that mostly claim the marriage was good. 

My point is a forum seems to attract a certain group or issue and it seems to be the major topic.

I can imagine a forum for divorced men would be anti female just as a forum where divorced women post could sound anti male.


----------



## Idyit (Mar 5, 2013)

Blondilocks said:


> In my time here; I have never, and I mean never, seen a female poster go off on a male member in that fashion. You figure it out.


I have. There was a thread joined by at least three moderators where one of them (female) did indeed go off on a male poster. Hateful and explicit language was used toward the other poster, almost appearing that the poster/moderator wanted to get banned. The only thing that I have noticed as a result is those posts were removed without any ban for the poster.

It happens both ways as I see it. None of them has influenced me to come here more or less.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

Idyit said:


> I have. There was a thread joined by at least three moderators where one of them (female) did indeed go off on a male poster. Hateful and explicit language was used toward the other poster, almost appearing that the poster/moderator wanted to get banned. The only thing that I have noticed as a result is those posts were removed without any ban for the poster.
> 
> It happens both ways as I see it. None of them has influenced me to come here more or less.


I'm sure you've noticed that there 'rules' and there are 'rulez'. The first applies to mere mortals.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Why do more men than women come to TAM?

Because very few men have a supportive network of males they can take their marital problems to.

The only people who know about my relationship **** are my friends on TAM. Nobody in my family or any of my friends know anything.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Idyit said:


> I have. There was a thread joined by at least three moderators where one of them (female) did indeed go off on a male poster. Hateful and explicit language was used toward the other poster, almost appearing that the poster/moderator wanted to get banned. The only thing that I have noticed as a result is those posts were removed without any ban for the poster.
> 
> It happens both ways as I see it. None of them has influenced me to come here more or less.


If you have a problem with a fellow member, moderator or other member, please make a report using the report button.


----------



## Idyit (Mar 5, 2013)

MattMatt said:


> If you have a problem with a fellow member, moderator or other member, please make a report using the report button.


I did so.


----------



## Idyit (Mar 5, 2013)

Blondilocks said:


> I'm sure you've noticed that there 'rules' and there are 'rulez'. The first applies to mere mortals.


This does seem to be the case at times. The one mentioned particularly stood out.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> FWIW, it isn't the brutality that gets to me. It's an overall worldview that pervades the site. it's so far removed from my own, I really can't imagine that any advice I might receive could possibly be relevant. *It's also why I'm very cautious about suggesting anything to anyone else as well. *
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I think there are some wise and interesting people here. Some of you are why I keep reading! But the overall culture really isn't welcoming to a woman like me. (And is often actually downright hostile.)


This post hit home with me @wild jade. I too am _very_ hesitant to suggest anything, even on threads where I have experienced the same thing and come out better after the fact. 


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Lila said:


> This post hit home with me @wild jade. I too am _very_ hesitant to suggest anything, even on threads where I have experienced the same thing and come out better after the fact.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


I am not disputing what either you are WJ are stating.

That said, you indicate a level of hesitation in posting certain things. Is the hesitation fear? If so, what do you fear would be the consequence?

And FTR, I have always seen you as outspoken and unafraid (in a totally positive way), Lila, which is why I am asking the clarifying questions.


----------



## VibrantWings (Sep 8, 2017)

RoseAglow said:


> I've been reading TAM for about 6 or 7 years now. Historically, IMO, there has been a clear and persistent sexist, anti-female bias IMO by a subset of posters. Not all posters, of course, but a vocal subset who have been louder at some times than other times.
> 
> In some ways, I think TAM has become a less hostile place for women to post. For instance, as recently as 2-3 years ago, posters fairly regularly referred to some women- especially cheating women- in highly sexist and derogatory manners. It was pretty common to see women described as *****s, cum-guzzlers, more hands on her than a door knob, etc. I think at any given time, if one looked through the first one or pages of threads, you could find at least post using this kind of language describing a woman. When other posters called them out on it, often the OP and usually other posters would chime in "sorry, but that's what she is". Those posters didn't acknowledge, and probably just didn't believe, that that kind of language is sexist or anti-woman. Like one of my family members says, she"isn't racist, just factual." Factually speaking, she's pretty racist.
> 
> ...


Love this post and agree with the bolded part. 

I hope I'm able to add some food for thought for some of the people who say they are turned off/afraid of posting here: If the dominant attitude is one that is unkind/unfriendly to a particular sect of people...and you feel like you're one of the few voices on the other side, doesn't that make your voice all that more important? 

As said by some others, all view points should be represented. It's important for the softer voice to remain even if the shouting voices try to quell your own. 
Stay because you are in the minority....and it's a voice that doesn't need to disappear entirely.




farsidejunky said:


> I am not disputing what either you are WJ are stating.
> 
> That said, you indicate a level of hesitation in posting certain things. Is the hesitation fear? If so, what do you fear would be the consequence?
> 
> And FTR, I have always seen you as outspoken and unafraid (in a totally positive way), Lila, which is why I am asking the clarifying questions.


I agree with FSJ- you rocked in another thread Lila and you can definitely hold your own  :smnotworthy: :yay:


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> I am not disputing what either you are WJ are stating.
> 
> That said, you indicate a level of hesitation in posting certain things. Is the hesitation fear? If so, what do you fear would be the consequence?
> 
> And FTR, I have always seen you as outspoken and unafraid (in a totally positive way), Lila, which is why I am asking the clarifying questions.


It's not fear. 

Some of it is pride - I hate wasting my time. It irks me to no end to put tons of effort on a post only too have others crap all over it.

Some of it is hurtful - I know what I have lived through and I know what worked for me. Having my experiences invalidated is hurtful. I try not to let it be but I'm also not encouraged to share more. 

And as WJ said, some of it is recognizing that I'm not like a lot of the women who post on here so my advice would probably never work for them. That's usually why I ask questions before I bring up advice. Knowing the audience is IMO as important understanding the situation. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

VibrantWings said:


> Love this post and agree with the bolded part.
> 
> I hope I'm able to add some food for thought for some of the people who say they are turned off/afraid of posting here: If the dominant attitude is one that is unkind/unfriendly to a particular sect of people...and you feel like you're one of the few voices on the other side, doesn't that make your voice all that more important?
> 
> ...


It's a lot of work being a minority voice. And what's the reward? There isn't one. This is why the internet tends to be pockets of people who think alike and validate each other's world view. Besides, it's clear to me that certain things I might say will at best not be heard, most likely be dismissed, and may only serve to make people angry and defensive. How is that valuable to anyone?


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Lila said:


> It's not fear.
> 
> Some of it is pride - I hate wasting my time. It irks me to no end to put tons of effort on a post only too have others crap all over it.
> 
> ...


Indeed. It is clear to me that most people here are after something very different than I am, and I honestly have no idea how they should go about realizing that Sometimes I can't help myself. But a lot of the time, I can only shrug know that my approach is basically the opposite of what the majority see as the "solution". 

(And after following a few threads, I can also see that while sometimes I may have well been right, other times I'm most certainly totally wrong. Different beliefs and values lead to very different life decisions!)


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

There is a lotta truth to that. Slightly overstated, but not by much .

OTOH, it is a site about Marriage, named long before the modern legal expansion of meaning.




wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


----------



## VibrantWings (Sep 8, 2017)

wild jade said:


> It's a lot of work being a minority voice. And what's the reward? There isn't one. This is why the internet tends to be pockets of people who think alike and validate each other's world view. Besides, it's clear to me that certain things I might say will at best not be heard, most likely be dismissed, and may only serve to make people angry and defensive. How is that valuable to anyone?


Hi Wild Jade, thanks for responding 

Your voice in this thread was just valuable to me...one of the noobs. 

The older, bolder, embittered...they will probably always say the same thing in every thread (I've already taken note of this from some posters). 

Different is good....even if it's not popular and yeah, exhausting sometimes. 

You seem quite intelligent and kind. Don't let that slip away ...that's always valuable. 

That being said, I do understand frustration and exhaustion, especially on the net.

Hope to see you around anyway. :butterfly:


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> Indeed. It is clear to me that most people here are after something very different than I am, and I honestly have no idea how they should go about realizing that Sometimes I can't help myself. But a lot of the time, I can only shrug know that my approach is basically the opposite of what the majority see as the "solution".
> 
> (And after following a few threads, I can also see that while sometimes I may have well been right, other times I'm most certainly totally wrong. Different beliefs and values lead to very different life decisions!)


I have a system for knowing whether or not I can be of any help to women on TAM. If you've watched Walking Dead you're familiar with Rick Grimms three questions (writer's ingenious version of The Cube). I have my own set of questions. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## VibrantWings (Sep 8, 2017)

Lila said:


> I have a system for knowing whether or not I can be of any help to women on TAM. If you've watched Walking Dead you're familiar with Rick Grimms three questions (writer's ingenious version of The Cube). I have my own set of questions.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Love that show....and they damn sure better not kill off Darrell. 

Tiger getting eat was a real bummer for me last week 

Okay I'll stop now and won't derail any further :toast:


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

VibrantWings said:


> Love that show....and they damn sure better not kill off Darrell.
> 
> Tiger getting eat was a real bummer for me last week
> 
> Okay I'll stop now and won't derail any further :toast:


Little TJ......LOL, I'm still on season 6, episode 8. Now I'm looking forward to tigers .

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

Lila said:


> I have a system for knowing whether or not I can be of any help to women on TAM. If you've watched Walking Dead you're familiar with Rick Grimms three questions (writer's ingenious version of The Cube). *I have my own set of questions.
> *
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


That's good because asking how many walkers a poster has killed wouldn't be very enlightening.:grin2:

However; asking yourself if you can trust them, can they help you and can they hurt you would be helpful to you.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

BrittanyJ said:


> EleGirl, not sure why you felt it necessary to to add the ?WTH?. A simple ?no? would have been enough. I only asked that question because many sites indicated the briefs worked better for side sleepers which is how my husband commonly sleeps.
> 
> As for the question pertaining to seeking medical attention, yes we did contact our healthcare provider to rule out any other serious problems that may cause nocturnal enuresis as a side effect. So please refrain from coping and pasting the same information that I?m perfectly capable of googling about potential causes.


Yet another promising new female poster scared away from TAM by an honest opinion.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


Hard for me to comment as I would have to see the thread(s) you are referring to and I'd like to avoid generalizing.
I will say that it's certainly possible to take some posts in isolation to fit this view, given that there are so many different views. But are they overwhelming? I am not sure that they are.
Have you personally experienced it? From what I have seen, for each hostile/imbecilic post, there are 10-20 sensible ones. Those are the ones that count.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> It's a lot of work being a minority voice. And what's the reward? There isn't one. This is why the internet tends to be pockets of people who think alike and validate each other's world view. Besides, it's clear to me that certain things I might say will at best not be heard, most likely be dismissed, and may only serve to make people angry and defensive. How is that valuable to anyone?


It might be valuable to *someone*. In fact that one post could make all the difference not just to the OP but to someone else who's reading that thread. I learnt not to rely on 'likes' too much and just say whatever feels right (which is sometimes the wrong thing to say but hey ho). :smile2:
The posts are not supposed to be so much for the audience but to help someone else. If you post something 'unpopular', it doesn't mean it is not valuable.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

I piss women off all the time. I still appreciate their input and I have occasionally had my opinion changed by their feminine perspective.

Hang in there ladies!😁


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


You know it's really strange (since we are being open) and this may sound like non-sense to you: when I first started reading TAM (less than a year ago i think), I was a bit perturbed how pro-feminist* the site was. I found that some female posters received special treatment by moderators that were not granted to male posters (saying basically equivalent stuff) since they would get away saying stuff about men that men could never get away saying about women.
This in turn made me sometimes more inclined taking little 'digs' and resort to annoying generalisations here and there where I probably otherwise wouldn't have. Maybe it's a chicken & egg situation and that 'bitterness' is self-evolving as long as both sexes are allowed to 'bang their heads together'. On balance, I don't envy being a moderator here...

I have seen some of what you are describing too but only in very isolated and limited instances (nowhere near 100%, perhaps 3-5% which is arguably still too much and more than 0, which it should be).

But I am still amazed how different my perception is/was from what you are describing.

* feminist not in the 'equal-gender' sense but the more militant definition of feminist. But that's excluding many of the the CWI threads.


----------



## Herschel (Mar 27, 2016)

RoseAglow said:


> TAM is especially hard on wayward wives. Personally, I feel that this is a huge weakness of TAM. There are a gazillion infidelity threads and very few successful reconciliation stories. If you remove the EAs you're looking at a very small percentage of successful reconciliation stories vs divorces. In real life, statistics tell us that most marriages tend to survive infidelity but it is not reflected here.


I think that posters are just as tough on cheating men. I know I am and whenever I post about it, I see just as many people hard on them. Like I said before, when someone posts here and they, themselves, cheated, I think they should be given a small benefit not awarded to others as they can see that they broke something and they are messed up.

I will disagree vehemently with your notion that most marriages survive infidelity. No marriages survive infidelity. The entire premise has changed and if people remained to stay married, they didn't survive it more than they decided getting divorced isn't worth it.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

anonmd said:


> There is a lotta truth to that. Slightly overstated, but not by much .
> 
> OTOH, it is a site about Marriage, named long before the modern legal expansion of meaning.


Exactly!


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

Herschel said:


> I think that posters are just as tough on cheating men. I know I am and whenever I post about it, I see just as many people hard on them. Like I said before, when someone posts here and they, themselves, cheated, I think they should be given a small benefit not awarded to others as they can see that they broke something and they are messed up.


It is very rare to have a male WS posting here, and when they do they tend to not be very serious about wanting to do the work to fix things. I'm trying to think back on the last time a male WS posted here.

There was recent female WS posting here. She was taking the lead on trying to recover. It was a short-lived affair, she confessed to her H, she also confessed/exposed her affair to their families and religious leaders as the W and H were religious people. She was strictly no contact with the AP. She was looking at message boards, reading books, and going to workshops to try to repair her marriage. She was doing just about everything a person could do to reconcile a marriage.

And yet some TAMmers still insisted that she was not remorseful enough, not sad enough, not serious. She was told she was a terrible bet and her H would be foolish to reconcile, and this is a polite summary of the thread. Her H very much wanted to reconcile. 

Not surprisingly, she is no longer on the board. It's my hope that she and her H find group of people who have successfully recovered their marriage and that they find success.

Also, I think it goes beyond just WSs who post. The bias can also been seen in the advice posted to the BS, as was discussed earlier in this thread. 



> I will disagree vehemently with your notion that most marriages survive infidelity. No marriages survive infidelity. The entire premise has changed and if people remained to stay married, they didn't survive it more than they decided getting divorced isn't worth it.


It may be your personal judgement that no marriages survive infidelity, or you might be referring to semantics. I can agree with semantics: that once infidelity (or really any major event) occurs in a marriage, the old marriage dies. However, there are many marriages that do go on to survive and outlast infidelity. Statistically speaking, more people stay together than split up. We used to have a few posters here who were in long-term (10+ years) recovery and their marriages were now happy but they aren't posting at this time.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> You know it's really strange (since we are being open) and this may sound like non-sense to you: when I first started reading TAM (less than a year ago i think), I was a bit perturbed how pro-feminist* the site was. I found that some female posters received special treatment by moderators that were not granted to male posters (saying basically equivalent stuff) since they would get away saying stuff about men that men could never get away saying about women.
> *This in turn made me sometimes more inclined taking little 'digs' and resort to annoying generalisations here and there where I probably otherwise wouldn't have. Maybe it's a chicken & egg situation and that 'bitterness' is self-evolving as long as both sexes are allowed to 'bang their heads together'. On balance, *I don't envy being a moderator here...
> 
> I have seen some of what you are describing too but only in very isolated and limited instances (nowhere near 100%, perhaps 3-5% which is arguably still too much and more than 0, which it should be).
> ...


LOL on the bolded. Yes, must be the anti-feminist slant is because of all those damn feminists getting away with murder.

Here's an exercise for you. For one day when you are reading TAM, notice if any of the following things happen and how often

someone asserts that women only like manly men, and can't stand nice guys, weak guys, etc.
women are said to be submissive by nature, and that men must always be stronger/lead the way
someone claims that women select men based on earning power, don't respect men that earn less than them, or will use men for paychecks, but actually want someone else (never minding the contradictions here)
a woman is criticized for having too many sex partners, or blamed if her husband or boyfriend has an issue with her sexual history
someone makes a disparaging claim like "women don't forget", women can't agree to disagree, talk too much, BSC, etc.
women are said to hate sex, or engage in it only to trap men into marriage
a wife who isn't putting out enough is automatically assumed to be witholding sex because she's obviously controlling, manipulative and doesn't love her husband, is using him for the paycheck, etc.
a woman who has been cheated on is assumed to be withholding sex or being a shrew or somehow deserving of it
women are compared unfavorably to sexbots, or told that we will be replaced by them
a woman in a sexless marriage is automatically assumed to be ugly, fat, shrewish or otherwise completely undesirable
feminists are pointed to as the root of all social problems or destroyers of male/female relationships

Then, look for comparable assumptions or claims made about men and count those


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Many years ago when I posted my story and antics in this here TAM most posters assumed that I was a rich manipulative sob that only wanted tail and money. I was told to find outside interests, be aloof and whatever, blah, blah. I got called every name in the book and then some. 

I'm still here . I learned many important lessons, most of which have nothing to do with my own personality. Such is life.

IMHO the understanding or compassion gap in TAM is mostly one based on empathy. There's way too many posters posting from the standpoint of their own mostly successful marriage without the ability to understand even 5% of what it means to be stuck in a fight you didn't choose. The kind of poster whose idea of conflict in marriage is trivial in the grand scheme of things. 

All things considered, life is a reality show and TAM is the Cliff's Notes version. So I stick around, mostly for the articles


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Blondilocks said:


> That's good because asking how many walkers a poster has killed wouldn't be very enlightening.:grin2:
> 
> However; asking yourself if you can trust them, can they help you and can they hurt you would be helpful to you.


LOL, I was just using Rick Grimms as an example. My questions have to do with their financial situation, marital dynamics, actions taken to date, and overall ability to walk away if things fail to improve. The questions are not meant to indicate whether their situation is resolvable. The questions are meant to indicate whether *my* advice based on my experiences would help them.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> LOL on the bolded. Yes, must be the anti-feminist slant is because of all those damn feminists getting away with murder.
> 
> Here's an exercise for you. For one day when you are reading TAM, notice if any of the following things happen and how often
> 
> ...


If somebody actually makes such broad generalizations (big 'if") how does one make the leap from this to 'all opinions on TAM are 100% anti-feminist'? The generalization itself is just somebody's opinion, not what everyone on TAM thinks or is ordered to think! Each and any view can be (and is) challenged, especially if it's that unreasonable.
I will see if I come up with list of anti-men sentiments I read about when I have time :grin2:
But just to start off:

- all guys ogle women and want to sleep with them all even if they are married
- men don't ogle women with low self-esteem enough apparently :scratchhead:
- all men will cheat eventually especially if they are not getting enough sex in their marriage
- men are wimps and moan about their marriages all day long and complain about sex (lack of) all the time even though they are the ones neglecting their wives emotionally
- men should never expect any kind of compromise with an LD wife because being LD is like sexual orientation: you can't change it nor should you expect to even bring it up. In fact compromise itself is a selfish thing to propose.
- men who don't bring an income home or earn less than their spouse are generally supposed to get punched in the throat, especially if they ask for sex as well (this one is my favourite)
- men are porn addicts with no control over their drive and would have sex with sex bots day in, day out, if given the opportunity
- an unemployed husband is a useless and lazy husband and needs to be punched. He probably plays video games all day as well.
- men are generally perverts and creeps because they ask spouse for sex even though she has already explained that she has a headache today (and any other day)

(Those are not my views btw, in case somebody takes it out of context).

I think TAM has a bit of everything to offer  Like someone said, just take what you need!


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

I get the idea men and women post answers often based on what they personally have experienced. It seems common that is how people see things.

I don't watch much TV so I don't want to give advice about which TVs are good o not as good.

I never vacationed using a motor home but I used to work on them, so that is a mixed bag. I have the repair knowledge but I don't know where the good places are.

I think if someone went through a bad break-up or divorce, that experience will color the what they say.

I am happy to see both men and women post on TAM. I think it is good or usually helpful for opposite genders to state an opinion. If I had to read only opinions from men about women, I don't think that would always work. The same goes if the situation is reversed.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

TAM has lots of empathy, wells of it, if you align with the dominant culture. But alas, @john117, while you do fit in here admirably, you're still a bit of a misfit. I've seen you push back on the standard tropes. :wink2:

@inmyprime
There are a couple of difference between your list and mine. Most obvious is prevalence. Yes you can find a post that asserts some of the things you say. Maybe two. But they do not reflect majority opinion or even a large subset. 

And did you notice that one of the items on your list wasn't even about men at all? Or criticizing them in any way? Even reinforced one of the items on my list?

With feminism, OTOH, whenever the topic comes up, which is relatively frequently, the conversation usually revolves around how it is the root of all social problems, how it destroys relationships, how misandric and terrible feminists are, that while early feminism may have brought value, feminism today is a waste of time, feminists are ugly and dress like men, and so on. Of course, you probably don't notice most of it because you largely agree. Did you notice you barbed feminism in this very thread?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

There's plenty of empathy among people with similar issues. Not a lot across groups of have issue and not have issue..


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

john117 said:


> There's plenty of empathy among people with similar issues. Not a lot across groups of have issue and not have issue..


Yes, but not entirely. Think about it. Sexless marriages that are falling apart are one of the most common issues here. There should've been vats and vats of empathy here for you, no? So why would you have the feeling of being raked over the coals?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

wild jade said:


> @inmyprime
> 
> It isn't really a question of fear, it's a question of why set myself up for something that will be unproductive. It isn't even really a question of overt hostility, as for the most part people are mostly polite.
> 
> It's about a certain sort of worldview that sees women in a very particular way. Imagine reading a whole series of threads where you're not even posting, but you can see from the way that people are talking that they would absolutely hate you if they ever knew you.


I feel the same way. I would never post my issues here.


----------



## She'sStillGotIt (Jul 30, 2016)

katies said:


> I've noticed this as well. What I can't believe is making fun of other forums regarding something like infidelity and not being a BS yourself. Does it make people feel better to kick others when they're down and they haven't even had the same experience?


How do YOU know whose a BS and who isn't?

You don't.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

wild jade said:


> TAM has lots of empathy, wells of it, if you align with the dominant culture. But alas, @john117, while you do fit in here admirably, you're still a bit of a misfit. I've seen you push back on the standard tropes. :wink2:
> 
> @inmyprime
> There are a couple of difference between your list and mine. Most obvious is prevalence. Yes you can find a post that asserts some of the things you say. Maybe two. But they do not reflect majority opinion or even a large subset.
> ...


I'm going to preface what I'm about to say with this... It is incredibly difficult to be a moderator on this site, and engage in discussions regarding politics. It gives the impression that TAM as a whole leans a particular direction when it is simply my opinion, and not the opinion of this site. 

Couple that with the fact that most of the moderators are conservative leaning (which is coincidental BTW), and it amplifies this effect. 

So when I say what I'm about to say, it is the opinion of me, and only me, as nothing more than a poster.

---

The difficult part about this discussion is that there is more than one brand of feminism.

If your brand of feminism equals equality, I will support it wholeheartedly. 

That said, many brands of feminism are not about equality at all, therefore I have a very poor opinion of feminism in general. 

The same could be said for the MRA movement. The line gets blurry between advocating for equality versus advocating for "extra" equality.

Not only would I like to see opportunities and pay for women be equal to men, I would like to see parental rights in divorce be equal as well. There are many other examples.

Ultimately, there seems to be a current trend of trying to find a way to be a victim. Not to say that all or even most of these are invalid, but now men have latched on to this as well. Just like feminism has blamed the patriarchy for the plight of women, men can now blame feminism for the various areas in which they experience inequality.

What's amazing to me is seeing people on this site who will demonize one of these movements while embracing the other. To do this, one must execute a tremendous amount of biased thinking.

Both movements have some truth to them, but are absolutely filled with people who are so ideological that they've lost sight of equality and would rather stick it to "the man" or "the woman". 

How about we just treat each other with love and respect? That seems to me to be the solution to all of it.


----------



## Emerging Buddhist (Apr 7, 2016)

That was a wonderful para to finish with Far...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> If your brand of feminism equals equality, I will support it wholeheartedly.
> 
> That said, many brands of feminism are not about equality at all, therefore I have a very poor opinion of feminism in general.
> 
> ...


A-men! I think equality in family courts for men is a critical issue for men, women and children! Viva equal rights in family courts!


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

She'sStillGotIt said:


> How do YOU know whose a BS and who isn't?
> 
> You don't.


why wouldn't someone admit this? I talked to one person and he said he was just interested in the subject and had not experienced it. 
so why bash then?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> How do you know if your biased opinion is good? How do you know if your biased advice meets the standard for "good advice on TAM"?


We, of course, have no way of knowing what advice is "good" vs what advice is "bad".

Which is a good reason not to limit our advice to only politically correct, gender neutral, comments.

Sure, we might be excluding some "bad" advice, but we could just as easily be excluding good advice.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


What's so weird is that I don't see any of this.

Honestly.

I would think it mostly has to do with confirmation bias.

Men don't expect to see things like this and don't.

Women do expect to see things like this and do.

The truth has to be somewhere in the middle.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

wild jade said:


> Yes, but not entirely. Think about it. Sexless marriages that are falling apart are one of the most common issues here. There should've been vats and vats of empathy here for you, no? So why would you have the feeling of being raked over the coals?


Plenty of empathy from people in similar situations. Very little otherwise, QED.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> TAM has lots of empathy, wells of it, if you align with the dominant culture. But alas, @john117, while you do fit in here admirably, you're still a bit of a misfit. I've seen you push back on the standard tropes. :wink2:
> 
> @inmyprime
> There are a couple of difference between your list and mine. Most obvious is prevalence. Yes you can find a post that asserts some of the things you say. Maybe two. But they do not reflect majority opinion or even a large subset.
> ...


It must have escaped me  You mean the bit where I said that "I don't know much about feminism"?
The things I read on 'militant feminism' are not very inspiring....and I don't think this is a way forward for society...
I am not even sure why call it 'feminism' at all and not refer to 'gender equality' (which i absolutely think is the way forward) which I think is a much less sexist term. There are areas where women are preferred and there are ares where men are preferred so I am not even sure what the deal is with 'feminism'.
I just don't like to be associated with any particular movement, party or religion. i think people should be taken and judged at their own merit. Once you start grouping people into 'movements', it just creates a whole set of prejudices.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> It must have escaped me  You mean the bit where I said that "I don't know much about feminism"?
> The things I read on 'militant feminism' are not very inspiring....and I don't think this is a way forward for society...
> I am not even sure why call it 'feminism' at all and not refer to 'gender equality' (which i absolutely think is the way forward) which I think is a much less sexist term. *There are areas where women are preferred and there are ares where men are preferred* so I am not even sure what the deal is with 'feminism'.
> I just don't like to be associated with any particular movement, party or religion.* i think people should be taken and judged at their own merit. *Once you start grouping people into 'movements', it just creates a whole set of prejudices.


You do understand that saying "there are areas where women are preferred and there are areas where men are preferred" completely conflicts with "i think people should be taken and judged on merit". It's one or the either; measure people on their merit or measure people based on gender biases.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Lila said:


> You do understand that saying "there are areas where women are preferred and there are areas where men are preferred" completely conflicts with "i think people should be taken and judged on merit". It's one or the either; measure people on their merit or measure people based on gender biases.


Perhaps I wasn't clear: I don't *condone* the fact that anyone is being preferred. I am *criticising* such behaviour and think that anyone should be judged on their own merit. I don't however think that it's *always* men who are being preferred in *all* walks of life.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> I am not even sure why call it 'feminism' at all and not refer to 'gender equality' (which i absolutely think is the way forward) which I think is a much less sexist term. There are areas where women are preferred and there are ares where men are preferred so I am not even sure what the deal is with 'feminism'.





Lila said:


> You do understand that saying "there are areas where women are preferred and there are areas where men are preferred" completely conflicts with "i think people should be taken and judged on merit". It's one or the either; measure people on their merit or measure people based on gender biases.





inmyprime said:


> Perhaps I wasn't clear: I don't *condone* the fact that anyone is being preferred. I am *criticising* such behaviour and think that anyone should be judged on their own merit. I don't however think that it's *always* men who are being preferred in *all* walks of life.


Here's a prime example of confirmation bias.

Lila was expecting sexist comments. She interpreted it one way.

I was not expecting sexist comments. I interpreted it the way IMP intended (before reading Lila's reply).

What I'm curious about is why one would lean towards assuming that the worst interpretation was his intent.

My reading of IMPs posts in the past contain nothing that would lead me to believe he would be against gender equality. In fact, he states his support of gender equality in the previous sentence.

Shouldn't we start by giving people the benefit of the doubt?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Here's a prime example of confirmation bias.
> 
> Lila was expecting sexist comments. She interpreted it one way.
> 
> ...


Well duh! It must be because I am a colossal harpy feminist ***** who hates everything about men to the core /s Say what you really mean Buddy. 

You were the one that said posting based on biases is a good thing for TAM. 

Just like you think my post was based on a "worst interpretation" of IMG I think yours was also based on worst interpretation of mine. See how that works? 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> What's so weird is that I don't see any of this.
> 
> Honestly.
> 
> ...


Except that it isn't just a man/woman issue. It's much more complex than that.

However, as an examplar of the dominant culture here, I wouldn't expect you to see anything any differently than you do.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> Perhaps I wasn't clear: I don't *condone* the fact that anyone is being preferred. I am *criticising* such behaviour and think that anyone should be judged on their own merit. I don't however think that it's *always* men who are being preferred in *all* walks of life.


Who said that men are preferred in all walks of life?? :scratchhead: 

FWIW, your barb was in the post where you indicated your gut reaction to the overly "pro-feminist" slant of TAM.

Which just makes me laugh out loud, slap my forehead, and shake my head in complete disbelief all at the same time.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Lila said:


> Well duh! It must be because I am a colossal harpy feminist ***** who hates everything about men to the core /s Say what you really mean Buddy.
> 
> You were the one that said posting based on biases is a good thing for TAM.
> 
> ...


You realize you did it again, in the midst of the sarcasm, right?

;-)


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

And this is what happens those that don't agree get 'responded' to over and over. There is a thread right now that a woman is supposed to put up with two minute sex. If this was reversed the man would be told duty sex is in unacceptable. Or she should try to do it to make him happy. 

It is no coincidence that those that don't see it are men. Are all men here like this no. But the atmosphere is definitely different.


----------



## Anastasia6 (May 28, 2017)

Wild jade there is no doubt also a societal norm expectation with sex. However that kinda to be expected on a marriage site versus a straight up sex site. Some alternatives are definitely represented here as well. 

Though can't say I've seen much LGBT threads.

Feminism is what you make of it. There are some traditional roles but we also see non traditional roles as well. There is quite a bit of man up advice. Though some of that I think is valid, just not the extent of it. Many women do still respond to masculinity. My husband is a nice guy. I run the finances and play a majority role in big decisions. But he hasn't lost his masculinity and that I enjoy.

I can only say what I've seen for about a year of reading and lurking. I can only comment from my perspective. But I think wild jade makes many valid points.

I often don't post because I know what is going to happen.

I still enjoy the site though. I find it is great for a certain male perspective. And I know I really didn't have any idea how much some men value sex. I don't think all men are this way but I was shocked how many it is. I also think that if you find this then it will be somewhat true for most men just to a lesser extent.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

*anastasia6
There is a thread right now that a woman is supposed to put up with two minute sex. If this was reversed the man would be told duty sex is in unacceptable. *

Two minute sex is unacceptable if the women wants more than the 2 min. Yes, the H needs to do better than that. I wouldn't go for 2 min sex and I am a man. It needs to be much longer. No gender bias here.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


It's amazing that we could be reading the same site and come up with such different analyses.

I find that this site is moderately feminist, although possibly much less so than a typical relationship site (although I haven't been on very many others).

I certainly have seen no cases here where women have been treated more severely than men with the same apparent level of bad behavior.

But of course I haven't seen everything, so I may have missed some that match that description.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Okay, I'll say it. This site is almost 100% anti-feminist, strongly advocates for submissive women, usually prefers traditional marriages and fixed gender roles, consistently tells women to be more "feminine", dress sexy, use our feminine wiles, but then is suspicious of that, calling us gold diggers, selfish, controlling, anti-sex, and a few other not so nice things. Strong women are usually put down, or at least treated with suspicion, promiscuous women are frequently put down, insufficiently feminine women are always put down, Ugly or overweight women insulted regularly, women are often associated with "crazy", "overly emotional", "manipulative", while men are just the poor hapless victims who have no power in their relationships, and where marriage is a sucker's game designed to screw them over.
> 
> I get that some of the complaints are true of some women. I get that the people saying these things may sometimes be just bitter and angry and lashing out. But it's also the overall culture here.


And then there are the following sentiments that get trotted out over and over (although a lot less lately)
*If you want to be happy for the rest of your life don't make a pretty woman your wife.* Um OK now this is one of the stupidest lines, so pretty a woman cannot make a good wife? 
*Men become high value as they get older and women are lesser value.* Again, um, really what a load of rubbish.
*Men age better than women.* Says no 40 plus year old woman that has seen just how badly some men age.
On and on. This is the underlying sentiment here by quite a few of the men. One will post any of these little gems then others chime in with yeah that is true dat.

With the usual exclusions of course. I honestly find most of the men here to be just normal guys. There are plenty I agree with on one thread but may disagree with on another.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> You realize you did it again, in the midst of the sarcasm, right?
> 
> ;-)


I don't know what you mean by this. Please explain it to me because I am thoroughly confused by what Buddy claimed. 

I saw a contradictory set of statements. I called them out as being contradictory, as neutral as I possibly could. Buddy claims I read IMG's statements as sexist and that I responded with bias. Does this mean that I can't question contradictory statements written by a man because it's automatically viewed as sexist bias? 

As much as Buddy promoted the idea of freely speaking ones opinion, his comment just reeks of "shut your mouth lila and just look pretty while the smart men talk about important things?" 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

anastasia6 said:


> And this is what happens those that don't agree get 'responded' to over and over. There is a thread right now that a woman is supposed to put up with two minute sex. If this was reversed the man would be told duty sex is in unacceptable. Or she should try to do it to make him happy.
> 
> It is no coincidence that those that don't see it are men. Are all men here like this no. But the atmosphere is definitely different.


??

Really i just read the thread and didn't see where anybody told her she should put up with two min sex.

They said she should be responcible for her own orgasm . I take that to mean comunicate what else might work because he can only last 2mins.

And there were some male posters who flat out said time to end it.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Let me give y'all a little window into my culture, just so you can see the difference.

In my world, men will outright claim to be feminist. And they won't just say that they stand for equality, they will understand the history of what feminism is, why it is, and see the value of feminism in today's world. They will argue with other men who disparage feminism. 

I have never ever heard a single man pine for a sexbot until I came here. 

Women aren't expected to be chaste, nor does anyone worry when we fully enjoy our sexuality. No one tries to tell us we're unhealthy because we decided to hook up, or are ruining our future chances with men. Indeed, men expect us to be just as "colorful" as they are.

I could go on. And I could viirtually guarantee you that those who align with the dominant culture here would be just as alienated in my world as I am in this one. I would, for example, bet a decent amount of money that at least some of the "no way TAM is real feminist" crew are right now thinking to themselves that I am deluded and all the guys I know are just placating me or otherwise hiding how they really feel.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Lila said:


> I don't know what you mean by this. Please explain it to me because I am thoroughly confused by what Buddy claimed.
> 
> I saw a contradictory set of statements. I called them out as being contradictory, as neutral as I possibly could. Buddy claims I read IMG's statements as sexist and that I responded with bias. Does this mean that I can't question contradictory statements written by a man because it's automatically viewed as sexist bias?
> 
> ...



In all fairness, I don't think @Buddy400 was telling you to shut up and look pretty. He was just revealing his confirmation bias, while pretending it was yours. 

The contradiction in IMPs post was real enough, and while he did come back to clarify that he doesn't condone half that contradiction, I would agree with your read that in his initial statement, it sure sounded like he was saying that both were true, ithat in some areas men are favored and in others women are, and that people are to be judged on their own merits.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> *In all fairness, I don't think @Buddy400 was telling you to shut up and look pretty*. He was just revealing his confirmation bias, while pretending it was yours.


Thanks. The bolded is especially gratifying coming from you (as we've been at odds in the past).

Saying (or meaning) "Shut up and look pretty" is nothing I have ever thought or would ever think. 

For the second sentence, I DO have confirmation bias. Everyone does.

I thought I clearly said that, while I thought @Lila might have a confirmation bias to look for sexist comments, *I (and probably men in general) have a confirmation bias to not look for sexist comments*.

I just signed on to TAM for the first time since posting yesterday and responded to this first thing.

I'll now go look at the details of the hornet's nest I apparently disturbed unintentionally.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> Well duh! It must be because I am a colossal harpy feminist ***** who hates everything about men to the core /s Say what you really mean Buddy.
> 
> You were the one that said posting based on biases is a good thing for TAM.
> 
> ...


I tried to say that posting shouldn't be limited to "un-biased" (in this case, gender neutral) advice because I do not believe that "biased" advice is necessarily bad.

Here's a liberal feminist who agrees (just so that you don't think that this is some sort of Red Pill stuff).

http://www.drpsychmom.com/2014/12/0...ce-doesnt-necessarily-perpetuate-stereotypes/

I'm not saying I'm right, just that I don't think we should decide a priori that advice is "bad" because it's gender specific.

I wrote this post because I had just posted on confirmation bias and then thought what I saw as an opportunity to clarify my point.

I do, indeed, try to assume the best intentions of others, especially when they don't agree with me.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> Except that it isn't just a man/woman issue. It's much more complex than that.
> 
> However, as an examplar of the dominant culture here, I wouldn't expect you to see anything any differently than you do.


It's an everything issue.

On any issue with two sides, each side sees what they expect to see and doesn't pay attention to what they don't.

I DO try to keep my confirmation bias in mind when I read about sexism. After all, I have a wife and daughter and I don't want to be oblivious to concerns that they may deeply effect them.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

@Buddy400, you posted this in response to my post to IMP



> What *I'm curious about is why one would lean towards assuming that the worst interpretation was his intent.*


You should know the answer to your own curiosity. You talk about it in your post below.



Buddy400 said:


> For the second sentence, *I DO have confirmation bias*. Everyone does.
> 
> I thought I clearly said that, while I thought @Lila might have a confirmation bias to look for sexist comments, I (and probably men in general) have a confirmation bias to not look for sexist comments.



Why even post that comment if you knew the answer? Were you trying to imply that I interpret things with the worst intentions?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> @Buddy400, you posted this in response to my post to IMP
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hmmmm. Good questions.

Initially, reading your response, my initial impression was that I'd screwed up again by including a secondary point which takes the focus away from my main point (confirmation bias). Perhaps the "why assume the worst" was taken personally? As if that was my main point; that there was something wrong about YOU. As I said above, I only commented on this because I thought it elaborated on my previous post, not because I thought this was a particularly egregious example.

But, on further reflections, the best way to try and deal with one's confirmation bias is to always try to assume the best intentions of the other party. So, they are related. Perhaps I should have tied the "assume the worst" comment more closely with the confirmation bias issue instead of allowing it to seem as if it was an attack on you. 

I apologize for saying it in a way that may have caused you to think it was a personal attack.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Lila said:


> I don't know what you mean by this. Please explain it to me because I am thoroughly confused by what Buddy claimed.
> 
> I saw a contradictory set of statements. I called them out as being contradictory, as neutral as I possibly could. Buddy claims I read IMG's statements as sexist and that I responded with bias. Does this mean that I can't question contradictory statements written by a man because it's automatically viewed as sexist bias?
> 
> ...


Wow, really? That's the reason why peaceful conversations are hard. The translator seems to be broken if that's what you got out of that post.

I have re-read what I have written:

"*There are areas where women are preferred and there are ares where men are preferred* so I am not even sure what the deal is with 'feminism'.
I just don't like to be associated with any particular movement, party or religion. *i think people should be taken and judged at their own merit*. Once you start grouping people into 'movements', it just creates a whole set of prejudices."

There is nothing contradictory about what I wrote. What 'is' and what 'should be' do not have to be the same things. In fact the whole point of this paragraph was that they are *not* the same things and that *this* is precisely why it* can* be an issue.
You seem to be (deliberately?) misunderstanding that I am agreeing with the fact that there are areas where gender inequality is an issue (for either men or women). The normal response would be to simply acknowledge that you misunderstood what was meant (especially after I clarified it nicely).
Just like with your 'shut your mouth lila and just look pretty while the smart men talk about important things?' interpretation, Buddy made a point that you (and others, it seems) are reading or wanting to read stuff into things where there is nothing to read into.
It's a little bit frightening or perhaps you are just being sarcastic, I cannot tell.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Lila said:


> @Buddy400, you posted this in response to my post to IMP
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Here is an analogy, in case it explains it better:

"in winter it rains too much and in summer it rains too little. i wish it rained more uniformly throughout the year so that all the crops could be happy."

If I said this, would you consider it a contradiction? Just because I mentioned words like 'too much, too little and uniformly' all within close proximity to each other?


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> Wow, really? That's the reason why peaceful conversations are hard. The translator seems to be broken if that's what you got out of that post.
> 
> I have re-read what I have written:
> 
> ...


Doesn't really matter. I have received confirmation from others that what I read posted by you was exactly as I explained it earlier. I'm glad you explained your intent in a followup post. I get it, you're all about equality but it does not negate the fact that what I interpreted is how others did as well. If you find this fact frightening, then so be it. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## VibrantWings (Sep 8, 2017)

Had to think about it a little bit and remember just what my initial thought process was when I first came here.
I noticed a lot of "get a divorce" posts, and an occasional DNA testing that looked like male IDs. It didn't really hit me that there are more men here...I just assumed that some happen to be more "regular". I've seen plenty of ladies posting (funny with the monikers here most can be figured out easily....if not by the posts themselves) so I never considered an actual discrepancy.
People discussing using VARs- that's definitely a new thing to me... and I saw men and women both talking about using them. (I've always thought key loggers were kind of wild but this is really out there to me).
I sensed distrust on both sides- just seems the ladies express it somewhat differently. 
Reading all that....I still don't quite see it as a male dominated site. Why? The regular ladies here strike me as strong and supportive to each other...even if I don't always agree with what they are saying.

I have detected anger and bitterness...but over time it seems to be the usual suspects. It's bothersome when the threads here get really long and it takes a while to see a dissenting post. 

Some of the attitudes in some of the posts here made me think....they are older. 
As in these are some of the things my parents would think, assume, take as the norm. My father would be 80 if he were still alive...and he was misogynistic on many levels and seemed to think it was his birthright to be so. :|
That being said, he did ask me what I was interested in more...a man to take care of me or education/training to get a good job. He assumed I could do either....and coming from someone such as him it was a compliment. I find myself reminded of him occasionally while reading here.

Reading some of the posts, I just assume some of the attitudes are that of an older generation. (kind of how my kids probably look at me now).


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* WildJade
or otherwise hiding how they really feel.*

That is about the same thing I hear from my W when she asks for my opinion and I tell her my thoughts.

Sorry, when I post something, that is how I feel and I am not hiding my opinion or how I feel.

I am not complaining about you personally WJ but I have heard that "hiding how you feel" way too many times. It is a can't win game to me.

Back to more men posting, I say good. It isn't that common on some forums.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Handy said:


> * WildJade
> or otherwise hiding how they really feel.*
> 
> That is about the same thing I hear from my W when she asks for my opinion and I tell her my thoughts.
> ...


Don't worry. I don't think you are hiding how you feel. Nor do I think that the guys I've talked to about these sorts of things are hiding how they feel. 

I was just speculating as to how some readers here might respond to my post.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> Thanks. The bolded is especially gratifying coming from you (as we've been at odds in the past).
> 
> Saying (or meaning) "Shut up and look pretty" is nothing I have ever thought or would ever think.
> 
> ...


I guess I missed the hornet's nest? :scratchhead: I don't see one now.

At any rate, no, I don't think everyone has "confirmation bias". Yes, confirmation bias exists. And yes, we will view things through the lens of our beliefs, values, assumptions and so on. But there is actually some observations that are more objectively accurate than others.

And I still think you are viewing this too simplistically. This isn't a man/woman thing where men see one thing and women another. It's a culture thing.

I'm willing to bet, for example, that there are also men that find the culture here a bit alien as well. It's just that women are probably more likely to because there is so much here derogating women. Even when it's not a deliberate put down, just a worldview as to the the way of things, it's still shoving women into a particular box that a lot of modern women don't want to be shoved into.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

VibrantWings said:


> Had to think about it a little bit and remember just what my initial thought process was when I first came here.
> I noticed a lot of "get a divorce" posts, and an occasional DNA testing that looked like male IDs. It didn't really hit me that there are more men here...I just assumed that some happen to be more "regular". I've seen plenty of ladies posting (funny with the monikers here most can be figured out easily....if not by the posts themselves) so I never considered an actual discrepancy.
> People discussing using VARs- that's definitely a new thing to me... and I saw men and women both talking about using them. (I've always thought key loggers were kind of wild but this is really out there to me).
> I sensed distrust on both sides- just seems the ladies express it somewhat differently.
> ...


This is so important, way more important than banter online. All parents should understand the impact they have on the next generation and TBH I sometime cringe and wonder if people here that have such horrid attitudes to the opposite gender realise the disservice they are doing their kids.

I am fortunate to have very supportive parents that have been able to move with the times as well as be very progressive. The ex and I are like this with our kids too and it is wonderful to see the excellent adults they are growing up to be.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The issues men and women face are highly asymmetric.

Untested rape kits mostly hurt women.

A total lack of tracking those untested kits - sends a message regarding priorities. 

A lack of tracking intimate partner violence that falls below the level of homicide - another message on priorities. 

Being raped or maimed - you’d think somebody would want to track that. But apprarently not.





inmyprime said:


> Wow, really? That's the reason why peaceful conversations are hard. The translator seems to be broken if that's what you got out of that post.
> 
> I have re-read what I have written:
> 
> ...


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

MEM2020 said:


> The issues men and women face are highly asymmetric.
> 
> Untested rape kits mostly hurt women.
> 
> ...



? I don't understand how this fits into the conversation. Could you elaborate? 

Did I miss something?


----------



## Yag-Kosha (Sep 8, 2016)

Feminism may as well be a punchline to some joke that went out of style decades ago. 

The most stern advocates for the doctrine create nothing, sit on HR/diversity boards, write on blogs, write for magazines, and think they contribute in some way to society, going on about 'toxic masculinity' and how there's not enough women or race x/y/z and how some intervention should be at play to make everything even.

Feminism is just another piece of the construct that is post-modernism and look how that's working out for us. Can't even state the obvious that there are two sexes -- which are assigned at birth -- and that people who think they're really the opposite sex have a mental illness and should seek mental help instead of hormone blockers.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

wild jade said:


> I agree that there are clear biases on TAM. It isn't all because more men post here, but there is a distinct demographic that makes this place not particularly welcoming to women and definitely skews the advice that is given.
> 
> I will never post a thread here because of it, and it will also probably be the reason I stop coming back.


Yup, I do the same. There are threads where _particular _TAM members get started on their favorite “bone to pick” where I just do not post. Because I know that the moment I post an opposing view or question what they have posted those members will go at me using terms like reactionary, misandrist or other personal insults instead of addressing my point of view. To me it’s a waste of my time arguing about it and it’s not worth having someone get worked up enough to get banned.

My favorite insult was a few years back where a poster implied that I was a gender-traitor … that was just bizarre.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Red Sonja said:


> Yup, I do the same. There are threads where _particular _TAM members get started on their favorite “bone to pick” where I just do not post. Because I know that the moment I post an opposing view or question what they have posted those members will go at me using terms like reactionary, misandrist or other personal insults instead of addressing my point of view. To me it’s a waste of my time arguing about it and it’s not worth having someone get worked up enough to get banned.
> 
> My favorite insult was a few years back where a poster implied that I was a gender-traitor … that was just bizarre.


Can you give general examples of threads you won't post on? I like woman that have my POV, I also like women who don't share my POV but share anyway.

I have really enjoyed it when a woman who has an opposing view changes my POV because of her feminine perspective and ability to communicate.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

john117 said:


> Plenty of empathy from people in similar situations. Very little otherwise, QED.


Are you referring to the fact that very few people here are (or were) married to Not-Normal people (i.e. cluster B's) or have spouses from a very different culture? If so, I agree however I think it may be because cluster B's are a very small fraction of the general population and perhaps inter-cultural marriages are uncommon as well.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

@Yag-Kosha, you should get along here very well. Welcome to TAM!

Those of you who have been arguing that TAM is pro-feminist, can you see how, with this type of post being very common here, there might be a lot of people who might be turned off from engaging in conversation or from seeking advice?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I'm just trying to illustrate that what Yag-Kosha is saying exemplifies the prevailing attitude here toward feminism, and toward those who don't align with traditional gender roles. So of course you won't see those people sticking around, posting, or seeking advice.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> Y
> My favorite insult was a few years back where a poster implied that I was a gender-traitor … that was just bizarre.


LOL. My husband was just telling me the other day that he's been called a gender traitor too. I guess some people just want a war of the sexes?? :scratchhead:


----------



## aine (Feb 15, 2014)

Recently, my visual of TAM is of many cavemen, with big muscles and clubs which are used to wack a person who holds a differing view on the head, if that doesn't work then insult them. 
Unfortunately, these same people refuse to or are unable to understand the nuances of relationships and adopt a very black and white approach to them. Standardized responses do not fit every scenario and there is no harm in exploring the more subtle differences in the problems people face with issues such as infidelity. 
The black and white thinking is becoming a real turn off and a dangerous one. It is possible to condemn a behavior and yet see what might have led to that behavior no matter how abhorrent it is (regardless of the gender). 

I think I will give TAM a miss for a while it appears to have become a somewhat 'unsafe' zone for alternative points of view or even those who might wish to explore dilemmas from different angles. *sigh* 
As my grandmother says ' to each his own'

Peace out.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

aine said:


> Recently, my visual of TAM is of many cavemen, with big muscles and clubs which are used to wack a person who holds a differing view on the head, if that doesn't work then insult them.
> Unfortunately, these same people refuse to or are unable to understand the nuances of relationships and adopt a very black and white approach to them. Standardized responses do not fit every scenario and there is no harm in exploring the more subtle differences in the problems people face with issues such as infidelity.
> The black and white thinking is becoming a real turn off and a dangerous one. It is possible to condemn a behavior and yet see what might have led to that behavior no matter how abhorrent it is (regardless of the gender).
> 
> ...


Take a breather if you need but don't leave, far too many fly by posters and stories tellers here now, it would be a shame to see more of the longer term posters leave.

The rabid misogynists used to get to me but honestly I don't give a **** about them. The picture I have in my head is of weak little old men that can't deal with progress. I used to get annoyed with some of the rantings but now just laugh at them and wonder why their are so angry. Fear is a big driver of that type of poster and that is what makes them such bullies. Don't let the bullies get to you.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Who said that men are preferred in all walks of life?? :scratchhead:
> 
> FWIW, your barb was in the post where you indicated your gut reaction to the overly "pro-feminist" slant of TAM.
> 
> Which just makes me laugh out loud, slap my forehead, and shake my head in complete disbelief all at the same time.



I’m sure it does but why do you feel that my perception that TAM can be just as Pro-feminist as it can be anti-feminist is somehow less valid than your perception of only seeing just the one side? (Anti-feminist).
And why does this automatically pushes me into the ‘anti-feminist’ camp just because I view it this way?

Look, I get there can be many stupid comments from any genders: I really think it’s less to do with gender biases as it has to do with intelligence, coupled with bitterness and you get a very unhealthy mixture.
It’s like anything on the internet: just pick what is helpful. You have to do your own filtering.

I personally would value women’s views and opinions on any matters and would not attack anyone for just holding a different view. I would probably challenge it if it was in my opinion an unreasonable view. But so far, we have just been discussing what the supposedly prevailing culture of TAM is: I mean does it really matter? WE make ‘the culture’ with the comments so just make the best of it and this ‘culture’ might just change.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

aine said:


> Recently, my visual of TAM is of many cavemen, with big muscles and clubs which are used to wack a person who holds a differing view on the head, if that doesn't work then insult them.
> Unfortunately, these same people refuse to or are unable to understand the nuances of relationships and adopt a very black and white approach to them. Standardized responses do not fit every scenario and there is no harm in exploring the more subtle differences in the problems people face with issues such as infidelity.
> The black and white thinking is becoming a real turn off and a dangerous one. It is possible to condemn a behavior and yet see what might have led to that behavior no matter how abhorrent it is (regardless of the gender).
> 
> ...


Isn't calling men "caveman with clubs" insulting

You did exactly what your complaining that others do.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Lila said:


> Doesn't really matter. I have received confirmation from others that what I read posted by you was exactly as I explained it earlier. I'm glad you explained your intent in a followup post. I get it, you're all about equality but it does not negate the fact that what I interpreted is how others did as well. If you find this fact frightening, then so be it.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk




Which ‘others’? By what means have you received this confirmation, may I ask? 
I want to understand how it is possible to misunderstand something as obvious as what I wrote.

Is being for ‘gender equality’ still somehow not good enough? I get the feeling it is still somehow offensive, unless one specifically mentions ‘pro-feminism’. 

I think this thread is getting slightly derailed because some people are referring to ‘extreme feminism’ while others simply are talking about feminism = equal rights for women (as was the original meaning). Whoever came up with that name really screwed up in my view. And to be clear: that’s not an ‘anti-feminist’ statement, it is an ‘anti-bad-skills-at-naming-things’ statement).

The problem with this term is that it singles itself out. It is singling women out. Whereas the whole point is for women to be perfectly equal/integrated/respected/valued etc. IMV it sends out the wrong message. In Europe this term has pretty negative connotations by now. And it is heavily criticised by women who are pro equal rights.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> @Yag-Kosha, you should get along here very well. Welcome to TAM!
> 
> Those of you who have been arguing that TAM is pro-feminist, can you see how, with this type of post being very common here, there might be a lot of people who might be turned off from engaging in conversation or from seeking advice?
> 
> Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I'm just trying to illustrate that what Yag-Kosha is saying exemplifies the prevailing attitude here toward feminism, and toward those who don't align with traditional gender roles. So of course you won't see those people sticking around, posting, or seeking advice.




Translation: I think he’s referring to extreme feminism. Do you feel any form feminism is a good thing and cannot be harmful by definition? Being against extreme feminism is really not the same as being against women having equal rights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

inmyprime said:


> I personally would value women’s views and opinions on any matters and would not attack anyone for holding a different view.


Hmmm … so you would never interrogate, assign a hidden agenda or label as reactive … a female poster who asks a simple question of a post in order to get clarification?

Okey Dokey.



inmyprime said:


> But so far, we have just been discussing what the supposedly prevailing culture of TAM is: I mean does it really matter?


It matters to some (why else discuss it here) ... others not so much.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> Hmmm … so you would never interrogate, assign a hidden agenda or label as reactive … a female poster who asks a simple question of a post in order to get clarification?
> 
> Okey Dokey.


Are you talking about Lila's post?
This:
"You do understand that saying "there are areas where women are preferred and there are areas where men are preferred" completely conflicts with "i think people should be taken and judged on merit". It's one or the either; measure people on their merit or measure people based on gender biases."

is not normally how one asks for clarification. (Even though I have given one immediately after). This sounds accusatory. Nor was there any 'thanks for clarifying, my mistake' etc afterwards. Just that, apparently someone else misunderstood it too, which makes it alright then.

It just all seems so hostile - I don't get it.
I mean I DO get it, given how some people communicate on these boards. But it seems that just because one is of a certain gender, one will get a particular treatment and that doesn't seem right to me.

I think these boards work best when genders actually help each other: women give men a female perspective (without fear of being shot down) and vice versa. 
That's the ideal anyway and possibly a distant dream (though I have seen it happen occasionally).


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

chillymorn69 said:


> Isn't calling men "caveman with clubs" insulting
> 
> You did exactly what your complaining that others do.


Oh FFS, she is describing her general impression by using an analogy. It's called hyperbole.

You know, like the terms "screaming harpies", feminazis, "golden vaginas" (etc.) that are thrown around here.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

inmyprime said:


> Are you talking about Lila's post?


No, the behavior I was describing is in a (now) locked thread.



inmyprime said:


> It just all seems so hostile.


Yes it was hostile.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> Oh FFS, she is describing her general impression by using an analogy. It's called hyperbole.
> 
> You know, like the terms "screaming harpies", feminazis, "golden vaginas" (etc.) that are thrown around here.


Actually, no. An analogy is: a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

This was not an analogy:
"Recently, my visual of TAM is of many cavemen, with big muscles and clubs which are used to wack a person who holds a differing view on the head, if that doesn't work then insult them."

Do you know what would happen to a male poster if he used that kind of 'analogy' to describe the females posting on TAM?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> No, the behavior I was describing is in a (now) locked thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it was hostile.


Sorry, my mistake then.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> Which ‘others’? By what means have you received this confirmation, may I ask?
> I want to understand how it is possible to misunderstand something as obvious as what I wrote.
> 
> Is being for ‘gender equality’ still somehow not good enough? I get the feeling it is still somehow offensive, unless one specifically mentions ‘pro-feminism’.
> ...


 @inmyprime, you appear triggered by my posts. As such, I encourage you to take a breather and maybe find someone/ something else to focus your attention. If that's not possible, then I recommend you block me. I don't want to be the continued cause for your meltdowns. 

God Bless and Happy Thanksgiving!




Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

Lila said:


> @inmyprime, you appear triggered by my posts. As such, I encourage you to take a breather and maybe find someone/ something else to focus your attention. If that's not possible, then I recommend you block me. I don't want to be the continued cause for your meltdowns.
> 
> God Bless and Happy Thanksgiving!





inmyprime said:


> Actually, no. An analogy is: a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
> 
> This was not an analogy:
> "Recently, my visual of TAM is of many cavemen, with big muscles and clubs which are used to wack a person who holds a differing view on the head, if that doesn't work then insult them."
> ...


Yep, @inmyprime I suggest you take a break (or block) from my posts as well.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> Oh FFS, she is describing her general impression by using an analogy. It's called hyperbole.
> 
> You know, like the terms "screaming harpies", feminazis, "golden vaginas" (etc.) that are thrown around here.


Lol o Tay

Awfully hypocritical 

I don't see it that way.

If it's not ok for one side and your going to throw it in play then it's not ok for the other side. Seems pretty simple to me.

Toxic feminism


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Lila said:


> @inmyprime, you appear triggered by my posts. As such, I encourage you to take a breather and maybe find someone/ something else to focus your attention. If that's not possible, then I recommend you block me. I don't want to be the continued cause for your meltdowns.
> 
> God Bless and Happy Thanksgiving!
> 
> ...


Haha - don't take it the wrong way: I wanted to understand what goes on in somebody's mind when someone's is acting like they are looking for a conflict. That's probably beyond my comprehension.

Don't take it personally. I have never blocked anyone, I am not going to start with you :wink2:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> Yep, @inmyprime I suggest you take a break (or block) from my posts as well.


Thanks, you both are so considerate. I will consider your advice.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

chillymorn69 said:


> Lol o Tay
> 
> Awfully hypocritical
> 
> ...


Those various (aforementioned) terms are used by both sides as general statements and I personally find them hilarious. I only object to such terms when they are aimed at an individual poster (male or female) because then they become a personal attack and, I believe are intended as such.

Gender-based personal attacks are what I find objectionable on TAM. I personally don’t care about the numbers of men vs. women posters here.

Toxic feminism? :rofl: Nope, I am an egalitarian.


----------



## RoseAglow (Apr 11, 2013)

inmyprime said:


> Is being for ‘gender equality’ still somehow not good enough? I get the feeling it is still somehow offensive, unless one specifically mentions ‘pro-feminism’.
> 
> I think this thread is getting slightly derailed because some people are referring to ‘extreme feminism’ while others simply are talking about feminism = equal rights for women (as was the original meaning). Whoever came up with that name really screwed up in my view. And to be clear: that’s not an ‘anti-feminist’ statement, it is an ‘anti-bad-skills-at-naming-things’ statement).


One hundred plus years ago, when Feminism was born, and even into the last quarter of the previous century, there was no concept of "gender equality" as a construct. Feminists had to win the right to an education, to own property, to vote, to have careers, and to get into some positions of power/policy making before the construct would even make sense. The phrase itself was borne out of Feminist philosophy.



> The problem with this term is that it singles itself out. It is singling women out. Whereas the whole point is for women to be perfectly equal/integrated/respected/valued etc. IMV it sends out the wrong message. In Europe this term has pretty negative connotations by now. And it is heavily criticised by women who are pro equal rights.
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I always find it ironic when women who are in positions of power say they are not feminists. It speaks to both the enormous success of the Feminist Movement and it's poor public-relations as well. The available opportunities for women today are now taken for granted as basic human rights

One of my good friends, who has a PhD, built her own business, is the bread winner in her family, and has a daughter, told me she was shocked that Sheryl Sandberg's book "Lean In" was so Feminist, LOL. My friend also does not consider herself a feminist. She is pretty conservative- in fact, I was shocked and delighted to hear that she had read "Lean In"! She does not see any irony, in fact, to her feminists are problematic (excluding yours truly, for the most part). She does not see that that very little of her current life was available to her mom, and basically none of it was possible for her grandmother or great-grandmother. I think she just doesn't quite believe it. She would never take a liberal Women's History course. Meanwhile, she is working hard to ensure that her daughter will have the chance to get a great education and will be able to support herself...but doesn't see any of that as having anything to do with feminism. This is the poor PR side of things. "Feminist" to many people means "Anti Male". 

I do think there will be a new term for mainstream feminist goals, hopefully something a little catchier than Gender Equality. I'd prefer something like Humanist, personally.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> I’m sure it does but why do you feel that my perception that TAM can be just as Pro-feminist as it can be anti-feminist is somehow less valid than your perception of only seeing just the one side? (Anti-feminist).
> And why does this automatically pushes me into the ‘anti-feminist’ camp just because I view it this way?


Sorry, but there's just no way on this lovely planet of ours that TAM is pro-feminist. It just isn't. 

But no, thinking that doesn't make you anti-feminist and probably "anti-feminist" is too strong. You have said quite explicitly, though, that you think it sexist, a movement that you don't align with, and generally a cause not worth supporting. Not exactly pro-feminist, is it?

I'm not trying to change your mind here. Just illustrating my point about culture for those who wanted actual examples.


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

I just stumbled across another example that illustrates my point. 

The constant refrain that all men want is for their women to feed them, sex them up and then STFU speaks huge volumes about the overall attitude about the value of women.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

wild jade said:


> I just stumbled across another example that illustrates my point.
> 
> The constant refrain that all men want is for their women to feed them, sex them up and then STFU speaks huge volumes about the overall attitude about the value of women.


Point me there please because that is one of the big misconceptions about men that many of us here actively try and shut down.


----------



## introvert (May 30, 2016)

Folks, we are all going to see stuff we disagree with on this site...I have found that it's really helpful to place particularly offensive individuals on "ignore". Those individuals will vary amongst us. 

As somebody posted earlier, use those tidbits that are useful, ignore those that are not.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

I'll also add that I'm seeing a return of Red Pill rhetoric and the associated stupidity by newer members to TAM. Moderators did a good job of exterminating that crap from TAM a while back but that mentality is viral, you can't let your foot off the pedal or else it comes back with a vengeance.....and bring friends. 

I'd be happy to engage if given the green light but know that will only create thread jacks from hell. 

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

wild jade said:


> I guess I missed the hornet's nest? :scratchhead: I don't see one now.


You're right. As I said in my reply, it was made before reading posts made since my previous visit. I assumed that if someone thought I'd said "shut your pretty little mouth and let us men talk", there be a lot of negative feedback.



wild jade said:


> At any rate, no, I don't think everyone has "confirmation bias". Yes, confirmation bias exists. And yes, we will view things through the lens of our beliefs, values, assumptions and so on. But there is actually some observations that are more objectively accurate than others.


My belief is that everyone does have confirmation bias and would be well served by being aware of it.
The subtlest way that confirmation bias works is that when you read something that fits in with one's bias, it's just accepted. When one hears something that conflicts, then it's investigated with an eye towards searching for flaws. Even deciding what to talk about, read or write about is affected.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Sorry, but there's just no way on this lovely planet of ours that TAM is pro-feminist. It just isn't.
> 
> But no, thinking that doesn't make you anti-feminist and probably "anti-feminist" is too strong. You have said quite explicitly, though, that you think it sexist, a movement that you don't align with, and generally a cause not worth supporting. Not exactly pro-feminist, is it?
> 
> I'm not trying to change your mind here. Just illustrating my point about culture for those who wanted actual examples.


But you haven't really provided actual examples (thread references) to prove any of these sweeping 'anti-feminist' generalisations that you claim is 100% the prevailing view on TAM. You made a list of things that seem true to you from comments somebody possibly made about a person (possibly a WS?) and then for some reason decided that ALL men here think this way about ALL of the women. And now it is my turn to shake my head in disbelief! :wink2:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

RoseAglow said:


> One hundred plus years ago, when Feminism was born, and even into the last quarter of the previous century, there was no concept of "gender equality" as a construct. Feminists had to win the right to an education, to own property, to vote, to have careers, and to get into some positions of power/policy making before the construct would even make sense. The phrase itself was borne out of Feminist philosophy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What is wrong with 'gender equality' as a term? What's not catchy or sexy about it? (How about an Equalist?). 'Humanist' as a term is fine too but it may lead to misunderstandings when people start arguing which gender is supposed to be more 'humane'...Plus do you think the feminists of today will be happy re-labelling themselves like this? 

By criticising the term 'feminism', doesn't mean I am ignoring the general benefits that the movement has brought over the century. 'Anti male' is unfortunately exactly what the 'feminism' has become more recently. It explains why many of your friends have no wish to be associated with this term.

What's interesting is that it wasn't actually a woman who called the movement 'feminism' back in 1837. It was apparently a French guy called Charles Fourier (not exactly a feminist himself):

https://www.stuffmomnevertoldyou.com/blogs/the-man-who-coined-feminism.htm


----------



## toblerone (Oct 18, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> 'Anti male' is unfortunately exactly what the 'feminism' has become more recently. It explains why many of your friends have no wish to be associated with this term.


Nah, too many dudes can't handle any sort of criticism in how they live or think so they chalk it up to chicks being 'anti-male'


----------



## wild jade (Jun 21, 2016)

Another classic example that illustrates the differences in the way women are treated here. Two threads, very different results. And when that difference is mentioned, it's justified as being the way of things. 

Sex or no sex that is the question 
I, woman, gets turned down for sex by man. 

(Sorry, I would've linked directly, but the function isn't working for me.)


----------



## Windwalker (Mar 19, 2014)

toblerone said:


> Nah, too many dudes can't handle any sort of criticism in how they live or think so they chalk it up to chicks being 'anti-male'



Who are you, myself or anyone else to judge anyone? Giving criticism implies the the fact that they are open to criticism as well.

This site consists mostly of opinions and beliefs. On both sides and all spectrums. It's certain posters, from both sexes that get pissed when someone disagrees with them.


----------



## Yag-Kosha (Sep 8, 2016)

wild jade said:


> Imagine reading a whole series of threads where you're not even posting, but you can see from the way that people are talking that they would absolutely hate you if they ever knew you.


You really think people would hate you for having such radically different opinions?

I think feminism in this decade is trash-bin worthy. Would I be friends or talk with a feminist if he/she was a decent person and we got along? In a heartbeat. 

There have been a number of feminists on TAM whom of course I radically disagree with but they seem like wonderful people. I would never turn down a friendship with them if I had the opportunity in real life.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Lila said:


> I'll also add that I'm seeing a return of Red Pill rhetoric and the associated stupidity by newer members to TAM. Moderators did a good job of exterminating that crap from TAM a while back but that mentality is viral, you can't let your foot off the pedal or else it comes back with a vengeance.....and bring friends.
> 
> I'd be happy to engage if given the green light but know that will only create thread jacks from hell.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


Why don't they just let us make fun of them.

Redpill the best strategy leading insecure men to vapid women ever devised.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

RoseAglow said:


> This is the poor PR side of things. "Feminist" to many people means "Anti Male".


It's a little more then poor PR. By the way many of these quotes are from leading thinkers in the movement over the last 30 years.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

toblerone said:


> Nah, too many dudes can't handle any sort of criticism in how they live or think so they chalk it up to chicks being 'anti-male'


Yes, yes and yes. I was hammered on TAM last year by one of these sorts of guys because I said I like good men but not so good men are just that, not so good. I would say the same about women. 

I am fortunate to have been surrounded by really great men my whole life, am a feminist and adore men, good men. Why do us women have to adore the not so good ones?


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

> If she's like most women, she'll get in the car with 3 flat tires and drive it home and then tell her husband once she gets home the car is making a horrible noise and there is a light on the dash.


^^^ This. Crap like this ... posted today and "liked" by multiple male posters, one of whom I thought highly of. I see this type of **** all the time on TAM. You might as well say all women are hopelessly stupid.

:slap:

What? You say he was only joking and I'm too "sensitive"? Bull****, I say it's a mindset and, people who make insulting jokes at the expense of an entire gender or group are *******s. *******s are never funny, well except to other *******s.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Red Sonja said:


> ^^^ This. Crap like this ... posted today and "liked" by multiple male posters, one of whom I thought highly of. I see this type of **** all the time on TAM. You might as well say all women are hopelessly stupid.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




What’s the thread? Is this some kind of analogy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## She'sStillGotIt (Jul 30, 2016)

katies said:


> why wouldn't someone admit this? I talked to one person and he said he was just interested in the subject and had not experienced it.
> so why bash then?


Not everyone cares to air their dirty laundry on a message board so they can be told to 'breath' (sic), 'drink water,' and "go to IC" by 15 posters in a row.

I've never posted anything private about myself here on TAM or on any other board and never will.

As long as a message board is open to anyone on the internet to read, then its content is open to criticism and judgment as well. I don't have to defend myself to anyone just because I choose to post in a thread that's *specifically* entitled, "What's is UP with Forums like SI?" 

They're more than welcome to 'bash' me over on their board if they're so inclined - it wouldn't bother me at all. In fact, if I cared any LESS, I'd be in a coma.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

Red Sonja said:


> ^^^ This. Crap like this ... posted today and "liked" by multiple male posters, one of whom I thought highly of. I see this type of **** all the time on TAM. You might as well say all women are hopelessly stupid.
> 
> :slap:
> 
> What? You say he was only joking and I'm too "sensitive"? Bull****, I say it's a mindset and, people who make insulting jokes at the expense of an entire gender or group are *******s. *******s are never funny, well except to other *******s.


Source, please?


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

Blondilocks said:


> Source, please?


I saw the post I quoted last night and reported it. Today the post is gone ... thank you Mods! It was in this thread:

My wife might be having an affair at work


----------

