21
   

Do even hot women like when you are respectful and a gentlemen to them?

 
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:17 pm
@ebrown p,
I'm sorry you have no idea about "man happy", ebrown.

I do sometimes agree with you, but I see you as very ready for manly manly takes on issues, wrapped in manly morality.


ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:24 pm
@ossobuco,
I'll also add that I'm for conversation with ebrown. I don't entirely not get his take.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:28 pm
I really disagree with this notion that the term 'gentleman' or 'gentlemanly' has anything to do with sexism whatsoever.

Quote:
Gentleman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Gentleman (disambiguation).

The term gentleman (from Latin gentilis, belonging to a race or "gens", and "man", cognate with the French word gentilhomme, the Spanish gentilhombre and the Italian gentil uomo or gentiluomo), in its original and strict signification, denoted a man of good family, analogous to the Latin generosus (its invariable translation in English-Latin documents). In this sense the word equates with the French gentilhomme (nobleman), which latter term was in Great Britain long confined to the peerage. The term "gentry" (from the Old French genterise for gentelise) has much of the social class significance of the French noblesse or of the German Adel, but without the strict technical requirements of those traditions (such as quarters of nobility). This was what the rebels under John Ball in the 14th century meant when they repeated:

When Adam delft and Eve span,
Who was then the Gentleman?[1]

John Selden in Titles of Honour (1614), discussing the title "gentleman", speaks of "our English use of it" as "convertible with nobilis" (an ambiguous word, like 'noble' meaning elevated either by rank or by personal qualities) and describes in connection with it the forms of ennobling in various European countries.

To a degree, "gentleman" signified a man with an income derived from property, a legacy or some other source, and was thus independently wealthy and did not need to work. The term was particularly used of those who could not claim nobility or even the rank of esquire. Widening further, it became a politeness for all men, as in the phrase "Ladies and Gentlemen,..." and this was then used (often with the abbreviation Gents) to indicate where men could find a lavatory, without the need to indicate precisely what was being described.

In modern speech, the term is usually democratised so as to include any man of good, courteous conduct, or even to all men (as in indications of gender-separated facilities).


Not a word in there re: gender relations. Everything entirely relating to social status and nobility; of late, as we have done away with nobility, it has become politeness and courtesy.

As for the original question, "Do even hot women like when you are respectful and a gentlemen to them?" Well, I'm sure you will agree when I say: of course they like it!

Now, is that necessarily what attracts a woman to a man? Not at all, in my experience.

Cycloptichorn
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:30 pm
@Butrflynet,
Yeah, can you say 'dinosaur'?
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:33 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


As for the original question, "Do even hot women like when you are respectful and a gentlemen to them?" Well, I'm sure you will agree when I say: of course they like it!

Now, is that necessarily what attracts a woman to a man? Not at all, in my experience.

Cycloptichorn


Not saying I'm hot or anything, but yes, that attracts me, a great deal. Says a lot about a man/person. If a man loves his mom and dad, I'm interested. If a man treats everyone (hot or not) with respect and graciousness, I'm interested. Call me old-fashioned (okay, so I'm not 'hot'), but those qualities are irresistible to me and many other women/people.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:37 pm
@ossobuco,
Quote:
I see you as very ready for manly manly takes on issues, wrapped in manly morality.


That is absolutely the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me on A2K.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:40 pm
@ebrown p,
Ah, but I don't

Not that my take is all so bad.
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:41 pm
@nat hale,
Psychologically speaking, men and women both prefer partners with high (perceived) social value.

Behaviors that will brand you with high social value in one group will brand you with low social value in other groups.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:41 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
There is nothing in any definition of the term "gentleman" I have seen that makes me want to be one, or to force my children to be one. Of course, If my kids want to be gentlemen, I would have no problem with it... but I don't think I is fair to force these social expectations on children. Kids should be who they are.

I also am highly skeptical of any claim that one thing or another "attracts a woman to a man".

Statements like this imply that all women are the same.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:44 pm
@ossobuco,
I do see you as machismo wrapped, when you seem brighter.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:47 pm
@ossobuco,
That was to ebrown..
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:47 pm
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:
There is nothing in any definition of the term "gentleman" I have seen that makes me want to be one, or to force my children to be one. Of course, If my kids want to be gentlemen, I would have no problem with it... but I don't think I is fair to force these social expectations on children. Kids should be who they are.

Do you impose social restrictions such as not biting, not hitting, and not stealing? How about social conventions such as using quiet voices in the library and saying please and thank you?

After all, kids should be who they are, and kids in their natural state are barbarians....
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 07:50 pm
I interpret the word "gentleman" to mean someone who endeavors to use proper manners in any given situation.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 08:11 pm
@DrewDad,
Agree! What a ludicrous statement that children should be who they are - of course they should, to a degree, and to the point of not being molded into little Barbies & Ken-Dolls, but we all have to get around in society and have to obey the rules if we want to get ahead at work, a loan at a bank, not spend your life in jail, etc. A little civility goes a long way. As does a job. And presentability. And anyone who knows me knows I'm not a conformist, per se, nor did I try to conform my children, but there's a line you draw where you realize you have to conform to some degree. For example, going to work naked is not going to have a good outcome. So some conformity is necessary.

I think Hawk and EP are related.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 08:15 pm
@Mame,
I don't, I think Hawk is on his own.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 08:42 pm
@DrewDad,
In my mind there is an important difference between morality and manners-- the former being far more important. Not assaulting or robbing other kids is clearly a matter of morality.

I don't mind manners (although they aren't that important to me) as long as they don't turn into pretentiousness... and there is often a fine line between the two.

The issue at hand is how a man should act in a relationship. Since people are individuals and each relationship is unique, I am arguing that (except for the obvious extreme rules against violence and crime) there is no correct answer to this question. Relationships that benefit both people involved are good relationships-- and there are a very wide range of relationships that meet this ideal.

This same logic applies to kids and families.


hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 09:09 pm
@ebrown p,
Quote:
The issue at hand is how a man should act in a relationship. Since people are individuals and each relationship is unique, I am arguing that (except for the obvious extreme rules against violence and crime) there is no correct answer to this question. Relationships that benefit both people involved are good relationships-- and there are a very wide range of relationships that meet this ideal


Even with violence. If a couple wants to have a BDSM relationship, where one habitually smacks the other around, it is nobody else's business. The most that anyone should do is to ask the one being smacked if they desire any help, if they are OK. The one being hit is not a victim unless he or she tells you that they are a victim. Playing the full court press and trying to browbeat him/her into saying that they are a victim is not cool either.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 09:41 pm
@hawkeye10,
Sorry hawk... you are on your own on this one.

Abusive marriages are a real problem-- where one partner (usually the wife) is trapped in a marriage that clearly doesn't benefit her. Trying to either say this is acceptable or to minimize the problem is wrong. This is a difficult problem-- but "asking the victim" is clearly not the answer.

My arguments specifically relate to "good" relationships which I have defined as a relationship that benefits both people involved. Abusive relationships clearly do not fit in this category.

I suppose that consensual BDSM could be part of a "good" relationship... but this would be quite a different thing than the very real problem of spousal abuse.
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 09:52 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
Even with violence. If a couple wants to have a BDSM relationship, where one habitually smacks the other around, it is nobody else's business. The most that anyone should do is to ask the one being smacked if they desire any help, if they are OK. The one being hit is not a victim unless he or she tells you that they are a victim. Playing the full court press and trying to browbeat him/her into saying that they are a victim is not cool either.


You are just a sorry excuse for a human being. Despicable to say the least!
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 Jun, 2009 10:13 pm
@CalamityJane,
Quote:

You are just a sorry excuse for a human being. Despicable to say the least!


Or alternately you are a busy body who refuses to let people live their own life if their choices don't match yours.......
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 12:52:42