Poll: The Manliness Conundrum

[BoogieManFL]

One mans view of being "a man" is different from another..

I'm not a man in that I'm not into sports or drinking beer (or any alcohol really) and I don't act macho and tough.

However, I am a man in that am polite to ladies and show them the courtesy of opening doors for them, watching my language around them, and other gentlemanly activities. And I don't hesitate to ask for assistance or direction if it would help.

I am also a man in that I am guided more by logic than emotion.

So take that as you will. I think I'm in man in the best ways that count. Maybe not a man to other men who are different, however.

 

[cthulhumythos]

i'm manly because i eat sharpened nails for breakfast. without milk.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I've never heard of this "Man Law," but I would say that a real man has to be true to himself and do what he believes is right. Also testicles and a Y-chromosome are mandatory.

This is Man's Law according to urbandictionary.com. No idea if it was being used in the same context in your discussion or not:

"An unspoken, unwritten law, whereas one man will not expose another man's attempt to get action on the side. Ironically, one of the only ways to find out about said law, is to break it."

That's the Man's Law? Hmph! Well it's my opinion that any man trying to get action on the side needs to be punched in the face repeatedly, but that's just me. ...or better yet kicked in the balls repeatedly.

Would you do the same thing on a woman? Would you cheer the stoning of them?

Nah I know your joking but I hate this whole he/she cheated and should be put to death. Yes it fucking stings like a mofo and is incredibly selfish but I hate making superficial judgement of relationship's I don't know. Also I disliek the cocnept that violence should be the response to immorality.

I imagine they were actually refering to male societal standards (probably toughness, interests in team sports played by males, ability to do violence, emotional stoicism, etc) and honestly I have no problems with people wanting to follow a society standards for behaviour. They do give you a good guide on what's expected. Of course they can also be retrrograde but that is the anture of the game.

No, something else would need to be devised for unfaithful women.
Also who said anything about death? I certainly didn't. And maybe making superficial judgments is wrong, but I cannot conceive of a reasonable or even an unreasonable excuse for that sort of behavior.
Also, I'm not promoting violence as a response to immorality, I'm promoting PAIN as a response to immorality.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

A description of what this "Man's law" is might help.

Though I already pretty much have an answer: Being "Manly" is a stereotype perpetuated by society, and I see no need to follow it in any context.

Fixed.

Seeing as how gender views are a societal construction, I say the second option.

 

[Chromanin]

I gauge my manliness through "Kenka Bancho: Badass Rumble." The rules of being a man are simple: always be badass and cool. A true badass should always be cooler than a cucumber dipped in liquid nitrogen. Never attack another badass without cutting a Menchi first. Never run away from someone else's Menchi. Never hurt civilians, and never pick a fight with something that can't fight back. Follow these laws, and your pompadour will always remain at full badassery.

 

[370999]

I've never heard of this "Man Law," but I would say that a real man has to be true to himself and do what he believes is right. Also testicles and a Y-chromosome are mandatory.

This is Man's Law according to urbandictionary.com. No idea if it was being used in the same context in your discussion or not:

"An unspoken, unwritten law, whereas one man will not expose another man's attempt to get action on the side. Ironically, one of the only ways to find out about said law, is to break it."

That's the Man's Law? Hmph! Well it's my opinion that any man trying to get action on the side needs to be punched in the face repeatedly, but that's just me. ...or better yet kicked in the balls repeatedly.

Would you do the same thing on a woman? Would you cheer the stoning of them?

Nah I know your joking but I hate this whole he/she cheated and should be put to death. Yes it fucking stings like a mofo and is incredibly selfish but I hate making superficial judgement of relationship's I don't know. Also I disliek the cocnept that violence should be the response to immorality.

I imagine they were actually refering to male societal standards (probably toughness, interests in team sports played by males, ability to do violence, emotional stoicism, etc) and honestly I have no problems with people wanting to follow a society standards for behaviour. They do give you a good guide on what's expected. Of course they can also be retrrograde but that is the anture of the game.

No, something else would need to be devised for unfaithful women.
Also who said anything about death? I certainly didn't. And maybe making superficial judgments is wrong, but I cannot conceive of a reasonable or even an unreasonable excuse for that sort of behavior.
Also, I'm not promoting violence as a response to immorality, I'm promoting PAIN as a response to immorality.

Are you actually serious? Like you really believe people should be punished for immorality? Wow.

For cheating? We will go for the oldies shall we. Let's pick a couple from a less developed part fo the world. They are in an arranged marriage and never turly love each other. One of them has an affair to at least feel something. Another one, Sam and Carlie are in a casual relationship. Sam thinks that means he can sleep with other people and that how he sees the relationship, Carlie doesn't. Alice dearly loves her husband Bob but has been going thorugh a rough patch with him lately. She gets drunk and then sleeps with a co-worker one night. she is ashamed and appaled by what she has done.

Is that wrong? Yes IMHO. Should one of them being physically assaulted? No and I can't beleive you would think they would. First of all it means a further state intrusion into people's private lives. Leaving aside question of the inevitable corruption and abuses of power that would ensue we come to the main one, you are making a messy situation even messier. And there is the fundamental most patronisng assumption here, people don't know what is right and wrong and need to be punished to remind, people aren't faithful because a relationship is a wonderful thing worth the sweat and tears but rahter they wish to avoid pain. Not good IMHO.

Let's take this further though do you beleive this applies to everything? Like would looking lustfully at someone when you are in a relationship count as bad to you? So porn is out for married couples? What about occasionaly wanting to do some role play in the bed room, is that wrong? What about if one partner wants to and the other doesn't, then is it cheating and therefore punishable.

 

[Loop Stricken]

*looks at own avatar*

Screw your preconceptions.

 

[Lunar Templar]

I would agree with the not restricting myself from anything. I'm secure enough in my manhood to enjoy the silly little things ... I suppose this is like the maturity argument to which one can respond:

Spoiler

xxx

o.0 that picture is filled with win, and truth

 

[GrimmjowPantera]

Answered other because, while there is masculinity, strength, size, a strong jaw, manliness is about confidence and assertiveness, not any law or restrictions or lack thereof. It's a state of mind, and I saw it's confidence and assertiveness because think of any manly person you know or have seen in fiction:
do they ever seem to NOT know what they're doing? Even when they don't have a plan (Indiana Jones) they always seem to KNOW what they're doing. That's confidence and assertiveness. And sure there could be other traits to manliness, but imo, those are the main ones.

 

[JaceArveduin]

I follow my own personal code of conduct which I've tailored into a type of satirical chivalry, so I voted "other" do to my code using the phrase "I don't care" on a regular basis.

 

[bad rider]

Lets be dead honest here for a second.

You just made Man Law serious by proposing it in this way. People are now seriously considering themselves "individuals" for not following man law. The point in Man Law is that it's a joke, something funny when taken seriously.

A few examples:
"2. When questioned by a friend's girlfriend, you need not and should not provide any information as to his whereabouts. You are even permitted to deny his very existence."

"12. On a road trip, the strongest bladder determines pit stops, not the weakest."

"34. You can not rat out a friend who show's up to work or class with a massive hangover, however you may: hide the aspirin, smear his chair with limburger cheese, turn the brightness on his computer way up so he thinks its broken, or have him paged every seven minutes."

Stop taking it seriously, stop believing in your contrived sense of individuality and appreciate what it it is. Something funny.

 

[JoJo]

A real man is manly not because he follows the set rules or actions that we define manliness with, but because he does these things purely on the basis that he believes such actions are the right thing to do.

Example: A man should not protect women and children around him because society says he should, but because it's what he thinks is his duty. That is manly.

Really this, real manliness is about responsibility and duty, not getting into pointless drunk fights and banging every whore you can find.

 

[bad rider]

I've never heard of this "Man Law," but I would say that a real man has to be true to himself and do what he believes is right. Also testicles and a Y-chromosome are mandatory.

This is Man's Law according to urbandictionary.com. No idea if it was being used in the same context in your discussion or not:

"An unspoken, unwritten law, whereas one man will not expose another man's attempt to get action on the side. Ironically, one of the only ways to find out about said law, is to break it."

That's the Man's Law? Hmph! Well it's my opinion that any man trying to get action on the side needs to be punched in the face repeatedly, but that's just me. ...or better yet kicked in the balls repeatedly.

Would you do the same thing on a woman? Would you cheer the stoning of them?

Nah I know your joking but I hate this whole he/she cheated and should be put to death. Yes it fucking stings like a mofo and is incredibly selfish but I hate making superficial judgement of relationship's I don't know. Also I disliek the cocnept that violence should be the response to immorality.

I imagine they were actually refering to male societal standards (probably toughness, interests in team sports played by males, ability to do violence, emotional stoicism, etc) and honestly I have no problems with people wanting to follow a society standards for behaviour. They do give you a good guide on what's expected. Of course they can also be retrrograde but that is the anture of the game.

No, something else would need to be devised for unfaithful women.
Also who said anything about death? I certainly didn't. And maybe making superficial judgments is wrong, but I cannot conceive of a reasonable or even an unreasonable excuse for that sort of behavior.
Also, I'm not promoting violence as a response to immorality, I'm promoting PAIN as a response to immorality.

Are you actually serious? Like you really believe people should be punished for immorality? Wow.

For cheating? We will go for the oldies shall we. Let's pick a couple from a less developed part fo the world. They are in an arranged marriage and never turly love each other. One of them has an affair to at least feel something. Another one, Sam and Carlie are in a casual relationship. Sam thinks that means he can sleep with other people and that how he sees the relationship, Carlie doesn't. Alice dearly loves her husband Bob but has been going thorugh a rough patch with him lately. She gets drunk and then sleeps with a co-worker one night. she is ashamed and appaled by what she has done.

Is that wrong? Yes IMHO. Should one of them being physically assaulted? No and I can't beleive you would think they would. First of all it means a further state intrusion into people's private lives. Leaving aside question of the inevitable corruption and abuses of power that would ensue we come to the main one, you are making a messy situation even messier. And there is the fundamental most patronisng assumption here, people don't know what is right and wrong and need to be punished to remind, people aren't faithful because a relationship is a wonderful thing worth the sweat and tears but rahter they wish to avoid pain. Not good IMHO.

Let's take this further though do you beleive this applies to everything? Like would looking lustfully at someone when you are in a relationship count as bad to you? So porn is out for married couples? What about occasionaly wanting to do some role play in the bed room, is that wrong? What about if one partner wants to and the other doesn't, then is it cheating and therefore punishable.

Spoiler

Don't Be a Jerk
This rule trumps any other. Any loophole you think you've found in any other rule is covered by this one. If you make our forums a less pleasant place to be, we don't want you here and we have no problem revoking your account.

Calm down and stop looking for a fight.

You know fully well that in that specific situation it would be unjustified, but we can all write one example where are argument can be justified. Either you know this and are flaming, or you don't because you haven't thought the argument through.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I've never heard of this "Man Law," but I would say that a real man has to be true to himself and do what he believes is right. Also testicles and a Y-chromosome are mandatory.

This is Man's Law according to urbandictionary.com. No idea if it was being used in the same context in your discussion or not:

"An unspoken, unwritten law, whereas one man will not expose another man's attempt to get action on the side. Ironically, one of the only ways to find out about said law, is to break it."

That's the Man's Law? Hmph! Well it's my opinion that any man trying to get action on the side needs to be punched in the face repeatedly, but that's just me. ...or better yet kicked in the balls repeatedly.

Would you do the same thing on a woman? Would you cheer the stoning of them?

Nah I know your joking but I hate this whole he/she cheated and should be put to death. Yes it fucking stings like a mofo and is incredibly selfish but I hate making superficial judgement of relationship's I don't know. Also I disliek the cocnept that violence should be the response to immorality.

I imagine they were actually refering to male societal standards (probably toughness, interests in team sports played by males, ability to do violence, emotional stoicism, etc) and honestly I have no problems with people wanting to follow a society standards for behaviour. They do give you a good guide on what's expected. Of course they can also be retrrograde but that is the anture of the game.

No, something else would need to be devised for unfaithful women.
Also who said anything about death? I certainly didn't. And maybe making superficial judgments is wrong, but I cannot conceive of a reasonable or even an unreasonable excuse for that sort of behavior.
Also, I'm not promoting violence as a response to immorality, I'm promoting PAIN as a response to immorality.

Are you actually serious? Like you really believe people should be punished for immorality? Wow.

For cheating? We will go for the oldies shall we. Let's pick a couple from a less developed part fo the world. They are in an arranged marriage and never turly love each other. One of them has an affair to at least feel something. Another one, Sam and Carlie are in a casual relationship. Sam thinks that means he can sleep with other people and that how he sees the relationship, Carlie doesn't. Alice dearly loves her husband Bob but has been going thorugh a rough patch with him lately. She gets drunk and then sleeps with a co-worker one night. she is ashamed and appaled by what she has done.

Is that wrong? Yes IMHO. Should one of them being physically assaulted? No and I can't beleive you would think they would. First of all it means a further state intrusion into people's private lives. Leaving aside question of the inevitable corruption and abuses of power that would ensue we come to the main one, you are making a messy situation even messier. And there is the fundamental most patronisng assumption here, people don't know what is right and wrong and need to be punished to remind, people aren't faithful because a relationship is a wonderful thing worth the sweat and tears but rahter they wish to avoid pain. Not good IMHO.

Let's take this further though do you beleive this applies to everything? Like would looking lustfully at someone when you are in a relationship count as bad to you? So porn is out for married couples? What about occasionaly wanting to do some role play in the bed room, is that wrong? What about if one partner wants to and the other doesn't, then is it cheating and therefore punishable.

*sigh* Obviously this sort of thing isn't a blanket black and white issue, and to go over every possible scenario in detail would take too long and only further derail the thread.
Suffice it to say that I merely meant that douchebags who get in a relationship and then knowingly sleep around, knowing full well he's taking advantage of the woman he's in a relationship with, are the ones who deserve repeated kicks to the balls.

And no, I can't condone that behavior under any circumstances. I can't approach women or get a relationship to save my life, yet it's all I've wanted ever since I was old enough to care about that sort of thing. So you'll understand if I lack any sympathy or understanding for those who treat it so casually.

 

[Mavinchious Maximus]

A real man is refined, yet badass.
They know both which fork to use for salad, and which fork to use for plucking out the eyes of their enemies.
Real men respect man law, and obey it.

this, and the hope that one day you will gain the power of lightning punches for following the law for a set time.

 

[Togs]

I dont consider myself to be that masculine, I try but dont quite succeed.

EDIT= a real man to me is someone who is emotionally stoic, physically strong and well read- on a good day I hit 1 of those three.

 

[MazdaXR]

Manliness is just a funny concept thought up by guys as banter nothing more, nothing less. Those who approach it as a serious subject, either perscribing to it as something that actually exists, or see's it as an out date unPC concept are just trying to turn it into something it is not.

A bit of banter about manliness between mates is just a bit of fun, that's why there are so many chuck norris and Bear Grills jokes about.

Plus I don't open beer bottles with a bottle opener I just bite the glass top right off so yeah I am manly

A lot of the stuff that is actually being talked about here is chivalry, honour, honesty, courage, loyalty and wisdom, which I think are much deeper that just the whole manliness thing

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I don't follow man law, because it tends to pander to the dying art of masculinity. I do however, have confidence and bravado in my actions, no matter what those actions are.

And I do, of course, follow most of The Bro Code. Because, you know, you just have to.

 

[FalloutJack]

I wasn't aware that men had law. Maybe we're referring to a code of honor and decency that not everyone follows? I dunno. I don't consider myself limited. I believe that I am answerable only to myself. The only man-law I will obey is WWJD*.

(*What would Jack do?)

 

[370999]

I've never heard of this "Man Law," but I would say that a real man has to be true to himself and do what he believes is right. Also testicles and a Y-chromosome are mandatory.

This is Man's Law according to urbandictionary.com. No idea if it was being used in the same context in your discussion or not:

"An unspoken, unwritten law, whereas one man will not expose another man's attempt to get action on the side. Ironically, one of the only ways to find out about said law, is to break it."

That's the Man's Law? Hmph! Well it's my opinion that any man trying to get action on the side needs to be punched in the face repeatedly, but that's just me. ...or better yet kicked in the balls repeatedly.

Would you do the same thing on a woman? Would you cheer the stoning of them?

Nah I know your joking but I hate this whole he/she cheated and should be put to death. Yes it fucking stings like a mofo and is incredibly selfish but I hate making superficial judgement of relationship's I don't know. Also I disliek the cocnept that violence should be the response to immorality.

I imagine they were actually refering to male societal standards (probably toughness, interests in team sports played by males, ability to do violence, emotional stoicism, etc) and honestly I have no problems with people wanting to follow a society standards for behaviour. They do give you a good guide on what's expected. Of course they can also be retrrograde but that is the anture of the game.

No, something else would need to be devised for unfaithful women.
Also who said anything about death? I certainly didn't. And maybe making superficial judgments is wrong, but I cannot conceive of a reasonable or even an unreasonable excuse for that sort of behavior.
Also, I'm not promoting violence as a response to immorality, I'm promoting PAIN as a response to immorality.

Are you actually serious? Like you really believe people should be punished for immorality? Wow.

For cheating? We will go for the oldies shall we. Let's pick a couple from a less developed part fo the world. They are in an arranged marriage and never turly love each other. One of them has an affair to at least feel something. Another one, Sam and Carlie are in a casual relationship. Sam thinks that means he can sleep with other people and that how he sees the relationship, Carlie doesn't. Alice dearly loves her husband Bob but has been going thorugh a rough patch with him lately. She gets drunk and then sleeps with a co-worker one night. she is ashamed and appaled by what she has done.

Is that wrong? Yes IMHO. Should one of them being physically assaulted? No and I can't beleive you would think they would. First of all it means a further state intrusion into people's private lives. Leaving aside question of the inevitable corruption and abuses of power that would ensue we come to the main one, you are making a messy situation even messier. And there is the fundamental most patronisng assumption here, people don't know what is right and wrong and need to be punished to remind, people aren't faithful because a relationship is a wonderful thing worth the sweat and tears but rahter they wish to avoid pain. Not good IMHO.

Let's take this further though do you beleive this applies to everything? Like would looking lustfully at someone when you are in a relationship count as bad to you? So porn is out for married couples? What about occasionaly wanting to do some role play in the bed room, is that wrong? What about if one partner wants to and the other doesn't, then is it cheating and therefore punishable.

*sigh* Obviously this sort of thing isn't a blanket black and white issue, and to go over every possible scenario in detail would take too long and only further derail the thread.
Suffice it to say that I merely meant that douchebags who get in a relationship and then knowingly sleep around, knowing full well he's taking advantage of the woman he's in a relationship with, are the ones who deserve repeated kicks to the balls.

And no, I can't condone that behavior under any circumstances. I can't approach women or get a relationship to save my life, yet it's all I've wanted ever since I was old enough to care about that sort of thing. So you'll understand if I lack any sympathy or understanding for those who treat it so casually.

Forgive me, I thought you were suggesting it as some type of law which got me a bit into "Is this the sex police?" mode.

I do stick by my belief that relationships are abit nuanced then you are making out. They aren't black and white.

We are going to disagree on your issue of violence, I think doing it at all apart from when your life or liberty is threatened is wrong.

Chin up though, I'm sure with that relationship you will get a girlfriend and she will be lucky to have someone so loyal (Just don't be too clingy, as I was early on)

You know fully well that in that specific situation it would be unjustified, but we can all write one example where are argument can be justified. Either you know this and are flaming, or you don't because you haven't thought the argument through

I'm sorry if you think I am flaming but I have no issue with the above chap. However I am still very much against his basic principle of doling out pain to those who don't comply with our moral principles and I will argue against it if you want to argue it.