Featured Video

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Showing posts with label Masculinity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Masculinity. Show all posts

24 September 2013

Norway Destroying Masculinity

Norway destroying masculinity - Admin 2

Boys in primary school talk about their feelings and hold hands. And they are very, very concerned about their bodies and appearance.
Share This:
4

According to new Norwegian research, decades of gender equality measures have helped to change children's upbringing and their understanding of gender.

"It's not that boys used to be naughty and now they are nice," says Stian Overå.

"But compared with previous classroom research, I've found a change in how boys relate to emotions. Being personal and talking about feelings was not problematic or feminine in their eyes. It was almost an ideal. And it was more important to be kind than to be strong."

Overå, a social anthropologist, recently defended his doctoral thesis on gender in primary schools. For an entire year he followed two groups of pupils aged 6-12 in a modern primary school in a suburb of Oslo. The area does not have a distinct working-class or middle-class profile. About 15 percent of the pupils had a native language other than Norwegian.

Gender equality measures work

Much of what Overå found was known from previous research. His study documents gender-stereotyped behaviour, such as girls who prefer to play in pairs and be best friends and boys who play in larger groups and have visible hierarchies with clear leaders.

But the boys observed by Overå behaved differently than the boys described in previous studies. So differently that it makes sense to talk about a change in the way boys behave

"Gender equality measures work," Overå states.

"Gender roles in the Nordic countries are changing. Several new Nordic studies have had similar findings. Gender used to be rooted in tradition. Today it is more fluid."

Scratch each other's backs

According to Overå, the boys aged 6-8 had the most relaxed attitude towards feelings and touching. These boys had "positive touching" as a daily school activity in which the pupils learned to touch each other. The objective was to create a sense of belonging to a group where everyone can touch and stroke each other regardless of whether they know each other and regardless of gender.

"The pupils liked it a lot. It was not strained in any way," says Overå.

"The youngest boys could scratch each other's backs and hold hands during recess."

When Overå presented the phenomenon of "positive touching" for a group of researchers at the University of California-Berkeley, they were flabbergasted.

"It's not coincidental that these measures are developed in Norway or the other Nordic countries," says the researcher.

"I think the changes I've observed are connected with Nordic ideals of gender equality and measures that are introduced as early as pre-school."

Considerate boys

The older boys, aged 9-12, did not have such a relaxed attitude towards bodily contact. They had to be on guard for being called "gay."

In spite of this, both the younger and older boys were considerate towards each other.

Other studies have found that boys' interactions are characterized by rough attitudes, aggressiveness and rule-breaking. In contrast, the groups of boys observed by Overå were friendly, inclusive and good-natured. And they talked about their feelings.

"Boys are not aggressive or emotionally incompetent. That is not my experience. In many situations the boys talked openly and thoughtfully about girls they had crushes on, difficulties at home, and anxiety and expectations about the future," says Overå.

"When one boy opened up, the others tried to support him and shared similar stories about fear or vulnerability."

Strong and kind

There was a lot of play fighting and other physical tests of strength as well, but this was mainly done at the beginning of the school year, before hierarchies were established.

"The boys organize themselves in a hierarchy with a clear pecking order and role differentiation with regard to leadership. Some would interpret this as a sign of aggression. I perceived it more as a game and a friendly form of contact," says Overå.

Physical strength, excelling at football and wearing fashionable clothes could win popularity points. But the most important factor for securing a high position in the boys' hierarchy was being a nice guy -- someone who is kind, funny, extroverted and relaxed with a "good personality."

The importance of hair wax

However, a boy's position in the hierarchy determines how much latitude each boy has, such as how physically intimate or fashionable he can be.

"The fear of being called 'gay' works like kryptonite on the boys' attempt to construct their masculinity," explains Overå.

Boys who cared too little about their appearance risked being called childish, boring or a nerd. The ones who cared too much risked being called feminine or gay. Two of the coolest boys wore eyeliner.

"Their masculinity and heterosexuality was not threatened by it," says Overå.

A less popular boy, however, should not try to do the same. The general rule was that boys do not wear make-up. Their hair, on the other hand, should be styled.

"Boys have fewer cards to play than girls when it comes to aesthetics, so their hair becomes a sacred domain," says Overå.

In a group interview, the boys talked about a day at school when a cool teacher had let them eat cake during home economics class. "I remember that! It was the day when I didn't use hair wax!" exclaimed one of the boys. The researcher was taken aback, and the boy explained: He got so much grief from the other boys that he understood he had better not go to school again without wax in his hair.

"It's not new in itself that boys are concerned about their bodies and appearance. What is new is the extent of their concern. They talk about it a lot. And there is a great deal of unseen work involved," explains Overå.

Metrosexual role models

A strong, well-defined, athletic body was the ideal for the older boys, who talked incessantly about each other's bodies in the locker room. One boy had read that football star Cristiano Ronaldo does 3,000 sit-ups every day, so he had started to do sit-ups every evening. He thought his ab-muscles were becoming more visible already and gladly lifted his shirt to demonstrate for the other boys.

"For young people today it's legitimate to try out new masculine expressions inspired by metrosexual idols like Ronaldo and David Beckham, who have their own lines of hair products and boxer shorts. This is different compared to 20 years ago when the role models were more traditionally masculine," says Overå.

Effortlessly successful

The boys need to be concerned about their bodies and appearance, but this concern must not show. In the same way, they should do well at school, without giving it prestige or putting work into it.

"It was an ideal to succeed in an effortless kind of way," says Overå.

"The boys did a great deal of unseen work, both with regard to their appearance and to their schoolwork. Many of them worked a lot at home, but claimed before a test, for example, that they had only studied for five minutes. They had to hide how much it meant to them to do well and look good, and how much effort they put into it."

The problem with boys

The focus of Overås' thesis is gender as such, but he has chosen to focus mainly on boys for two reasons: Descriptions of boys' lives and perspectives are underrepresented in the literature from school research, and today's society is especially worried about the situation for boys in school and society at large.

The debate about boys as losers in a gender-equal society and the feminized school arose in the 1990s. In the 2000s, stories about boys who did poorly in school dominated the debate.

But the differences in school have more to do with socioeconomic class, particularly when it comes to school performance, according to Overå. The fact that girls perform slightly better than boys in school has been known since measurements began in the 1950s. Concerns about boys arose only after girls started to maintain their advantage at higher educational levels.

Socioeconomic class more significant

"It's a mistake to let the overall discussion focus on gender when large-scale qualitative and quantitative studies show that socioeconomic class is far more significant than gender with regard to grades in school," says the researcher.

Overås' data confirm previous studies that find that girls handle the demands of school better than boys. A few more girls than boys were moved to higher levels in those subjects in which the school offered this.

"But when I controlled for class, it was clearly more significant whether a pupil came from the working class or middle class than if the pupil was a girl or boy," says Overå.

"It's problematic to talk about differences in the schools only regarding gender. Just as there are boys who do very well, there are girls who struggle. Using gender as an explanation for this is discriminatory for both sexes."

Source: http://tinyurl.com/mq6mg6m

* * * * * * *
From one of the natons that gave us the brave and very masculine  vikings, we now get the effete, gay-looking, clown-smiling, man-touching, dress-wearing, cabbage-eating, Lady Gaga-loving, sensible "man".

And why is this? Because it's easier to control a feminized nation than a masculine one. Men don't submit easily. Women do (it's not a flaw; in women, this is a positive trait). 

That is why the central bankers finance feminization since by doing that, they reduce the chances of a popular revolt.

23 September 2013

The End of Woman

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

I have been attending a small vegetarian cooking class. The teacher is a woman aged 70 who could pass for 55. There is another female classmate, a French Canadian retired teacher in her 60's who is also quite vivacious.

Normally I don't notice women my age (almost 64) but there is something uncannily different about these ladies. I felt so relaxed in their presence that I almost fell asleep. Then I realized what it was: these women are feminine. I had stumbled upon a species that is almost extinct: "woman."

Like myself, these women came of age in the 1960's, a time of transition. But, in high school, girls still took home economics and boys took shop. Boys asked girls out on "dates" - to dances or the movies. Premarital sex was still frowned upon and illegitimate children were called "bastards."  A popular song had the chorus: "Love and marriage, love and marriage, go together like a horse and carriage." We were taught to question authority, not our gender.

What is it about these two cooking class women that define "feminine?" If I had to choose one word, it would be "vulnerability." These are women who do not kill their own snakes. They rely on a man, their husband, to protect them and for direction. They do not compete with men.

Another key word is sacrifice. They are dedicated to their families and are cherished in return. They are loved not for their looks, careers or repartee but for their contribution to their families.

Another key word is surrender. You feel that a loyal man with vision and determination could could earn the life-long devotion of women like these.

Both men and women have been grievously injured by the Illuminati social engineers who have undermined gender and marriage with the complicity of our government, media and education system. Women have been "empowered" and men emasculated. The purpose is to neuter and re-engineer humanity as a slave race.

Women were designed by nature to sacrifice and surrender for family.  But feminism taught young women to be "strong and independent" and regard men, marriage and family with suspicion. As result, women have been deprived of fulfillment they crave and can only achieve through selfless dedication to a loving husband and children. This also extends to their sexual fulfillment (http://www.savethemales.ca/000441.html).

Women used to be essentially different from men. Their focus was the home.  Their spirit made them a refuge and harbor for a man. Their energy balanced his energy.

Young women today are so busy pursuing careers, they are barely distinguishable from males. Feminism has fitted many with a psychological penis.

Many suffer from what I call "personality deficit disorder." They may have looks but they have little personality, style or charm.  They can't be men, and they don't know how to be women. They are mutants.

In contrast, there is a lightness and charm about feminine women of my generation. They don't take themselves so seriously. A man can relax in their presence. They are still girlish and attractive in their 60's and after.

Under the guise of gay and women's "rights", the Illuminati has waged war on gender and has crippled heterosexuals psychologically.  Only Satanists could attack the love between husband and wife, mother and child. Men today are always portrayed as feminine and pussy-whipped. Women cannot love these men.

The essence of masculinity is power.  My advice to young men is to find a rewarding career that you enjoy. Define a vision for your life and a place for the woman in it. Then help a young woman find her fundamental feminine nature by accepting you as her leader. You must be the boss or a woman won't respect you. You will be her brother or son.    -

Source: http://ow.ly/p72wK


03 June 2012

How women view male authority

25 May 2012

Can you increase your sex appeal by changing the position of your chin?

Source

Girls, chin down. Guys, chin up.

Human faces show marked sexual shape dimorphism, and this affects their attractiveness. Humans also show marked height dimorphism, which means that men typically view womens faces from slightly above and women typically view mens faces from slightly below. We tested the idea that this perspective difference may be the evolutionary origin of the face shape dimorphism by having males and females rate the masculinity/femininity and attractiveness of male and female faces that had been manipulated in pitch (forward or backward tilt), simulating viewing the face from slightly above or below. As predicted, tilting female faces upwards decreased their perceived femininity and attractiveness, whereas tilting them downwards increased their perceived femininity and attractiveness. Male faces tilted up were judged to be more masculine, and tilted down judged to be less masculine. This suggests that sexual selection may have embodied this viewpoint difference into the actual facial proportions of men and women.

Source: "A New Viewpoint on the Evolution of Sexually Dimorphic Human Faces" from Evolutionary Psychology (2010), Volume: 8, Issue: 4, Pages: 573-585

Share

Twitter Delicious Facebook Digg Stumbleupon Favorites More