PatrickC

Yea, I think you make a reasonable critique.

Come on guys, I'm a fervent anti feminist, but this is complete satire.

fridolutin is trolling this board with his leftist Taoist ideaology. He knows only too well what this board stands for and like many leftists is attempting to set the cats amongst the pigeons.

Well, I will be talking with my brother this coming weekend who runs a sales team in Thailand. He's in contact with a few companies and employers in that region, so he might be able to give me some details for you. Failing that, you can do online research yourself. I recommend Thailand, Japan, Korea, Honk Kong, Singapore and China primarily as the countries to look at. Teaching jobs are fairly easy to come by and often a good start for those that want to acclimatise to a different culture, before attempting some more entrpreneurial pursuits. A fellow on the board, Pheonix Zerin has a blog about his current experiences working and living abroad. He also does a podcast too. http://www.fiveyearsabroad.com/

This was very funny.

No words and there meanings are very important. Attempting to stretch them is hyperbole at best. "The beginning of philosophy, is to call things by their proper name."

I wasn't defining workers, I was defining slaves. Two very different words.. If you choose to expand on the definition of slavery beyond it's actual meaning and particularly the one I see you heading for. Then you are going to have to prove how any provision we make for ourselves does not involve our labour. Even going to the supermarket to pick up our food involves our labour. What's fascinating about this debate, is how it's been the free market since for well over 150 years that has consistently increased workers wages and reduced their hours of work. You only need do a cursory examination of the industrial revolution to understand that. Assembly workers are not slaves, they are voluntarily engaged in a past time that rewards them for it.

Yes, this part was difficult to ignore. I mean it doesn't entirely discredit him of course, but it sure leaves a contradiction there, for people to fathom. Peter's principles come from the greatest good for the greatest number. This was highlighted by his assumption that Stef would save 200,000 people over 200.. This is the philosophy of the leftist and even the religious. In fact it's the philosophy of statism and kings. Attempts at lauding the collective over the individual once again.

Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work. Slaves can be held against their will. I too dislike the way the 'left' constantly widens the net with this definition for hyperbole.

A cow with a grill under its udders.

The way I've approached this topic, rather than ignore it, is by being very conscious that the ideology exists. Having said that you cannot change the culture for other folk, you can merely reject it yourself with reason to others. It's a tough topic because of the culture we live in. But for virtuous men and women out there that broach this topic, good on them, they will change the culture with reason eventually.. I take it like anarchism, a slow but methodical process of reason. Hope that helps.

Good for you.. Have fun!

Which is why debating this any further will be frustrating for all concerned.. STer's position is that 'probability' is the most rational position from his perspective.. Accept 'probability' by definition cannot prove anything other than a stronger or weaker possibility depending on its gradient.. This is why you're a minarchist of course STer.

Yes, there is nothing worse than a self loathing man which Michael Urbina clearly is.

Yes, you make some good points Kevin. I can see that my suggestion assumes a lot of responsibility on the man. However, I think this is the quality that men bring to the table. With those that we dearly care for we (as men) can offer those challenges to them as a means to better ourselves together.. Woman of course can (and do) add a lot of stability to that family situation in different ways.. Men taking responsibility for their personal decisions that they have negotiated with their family about seems like a reasonable responsibility to take. Men seemingly (not exclusively necessarily) like to take those calculated risks which very often pay off handsomely for their family. The situation as it exists now is that men mostly avoid taking those risks, because they can just indulge in the more degenerate aspects of (let's say) PUA to get their kicks. Maleness is all about creating a future and a lineage for themselves, which I believe incorporates integrity and delayed gratification into that mix, if that makes sense.

I'm going to be a devils advocate here. I don't think it's a social paradigm at all. I'm finding that many women assume male leadership roles as the norm and always have done... Having said that, given the vast changes in living standards of recent decades I expect a change in emphasis from prior historical perspectives. Like Sam Cooke predicted, 'a change is coming' (I hope). However, with leadership comes responsibility of course.. So men (in general) have to step up I think from our current situation.

This is another great example of how people twist the definitions of words. In this case 'slavery'.

Yes, I imagined you were anxious.. Indeed Bro, pretty brave indeed, kudos!... Anyway, despite that, it doesn't particularly surprise me the youngest lady is taken by your challenge. Remember, this young lady has probably had to deal with the same BS you dealt with her, but you managed to deflect it rather eloquently. Without sounding too verbose, I'd say you gave that older lady the lightest of slap downs, that she may well have perhaps deserved.. Well done for navigating that awesomely well.

Interesting.. In my opinion, older females can be the most problematic as you confront them.. I find I liked your approach (as you said it), albeit with some reasonable anxiety attached.. 'Girl power', despite the cartoonish way it is often described, actually does have power at times. I was curious if the ladies that complemented you on your challenge were younger than the lady you engaging with.

I wanted to talk more broadly about my thoughts on this topic, rather than engage in the interesting conversation you are both having. It may help perhaps. There is an awful lot of resistance in the world to discuss masculinity. It's had such a dreadful dragging through the mud of recent decades that even most men feel averse to discussing it. Whereas the feminine has been lauded and celebrated to such a degree that we now currently live in a hyper feminized culture, where femininity is ranked right next to civility. The moment positive aspects of maleness are discussed it's not unusual to feel like you're walking into a highly taboo topic whilst listening to the egg shells literally crunching under your feet. The reason is because this discussion is assumed by proxy to be being critical of women, which in my opinion is the definitive taboo and not the discussion around masculinity. I'm really not buying into this idea that men and women can be either gender. Sure there are exceptions to this, but for the most part any notion that we share feminine and masculine traits are entirely culturally based. For the most part feminists have been very keen to stress that women can and should do the same things that men can. In turn they have used this shared feminine/masculine trait idea to suggest that women can even be better than men. Now for perhaps my most un PC view, if I haven't shocked you enough already. Many women don't feel comfortable with this idea of being better than men. So as a means to alleviate this rather uncomfortable view we find many of them falling into a more egalitarian position. Unfortunately, this still manages to say that men and women are still equally capable of the same things and still drives women into more masculine pursuits, such as careers and putting off motherhood. Egalitarianism is I would argue a very feminine trait and a good one at that. Insofar as it's a great way of bringing people together and avoiding conflict. But men do not function particularly well in that environment. Men will often accept it, because it's seen as a viable option for finding a wife and it often is in the short term. But men thrive on challenge and dexterity. Men's relationships with other men are quite different to that of women's relationships with women. Neither is better than the other of course and I tend to think they compliment each other rather well. Personally I have found that embracing my masculinity in this way to be a liberating moment of self actualization.

I have to say, if you truly live your life like that, then good luck.

I've said this before.. An exception doesn't break the rule. I now see that most of your commentary is about defining the exception. Sure they exist, but so does the rule.

Wuzzums, to be honest, I had a struggle understanding your position, given the large amount of text.. Perhaps you could break down your points more succinctly so that I might understand your position better.

This is when I resort to my reptilian Anglo prejudices.. 'Trust the bladdy frogs!'..

An Interesting idea for an interview perhaps.. Permaculture is a fascinating topic I think.