Davidgrey:
Society demands it from you

The social logic that "Men are emotionally more matured than women" Certain things aren't "expected" of you as a man

Attacking a woman that hurts you is a sign of weakness

Besides most times the death of a relationship is instigated by the man.

y3mi:

Let's be rational here bro...what makes that social logic valid ? If society demands it from us as males to be impassive when hurt by females for being more emotionally matured than them then why does the same society provides leeway for the feminists to agitate for gender equality in every context but when it comes down to being emotionally abused and destroyed, the male should soak it up for being emotionally stronger while the female reserves the privilege to unleash her demons when emotionally hurt if decide to. I don't hate females neither have I suggested women/babes should be attacked when ever they hurt men/guys, I just want that recurring proverb to be examined much deeper.

Davidgrey:
Feminism isn't a widely accepted ideologue

Besides that cogent arguments about gender equality are usually one sided and laced with so much bias by both parties

Like i said earlier a man is "expected" to be more matured "emotionally" than a woman

Comparing yourself to women and demanding equality for insignificant things is plain silly.

y3mi:

Feminism isn't a widely accepted ideologue, well so says you. It may be not be called 'feminism' in Kandahar nor was it called so when the British colonialists constantly poured huge amounts of coins on the roads of where Ijebu markets were majored in order to instigate the Ijebu womenfolks who concentrate there for trading to look their husband in the eye being financially equal if not superior, which actually did work. The British knew once the family is weakened, their menfolk would be destabilized socially enabling there colonial missions to proceed unhindered. Point is - for the fact they took those free currencies suggest that - the ideology behind what is termed 'feminism' today already exist globally in several forms albeit dormant and isn't peculiar to just some part of the planet alone such as the western world as you must have meant.

Back to the topic

I don't quite follow as what you seem to be saying is - the accumulation of bottled up emotional hurt without venting not only defines a matured man but also makes a man sissy as soon as he start emanating behaviors which to me is 'attuning' and maybe to others 'retributory' but to you 'comparing'. Even if you do tell me you've managed to be stoical with 19 heartbreaks and counting, I nevertheless will still have to disagree with you on some of the point you've made.

It's being a pleasure discussing with you, David/grey.

Davidgrey:

...You are "Expected" to look for healthy ways to channel out your anger that's why you are a "Man"

y3mi:
Let's shed all the feminism talks aside.

So in order not to loose your manliness how would you channel your anger healthily after seven consecutive jilts, each of which you had invested tremendous amount of time on, the least being three months. Please do tell ?

Davidgrey:

*If you can, Leave that area for awhile "2weeks"

Davidgrey:

*Stand by your decision* Nobody is "Irreplaceable"

Read a good book, focus on hobbies, Go out with friends.

y3mi:

You said it yourself "If you can" and that is if one can.

But wait a sec, have you ever truly being in a committed relationship before, where in the long run all your dazzling high hopes was smashed ? If yes, then was that the 'way-to-go' you went ? Vacating the vicinity for awhile was how you managed to pull yourself back together ? Come on guy.

Be real with me David Grey, even Craig David would never try Walking Away like that without lashing out somehow. The only premise I might agree with you on is, if only you are referring to scenarios where the male is tired of the stale relationship already and by not letting her know yet, he waits untill the right time present itself to call it quit, but before that time arrives as he hangs on, the committed-looking babe surprises him by breaking it to him first that she is now loves someone else and pretemtious arguments ensue from the guy like he's concerned, whereas it's more like she's the one doing him a favor. So, perhaps maybe that's kind of a instance where your 'vacate the area to go chill out with your buddy' applies.


Why doesn't some jilted babes find these suggestions of yours heedful and instead would rather become livid, consciously looking for slightest opportunity to be retributive? Thus underscoring the proverb "hell hath no fury than a woman scorned in love"

Davidgrey:


Granted.... But No matter how much hurt you feel or how much pain you express, when someone doesn't want to be with you, The person "simply" doesn't want to.... Reacting and expressing hurt is purposeless

I'm a very practical person, i look at situations objectively and take the appropriate route

Having said that.... Like i have stated "repeatedly" women are allowed to "over react" because they are emotionally weak.

Davidgrey:

Feminism in actual sense is giving women the right to be opinionated and respected, The basic conceptualization of feminism isn't a difficult ideology to accept..... But ignorant understanding by most small-minded women has led to it's abuse and constant public rejection.

Empowering women isn't promoting feminism like you were trying to push, feminism is a personal choice, Naturally if you empower an opinionated person his/her opinions gain traction based on social conditioning, that shouldn't be miss-interpreted as feminism.

In every relationship women invest more emotionally than the man(from child bearing to family bonding) it's their nature, in few rare cases(courtship) it's the other way around but let's be objective

The only kind of analogy that you should draw your conclusions from are standard relationships...that is a relationship wanted by both parties not one wherein the woman was coaxed(money and lies) into the relationship, in such cases(standard relationship) the woman commits so much emotional investment into the relationship as is her nature

The social logic is simple as a man no matter how hurt you feel even outside courtship you bottle your emotions, hide any visible sign of weakness, emotional fragility and vulnerability, It's the ultimate insult for a man to appear emotionally weak no matter how hurt you are, You are "Expected" to look for healthy ways to channel out your anger that's why you are a "Man"

Having said that .... Your claims Aren't without merit

From my 4th paragraph if a woman loves a man and he equally loves her "a standard relationship" the odds of her breaking his heart are very slim, like i said in my previous post it's usually the man that instigates the death of a relationship directly or indirectly

The cases you are referring to are situations wherein the woman was never in love or wanted the man in the first place and he made more that the usually reasonable amount of emotional investments into the said relationship to win and keep her, and even relationships like that are rare.

Davidgrey:

Feminism in actual sense is giving women the right to be opinionated and respected, The basic conceptualization of feminism isn't a difficult ideology to accept..... But ignorant understanding by most small-minded women has led to it's abuse and constant public rejection.

Empowering women isn't promoting feminism like you were trying to push, feminism is a personal choice, Naturally if you empower an opinionated person his/her opinions gain traction based on social conditioning, that shouldn't be miss-interpreted as feminism.

In every relationship women invest more emotionally than the man(from child bearing to family bonding) it's their nature, in few rare cases(courtship) it's the other way around but let's be objective

The only kind of analogy that you should draw your conclusions from are standard relationships...that is a relationship wanted by both parties not one wherein the woman was coaxed(money and lies) into the relationship, in such cases(standard relationship) the woman commits so much emotional investment into the relationship as is her nature

The social logic is simple as a man no matter how hurt you feel even outside courtship you bottle your emotions, hide any visible sign of weakness, emotional fragility and vulnerability, It's the ultimate insult for a man to appear emotionally weak no matter how hurt you are, You are "Expected" to look for healthy ways to channel out your anger that's why you are a "Man"

Having said that .... Your claims Aren't without merit

From my 4th paragraph if a woman loves a man and he equally loves her "a standard relationship" the odds of her breaking his heart are very slim, like i said in my previous post it's usually the man that instigates the death of a relationship directly or indirectly

The cases you are referring to are situations wherein the woman was never in love or wanted the man in the first place and he made more that the usually reasonable amount of emotional investments into the said relationship to win and keep her, and even relationships like that are rare.