OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 20, 2014, 11:59:32 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why are so many young women fickle and immature?  (Read 14292 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« on: May 02, 2006, 02:20:16 AM »

If a man treats a young woman with respect and kindness, all too often he will receive rejection and condemnation in return.
If all a man cares about is getting into a girl's panties as fast as possible, he is all too likely to get what he wants.
Is this just the nature of the fallen world, where the evil ones are rewarded with material happiness while the righteous are punished?
This behavior, in allowing oneself to be manipulated by heartless men while mistreating those who could truly love you, is socially retarded. I hope that as women get older and their hearts are broken enough times, the nice guys start to look more appealing.

I know that all too many young men are immature. But why do young women continue to date them, despite complaining how they can never find the nice guy? We're here, we're everywhere, but so many young women are too busy dating jerks to notice us.

Peace.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 02:21:15 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
aurelia
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 588


« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2006, 07:40:18 AM »

I wouldn't worry about it too much. ÂÂ By the time you're my age and you figure out you married the jerk, all the nice guys are taken.  So, sooner or later you get noticed.  Smiley
« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 07:42:03 AM by aurelia » Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2006, 09:09:31 AM »

We're here, we're everywhere, but so many young women are too busy dating jerks to notice us.

Okay, generalizing a bit. But you think this through --

It's hard wired and about survival. In the early stages of mankind the "jerks" were the survivors, risk takers and best providers.

It's amazing how instead of complaining about this you don't just sit back and think what IS it about these "jerks" you don't like and think about WHY they might be attractive to the opposite sex? Instead, you try to apply millions of years of evolution to today. But TODAY's society is a very small slice of our existence on this planet.

You cannot separate mankind from any other type of animal when it comes to surviving.

From a young woman's point of view who's hormones are raging and her thoughts are all about BABIES and Protection and surviving!

1) Self Centered = survival

2) Aggressive = survival & protection

3) Risk Takers = survival

4) Leaders = survival & protection

etc...

THINK Matthew, THINK!



« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 10:16:01 AM by TomS » Logged
jaderook
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 113


« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2006, 09:26:13 AM »

If a man treats a young woman with respect and kindness, all too often he will receive rejection and condemnation in return.
If all a man cares about is getting into a girl's panties as fast as possible, he is all too likely to get what he wants.
Is this just the nature of the fallen world, where the evil ones are rewarded with material happiness while the righteous are punished?
This behavior, in allowing oneself to be manipulated by heartless men while mistreating those who could truly love you, is socially retarded. I hope that as women get older and their hearts are broken enough times, the nice guys start to look more appealing.

I know that all too many young men are immature. But why do young women continue to date them, despite complaining how they can never find the nice guy? We're here, we're everywhere, but so many young women are too busy dating jerks to notice us.

Peace.
I remember things from the nice girl perspective.  I found that there were all too many guys that didn't meet my standards.  Piece of advice for you:  Don't compromise.  You may wait longer to find the right girl, but it will be worth it.
Logged
Pravoslavbob
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,194


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2006, 09:26:47 AM »

THINK Matthew, THINK!

Tom,
Your points are correct.  But don't be so hard on the poor guy.  He's obviously having a rough time right now with this.

« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 09:30:22 AM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Orual
Orthodoxy = 7, not 3
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Sunday Morning Costume Parade
Posts: 951


I'm just here for the food.


« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2006, 09:31:52 AM »

I know that all too many young men are immature. But why do young women continue to date them, despite complaining how they can never find the nice guy? We're here, we're everywhere, but so many young women are too busy dating jerks to notice us.

Well, Casanova, maybe the young ladies don't like you BECAUSE you characterize them as fickle and immature...  Wink  
Logged

He spoke it as kindly and heartily as could be; as if a man dashed a gallon of cold water in your broth and never doubted you'd like it all the better. 

- C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
f.k.a. Matron.a
Pravoslavbob
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,194


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2006, 09:55:55 AM »

I know that all too many young men are immature. But why do young women continue to date them, despite complaining how they can never find the nice guy? We're here, we're everywhere, but so many young women are too busy dating jerks to notice us.

Peace.

Matthew,

What Tom says is true.   Most young women tell themselves and others that they want a nice guy, but really they want what Tom describes.  That is, most of them.  I think Jade is right.  There are nice girls out there.  Hold out for one.  

It's unfortunate, but so many people at age 20 are just not formed yet in their personality.  A man or woman at 20 can be a completely different person by 30.  If you try, you can come to recognize the people who are going to grow through their twenties, but not be completely different people by the time they are 28.  (That is to say, you can learn to recognize the mature ones.)  

It's a tough world out there.  Men and women are so often jerks to each other.  It's weird.  Also, I'm sure you will find at some point that a very nice girl will be totally flipped over you, and you won't have the time of day for her.  You won't have anything against her, she just won't be your "type."  And she will wonder about all the things you have wondered about in your post, only in reverse (about guys that are jerks instead of girls that are jerks.)  I'm sorry, I know that this is small comfort right now.  If you are meant to be married, there is one out there who is just for you.  Pray about it and just continue to live your life like you're doing now.  You won't have anything to worry about.

JB

Oh, and further to Tom's point.......there are some very practical reasons why women want a guy who looks like he will be a good provider for the family.  If you show yourself to be someone who is confident about being able to this, and who knows where he is going (even if you have normal insecurities about this ) then this will help a lot.  Hmmm.  Or hinder a lot, because girls who are not right for you will be interested in you.  What do I know?  The world is too much with us.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 10:06:37 AM by Pravoslavbob » Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2006, 10:20:14 AM »

Women's choice of men goes in cycles

Women are attracted to more masculine-looking men at the most fertile time of their menstrual cycle, psychologists have shown.

During the less fertile times, they choose men with more feminine-looking faces. These are seen as kinder and more co-operative, but less strong and healthy genetically.

A controversial implication of the new research is that, in evolutionary terms, it is natural for a woman to be unfaithful in order to secure both the best genes and the best carer for her children.

This is because a less masculine-looking man may be a better long-term partner, but the strongest, healthiest children would be produced by a quick fling with a more masculine-looking man.

Not a moral judgement

However, the head of the laboratory at St Andrews University where the research was done, Professor David Perrett, told BBC News Online: "This suggestion is a possibility, but we don't know how behaviour is affected by the preferences we see. We're assuming that preferences for different faces are affecting the choices women make."

"But whatever is best in an evolutionary sense is not necessarily the moral thing to do socially. We are not advocating any particular strategy," he said.

The study was carried out by researchers in Scotland and Japan. They asked women to select the one face from a range that they were most attracted to as a partner for a short-term sexual relationship.

They found that in the most fertile week of their menstrual cycle, women preferred more masculine faces. However, the choice of face did not vary for women using an oral contraceptive (i.e. not fertile) or those asked to choose the most attractive face for a long-term relationship.

Smell of success

The results are supported by previous research which showed that a male hormone smells unpleasant to women, except in the week of fertility. Also, the smells of more symmetrical, and therefore more attractive, men are preferred by women but again only in that week.

Men who look more masculine have higher levels of male hormones and also show a better ability to fight off disease. This makes them attractive as potential mates because their children will inherit this useful characteristic.

Professor Perrett believes that preferences for certain types of faces will have an effect on the partners people choose: "We keep finding very strong links between the appearance of males and their perceived personality. People reckon they can judge personality from the way others look."

"And as long as those links are there, I think preferences will be a profound influence on choice," he said.

He also points out that there are real links between face form and behaviour. For example, a study has shown that more masculine-looking US servicemen are more likely to get divorced and be violent towards their partners.

Not real life

However, Dr Paula Nicolson, a psychologist at the University of Sheffield, thinks this kind should not be seen as applicable to everyday relationships. She will deliver a lecture next month to the British Psychological Society's conference called "Evolutionary psychology is not the answer to everything."

"The research uses experimental methodology which accounts for extraneous variables and for social context. So they find the essence of human nature, which in this case is to do with mating behaviour," she told BBC News Online.

"But this methodology is also a weakness because this is not actually how people live - decisions about choice of partner are made on a whole range of issues. I think the effect of facial preferences is probably lost in today's social context.

"It is important to look at human biology in a basic sense but even most biologists would admit that biology is not that clear-cut."

---

The study is published in the journal Nature.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 10:21:20 AM by TomS » Logged
Pravoslavbob
Moderator
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,194


St. Sisoes the Great


« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2006, 10:33:25 AM »

Matthew,

Here is a thread from this forum discussing the whole painful man-woman divide, only this time from a female perspective.....

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=6747.0


JB

Logged

Religion is a disease, and Orthodoxy is its cure.
Mo the Ethio
Proud Capitalist
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Ορθοδοξία ή θάνατος!
Posts: 453



« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2006, 10:55:46 AM »

Mat: ÂÂ
 ÃƒÆ’‚ Navigating the treacherous waters of relationships is never easy. Even when it`s easy,it ain`t easy.
Here`s my take on some aspects of what we have to deal with today.
 ÃƒÆ’‚  We live in society that is self centered , spoiled and requires instant gratification.
Unfortunately , young people today are bombarded with these values ( if you can call them values) through the media and the images portrayed by pop artists.
 ÃƒÆ’‚ Our young women are taught to wear cloths that leave little to imagination, have no respect for their elders and ,to always be on the look out for a BIGGER, BETTER DEAL. And having kids is usually the LAST thing on their minds ( might cramp their style and limit their social life.)
 ÃƒÆ’‚ They think they want a "bad" boy because they love the element of danger. It is the same reason being a "gansta" seems so hip and cool for young men. It`s all fun and games until (a) the young woman is hurt either emotionally or physically or (b) some young man is gunned down because the thinks he`s gansta and try to show what a big man he is.
 ÃƒÆ’‚ Most women outgrown this ( though some don`t).  The only other thing to watch out for is the " Thirty-something freak-out "that all women go though. Usually happens between 29-31. After that, you`re home free.
 ÃƒÆ’‚ Don` t sweat it bro.  Like someone said has already said, hang in there . The right girl will come along.
But as a man who has been married for 45 years once told me...." Just because I`m married to a woman,
 doesn`t mean I pretend to understand them!"


 ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  ÃƒÆ’‚  I am sorry to the Women I`ve offended by my above comments..........but I stick by what I have said Kiss
Logged

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names."
- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2006, 11:47:55 AM »

It's a tough world out there.  Men and women are so often jerks to each other.  It's weird.  Also, I'm sure you will find at some point that a very nice girl will be totally flipped over you, and you won't have the time of day for her.  You won't have anything against her, she just won't be your "type."

I second this - as I think it is happening to me at the moment.  This newly illumined girl at church seems to want me (has basically asked me out a couple of times) and I'm not really that interested in her...and I'm probably as desperate as her too. Undecided Huh  Even though I get nervous and apprehensive about things, I don't try to carry myself that way and am confident in what I do know.  This girl just seems both desperate and insecure (rather low self esteem), which is a real turnoff.  You can be a nice person, humble and caring without appearing like some desperate wretch.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2006, 12:08:24 PM »

Okay, generalizing a bit. But you think this through --

It's hard wired and about survival. In the early stages of mankind the "jerks" were the survivors, risk takers and best providers.

On the flip side, the male is hard wired to procreate with as many women as possible. Clearly from the questions Matthew is posing he has not yet come to terms with his own biological imperative; so until he has come to the point where relationships (and procreation which is the ultimate goal, conscience or otherwise) are not essential and of such great importance he has no right to criticize others for their failure to control evolutionary influences.

Matthew, I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but from an evolutionary perspective of a polygamous species (which homo sapiens initially were) you're a failure; mind you, this would also be true of myself, so don't feel too bad, the fact of the matter is that this is true of the (usually overwhelming) Majority of the Population in a polygamous species. This is the history of our evolution and our biological imperative...However, things have changed in the last few thousand years, primarially due to the influence of englightened western culture. An initially polygamous species is not almost exclusively monogamous, which means that the entire population, male and female, will drift towards a single equilibrium (consider eagles and foxes), because a strong 'dominate' male looses his procreative advantage, thus eliminating evolutionary rewards.

Furthermore, with the rise of civilization the most violent and unruly members, which before civilization would have been dominate, were eliminated as threats to the community (capital punishment, exile, etc.), rather quickly eliminating nearly all 'alpha males' within a few generations. While some things can be accounted for by culture, a telling statistic is that the murder rate today in england has dropped 20 fold from what it was in the 13th Century...punishment for violent crime and monogamy are having an impact at increadibly fast rate from an evolutionary perspective. Thus, while these evolutionary impulses are substantially reduced, it will take many, many more generations before the results of our primitive polygamous behaviour are rectified, unless of course genetic engineering can speed along the process (and I have a feeling that it will begin to do so within the next 30 years).

Thus, we are in a transistional period, the influneces of past evolution are present, but more of a nuisance than an actual threats; really just enough to make life interesting.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #12 on: May 02, 2006, 12:10:34 PM »

Excellent post, GiC
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 02, 2006, 05:24:05 PM »

Instead, you try to apply millions of years of evolution to today. But TODAY's society is a very small slice of our existence on this planet.

The standard should be love and godliness, not 19th century naturalism.

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 02, 2006, 05:25:34 PM »

You may wait longer to find the right girl, but it will be worth it.

At this point in my life, I am not even looking for a relationship. All that I want is for people to treat each other with honesty, respect and kindness. I don't understand why these qualities are hard to find.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 02, 2006, 05:26:33 PM »

Well, Casanova, maybe the young ladies don't like you BECAUSE you characterize them as fickle and immature...  Wink ÂÂ

Or maybe I characterize them as such because I am able to witness their behavior. Granted, there are exceptions.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 02, 2006, 05:31:44 PM »

This newly illumined girl at church seems to want me (has basically asked me out a couple of times) and I'm not really that interested in her

Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. - Proverbs 31:30

If this female fears the Lord, you should at least give her a chance.

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 02, 2006, 05:33:35 PM »

the male is hard wired to procreate with as many women as possible.

That is against the teachings of Orthodoxy. Humans are an inherently monogamous species, that is how God created us.

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,503


« Reply #18 on: May 02, 2006, 06:39:03 PM »

Quote
At this point in my life, I am not even looking for a relationship. All that I want is for people to treat each other with honesty, respect and kindness. I don't understand why these qualities are hard to find.

I guess this is a question for which most Christians would insert the phrase "free will" in, as though it's a catch-all, fully explanatory answer. Only you know if you find such an answer persuasive though.

Quote
That is against the teachings of Orthodoxy. Humans are an inherently monogamous species, that is how God created us.

I think you are confusing cultural conditioning with genetics here. Wink I think that most guys, if they honestly believed that they could be polygamous without negative consequences (legally, morally, etc.), would do so in a heart beat. I think a truly monogamous male would be even more rare than your honest, respectful, kind person.
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #19 on: May 02, 2006, 06:58:56 PM »

I think you are confusing cultural conditioning with genetics here. Wink

Why would God create us to be genetically polygamous and then insist that we be monogamous?

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #20 on: May 02, 2006, 07:04:08 PM »

Why would God create us to be genetically polygamous and then insist that we be monogamous?

Peace.

I dont know...why does God give us challenges to rise above?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: May 02, 2006, 07:11:40 PM »

Why would God create us to be genetically polygamous and then insist that we be monogamous?

Isn't it a mark of Divine respect for the dignity of humanity that God created an animal with the expectation that it should rise above the level of an animal?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #22 on: May 02, 2006, 07:26:41 PM »

I dont know...why does God give us challenges to rise above?

The teachings of Scripture are against your evolutionist polyamory idea. We are created to be a monogamous species. Take heed to Scripture and patristics, not 19th century naturalism.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2006, 07:28:23 PM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,464


« Reply #23 on: May 02, 2006, 07:52:41 PM »

Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. - Proverbs 31:30

If this female fears the Lord, you should at least give her a chance.

Peace.

Yes, but there has to be some type of attraction - and from my perspective there isn't really any.  While I have a "castle" (I own a condo), I can (can't really) afford said castle sans $$$ help UNLESS I get a better paying job.  Looking at Zillow.com, only 8% of the residences in my area have a lower market value, so there isn't anything to downgrade to.  I'm not some might jock-protector - I want some on more of a peer basis and there are plenty of Orthodox females out there that are more like this that ARE family oriented.
Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #24 on: May 02, 2006, 08:09:16 PM »

That is against the teachings of Orthodoxy.

Another thing the Fathers got wrong.
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 02, 2006, 08:15:58 PM »

Another thing the Fathers got wrong.

The fathers were wrong that humans are an inherently monogamous species? Where is your Orthodoxy?
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #26 on: May 02, 2006, 08:58:23 PM »

The fathers were wrong that humans are an inherently monogamous species? Where is your Orthodoxy?

Even in primitive societies in scripture we see polygamy. Polygamy may not have been the theological ideal, but it was the cultural and evolutionary realty. Somewhat like divorce not being the ideal, but it has always been a reality of human relationships. The fact that we have ideals doesn't mean that's how we evolved.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #27 on: May 02, 2006, 09:30:28 PM »

God's law endures forever regardless of whether human society follows it. We've been created to be a monogamous species, that's such a basic of Orthodoxy that anyone who claims otherwise isn't Orthodox.

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,503


« Reply #28 on: May 02, 2006, 09:38:32 PM »

Matthew,

Could you give a few quotes from the Scriptures and Fathers who so explicitly teach this belief that you hold to? So as to not waste your time, please keep in mind that someone saying "Having one wife is good" is not in any way an evidence of what you are saying, since it is not an anthropological/genetic statement, but a moral/practical statement.
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
calligraphqueen
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GOA
Posts: 341


« Reply #29 on: May 03, 2006, 11:34:59 AM »

You guys that host the humanistic self deifying posture are even further from the point than you realize.  You make the mistake of seeing the whole male female divide from only the male pov.  What woman wants a man that thinks it perfectly "natural" to invade as many panties as possible?  Sure you have society and asinine evolutionary theories to support your self deification, you miss the mark though.  What benefit is it to any society to have the men be polygamous? What woman wants to be one of many? How does this line up with our knowledge that men AND women were created in God's image?  We females aren't breeding machines or biological release receptacles for men.  ARgh!  Men that think they are animals should be put in cages and fed soft bananas.  It would be safer for the females and the men that know better.
It's a lot simpler than you guys think.  Some of the most perfect men in the world are passed up because they don't appear to have it all together.  They don't appear to have any self esteem or self-worth.  They appear to be weak and frightened, even if they aren't physically coming across like that based on looks or actions. You can have a condo, but so could the guy whose mom lives there with him.  Wink The woman can't see herself as being protected in life, and since we live as PREY  most of the time we need that sense of protection.  The jocks, and the model looking guys at least appear like they have it all together.  Remember the jocks in school that had girls dripping off of them all the time.  they just looked like they had it figure out in life. They were just aloof and as dense as all the other guys, but they put on an act and it won them the girl.  And the girl was already struggling with her self image, so she put on airs as well.
 It's not much different by age 20 for most girls or guys. ÂÂ At that point the part of the brain that operates finer reasoning is just finally developing. ÂÂ anyway, I married the guy I met at 14 that looked like he was scared to death, but only after experiencing the heartbreak of a few of the jerks. ÂÂ If you are meant to be married, your lady is out there. ÂÂ Be praying for her now, wherever she is, that she won't have to give away pieces of her heart bit by bit, along the way to finding you. ÂÂ Then she has all those other memories to take to bed with her. From most of this conversation I can see many of the guys will have images of other women to take to bed with you. ÂÂ God expects a lot more of the one He created in his own image than he does a wild dog or armadillo. ÂÂ The best advice I could give is to not think of all women as free samples on a buffet, ÂÂ each woman is either to be married to another man or to God so most of the ones you guys will oggle belong to someone else! ÂÂ Even if they dont' know it yet.
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,503


« Reply #30 on: May 03, 2006, 12:24:09 PM »

Quote
You guys that host the humanistic self deifying posture are even further from the point than you realize.  

That sounds very Buddhistic... self-deifying posture!  Smiley
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
calligraphqueen
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: GOA
Posts: 341


« Reply #31 on: May 03, 2006, 12:26:22 PM »

I hadn't thought of it that way Lips Sealed
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #32 on: May 03, 2006, 01:35:21 PM »

You guys that host the humanistic self deifying posture are even further from the point than you realize.  You make the mistake of seeing the whole male female divide from only the male pov.  What woman wants a man that thinks it perfectly "natural" to invade as many panties as possible?  Sure you have society and asinine evolutionary theories to support your self deification, you miss the mark though.  What benefit is it to any society to have the men be polygamous? What woman wants to be one of many? How does this line up with our knowledge that men AND women were created in God's image?  We females aren't breeding machines or biological release receptacles for men. ARgh!  Men that think they are animals should be put in cages and fed soft bananas.  It would be safer for the females and the men that know better.


LOL Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

You try to criticize evolutionary psychology by appealing to a social perspective? There may be no social benifit to polygamy, but evolution does not generally reward social advantages, it rewards procreative advantages, the social advantages are only rewarded if they also help in procreation (including survival of offspring to mate).

But that's not the funny part, the funny part is that every point you make in your next paragraph supports evolutionary psychology. I mostly addressed the development of the male psychology form an evolutionary perspective in my last post, but evolution can also explain the female psychology as you presented it.

Quote
It's a lot simpler than you guys think.  Some of the most perfect men in the world are passed up because they don't appear to have it all together.  They don't appear to have any self esteem or self-worth.  They appear to be weak and frightened, even if they aren't physically coming across like that based on looks or actions. You can have a condo, but so could the guy whose mom lives there with him.  Wink The woman can't see herself as being protected in life, and since we live as PREY  most of the time we need that sense of protection.  The jocks, and the model looking guys at least appear like they have it all together.  Remember the jocks in school that had girls dripping off of them all the time.  they just looked like they had it figure out in life. They were just aloof and as dense as all the other guys, but they put on an act and it won them the girl.  And the girl was already struggling with her self image, so she put on airs as well.

The only real difference between the male and female in evolution is number and size of reproductive products. The male produces many smaller ones (called sperm) and the female produces many larger ones (called eggs). Any other differences are accidental and develop as a result of this factor and the enviromental factors that surround them. Thus, the strategy that is rewarded (from a perspective of genetics and evolution) for males is mass reproduction; with females, on the other hand, they are limited by the number of offspring they can produce, so evolution rewards females who are able to bring as many offspring as possible to mating age (and, in some species, killing off the offspring of less dominate females, to both increase her offspring's chance and reduce the genetic effect of other females). Thus, while the male is genetically programmed to mate as often as possible, the female is genetically programmed seek security, somewhat for herself but especially for her offspring.

This is exactly what you're saying you want from a male, you want a secure and stable enviroment that will give your offspring the greatest chance of reaching an age at which they can mate and pass on your genes. Both perspectives are clearly explained from the perspective of evolutionary psychology.

Now, monogamy is a victory for the female over the male, usually caused by agressive behaviour in the females which forces the male to chose one and only one mate and by the increased influence of non-alpha males in a societal setting (thus, also contributing to an eventually equilibrium between the genders). Here the female gets the most secure enviroment in which to raise her offspring, one with the constant support of the male, and the male makes the compromise that mating with one female is better than mating with none. While homo sapiens are tending towards monogamy today, we were polygamous VERY recently in our evolutionary history, thus leading to the dichotomy between that for which a male and female looks, creating these interesting relationship situations in the first place.

Quote
It's not much different by age 20 for most girls or guys.  At that point the part of the brain that operates finer reasoning is just finally developing.  anyway, I married the guy I met at 14 that looked like he was scared to death, but only after experiencing the heartbreak of a few of the jerks.  If you are meant to be married, your lady is out there.  Be praying for her now, wherever she is, that she won't have to give away pieces of her heart bit by bit, along the way to finding you.  Then she has all those other memories to take to bed with her. From most of this conversation I can see many of the guys will have images of other women to take to bed with you.  God expects a lot more of the one He created in his own image than he does a wild dog or armadillo.  The best advice I could give is to not think of all women as free samples on a buffet,  each woman is either to be married to another man or to God so most of the ones you guys will oggle belong to someone else!  Even if they dont' know it yet.

Which demonstrates that with the rise of society and modernity, what is required for stability and security is fundamentally different than what was required 100,000 years ago when we first evolved, strength, for example, is no longer significant for survival. However, we are genetically programmed to view it as essential, since it was vital at one point, thus leading many people to look for the historical ideal mate at a young age, when dirven by hormones alone, but as reason and experience takes over (we are an intelligent species after all, or so they claim, you wouldn't know it by reading this board Wink ) one might readjust their ideals to fit with what they 'know' (though perhaps subconsciously) to be evolutionary advantageous (i.e. lead to the most procreative success and and create offspring with the greatest chance at procreative success, by inhereting themse advantageous traits...such as financial stabilty, emotional stability, lack of violent tendencies (social influence on evolution), etc.), rather than what they 'feel' on a more fundamental level (strength, health, speed, stamina, etc....things that would have lead to procreative success when our species initially evolved)

(It's probably this last paragraph that best answers the initial question that was asked on this forum, 'Re: Why are so many young women fickle and immature?')
« Last Edit: May 03, 2006, 01:47:41 PM by greekischristian » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 03, 2006, 03:15:05 PM »

God created Adam and Eve, not Adam, Emily, Sarah, Britney, Kirsten and Eve. If man and wife are to become one flesh, let no other enter into that bond.

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #34 on: May 03, 2006, 03:42:33 PM »

God created Adam and Eve, not Adam, Emily, Sarah, Britney, Kirsten and Eve. If man and wife are to become one flesh, let no other enter into that bond.

Peace.

At least not without being tested first!  Grin

Geez Matthew, GENESIS IS NOT LITERAL!
Logged
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #35 on: May 03, 2006, 03:50:13 PM »

Geez Matthew, GENESIS IS NOT LITERAL!

The consensus of patristic tradition is stacked against you. Even if Genesis were an allegorical account, its message of God's institution of marriage, between one man and one woman, would remain.

Peace.
Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #36 on: May 03, 2006, 04:00:54 PM »

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our own image, in our likeness, and let them reign over the fish of the sea, and the birds of air, and the cattle, and all the land, 2 and all the creatures that crawl upon the earth."
27 So God created man in the image of himself, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.
28 And God blessed them, and he said to them, "Be fruitful, and increase, and fill the earth and conquer it. And reign over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the earth."

---
"them" not necessarily "the TWO of them". The male and female of the species
---

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and  multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over  the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living  thing that moveth upon the earth." King James Version, Genesis 1:28

"God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in  number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and  the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the  ground." New International Version, Genesis 1:28

---
"them" not necessarily "the TWO of them". The male and female of the species

---
« Last Edit: May 03, 2006, 04:02:29 PM by TomS » Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #37 on: May 03, 2006, 04:24:58 PM »

God created Adam and Eve, not Adam, Emily, Sarah, Britney, Kirsten and Eve. If man and wife are to become one flesh, let no other enter into that bond.

Roll Eyes Cheesy Roll Eyes  Cheesy Roll Eyes Cheesy

Matthew, do I have the school for you:

http://www.icr.edu/

If you get a degree from there you'll be in demand by every baptist school in the country...some may even be willing to pay you.

Out of curiosity, do you even take yourself seriously?
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,503


« Reply #38 on: May 03, 2006, 07:14:50 PM »

Quote
God created Adam and Eve, not Adam, Emily, Sarah, Britney, Kirsten and Eve. If man and wife are to become one flesh, let no other enter into that bond.

We already know your interpretation, but what about some quotes from the Fathers or Scriptures? Something along the lines of "When God made humanity, he purposely designed men so that they would naturally only enter into a marital union with one woman" (St. Notpatristic, Butgoodluckfindingit, 2, 4). Besides, various Fathers consider children resulting from sexual relations to be part of that "bond" or "union," even going so far as to say that "three become one flesh" (Chrysostom, 20th Homily on Ephesians), so I don't really think the point of the verse was to set precise (numerical) limits, but only to teach some spiritual truth. I do not, of course, say that Chrysostom advocated polygamy... I do not advocate it either. What is being discussed, so far as I understand, is not whether men can or should be polygamous, but rather whether they are by nature.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2006, 07:15:33 PM by Asteriktos » Logged

Large Marge sent me...
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #39 on: May 04, 2006, 01:35:52 AM »

---
"them" not necessarily "the TWO of them". The male and female of the species
---

Male and female, God created them, not male and females. Besides, Genesis 2 is nothing more than a more detailed account of day six.

Christian morality is contingent upon the fact that God created man and woman to be monogamous, to be joined as one flesh. If you take that away, you've lost the Christian faith. I'd recommend that you stop listening to the voice of 19th century naturalism and start studying Scripture and Orthodox theology.

Premarital sex is sinful because it violates God's clear intention for human sexual relations, to be shared between husband and wife. If you can't accept that, you aren't Orthodox or even Christian. ÂÂ

Peace.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2006, 01:58:23 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 04, 2006, 01:41:20 AM »

Out of curiosity, do you even take yourself seriously?

I take the teachings of the Orthodox faith seriously, you obviously do not. I am not and haven't claimed to be a young earth creationist. I just know enough of Scripture and tradition to see through your spurious reasoning.

Matthew 19
4 But he answered and said to them, Have you not read, that he who made from the beginning, made them male and female?
5 And he said, Because of this, a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.
6 Henceforth they are not two, but one body; therefore what God has joined together, man must not separate.

Your polyamorous ideas are contrary to the clear words of Christ. Humans are an inherently monogamous species, this is how God created us. It is not three, five, or thirty-seven that are created to become one flesh but two and only two. I'd recommend that you discuss this with a priest as soon as possible.

Peace.

 
« Last Edit: May 04, 2006, 01:42:29 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #41 on: May 04, 2006, 01:48:33 AM »

We already know your interpretation, but what about some quotes from the Fathers or Scriptures?

Unless your favorite church father is Shelby Spong, you should know the unanimous patristic teaching that God created human sexuality specifically for husband and wife.

I'm surprised that anyone who claims to be Orthodox would not understand the most basic of Christian teachings on marriage and human sexuality.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2006, 01:50:54 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Matthew777
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,497

Seek and ye shall find


WWW
« Reply #42 on: May 04, 2006, 02:07:44 AM »

On the flip side, the male is hard wired to procreate with as many women as possible.

Could you care to explain why God has hard wired us to preocreate with as many women as possible? Perhaps you could find a Scriptural or patristic basis for such an assertion.
I am sorry if I am being too hard on you but you need to be able to provide a Scriptural or patristic basis for your reasoning. All you've provided so far are secularist assertions that contradict all Orthodoxy.
Even a Christian who believes in evolution should recognize that God created human sexuality exclusively for husband and wife. My AP biology teacher from high school, who happens to be both a devout Catholic and professional biologist, would insist that human sexuality is intended exclusively for husband and wife.

Peace.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2006, 02:32:38 AM by Matthew777 » Logged

He who has a why to live for can bear with almost any how. - Friedrich Nietzsche
www.aramaicpeshitta.com
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,503


« Reply #43 on: May 04, 2006, 08:44:32 AM »

Matthew,

Quote
Unless your favorite church father is Shelby Spong, you should know the unanimous patristic teaching that God created human sexuality specifically for husband and wife.

1. I've never read Shelby Spong, though have heard enough to avoid him.

2. There is no such thing as a "unanimous patristic teaching" on sexuality.

3. Please stop hiding behind generalized statements and provide some evidence.

4. You keep talking as though you are someone with a doctorate who spent years of in depth study of this issue. You needn't cite specific sources, Matthew's word is all the weight that is necessary. But what have you read on sexuality in the ancient Church that has informed your beliefs? I can think of at least a half dozen modern works that I've read on the subject (the names of which I'd be happy to give if you're interested), and more importantly have actually went back and read and read and reread the original patristic texts on the subject. And it's a good thing that I did that, because sometimes I realised only on my 3rd read-through that I had things completely wrong regarding one Father or another. So who exactly have you read that makes you speak with such confidence, and affirm a "unanimous patristic teaching".

5. As far as your last point, it is somewhat correct and somewhat not. A number of Fathers did indeed believe that God created sexuality for a husband and wife. Some Fathers may have believed that marriage and sex was an intended and normal part of human nature from the beginning; but others had a different view. John Chrysostom, for instance, said: "When he was created, Adam remained in paradise, and there was no question of marriage. He needed a helper and a helper was provided for him. But even then marriage did not seem necessary... Desire for sexual intercourse and conception and pangs and childbirth and every form of corruption were alien to their soul." (On Virginity, 14)  That hardly sounds like an endorsement of the idea that sexuality, or even marriage, was part of our original nature; apparently St. John considered marriage to be a consequence of the fall--albeit possibly a good one: one to help support us in a fallen world. St. John says elsewhere: "Thus they lived in paradise like angels, neither set on fire by desire nor besieged by other passions." (On Genesis, 15, 4).

So how are the various Genesis passages explained which seem to contradict this? A number of attempts have been made, just like a number of attempts have been made to explain away certain barbaric historical practices and "laws of God" written about in the Old Testament. Maximos the Confessor said that "increase and multiply" was meant to indicate a "spiritual increase" (Ambigua), while John of Damascus handled some of the problems thusly:

Quote
So that to prevent the wearing out and destruction of the race by death, marriage was devised that the race of men may be preserved through the procreation of children. But they will perhaps ask, what then is the meaning of “male and female,” and “Be fruitful and multiply?” In answer we shall say that “Be fruitful and multiply“ does not altogether refer to the multiplying by the marriage connection. For God had power to multiply the race also in different ways, if they kept the precept unbroken to the end. But God, Who knoweth all things before they have existence, knowing in His foreknowledge that they would fall into transgression in the future and be condemned to death, anticipated this and made “male and female,” and bade them “be fruitful and multiply.” - Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, 4, 24


6. Even supposing that your point was completely correct, it still wouldn't be an evidence for your position. That God made sex "specifically for husband and wife," besides being a generalization with no patristic evidence given to support it, also does not even deal with polygamy. It deals with what the reason for the origin of sexuality might be. Your statement affirms that sex is for a husband and wife, but does not touch upon whether the husband can have a second wife, nor does it touch upon the heart of the matter here, which is that sometimes your God (apparently) makes (or allows humans to be born) in a "natural" state different from what he wants morally. So, even if God did make sex specifically for husband and wife, that in no way refutes (indeed, it doesn't even attempt to deal with) the idea that men are genetically designed to seek out sex with many partners. This is what Ozgeorge and GIC have been trying to get across, not that polygamy is good, but that it should be seen as a challenge for men to overcome. I guess it's another test of your Deity, to see if we pass. I dunno. In any event, I don't see why you are arguing with this idea.

Justin
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,503


« Reply #44 on: May 04, 2006, 08:46:07 AM »

Quote
I am sorry if I am being too hard on you but you need to be able to provide a Scriptural or patristic basis for your reasoning.

Kettle, call your office, Pot is here to see you, he'd like to discuss your exterior color!  Wink
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.159 seconds with 73 queries.