It seems like the dawn of The Age of Woman may have arrived. The other day I was walking out of a bank after finishing some business there (not at a teller, but in the back - the special services area or whatever), and there was a shapely young brunette gal walking out ahead of me who I suspect was a bank employee. As I reached the gatekeeper area, I observed that the equally attractive blond who had sent me to the back a few minutes earlier was rather openly admiring the brunette's 'assets' as she walked by. (Just to stop any Penthouse Forum fears here, neither of these ladies were Ms. Universe or anything, but they were both perfectly fine and attractive 'regular' girls.) Now, I've been around the block a time or two, so I know how to read people fairly well, and the blond was genuine in her admiration of the brunette, and that is indeed what it was - no innocent coincidence of field of view or anything like that. She basically gave her the extended 'eye grope' as she passed, with a distinct look of satisfaction on her face as she did it. I know checking someone out - and liking what you see - when I see it. A couple seconds later I crossed the same threshold myself, and the blond (who I had spoken to earlier when she sent me to the back) looked away from the brunette for a moment at me with a look on her face that said "I thought I heard a noise," not speaking to or acknowledging me whatsoever, and then returned her gaze to the brunette, in the same fashion as before, with me clearly able to observe her and she apparently not caring. Just for context, remember that this is an employee of a financial institution, not a stripper at a seedy club, so you might think she would have reason to behave, as it were, regardless of her sexual orientation. As far as I know, employees usually don't act out like that in front of customers - or at least I always thought it was discouraged, anyway. Also note that this was not a case of the blond girl trying to push my buttons by playing the girl-girl card or anything like that. As much as I might wish it was, it simply wasn't. I was just a bystander. So, what we have here is a modern woman who a. apparently is gay or bisexual, and b. doesn't care who knows or sees it, even in her professional life, and c. regards men the same way she would a potted plant. (To be clear, I'm not Mr. Irresistable or anything, and this is not a disguised bashing of the blond girl in order to comfort my damaged ego ... but I'm also not a 90 year old man, or a stapler, or a noise. In other words, it's mildly offensive because the last time I checked I still had a pulse and was drawing breath, which I think means I'm a living person. Not because I'm aghast that she didn't see me as a 'playa.' ) Okay, so end titillating story. (That was it anyway - I just walked out of the bank into further obscurity.) So what does this mean? Are women today to the point where they don't need men anymore, for anything, and don't care that we know it? Is this truly the Age of Woman? I know this story is just anecdotal, but I have a strange sense that it is oddly representative of what may be an emerging new norm, or at least a sweeping general tendency that's looming on the horizon. I'm quite sure it would not have happened this way, this openly, even ten years ago. If that's what it is, it's not fair, because the day would never come when men didn't need women. Not fair! :smarty:
Personally, I think ALL women are evil ... I swear my wife is pulling out my hair while I sleep, just a few at a time mind you. They're eeeeevil ... but what are we gonna do?
The most important aspects women* need men for are making children and raising children. If a woman does not need a man, then she does not need/want children, then she is not a woman. So relax, Gaear, there will always be some deviations, but most will be normal (and if not, we will be extinct, so we will not care anyway.) [EDIT] *In my opinion, though I may be completely wrong, for I am not a woman, nor am I able to read thoughts of women telepathically.
One day the age of man will return, when I quit looking at a computer all day pretending I'm a Barbarian or a Paladin. I will arise from my desk and become the man I was created to be. But first I have to kill the slavers and clear out a temple. Then maybe craft a few holy weapons and scribe some scrolls. Actually I'm pretty busy. That whole "age of man" thing may have to wait.
I think that the thing we forget is that ten years ago it wasn't generally accepted when someone was gay the way it is today. I'm sure there were always people checking out people of the same sex but they did it on the sly because they didn't want to be found out and in turn osterizised. I'm no expert but i have two close male friends that are gay and my wifes cousin recently has begun to act on feelings she has had for a long time and is dating a woman, not to mention that my own cousin is Bi, i can tell you that after speaking with them about these things you will find that they have always felt the way they do but were afraid to show it in the past. Personally i say to each his own, oh and on the subject of lesbians not wnting children, trust me they do. The good things is that many of them, and gay men as well, are turing to adoption. In my opinion i think this is a far nobler act then squeezing out a child yourself, there are far to many children being had to families or people that want nothing to do with them or have no right teaching another human being what it is to be human. My wife and I always said that if we couldn't have children for one reason or another we would adopt.
As a true Soviet man I am not tolerant to dangerous deviations, further comments from me would only lead to flaming (by me) and banning (of me). But, I think, everyone could imagine what I would post. (Like this: "No offence, but people with illnesses should be treated, not called "just the other type of good health", especially if their illness is contagious".)
I'm finding this all very unconvincing ... Face it guys, we are over! (I hope you all realize that my hypothesis up the thread is largely tongue-in-cheek. That said, I do believe that women are, in general, well on their way to becoming the dominant sex, for a variety of reasons.)
well gaear, this is the last kick in the nuts for us guys... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...s-discover-turn-womens-bone-marrow-sperm.html
Hmmmm. Boy would I like to meet you! You imply that the man does all the work? If so, then why can a woman with a bit of skill bring the man off whenever she wants to? Perhaps physical movement doesn't equate with skill necessarily? Try being on the bottom once in awhile. Or...better yet...try some of the more esoteric practices that utilize minimal movement and maximum focus. As for me, I have always noticed (and appreciated) when a woman was particularly well put together. I have a mental snapshot of a woman, honey blond, dressed in monochrome shades that went with her hair, down to her leg makeup (with a faint sparkle). Stunning! And yes, I gawked. :yikes: No other word for it. It will be a sad day when men are irrelevant. You are simply too much fun.
I was pointing out that being "in charge" is a lot of work. I'm not afraid of being obselete. I think we'll be kept around as pets or hobbies. Plus we can do manual labor and also bring in an extra pay check. And we are often the baby's favorite toy.
GA82, do not miss your luck here! Grab your Hummer (or whatever you, Guardian Angels, have at your disposal) and hurry up to where your Queen calls you!
It would certainly be an interesting relationship, considering our history of whackings and GA82's propensity for wearing a helmet and diving out windows... Edit: Did I just earn a bad reputation for that remark?
<Whispering to GA82> Pssst, man, the Queen gave you TWO transparent hints already! Are you not on your way yet?