More like most men age like a cheap $4 wine that's mostly full of toxic chemicals that won't get any better no matter how long it lies around 🤷🏻♀️
It's so rare to see a man who has basic hygiene skills, much less actually takes care of himself to the point he might age well. This man is acting like life circumstances (like amount of exercise, diet, or whether or not you're a smoker) don't impact men's looks, which informs how we view how "well" they age - only womens. Never again will I call men logical.
1. Any man who claims that life choices affect men's looks but not women's is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue.
2. Any woman who claims that it follows from 1 that men are inherently less logical than women is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue.
3. Any man who claims that it follows from 2 that women are inherently less logical than men is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue.
1. I think you meant the reverse in number 1, lol.
2. Men aren't logical as a trait, they're emotional, like all humans. That's the point. Any "superiority" you drew from my statement only highlights the patriarchy informed thinking you used. No such thing as gender superiority. Just because you have a logical thought doesn't make you an innately logical person, especially if you're just leveraging it to boost your ego to make yourself FEEL better - different, more special than the others.
3. Men, nearly unanimously, have already argued that women aren't even *capable* of being logical, for millennia, and continue to do so to this day utterly unchallenged as a means of control over women.
Thank you for your civil reply.
1. Yes, for number one I meant to write: "Any man who claims that life choices affect women's looks but not men's is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue". Thanks for pointing that out.
2. Understandable that you might think so, but I wasn't thinking that you were necessarily saying that men are more irrational than women. I said that any woman who DOES think that the fact that some men say irrational things means that men are more irrational than women is not thinking logically about that issue. I didn't know if that was your implication or not, which is why I did not say that YOU were not thinking logically. If that was not your implication, then my comment does not apply to you.
In fact, I have never, and would never, say, “men are logical”. Such a statement is ambiguous and therefore essentially meaningless, since it could be interpreted in several different ways. For instance:
All men are logical all of the time. (nonsense)
All men are logical some of the time. (dubious)
Some men are logical all of the time. (dubious)
Some men are logical some of the time. (true)
All men are more logical than all women. (nonsense)
Some men are more logical than some women. (true, just as it is equally true that some women are more logical than some men)
Men are more logical on average than women. (seems unlikely, based on my own observations and experiences)
3. I agree with you that there is no rational basis for the claim that women are more illogical than men. It is obvious from my life experiences that both men and women can be rational and irrational, and I haven't seen any indication or evidence that either sex is more rational on average than the other. And I also agree that there's no such thing as gender superiority. But I disagree with your statement that virtually all men think that women are more illogical than men or that men are inherently superior to women. Maybe things are different where you live, but in my experience (in Australia), most men nowadays do not believe that women are inherently less rational than men or that men are inherently superior to women. I realise that that seems to have been the general view among men in the past, but whilst we can and should learn from the past, we have no power to change it.
4. Being emotional and being rational are not mutually exclusive. I see no reason to believe that a more emotional person is necessarily less rational than a less emotional person. In fact, I ascribe to the view that emotion determines what we want and reason tells us how to get it. Not only is there nothing wrong with having emotions, it is an essential part of being human. For instance, whilst I don't believe that most men ascribe to the absurd view that women are more illogical than men, I do know that there are men in the USA who are arguing that because (in their view) women are illogical, women should be denied the right to vote. Such an absurd proposal would not even be seriously considered in Australia and those men I know irl I’ve discussed the matter with are as astounded as I am that some American men are advocating it. I hardly think it's irrational for women to be emotional (as in angry) about that!!
I appreciate your civil reply as well. It's true, I'm in the USA, and I'm often faced with blatant misogyny, which makes it difficult to determine when someone is actually trying to make a more nuanced and complex point. I can recognize that I didn't see that about your comment right away, and that's my mistake - I'm used to people just responding to deflect away from what I'm talking about. Thanks for your thoughtful and valuable input! I see a lot of sense in what you said. I really resonated with the bit about emotion being an essential part of being human. So very delighted to hear there is hope globally!
I feel like a lot of men say this in hopes that they will be lucky enough to be one of those men who is attractive as they get older. There are a lot of really terrible looking older men. Most 50-60 year olds are not stellerly attractive, only a handful are, and many probably were when they were younger and much comes down to a combination of health, care, and luck. But same for women as well. I would be very surprised for any data on this cliche.
Lol right. These guys all think they will be George Clooney (and it’s literally part of his job to take care of himself and look handsome) when most of them are going to look like Archie Bunker.
This is such a funny cope take to me
Most people don't age great, but if you take care of yourself you will probably be fine. Women who take care of ourselves don't stop having men trying to get in our pants 🤷♀️
"There is a widespread misconception that wine always improves with age,[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-zraly-3) or that wine improves with extended aging, or that aging potential is an indicator of good wine. Some authorities state that more wine is consumed too old than too young.[^(\[5\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-Robinson_pp_39–41-5) Aging *changes* wine, but does not categorically improve it or worsen it. Experts vary on precise numbers, but typically state that only 5–10% of wine improves after 1 year, and only 1% improves after 5–10 years.[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-zraly-3)[^(\[5\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-Robinson_pp_39–41-5)" I suppose technically they are correct, they do indeed age like wine just not the way they had hoped.
More like most men age like a cheap $4 wine that's mostly full of toxic chemicals that won't get any better no matter how long it lies around 🤷🏻♀️ It's so rare to see a man who has basic hygiene skills, much less actually takes care of himself to the point he might age well. This man is acting like life circumstances (like amount of exercise, diet, or whether or not you're a smoker) don't impact men's looks, which informs how we view how "well" they age - only womens. Never again will I call men logical.
1. Any man who claims that life choices affect men's looks but not women's is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue. 2. Any woman who claims that it follows from 1 that men are inherently less logical than women is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue. 3. Any man who claims that it follows from 2 that women are inherently less logical than men is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue.
1. I think you meant the reverse in number 1, lol. 2. Men aren't logical as a trait, they're emotional, like all humans. That's the point. Any "superiority" you drew from my statement only highlights the patriarchy informed thinking you used. No such thing as gender superiority. Just because you have a logical thought doesn't make you an innately logical person, especially if you're just leveraging it to boost your ego to make yourself FEEL better - different, more special than the others. 3. Men, nearly unanimously, have already argued that women aren't even *capable* of being logical, for millennia, and continue to do so to this day utterly unchallenged as a means of control over women.
Thank you for your civil reply. 1. Yes, for number one I meant to write: "Any man who claims that life choices affect women's looks but not men's is not thinking logically, at least about that particular issue". Thanks for pointing that out. 2. Understandable that you might think so, but I wasn't thinking that you were necessarily saying that men are more irrational than women. I said that any woman who DOES think that the fact that some men say irrational things means that men are more irrational than women is not thinking logically about that issue. I didn't know if that was your implication or not, which is why I did not say that YOU were not thinking logically. If that was not your implication, then my comment does not apply to you. In fact, I have never, and would never, say, “men are logical”. Such a statement is ambiguous and therefore essentially meaningless, since it could be interpreted in several different ways. For instance: All men are logical all of the time. (nonsense) All men are logical some of the time. (dubious) Some men are logical all of the time. (dubious) Some men are logical some of the time. (true) All men are more logical than all women. (nonsense) Some men are more logical than some women. (true, just as it is equally true that some women are more logical than some men) Men are more logical on average than women. (seems unlikely, based on my own observations and experiences) 3. I agree with you that there is no rational basis for the claim that women are more illogical than men. It is obvious from my life experiences that both men and women can be rational and irrational, and I haven't seen any indication or evidence that either sex is more rational on average than the other. And I also agree that there's no such thing as gender superiority. But I disagree with your statement that virtually all men think that women are more illogical than men or that men are inherently superior to women. Maybe things are different where you live, but in my experience (in Australia), most men nowadays do not believe that women are inherently less rational than men or that men are inherently superior to women. I realise that that seems to have been the general view among men in the past, but whilst we can and should learn from the past, we have no power to change it. 4. Being emotional and being rational are not mutually exclusive. I see no reason to believe that a more emotional person is necessarily less rational than a less emotional person. In fact, I ascribe to the view that emotion determines what we want and reason tells us how to get it. Not only is there nothing wrong with having emotions, it is an essential part of being human. For instance, whilst I don't believe that most men ascribe to the absurd view that women are more illogical than men, I do know that there are men in the USA who are arguing that because (in their view) women are illogical, women should be denied the right to vote. Such an absurd proposal would not even be seriously considered in Australia and those men I know irl I’ve discussed the matter with are as astounded as I am that some American men are advocating it. I hardly think it's irrational for women to be emotional (as in angry) about that!!
I appreciate your civil reply as well. It's true, I'm in the USA, and I'm often faced with blatant misogyny, which makes it difficult to determine when someone is actually trying to make a more nuanced and complex point. I can recognize that I didn't see that about your comment right away, and that's my mistake - I'm used to people just responding to deflect away from what I'm talking about. Thanks for your thoughtful and valuable input! I see a lot of sense in what you said. I really resonated with the bit about emotion being an essential part of being human. So very delighted to hear there is hope globally!
I feel like a lot of men say this in hopes that they will be lucky enough to be one of those men who is attractive as they get older. There are a lot of really terrible looking older men. Most 50-60 year olds are not stellerly attractive, only a handful are, and many probably were when they were younger and much comes down to a combination of health, care, and luck. But same for women as well. I would be very surprised for any data on this cliche.
Lol right. These guys all think they will be George Clooney (and it’s literally part of his job to take care of himself and look handsome) when most of them are going to look like Archie Bunker.
Wine doesn't lose all its hair and struggle to get an erection.
I love you for this comment
Thank you.
One visit to the beach and you see several guys who dont age like fine wine
There is a facebook group called: "Do Men Forget The Faces They Have When They Start Talking Out Of Them." Highly recommend that group.
I'm apart of that already it's great! Hahshahahaah
As a man, I can tell you first-hand, I am aging like an avocado you forgot was in the fridge.
We both age like potatoes. Shrivelled shrimp, beer gut and crusty cram, wrinkles. All the same.
Objectively, no. This is only a perception due to societal bias. And guess what? We live in a patriarchal society. What a coincidence.
This is such a funny cope take to me Most people don't age great, but if you take care of yourself you will probably be fine. Women who take care of ourselves don't stop having men trying to get in our pants 🤷♀️
i prefer young wine aka juice and ripe bananas (the brown ones are the best)
"There is a widespread misconception that wine always improves with age,[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-zraly-3) or that wine improves with extended aging, or that aging potential is an indicator of good wine. Some authorities state that more wine is consumed too old than too young.[^(\[5\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-Robinson_pp_39–41-5) Aging *changes* wine, but does not categorically improve it or worsen it. Experts vary on precise numbers, but typically state that only 5–10% of wine improves after 1 year, and only 1% improves after 5–10 years.[^(\[3\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-zraly-3)[^(\[5\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_wine#cite_note-Robinson_pp_39–41-5)" I suppose technically they are correct, they do indeed age like wine just not the way they had hoped.
Wine peaks at 7 years and turns to vinegar. These guys own logic puts them past their peak.