Hey there I_Like_1981 - This is my 1981st forum post!!!

[Fat Man]

Special alert to I_like_1981

This post in my 1981st post.

You told me to let me know in another topic.

So, I dedicate this topic just for you!

This is my post # 1981

[i_like_1981]

Special alert to I_like_1981

This post in my 1981st post.

You told me to let me know in another topic.

So, I dedicate this topic just for you!

This is my post # 1981

Congratulations Fat Man! Happy 1981st post!

Somebody get this man a beer. Or even better, a glass of Bucks Fizz... for they won the Eurovision Song Contest back in 1981!

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[The Imperialist]

I will be tempted to send a copy of Urusei Yatsura (that first aired in 1981) but I shall desist.

[i_like_1981]

Anything from 1981 is fine by me. But then again, Fat Man has achieved the honour, so I shouldn't take it from him!

I see you've now got to 200 posts, Imperialist... in just over a month, as well! Now that's what I call devotion. At this rate you'll have got to 1,000 not long into the New Year... assuming you plan on staying around that long, that is. I'll be around. It's a good forum, here. Only anti-sports forum on the internet. With all these damn sports websites around it's good to have one that deliberately goes against them to let them know... their games are not so adored by all. What these sheep reckon is that because so much money goes into the sport industry worldwide and so many millions of people watch the games every day, it's become a social obligation now and anyone who doesn't do it is considered "abnormal" or "pathetic". It's not just an interest for people anymore, sports, not a light-hearted pastime, but a dominating enterprise that has invaded the world and the minds of the people who enjoy it!

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[Jerry McGuire]

I've never met someone who considered another pathetic because they didn't like sports. Most people just kind of shrug it off, like who cares? But I digress.

I've been wondering why you like the year 1981 so much. Is that your birth year?

[i_like_1981]

I've been wondering why you like the year 1981 so much. Is that your birth year?

Yes, I was born in 1981, and a lot of my favourite albums were also released that year, such as Time by the Electric Light Orchestra. That's probably my favourite ELO album. Definitely ahead of its time. So when it came to picking a favourite year of the 80's, 1981 seemed the most logical choice. Don't worry. I'm not so obsessed with that specific year in real life but I am obsessed with old music in general. Today's stuff is just... not the same. Seems to me that most of our top artists today just make music to get famous and earn legions of sheepish fans and not because they genuinely have a passion for being adventurous or original in the music they create. The modern charts are not for me.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[Earl]

I've never met someone who considered another pathetic because they didn't like sports. Most people just kind of shrug it off, like who cares?

I don't doubt that you're telling the truth about your own experience. But perhaps you haven't had occasion to socialize with those who do denigrate nonathletic guys. A former member of the forum, SportsGuy92 (a high-school football player attending a parochial school), admitted that most of his teammates referred to the nonathletic guys at their school as "fags." Sadly, the rest of us have had that experience (or worse). If we and others had had your experience, this website probably wouldn't exist today.

[Jerry McGuire]

That's unfortunate. I know quite a few athletes, but I've never heard someone call another person a fag just because he didn't like the particular sport. I won't pretened to know all athletes, but hopefully they don't represent the majority.

Today's stuff is just... not the same. Seems to me that most of our top artists today just make music to get famous and earn legions of sheepish fans and not because they genuinely have a passion for being adventurous or original in the music they create. The modern charts are not for me.

I feel the same way. My favorite band, Muse, is actually from England. Perhaps you've heard of them? They aren't an old band, but they produce very high quality music! You should give them a listen.

[i_like_1981]

I feel the same way. My favorite band, Muse, is actually from England. Perhaps you've heard of them? They aren't an old band, but they produce very high quality music! You should give them a listen.

Well, I have heard a lot of positive reviews about Muse's material which leads me to believe that they are about as good as modern music can get. I don't know anything by them, and sadly I really don't listen to anything that's from after the Eighties. By no means is it bad music, it just doesn't compliment my style. But I'm sure they make far better music than trashy artists like Drake, Jay-Z and Avril Lavigne. You never hear much about Avril Lavigne any more, do you? Maybe she's grown up and realised that making shitty music is alienating just as many people as it attracts. I'm probably wrong though.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[Earl]

That's unfortunate. I know quite a few athletes, but I've never heard someone call another person a fag just because he didn't like the particular sport. I won't pretened to know all athletes, but hopefully they don't represent the majority.

I just found the following comment at a Coach Wyatt's website, which I've copied and pasted below.

A study by Duke University psychologist Philip Rodkin turns current conflict-resolution and anger-management theories upside-down, because he contends that classroom bullies are not always the "unpopular kids with poor social skills" that most violence-prevention programs are aimed at. Instead, his study of 450 4th-5th- and 6th-graders found that approximately a third of popular - athletic, good-looking, outgoing - kids tended to be aggressive, getting into fights and arguments and being generally disruptive. But they also tend to be socially adept enough to slide by, and avoid intervention. Hey, I hate to say this, but is it possible they are manifesting some sort of natural "alpha male" aggressiveness?

http://www.coachwyatt.com/JAN&FEB00.html

I'm not saying that the majority of high-school athletes are bullies. There are even a few who stand up to bullies who pick on other students. A notable example is Andy Austin, a Montana State football player who posted at this website briefly in January and again during the summer. But there is considerable evidence that other school athletes do bully students who are viewed as being "different" or somehow deserving of bad treatment. What is also interesting is that bullying is less likely to be found among athletes in certain sports, as compared to others. (By the way, notice the last sentence by the coach. He seems to be condoning bullying, as if bullying is natural and is just the process of "putting others in their place." What a jerk!)

Some who read this post may not believe what I'm about to say, but I get no pleasure out of making observations of this sort.

[Earl]

Jerry, I'm continuing my line of thought from my previous post in this topic, which immediately precedes this one.

Do you seriously believe that nonathletic boys are rarely negatively stereotyped as supposedly having homosexual tendencies (a false accusation that I personally find to be particularly vile) simply because they have no interest in sports? I've posted a link to a topic at another website that should enlighen you. Please read the entire topic to see what I'm talking about.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... 04x4307241

[Jerry McGuire]

A study by Duke University psychologist Philip Rodkin turns current conflict-resolution and anger-management theories upside-down, because he contends that classroom bullies are not always the "unpopular kids with poor social skills" that most violence-prevention programs are aimed at. Instead, his study of 450 4th-5th- and 6th-graders found that approximately a third of popular - athletic, good-looking, outgoing - kids tended to be aggressive, getting into fights and arguments and being generally disruptive. But they also tend to be socially adept enough to slide by, and avoid intervention. Hey, I hate to say this, but is it possible they are manifesting some sort of natural "alpha male" aggressiveness?

That's interesting because at first glance I had the opposite observation. I had thought that he was not condoning the bullying, but trying to find some sort of biological justification. This could have been a lapse in comprehension by me however.

In regards to your second link, that article has a few points that make me wonder what he was thinking. Showering to show off your penis? Really? I mean granted, when I was very young, I would sometimes shower with my father, but I think it was to make sure I didn't fall (I had stopped taking baths at this point) and hurt myself. And if that article is true, then I'm a homosexual! I admit that I had a tendency to cry quite a bit, and I've never really been athletic by any means. However, the point about being nonathletic and not into roughhousing is only one of many he tries to make (not very successfully). He doesn't really focus on that as much as just acting effeminate, or "girly". Which is wrong to imply that not being athletic is girly, but it is central to the stereotypical "this is how a man should be" machismo that we're fed as children.

[Earl]

A study by Duke University psychologist Philip Rodkin turns current conflict-resolution and anger-management theories upside-down, because he contends that classroom bullies are not always the "unpopular kids with poor social skills" that most violence-prevention programs are aimed at. Instead, his study of 450 4th-5th- and 6th-graders found that approximately a third of popular - athletic, good-looking, outgoing - kids tended to be aggressive, getting into fights and arguments and being generally disruptive. But they also tend to be socially adept enough to slide by, and avoid intervention. Hey, I hate to say this, but is it possible they are manifesting some sort of natural "alpha male" aggressiveness?

That's interesting because at first glance I had the opposite observation. I had thought that he was not condoning the bullying, but trying to find some sort of biological justification. This could have been a lapse in comprehension by me however.

In regards to your second link, that article has a few points that make me wonder what he was thinking. Showering to show off your penis? Really? I mean granted, when I was very young, I would sometimes shower with my father, but I think it was to make sure I didn't fall (I had stopped taking baths at this point) and hurt myself. And if that article is true, then I'm a homosexual! I admit that I had a tendency to cry quite a bit, and I've never really been athletic by any means. However, the point about being nonathletic and not into roughhousing is only one of many he tries to make (not very successfully). He doesn't really focus on that as much as just acting effeminate, or "girly". Which is wrong to imply that not being athletic is girly, but it is central to the stereotypical "this is how a man should be" machismo that we're fed as children.

I guess I could be wrong about the coach. Since I've noticed that some adults take a social Darwinist view of bullying in the schools, I may have a bit of a knee-jerk reflex at times.

Despite what the editors of Esquire magazine may say, machismo (properly defined) is not true masculinity. I have a lot to say concerning the claim that "real men don't cry." My decidedly nonathletic father was extremely successful in his chosen field of architecture. He came from a dysfunctional family background, but ended up as a CEO and also (for a number of years) a university professor. As you would imagine, he frequently experienced a great deal of stress. Years after he had passed away, my sister told me that frequently when he would come home from work, he would tell our mother that he was going to go into their bedroom (where he did not want to be disturbed) just so he could have a good cry about all the stress that was going on. He was actually a sensitive man who could be reduced to tears by a newspaper headline reporting a terrible tragedy. But he was still a very successful businessman, someone who certainly was no pushover.

In the early spring of my sophomore year in high school, I watched the movie The Diary of Anne Frank for the first time on TV. The ending, of course, brought tears to my eyes. (After all, it really happened.) Because of the macho conditioning I had received from cultural influences outside my home, I actually felt ashamed of myself for shedding tears. (Today I realize that I was silly to feel ashamed of myself at that time.) But nearly 20 years later a friend of mine who had played football at a university was moved to tears by the ending of E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial when it was first shown in cinemas.

During the 1980s a medical researcher named William Frye discovered that the chemical composition of emotion-caused tears differed from the compositon of irritant-caused tears. He actually collected irritant-caused tears by having volunteers peel onions, and collected emotion-caused tears by having volunteers watch a sad movie (which was Brian's Song). The emotion-caused tears contained chemicals that arise in the body during stess and are slightly toxic, if I remember correctly. Dr. Frye theorized that one reason women generally live longer than men was because women allow themselves to cry more often, which means that stress-causing chemicals produced in their bodies are eliminated. Of course, if this is true, this wouldn't be the only reason why women live longer than men; but it would be one of them.

One final comment: I did think that a few of the replies in that DU thread were funny, such as "If I had a son, I'd show him my ... box turtle."

[Jerry McGuire]

Yeah, I get what you mean. Personally, I was raised to be more stoic when it came to emotions, even though it didn't really kick in until later in life. I've only personally seen my father cry about 4 or 5 times in my life, and those were for serious tragedies (like a horrible death in the family). However, when it comes to movies, it's pretty hard to crack me. Now don't get me wrong, I've seen quite a few sad movies, and they make me feel bad. But the only movie I've ever watched that brought tears to my eyes was Marley and Me. I bawled like a baby at the end! Even athletes cry. Tim Tebow, quarterback of the University of Florida Gators, cried on national television during a game in which they were being beaten badly. Had they won that game they would have played for the national championship, and he just let his emotions take him over in the agony of defeat. So yeah, men can cry, and it's perfectly okay to do so. Anyone who says otherwise is just trying to overcompensate.

[i_like_1981]

In the early spring of my sophomore year in high school, I watched the movie The Diary of Anne Frank for the first time on TV. The ending, of course, brought tears to my eyes. (After all, it really happened.) Because of the macho conditioning I had received from cultural influences outside my home, I actually felt ashamed of myself for shedding tears. (Today I realize that I was silly to feel ashamed of myself at that time.)

Really is pretty saddening, when this "hyper-macho" mentality that seems to exist in so many schools around the world will make a person feel ashamed and embarrassed at shedding tears over one of the most horrific, sickening events of the world's history. Anyone who would not be moved by a story like Anne Frank's really has got no emotion whatsoever. Maybe at the time it's important to know that you're doing the right thing by feeling for those who have suffered needlessly and that the macho mentality that seems to influence so many guys is just messed up. I can understand guys wanting to seem tough and trying to be the best, but if they fail to understand somebody crying over people losing their lives just because of the bigoted, unjustified beliefs of others, they should hang their heads in shame. I myself have read the diaries of Anne Frank and it was very upsetting, going into it from the start knowing what was going to happen and where it would all go, and how abruptly it finished with its writer having no way of knowing what was going to happen. A truly disturbing read, and there were so many others at that time who were even less fortunate. Absolutely nothing wrong with being emotionally upset by that. It's sad that idiots in high school would make it seem like there was something wrong with it, though. Yeah, because showing any compassion or consideration for others is beyond these boneheads' sphere of understanding, isn't it?

Best regards,
i_like_1981