The Student Room Group

Why is the term ''loser'' applied almost exclusively to men?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Original post by Riku
I see.
If being a house-husband (including nurturing the children) is an unattractive 'feminine' trait, then what are the thoughts on teaching? Plenty of male teachers, who are in a sense nurturing their class with knowledge and (in the case of younger pupils) protection. :s-smilie:

I'm only speculating, but I don't think wanting to nurture children is the part that makes it less attractive, I think it's women's want of a financially independent, driven man, and wanting to be a house-husband doesn't particularly communicate these things.
Reply 21
Original post by miser
I'm only speculating, but I don't think wanting to nurture children is the part that makes it less attractive, I think it's women's want of a financially independent, driven man, and wanting to be a house-husband doesn't particularly communicate these things.



Ok, so it's about independence and ambition, what anyone wants from an adult. Yeah I can buy that :smile:
Reply 22
Original post by jamieTT
Girls don't like dating ''losers'', right? The times I've heard I wouldn't date this guy or that guy because he lives with his parents, doesn't have his own house, doesn't own a car (this is especially big in the US), doesn't have a job or a good job and so on. I have rarely if ever heard a guy call a woman a loser for any reason (including the ones I just mentioned) or refuse to date for because of them. What's up with it?


My boyfriend ALWAYS calls me a loser.

I definitely wouldn't say its a male only thing.
Reply 23
Original post by redferry
My boyfriend ALWAYS calls me a loser.

I definitely wouldn't say its a male only thing.


He's already with you so it doesn't count. I'm talking about the undateable men women despise. Why does he call you a loser? It can't be in a serious manner. First the dating some hot horrible bitch , now this. Hmmm....
Reply 24
Original post by jamieTT
He's already with you so it doesn't count. I'm talking about the undateable men women despise. Why does he call you a loser? It can't be in a serious manner. First the dating some hot horrible bitch , now this. Hmmm....


No its not serious he just teases me because I always get excited/know random facts about animals.

Basically because I am a loser :tongue:

We have that kind of relationship (hurling insults in an affectionate manner)
Original post by jamieTT
They don't seem to want to give men the same choice though. Have cake and eat it.


I want my equal in a relationship. Nothing more and nothing less.
I'm a career woman myself. One of those women you don't really like. Someone with similar earning potential/ambition is fine - he doesnt need to be a millionaire or super rich.

The women who do want to be entirely supported belong to a very specific section of society which is shrinking.

I woudn't want to be with someone who was in a minimum wage job at my age. It's not being a loser, but its certainly unattractive.
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 26
Original post by redferry
No its not serious he just teases me because I always get excited/know random facts about animals.

Basically because I am a loser :tongue:

We have that kind of relationship (hurling insults in an affectionate manner)


Then it's unrelated to the thread. This is about most ''modern'' women wanting to choose their gender role while still demanding men to keep theirs. A lot like suffragettes and white feathers. Have cake, eat cake.
Original post by Riku
If we're going by very stereotypical and shallow traditional gender roles, a woman who's a loser would be either 'fat' or a 'slut'.

because
Men=what you do+how much you earn
Women=what you look like/how pretty you are+have you lost your virginity yet/how 'pure' are you

but personally I judge a woman based on what she can do same as a man because we're both adults with brains and we live in the 21st century not a cave.

If a person is a loser it's usually because they exhibit what I see as some sort of really revolting personality trait-leeching off everyone else, hypocrite, liar, (Imo would add misogynist, racist, homophobic, neo-Nazi, aware these are more contentious) I could go on.

JamieTT what are you trying to glean from these threads exactly?

edit: I've not once heard a man be called a 'loser' outside the context of 90s US soaps :tongue:


Your wrong mate , the label is typically applied to a man who fails to be succesful in life .

If a man plays video games all day , he's a loser.
If a man works in a minimum wage job he's a loser
If a man can't drive he's a loser
If a man lives with his mum he's a loser
If a man is fat he's a loser

etc etc

"You can do better " and such phrases are used by women when talking about losers , they are generally seen as lesser men.

It's because of patriarchy though
Original post by Eveiebaby
I want my equal in a relationship. Nothing more and nothing less.
I'm a career woman myself. One of those women you don't really like. Someone with similar earning potential/ambition is fine - he doesnt need to be a millionaire or super rich.

The women who do want to be entirely supported belong to a very specific section of society which is shrinking.

I woudn't want to be with someone who was in a minimum wage job at my age. It's not being a loser, but its certainly unattractive.


Even if he did everything to help his circumstances but just couldn't ascend in his job ?

How sad .
Original post by Jaegon Targaryen
Even if he did everything to help his circumstances but just couldn't ascend in his job ?

How sad .


I'm 28 - I don't have the luxury of waiting for 10 years to see if he can ascend in his job because of my fertility. I need to meet someone who is mentally and financially sorted. I'm not being a hypocrite - I earn a fairly healthy salary and just want someone who would be able to contribute equally.
Reply 30
Original post by Eveiebaby
I want my equal in a relationship. Nothing more and nothing less.
I'm a career woman myself. One of those women you don't really like. Someone with similar earning potential/ambition is fine - he doesnt need to be a millionaire or super rich.

The women who do want to be entirely supported belong to a very specific section of society which is shrinking.

I woudn't want to be with someone who was in a minimum wage job at my age. It's not being a loser, but its certainly unattractive.


Why is someone's salary or ''ambition'' important? Some of the greatest, most wonderful people I know are not financially/career driven, in fact most. A person's worth has nothing to do with their earning potential. Maybe men and women have a different view. Maybe that's why male doctors marry nurses and female doctors marry surgeons. When I got married my wife's income (zero) had no effect whatsoever on my decision.

Entering the female mind is like going into one of those caves in ''The Hobbit'' : very fascinating, but damn it's scary.
Reply 31
Original post by jamieTT
Then it's unrelated to the thread. This is about most ''modern'' women wanting to choose their gender role while still demanding men to keep theirs. A lot like suffragettes and white feathers. Have cake, eat cake.


I think its only horrible bitchy girls that use that term really.

Its not that common
Reply 32
Original post by skd1996
Why is the term ''slut'' applied almost exclusively to women?


I don't know , why?
Original post by jamieTT
Why is someone's salary or ''ambition'' important? Some of the greatest, most wonderful people I know are not financially/career driven, in fact most. A person's worth has nothing to do with their earning potential. Maybe men and women have a different view. Maybe that's why male doctors marry nurses and female doctors marry surgeons. When I got married my wife's income (zero) had no effect whatsoever on my decision.

Entering the female mind is like going into one of those caves in ''The Hobbit'' : very fascinating, but damn it's scary.


Because I want to bring up my children in a house in a safe area near a good school. On my own salary, I will not be able to afford this, but my salary x 2 will work fine. I don't expect a man to support me but I do want someone who can contribute.

Source: I am the daughter of a single parent who grew up in a council flat with next to nothing. Yes I made it ok, but I am an exception rather than the rule given my start in life.

I don't see how confusing that is. It's pure logic. I thought you guys were all about logic and common sense...
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by jamieTT
I don't know , why?


No soap, Radio!


Original post by skd1996
Why is the term ''slut'' applied almost exclusively to women?

For the same reasons that the term loser is almost exclusively applied to men - how society judges men and women differently.
Original post by Jaegon Targaryen

It's because of patriarchy though

No, it's because of biology.
Reply 36
Original post by redferry
I think its only horrible bitchy girls that use that term really.

Its not that common


Not the point. Most women still expect the man to make at least as much money as them and even have a certain status attached to it. Men don't. This is why male doctors marry nurses and pilots marry flight attendants, while the vast majority of women always want to marry up. And don't tell me it's men's fault because they'd feel emasculated, there would be millions of men signing up for the offer. It just wouldn't be the highly prized men they want. This is why there are no mail order grooms.
Original post by PythianLegume
"Because men are appressed by the wimminz" (Smith, 2014)

^See I have an up-to-date citation.

JamieTT's suspicions have been confirmed by expert academics.

/ThreadsmadebyjamieTT


:toofunny:
Reply 38
Original post by jamieTT
Not the point. Most women still expect the man to make at least as much money as them and even have a certain status attached to it. Men don't. This is why male doctors marry nurses and pilots marry flight attendants, while the vast majority of women always want to marry up. And don't tell me it's men's fault because they'd feel emasculated, there would be millions of men signing up for the offer. It just wouldn't be the highly prized men they want. This is why there are no mail order grooms.


Do they really though? Today? In the UK? Because that's not what my experiences suggest, at least among the university educated.

I mean look at how many women in your poll were happy to have a part time partner
Original post by jamieTT
Not the point. Most women still expect the man to make at least as much money as them and even have a certain status attached to it. Men don't. This is why male doctors marry nurses and pilots marry flight attendants, while the vast majority of women always want to marry up. And don't tell me it's men's fault because they'd feel emasculated, there would be millions of men signing up for the offer. It just wouldn't be the highly prized men they want. This is why there are no mail order grooms.

I don't give a monkey's about status btw......
I think you are hung up on a certain kind of woman and you seem to think that they make up more of the population than they actually do.

Also I would find it very unattractive that a woman was completely dependent (on a man or otherwise). I am bisexual so i'm trying to think of more than one scenario.

It suggests (to me) being feeble, weak and infantilised, when my ideal women are like warrior princesses and kick some serious ass :cool: :sexface:

Quick Reply

Latest