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

Sigh. I'm guessing you didn't read the rest of the thread, I posted this on the first page:

"Girls get called bossy. Boys get called losers. Each are equally significant in reinforcing traditional gender roles and each are damaging."

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?

i did. and i said that girls get called names worse than that at an age in which bossy would hurt them the most... Hell, most girls i know where called bossy at least once in their lives and some of them have gone on to be decent 'team leaders'

Balls, my mistake, sorry dude, skim-read your post.

It's not that "bossy" is a bad insult or paricularly upsetting, its more about the implication that girls aren't meant to take control.

In virtually any scenario men are more predisposed to be leaders than women. This is something that is reinforced in childhood, and the men who can't be leaders are "losers" and the girls who want to be are "bossy". I'm not saying that they are the worst insults in the world; I'm saying that its exactly this kind of thing that reinforces gender roles, that reinforces the dreaded "patriarchy" and drives men to suicide and women to a lifetime of house-wivery.

You know what sometimes being called a loser is a good thing. Because sometimes instead of being called a loser people feed you bull**** sympathy when you **** up. And that's just as bad. Because you know you suck. You know you're a failure. But you're so pathetic people are nice to you just so you have some false assetts.

Incredibly harsh. I see the only loser as the person who fails to even try. Or the person who never gives, only takes.

Harsh? I'm talking about myself.

You're not a loser or pathetic at all. That would be depressingly self deprecating even by my standards.

Yeah the number of times I've heard women say to other women that 'they should marry up at least one rung up from their parents generation' lol, snooty or what!

Physical attraction can alleviate some of the shortcomings a man might have but even that tends to only go so far. You know the long tick box list women seem to have.

All seems a bit ridiculous to me, I mean since women have come into the labour force en mass and mass immigration from eastern Europe, good jobs are scarcer than ever. So why so many women expect men to be in the good jobs they are competing with them to get is pure lunacy. For sure, I'm guessing that women aren't expecting men to have real glamorous top tier jobs to date them, something towards middle management maybe, but even that is tough these days given the above, plus the recession.

What strikes me as most shocking is the number of women that still looking for 'mr right' with their long tick box even into there thirties when time is running out to have kids and their looks are really starting to fade. If they only realised that just getting with someone they would be happier and do better working together than holding onto all their expectations. A man can only be so many things. Can't imagine being alone and childless for a woman can be much joy for a woman in her forties, etc. but they seem oblivious to it.

Loser? Perhaps not. But my god I can be pathetic.

How?

Because typically, men are meant to strive for success and are meant to be ambitious. If women are, it's a pleasant exception.

I just can be. No offence but what does it matter?

What do the immigrants have to do with competition for good jobs? The vast, vast majority of immigrants work in unskilled jobs that would hardly impress anyone.