Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 160

Thread: Misandry

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,562
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Misandry

    Has anyone else here encountered at least one too many misandrists? Misandry makes me sick (and so does misogyny, but that gets talked about a lot more.) MRAs and cringy and should be shamed, but that's not what I'd like to talk about. I'm talking about what seems to be an entire "female culture" that thinks you should throw rocks at sensitive little boys who might not even know what being a boy or girl means, who think that, pardon my French, boys' shit stinks while theirs doesn't (I have literally heard this complaint and it was ridiculous,) who don't like it when people listen to music by male artists when there are female artists and ditto for painters, sculptors, novelists, poets, etc. and who also go off and hate tomboys, butch lesbians, and even girls cutting their nails short for being supposed traitors to their sex. Most of these people are either housewives who think their husbands are their slaves, or self-hating men who marry them, and they watch a ton of dumb talk shows and exactly what you'd expect. I've met at least one gay femme like this too though, and I'd imagine some lipstick lesbians but not generally butches are like this. Yes, misogyny is completely on-topic and I don't care if this thread becomes a misogyny thread for a while, but it's definitely not a case of men just oppressing women and then getting what they deserve from bored housewives as recompense. Discuss.

  2. #2
    ouronis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    TIM
    ref to ptr to self
    Posts
    2,941
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I mean, of course. But also, no.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,562
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ouronis View Post
    I mean, of course. But also, no.
    That is nowhere near as thorough as my post. I guess MRAs and radical feminists are ruining discussions on sexism for everyone by tainting the words misandry and misogyny.

  4. #4
    Haikus
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    2,598
    Mentioned
    103 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There are plentiful of garbage people in the world.

  5. #5
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We're conditioned to be pretty oblivious to misandry. I'm not sure if it's biological or cultural conditioning; perhaps a bit of both? I imagine our survival as a species probably depended on devaluing men to some degree in the past, and modern day forms of misandry are probably a holdover from that mode of thinking.

    The feminists might be right that there's plenty of misogyny coded into our thinking, our culture, etc, but there's definitely a lot of misandry as well, it just tends to be overlooked, unchecked, or tolerated a bit more, although I think that's slowly changing.

  6. #6
    C-ESI-Se 6w7 sx/sp ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,798
    Mentioned
    909 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    I used to distrust and generalize about men in conjunction with radical feminist beliefs.
    I don't see myself returning to that, but I find it kinda understandable with my Personal Experience, and statistics about violence, and it seems like a relatively innocent vice - at most, an obnoxious personality quirk - all things considered. My experience with misandry is different. They were mostly women who didn't strongly identify with gender and hated porn and macho shit.

    I will still react different with my body language and eye contact when I'm approached by a man versus a woman at the bus stop so maybe that makes me stil a misandrist instead of a normal person, or maybe it's just the fact that I'm willing to acknowledge it.

  7. #7
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha View Post
    I used to distrust and generalize about men in conjunction with radical feminist beliefs.
    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha View Post
    I don't see myself returning to that, but I find it kinda understandable with my Personal Experience, and statistics about violence, and it seems like a relatively innocent vice - at most, an obnoxious personality quirk - all things considered. My experience with misandry is different. They were mostly women who didn't strongly identify with gender and hated porn and macho shit.

    I will still react different with my body language and eye contact when I'm approached by a man versus a woman at the bus stop so maybe that makes me stil a misandrist instead of a normal person, or maybe it's just the fact that I'm willing to acknowledge it.
    I think that's really just common sense pragmatism to be a little more nervous around a strange man versus a strange woman. I wouldn't consider that misandry, just survival instincts. I get nervous on a dark city street if I see a male approaching from the opposite direction.

    The misandry I was thinking of is more in how we think of and portray men as stereotypical oafs and dumbshits who need "women's intuition" to see the wrong in their ways, or in the common understanding many have that men are undiscerning fuckbois who will gladly stick it in any warm, moist hole.
    Last edited by perpetuus; 07-23-2019 at 01:36 PM.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soulless ginger mutant View Post
    The misandry I was thinking of is more in how we portray men as stereotypical oafs and dumbshits who need "women's intuition" to see the wrong in their ways, or in the common understanding many have that men are undiscerning fuckbois who will gladly stick it in any warm, moist hole.
    Oh really, so that's what misandry was about. I thought it was just a ploy for the guys to turn around and say "See? Women rule over us, and we're actually the victims", while they exploit the living shit out of them.

  9. #9
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Oh really, so that's what misandry was about. I thought
    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    it was just a ploy for the guys to turn around and say "See? Women rule over us, and we're actually the victims", while they exploit the living shit out of them.


    no, you're repeating a strawman used to dismiss people expressing legitimate concerns like

    -dying earlier than women (on average)
    -being far more likely to die in any war or violent conflict
    -being more likely to be murdered if walking down a street in a bad neighborhood
    -being legally expected to sign up for selective service and subject to prosecution when avoiding selective service enrollment, when the other sex is free to choose whether they want to serve

    -being the last person allowed to board lifeboats
    -being more likely to be assumed an aggressor and rapist after a night of drunken regret sex.
    -being more likely to be assumed the instigator in relationships with mutual domestic violence; even sometimes being assumed by authorities to be the instigator when he is the one at the receiving end of domestic violence (you can thank the Duluth Model for this)
    -having little or no say in deciding to keep or abort a child, not even being allowed to opt out with a "financial abortion" should the mother want to keep a child.

    -comprising 93% of workplace fatalities
    -being more likely to end up homeless
    -receiving longer prison sentences for the same crimes (on average, and with no prior convictions); when on trial for cooperating with women in crime, being more likely to be assumed as and labeled the "ringleader" by prosecuting attorneys, even when evidence suggest equal complicity
    -being more routinely fucked over in family courts (where divorce lawyers often encourage wives to falsely accuse husbands of assault and rape to win the court's sympathies and thus more or full child custody and child support/alimony)
    -being more likely to be dismissed or laughed if a victim of rape, assault, or domestic violence
    -receiving no special grants or loans when attempting to start new businesses
    -being dismissed as patriarchal bigots anytime misandry, issues that affect both sexes at similar rates yet receive more attention for only one sex, or other concerns are brought up
    Last edited by perpetuus; 07-23-2019 at 01:21 PM.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soulless ginger mutant View Post
    no, you're repeating a strawman used to dismiss people expressing legitimate concerns like
    You just trivialized it yourself by saying that misandry is about men being portrayed as "dumb oafs" in the media.

    Also most of what you listed have little to do with misandry.

  11. #11
    C-ESI-Se 6w7 sx/sp ashlesha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    the center of the universe
    Posts
    15,798
    Mentioned
    909 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    I take it for granted now that "the things that nobody ever talks about" will be a major focus of discussion here, like on Facebook

  12. #12
    mindless Aeris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    nowhere important
    TIM
    heartless
    Posts
    481
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A lot of people treat biological sex as indicating something about people, assumptions, prejudices, but this happens with almost any observable caracteristics ime. Yeah, men get shit for being males, and women get shit for being females. Blonds get shit for being blonds, androgyne people get shit for looking androgyne... it's never ending.

  13. #13
    Alonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    SLE-C/H; E8 SX
    Posts
    874
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So many threads around here centered on false balances; it all reeks of unabated intellectual dishonesty. Just because one side (misogyny) [deservedly] gets more attention, does not mean that the opposing side (misandry) warrants the same scrutiny. This strikes me as petty, tit for tat diversion tactics. Misogyny has had a far greater objective-material-hardened impact (detrimentally so) on human society than anything misandry has wrought.

    Furthermore, oftentimes misandry is a byproduct of misogyny. I'm so tired of all of this patriarchal "pissing in the wind." Don't get mad when socio-culturally pervasive/entrenched notions of male masculinity centered on dominance, hyper-aggression, and a lack of empathy (vs. weak, docile, subservient narratives centered around femininity) come back to bite you in the ass. Within every (unjust and inefficient) system, there are glaring flaws waiting to be exploited. I can't get too riled up when the historically victimized find ways to gain leverage and add more balance to the scales, so to speak. Is it somewhat unfair? Sure, but a lot of shit is unfair. Either change the system (socially, culturally, politically, economically) so that is is equitable for all, or don't complain when the tables turn.

    Lastly, women are human beings, and so, obviously, among their number will always be those naturally predisposed or inclined to bigotry and prejudice. It's just that the overarching patriarchal system often prohibited them from directly voicing their biases. With greater equality and equity, they are finally getting the chance to voice what they really think/feel/believe. I'm not saying it's "right" necessarily, but if men are allowed to be prejudiced, then should't women be afforded that right as well, if "equal treatment" is the objective?

  14. #14
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alonzo View Post
    So many threads around here centered on false balances; it all reeks of unabated intellectual dishonesty. Just because one side (misogyny) [deservedly] gets more attention, does not mean that the opposing side (misandry) warrants the same scrutiny. This strikes me as petty, tit for tat diversion tactics. Misogyny has had a far greater objective-material-hardened impact (detrimentally so) on human society than anything misandry has wrought.

    Furthermore, oftentimes misandry is a byproduct of misogyny. I'm so tired of all of this patriarchal "pissing in the wind." Don't get mad when socio-culturally pervasive/entrenched notions of male masculinity centered on dominance, hyper-aggression, and a lack of empathy (vs. weak, docile, subservient narratives centered around femininity) come back to bite you in the ass. Within every (unjust and inefficient) system, there are glaring flaws waiting to be exploited. I can't get too riled up when the historically victimized find ways to gain leverage and add more balance to the scales, so to speak. Is it somewhat unfair? Sure, but a lot of shit is unfair. Either change the system (socially, culturally, politically, economically) so that is is equitable for all, or don't complain when the tables turn.

    Lastly, women are human beings, and so, obviously, among their number will always be those naturally predisposed or inclined to bigotry and prejudice. It's just that the overarching patriarchal system often prohibited them from directly voicing their biases. With greater equality and equity, they are finally getting the chance to voice what they really think/feel/believe. I'm not saying it's "right" necessarily, but if men are allowed to be prejudiced, then should't women be afforded that right as well, if "equal treatment" is the objective?
    Is this satire?

  15. #15
    Alonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    SLE-C/H; E8 SX
    Posts
    874
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soulless ginger mutant View Post
    Is this satire?
    To the stupid and dishonest, perhaps.

  16. #16
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by DarkAngelFireWolf69
    Posts
    4,671
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alonzo View Post
    So many threads around here centered on false balances; it all reeks of unabated intellectual dishonesty. Just because one side (misogyny) [deservedly] gets more attention, does not mean that the opposing side (misandry) warrants the same scrutiny. This strikes me as petty, tit for tat diversion tactics. Misogyny has had a far greater objective-material-hardened impact (detrimentally so) on human society than anything misandry has wrought.

    Furthermore, oftentimes misandry is a byproduct of misogyny. I'm so tired of all of this patriarchal "pissing in the wind." Don't get mad when socio-culturally pervasive/entrenched notions of male masculinity centered on dominance, hyper-aggression, and a lack of empathy (vs. weak, docile, subservient narratives centered around femininity) come back to bite you in the ass. Within every (unjust and inefficient) system, there are glaring flaws waiting to be exploited. I can't get too riled up when the historically victimized find ways to gain leverage and add more balance to the scales, so to speak. Is it somewhat unfair? Sure, but a lot of shit is unfair. Either change the system (socially, culturally, politically, economically) so that is is equitable for all, or don't complain when the tables turn.

    Lastly, women are human beings, and so, obviously, among their number will always be those naturally predisposed or inclined to bigotry and prejudice. It's just that the overarching patriarchal system often prohibited them from directly voicing their biases. With greater equality and equity, they are finally getting the chance to voice what they really think/feel/believe. I'm not saying it's "right" necessarily, but if men are allowed to be prejudiced, then should't women be afforded that right as well, if "equal treatment" is the objective?
    I mean if you know any men in your life who have been exploited and not afforded the emotional outlets and other support women in developed societies have for such exploitation, it would move you towards awareness that there is an issue there too, with the more fundamental issue being that humanity could use a little more empathy in general. Having more for one group does not take it away from another; it doesn’t work like that. How about that for a false balance? Rather, it adds to the habit of more compassion in general, benefitting everyone. You’re right that by weight misogyny deserves more attention though ... which is also why misandry getting some attention too won’t affect some kind of balance there.

  17. #17
    Alonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    TIM
    SLE-C/H; E8 SX
    Posts
    874
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    I mean if you know any men in your life who have been exploited and not afforded the emotional outlets and other support women in developed societies have for such exploitation, it would move you towards awareness that there is an issue there too, with the more fundamental issue being that humanity could use a little more empathy in general. Having more for one group does not take it away from another; it doesn’t work like that. How about that for a false balance? Rather, it adds to the habit of more compassion in general, benefitting everyone. You’re right that by weight misogyny deserves more attention though ... which is also why misandry getting some attention too won’t affect some kind of balance there.
    I'm inclined to agree with you, but I'm just highly skeptical that, especially around here, folks raise the issue of "missandry" from a place of having been on the end of intense bigotry and prejudice at the hands of women and/or that they are concerned citizens/advocates just trying to spread awareness about some open secret that demands a much needed spotlight. I don't believe this topic is broached from a place of good faith--it strikes me as whataboutism or bothsidesism, but I could be wrong, of course.

    Having said that, I personally know of several instances where young guys were pressured into sex acts that they regretted but were shamed into doing because "real men always want it" or men who have been unfairly destroyed in divorce/custody proceedings that tend to favor women. I don't think any of that is good/right/fair/OK; but aggro feminists going around gang raping defenseless nerds is not a thing; that's just not a reality, but the reverse is far more likely. I have never ever in my life worried about possible sexual assault. But that's a potentiality that any prudent woman must be aware of. The average male doesn't get the cumulative psychological toll that type of shit takes. Lastly, the same men who blindly uphold, enforce and weaponize patriarchy (via the entrenchment of stereotypical gender roles, hyper-masculinity and aggression) against others usually fail to see that they also fall victim to these same stifling, problematic metrics. Until there is full gender equality, it seems fitting (cosmic justice) that there should be exploitable holes in the system that allow women to gain some leverage and men to be hoist with their own petard.

  18. #18
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,922
    Mentioned
    220 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Overall, it is roughly equal between the genders give or take a few IMO. Objectively speaking, one of the genders are probably slightly better off. Also, men and women have distinct advantages and disadvantages that are very different, but in the 21st century it roughly cancels out.

    Women are treated poorly in several middle eastern and African countries. Also, there are a substantial amount of sex slaves that are mostly women that are living terrible lives. Effort needs to be put to helping women in these awful situations rather than worrying about minor differences in 1st world western nations.

    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  19. #19
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    Overall, it is roughly equal between the genders give or take a few IMO. Objectively speaking, one of the genders are probably slightly better off. Also, men and women have distinct advantages and disadvantages that are very different, but in the 21st century it roughly cancels out.

    Women are treated poorly in several middle eastern and African countries. Also, there are a substantial amount of sex slaves that are mostly women that are living terrible lives. Effort needs to be put to helping women in these awful situations rather than worrying about minor differences in 1st world western nations.

    We're all in this together. There was always a trade-off. One sex tended to sacrifice themselves for the other and the children, and generally they were granted more authority in the public sphere, as they tended to be the predominant risk takers in the public sphere (it's only fair that authority and responsibility go hand in hand). The other sex tended to sacrifice autonomy in the public sphere, as a tradeoff for more protection and security. To pretend one benefitted unequally at the expense of the other involves a willful ignorance of history and biology, as well as an overly simplistic and one-sided narrative, as both sexes faced and still do face their own unique hurdles, not to mention all of the tiny little micro hurdles individuals face in their lives that gender-based ideologies like masculinism and intersectional feminism often fail to consider. It wasn't an ideal situation for either sex, but it was the best we could do with the societal hardware we were running, which simply couldn't handle more advanced software at the time.

    We're at a point where it's very balanced in the first world, yet people have been so inundated with a pseudo-religious narrative that pits one gender against the other and uses gender-specific language to articulate all of the past and current evils of the world. So when people are that brainwashed by that narrative, it's very easy to dismiss any opposing viewpoint as "patriarchal pissing in the wind" or bigotry or whatever we're calling it these days.
    Last edited by perpetuus; 07-23-2019 at 05:51 PM.

  20. #20
    Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    4,922
    Mentioned
    220 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soulless ginger mutant View Post
    We're all in this together. There was always a trade-off. One sex tended to sacrifice themselves for the other and the children, and generally they were granted more authority in the public sphere, as they tended to be the predominant risk takers in the public sphere (it's only fair that authority and responsibility go hand in hand). The other sex tended to sacrifice autonomy in the public sphere, as a tradeoff for more protection and security. To pretend one benefitted unequally at the expense of the other involves a willful ignorance of history and biology, as well as an overly simplistic and one-sided narrative, as both sexes faced and still do face their own unique hurdles, not to mention all of the tiny little micro hurdles individuals face in their lives that gender-based ideologies like masculinism and intersectional feminism often fail to consider. It wasn't an ideal situation for either sex, but it was the best we could do with the societal hardware we were running, which simply couldn't handle more advanced software at the time.

    We're at a point where it's very balanced in the first world, yet people have been so inundated with a pseudo-religious narrative that pits one gender against the other and uses gender-specific language to articulate all of the past and current evils of the world. So when people are that brainwashed by that narrative, it's very easy to dismiss any opposing viewpoint as "patriarchal pissing in the wind" or bigotry or whatever we're calling it these days.
    The social narrative pushed on us by mass media via corporations and the education system via the government is merely a psy op that has successfully brainwashed the majority of the population. False dichotomies are artificially created to get the proles (~95% of the population) divided and fighting with each other.

    Religion (Christians vs. Muslims), Gender (Patriarchy/Males vs. Females), Class (Middle Class vs. Poor), Sexual Orientation (Cisgender/Straight vs. LGBTQ), Race (Majority whites vs. Minorities) Politics (Left vs. Right). While the real enemy of everyone mentioned above (the top ~0.1% or whatever it is) successfully carry out their plans and everyone else fights with each other.
    “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-9w1-4w5

  21. #21

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well actually, after reading things like Adam's posts, I'd have to say that from women's point of view, men really are clueless dumb oafs that constantly misread their intentions.

    For better or worse, "women's intuition" are a one notch above men's, and it is generally true that women tend to be more emotionally mature than men. So from women's POV, yes, men really do seem like dumb oafs.

    However I don't want to say that this means that men are victims or women are manipulating men.

  22. #22
    Shazaam's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lamp
    TIM
    AB-IEI-Ni
    Posts
    13,815
    Mentioned
    597 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well yeah I'm sure it exists, just like heterophobia probably exists but the thing is with discrimination against somebody it is more or less based on institutional abuse of a group of people not 'well, the opposing group can be hateful assholes too!' Ya know? Even if many times women (and gay men) were cruel bitches to poor widdle str8 male feelings (and I admit it, I can be an asshole sometimes OK? I'm sorry if I hurt anybody.) - we still clearly didn't and don't have the institutional/governmental power that white str8 men do. I'm speaking generally on a wider scale, of course there is still going to be women in high places of power and men in lower class blue collar jobs of course. But throughout history there is still no women president, women still got the right to vote way later, had less basic rights and economical opportunities... and then black people were once assholeishly thought of their votes only counting as 33% as good and things like that. All of this is institutional abuse and discrimination.

    I don't think PC programs that point this out though are all that helpful either, because its like corny and kind of heartless too in a way. But that's another topic...

    Cruel hateful women don't do anything to help the cause of course - but why should they make all women look bad. We are individuals.

    Now I think power itself corrupts anybody, so I don't think things like if we had a gay or female president, the world would somehow be some nice utopia or anything lol but it does expose the true nature of discrimination when things like this happen. You could perhaps argue there is some sort of biological or nature reason why we want some bossy asshole Te valuing (usually white) str8 man to tell us what to do and how to behave and what to think in life or whatever but yeah.. I hope you get my point.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,562
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BandD View Post
    Well yeah I'm sure it exists, just like heterophobia probably exists but the thing is with discrimination against somebody it is more or less based on institutional abuse of a group of people not 'well, the opposing group can be hateful assholes too!' Ya know? Even if many times women (and gay men) were cruel bitches to poor widdle str8 male feelings (and I admit it, I can be an asshole sometimes OK? I'm sorry if I hurt anybody.) - we still clearly didn't and don't have the institutional/governmental power that white str8 men do. I'm speaking generally on a wider scale, of course there is still going to be women in high places of power and men in lower class blue collar jobs of course. But throughout history there is still no women president, women still got the right to vote way later, had less basic rights and economical opportunities... and then black people were once assholeishly thought of their votes only counting as 33% as good and things like that. All of this is institutional abuse and discrimination.

    I don't think PC programs that point this out though are all that helpful either, because its like corny and kind of heartless too in a way. But that's another topic...

    Cruel hateful women don't do anything to help the cause of course - but why should they make all women look bad. We are individuals.

    Now I think power itself corrupts anybody, so I don't think things like if we had a gay or female president, the world would somehow be some nice utopia or anything lol but it does expose the true nature of discrimination when things like this happen. You could perhaps argue there is some sort of biological or nature reason why we want some bossy asshole Te valuing (usually white) str8 man to tell us what to do and how to behave and what to think in life or whatever but yeah.. I hope you get my point.
    BandD, that's like saying we're not going to prosecute murders because they're not genocides and exactly what I'm trying to critique. Even if there was just one murder in the world, it should be prosecuted, but as it happens there is a rather large number of murders.

  24. #24

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BandD View Post
    Now I think power itself corrupts anybody, so I don't think things like if we had a gay or female president, the world would somehow be some nice utopia or anything lol but it does expose the true nature of discrimination when things like this happen. You could perhaps argue there is some sort of biological or nature reason why we want some bossy asshole Te valuing (usually white) str8 man to tell us what to do and how to behave and what to think in life or whatever but yeah.. I hope you get my point.
    I think men tend toward more vertical, hierarchical relations, while women tend toward more horizontal, "egalitarian" relations. Of course there are individual differences and this doesn't necessarily have to do with males or females, but it might have something to do with testosterone and oxytocin.

    But both have their pros and cons. Pros are hierarchical structures create "chains of command" that get things done and create personal responsibility at the top, while horizontal structures create more peaceful cooperation. Cons are hierarchical structure creates corruption, arbitrariness and abuse of power, while horizontal structures create situations where everybody is equally responsible, and hence nobody is responsible for anything and issues get muddled and swept under the rug.

    The negative effects of hierarchical structure is artificially mitigated by things like the law and democracy (criticisms of authority). I'm not really sure how the negative effects of horizontal structures can be mitigated. Maybe someone will find a way that can combine both that can get the best of both worlds.

  25. #25
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by DarkAngelFireWolf69
    Posts
    4,671
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hating men is not productive towards feminist/equal-rights/liberal goals anyway

  26. #26
    Moderator slowerthan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    3,722
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes, usually from women who've had bad relationships with men and who blame everyone else but themselves for it, failing to realise that it's their own responsibility who they choose to enter a relationship with.

  27. #27
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by DarkAngelFireWolf69
    Posts
    4,671
    Mentioned
    333 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Alonzo Two very important men in my life were heavily sexually assaulted when they were young and powerless to fight back.

    The first was assaulted by a female family member. He ended up becoming an MRA. Very damaged to this day.

    The second was assaulted by a male stranger. He became a women’s rights activist and is doing comparatively well, but has still told only maybe one or two people after several decades of struggling and distorted relationships.

    So it does happen and the consequences are not great. And the more the negativity comes from women, the more it has a boomerang effect on women’s rights. IME.

  28. #28
    Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    On the endless seas of madness
    TIM
    We sail forevermore
    Posts
    2,292
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was gonna post this book-length edgy post on the topic that I saved in Notepad, but suffice to say, I've noticed too many women use the wrong, very superficial heuristics to judge what type of men in day-to-day professional interactions might actually pose a danger to them, and it's usually the lower-value or "crazy vibes" men that just look weird but otherwise don't have much potential to do damage that get the worst treatment from this. Like if a weak man goes to prison, he's gonna receive sexual violence just like women are afraid of receiving, and even if you're just walking through a bad area, there's always a risk of gangsters or drunks beating the crap out of you for fun or because they don't like your face. In my experience, there's a bit too great a tendency for women to misjudge or stigmatize the types of men who stand to do the least harm to them, and if I'm guessing correctly, it's because they're being mentally lazy and scrambling their heuristics for picking a desirable date, with their heuristics for which men are "safe" to even interact with. I'm not referring to in the dating pool either, I'm saying there are circumstances where the paranoid standoffishness a lot of women exhibit sort of becomes a career danger to a male coworker if he vibes a little funny. It's unfortunate that women are often more hesitant to relinquish their own privilege than men are.



    I suspect this "incel-hate" thing is tied to tradcon women posing as feminists not wanting to have to deal with a world where male disposability is gone, because they prefer being surrounded by chivalrous warriors than by dweebs, but this is just speculation. Yeah, sure, it's your responsibility if you're incapable of getting a date, but there's been a lot of fearmongering going around where "incel == domestic terrorist," and since no incel wants to be outed as a "terrorist," people will expect incels to lie and pose as voluntary celibates. Meaning, every male virgin is an incel, and so if you vibe of traits that might make you a virgin even if you aren't, if you just look a bit outwardly spergie, now people are gonna assume you're a dangerous psychopath who wants to destroy society, rather than just a typical dreg.

    With all the "women are more empathetic and cerebral" essentialism you'll see some feminists cite, you'd think more women would recognize the problems this creates and try to do something to slow down the slander, but those who want to keep benefiting from female fragility and male disposability would be okay with this. If true, it's an unfortunate situation.



    Endnote: anyone who read Elliot Rodger's edgy book would know that he hated sexuality until his roommates bullied him for being a virgin, then he went hellbent on getting laid to increase his social status. It was then that he started killing the women he felt had "denied" him that. If you're a person who wants sex or female company for its own sake, you're a lot less likely to direct your wrath on the object of your desire like he did, as his desires for sex were clearly extrinsic. It would be like if you're in a country that has no oil, so you invade another country to burn their oil instead of just taking it for yourself.

    I'm in no way arguing that female selectivity is too great in dating or whatever, I'm saying it's a mistake to equate male sexual frustration to the apocalypse.
    Please don't virgin-shame. And please don't endorse male disposability.

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,562
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    tradcon women posing as feminists not wanting to have to deal with a world where male disposability is gone
    This is basically the problem with ambition in the US, not feminist posers specifically but ideological posers in general. People mostly just end up impaling themselves on ideologies they don't believe though it can have negative effects on their environment in the meantime. One of my Russian Facebook friends didn't believe postmodernist posers were a thing but I suspect that's just because she was an actual instance of an ivory-tower academic rather than because that doesn't happen in Russia. Knowing how to turn people against themselves is a pretty good pragmatic use for philosophy in the right environment.

  30. #30
    Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    On the endless seas of madness
    TIM
    We sail forevermore
    Posts
    2,292
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    This is basically the problem with ambition in the US, not feminist posers specifically but ideological posers in general. People mostly just end up impaling themselves on ideologies they don't believe though it can have negative effects on their environment in the meantime. One of my Russian Facebook friends didn't believe postmodernist posers were a thing but I suspect that's just because she was an actual instance of an ivory-tower academic rather than because that doesn't happen in Russia. Knowing how to turn people against themselves is a pretty good pragmatic use for philosophy in the right environment.
    It's freaky that Russia's overtly decriminalized wifebeating. To the point where cops receiving calls from physically abused wives reply with "We'll come to take care of the body" or similar things.

    It actually scares the crap out of even ME that the vapid "SJW OWNED CRINGE COMPILATION" kiddie fandom actually praises Russian law enforcers for quelching the feminist protestors in their country, when in reality that group of feminists is just fighting for basic rights we take for granted here, not anything we'd consider revolutionary or even novel.

  31. #31

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soulless ginger mutant View Post
    There was always a trade-off. One sex tended to sacrifice themselves for the other and the children, and generally they were granted more authority in the public sphere, as they tended to be the predominant risk takers in the public sphere (it's only fair that authority and responsibility go hand in hand).
    Pretty sure it's the mothers that sacrifice themselves for others and the children.

    Both men and women can sacrifice themselves, of course, and that seems to be uniquely human for the most part. In general, men seem to sacrifice themselves in a more abstract way, while women tend to sacrifice themselves in a more "down-to-earth" way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    In my experience, there's a bit too great a tendency for women to misjudge or stigmatize the types of men who stand to do the least harm to them, and if I'm guessing correctly, it's because they're being mentally lazy and scrambling their heuristics for picking a desirable date, with their heuristics for which men are "safe" to even interact with. I'm not referring to in the dating pool either, I'm saying there are circumstances where the paranoid standoffishness a lot of women exhibit sort of becomes a career danger to a male coworker if he vibes a little funny. It's unfortunate that women are often more hesitant to relinquish their own privilege than men are.

    I suspect this "incel-hate" thing is tied to tradcon women posing as feminists not wanting to have to deal with a world where male disposability is gone, because they prefer being surrounded by chivalrous warriors than by dweebs, but this is just speculation. Yeah, sure, it's your responsibility if you're incapable of getting a date, but there's been a lot of fearmongering going around where "incel == domestic terrorist," and since no incel wants to be outed as a "terrorist," people will expect incels to lie and pose as voluntary celibates. Meaning, every male virgin is an incel, and so if you vibe of traits that might make you a virgin even if you aren't, if you just look a bit outwardly spergie, now people are gonna assume you're a dangerous psychopath who wants to destroy society, rather than just a typical dreg.

    With all the "women are more empathetic and cerebral" essentialism you'll see some feminists cite, you'd think more women would recognize the problems this creates and try to do something to slow down the slander, but those who want to keep benefiting from female fragility and male disposability would be okay with this. If true, it's an unfortunate situation.
    You're talking about the kind of people that literally want to rape and kill them, at least online. And then you go on about "Woah! You should try being nice to them. Have a little empathy". I think that's a tall order to make. They do have the right to be dismissive towards the "incels". It's only legitimate self-defense.

    Well look, consciously or unconsciously, women are expected more "empathy" and "understanding". This is a shitty manipulativeness, and unfortunately it tend to work. If men get mad, it is the women's fault, and if there are incels and MRAs killing women, then it is also women's fault. Total and utter bullshit.

  32. #32
    Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    On the endless seas of madness
    TIM
    We sail forevermore
    Posts
    2,292
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    You're talking about the kind of people that literally want to rape and kill them, at least online. And then you go on about "Woah! You should try being nice to them. Have a little empathy". I think that's a tall order to make. They do have the right to be dismissive towards the "incels". It's only legitimate self-defense.
    You're only describing the self-identified ones. "Involuntary celibacy" originally was a kind of unisex safehaven project for loveless individuals started by a bisexual woman, before the label got co-opted by edgelords.


    Here's the thing though. If you make a conscious choice to protect your celibacy, that makes you a voluntary celibate, or volcel. And if you want sex but have never been able to get it practically, that's an incel.

    But what if someone neither actively pursues sex and fails to get it, nor actively avoids it, but just by acting passively, doesn't happen to get it? Technically, his passive state of not having sexual activity is just a default, therefore it's not truly voluntary. Therefore, by the strictest definition, he is an "incel," even if he doesn't particularly mind his not-totally-voluntary state of not engaging in sexual activity.


    And in practice, to the wrong kind of people, it doesn't matter if you're not the type to make those edgy rants about wanting to harm women, they'll still call you "incel" as an invalidator even if you don't self-identify as one. Not only does it not matter to them whether or not you're virgin voluntarily, they don't care if you claim to be a virgin or not at all, if you possess the wrong traits in their eyes. If you don't want vulnerable people to self-identify with a terrible label, you forfeit the right to invalidate them with it, too.

    In practice, the umbrella of people who will be labeled "incel" exceeds the self-identified range that has the truly dangerous traits, and because of the terrorist hype that's been mongered about the label, many women are too terrified or alienated to actually see what's going on and speak out against it.
    It's a reprehensible alliance of male toxicity and female toxicity to cull out and quelch the weakest strata of males. It is punching down in the grossest sense, and yet mainstream media has the gall to defend it.

  33. #33

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    Endnote: anyone who read Elliot Rodger's edgy book would know that he hated sexuality until his roommates bullied him for being a virgin, then he went hellbent on getting laid to increase his social status.
    ...
    Please don't virgin-shame. And please don't endorse male disposability.
    Your argument is thinly-veiled as "let's not attack the weakest of males" in an appeal to "empathy" and "understanding" (especially that of maternal), but in reality it's "let's placate to the incels, lest they turn violent".

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    It was then that he started killing the women he felt had "denied" him that. If you're a person who wants sex or female company for its own sake, you're a lot less likely to direct your wrath on the object of your desire like he did, as his desires for sex were clearly extrinsic.
    That's a load of crap. Some males will attack and hate women that they claim to be sexually attracted to. That's what misogyny is.

    He didn't attack women just because he was a poor victim of society that virgin-shamed him. He attacked women because he was a narcissist and he felt entitled to having sex with whomever he wanted.

    The question is, why would you feel angry if a woman denies you? It's because you felt entitled.

  34. #34
    Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    On the endless seas of madness
    TIM
    We sail forevermore
    Posts
    2,292
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Your argument is thinly-veiled as "let's not attack the weakest of males" in an appeal to "empathy" and "understanding" (especially that of maternal), but in reality it's "let's placate to the incels, lest they turn violent".
    If you think toning down the egregious amounts of virgin-shaming society is guilty of is unreasonable, just because it would also serve as placation to a couple violent spergs who were probably insane to begin with, your faculties are too warped for this discussion.


    He didn't attack women just because he was a poor victim of society that virgin-shamed him. He attacked women because he was a narcissist and he felt entitled to having sex with whomever he wanted.
    Did you even read the manifesto he produced, or are you going to claim better knowledge of it than someone who did? I could open up a PDF of it right now and pull out a bunch of quotes that reinforce what I'm saying, but the book is taboo material that may or may not still be feasible to access, I'm on my flimsy phone keypad instead of a computer, and it's 1 AM, so it's not expedient at the moment.

    The question is, why would you feel angry if a woman denies you? It's because you felt entitled.
    No, he felt entitled to social acceptance. Which he was. As everyone is. His family and friends began to lose respect for him because he wasn't active enough in getting laid, and he came to truly believe no one would accept him until he completed that rite of passage. And the fact that something so delicate and chaotic as sexual action is seen as a rite of passage for men in the first place is why these situations are so precarious.
    His fixation wouldn't have been on the women he obviously had no skill in appealing to if not for externally imposed perceptions.

    People like you who treat the symptom of violence but not the cause are the reason there's ongoing strife in the world.
    The social malaise lies in the fact that male sexual aggression is still the script and the expectation, in a time when that behavior's increasingly obsolete. If you don't address the malaise itself, and just start killing or restricting people only when they start damaging your precious systems, the pressure that is still there will burst out at some other point, because you refused to do anything to relieve it.

  35. #35

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    If you think toning down the egregious amounts of virgin-shaming society is guilty of is unreasonable, just because it would also serve as placation to a couple violent spergs who were probably insane to begin with, your faculties are too warped for this discussion.
    Ah ok... so we should tone down the virgin-shaming that is not inherently violent, but we shouldn't bother with toning down misogynistic hate (which culture that Elliot Rodger was part of) that is actually promoting violence against women.

    And "virgin-shaming" is not actually misandry, but rather it's misogyny that treats women as prizes and says that the guy that doesn't get that "prize" is a loser.

    You know it's kinda funny, it's not as if virgin women are not made fun of, but it's not often that they're treated as "losers". What do you "win", if you get laid...?

  36. #36
    Grendel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    On the endless seas of madness
    TIM
    We sail forevermore
    Posts
    2,292
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Ah ok... so we should tone down the virgin-shaming that is not inherently violent, but we shouldn't bother with toning down misogynistic hate (which culture that Elliot Rodger was part of) that is actually promoting violence against women.
    If your tactic to curb the dangerous spergs is to amp up the blanket incel-shaming so that everyone who is able avoids anything encircling that label, people who don't think the same way but still show traits that make them a target for virgin-shaming will get caught in the crossfire. This group may become further radicalized this way than had the "incel" meme never caught on.

    I'm not arguing that violence is good. I'm arguing that shaming is always a bad tactic for curtailing it, because this tactic always tends towards strengthening the preexisting social norms, and the ones that exist on this issue are what caused the problem in the first place.


    And no, there will never be a wave of domestic terrorism great enough that it's worth starting another Red Scare over. The number of lives lost to nutters that fly off the handle is tiny compared to the number lost to mundane crap like heart disease and suicide. If it were someone close to me that were taken in one of these killings, I'd be dismayed, but I'd also be sad if they died in a car crash.
    The social damage and consequences to people's livelihood because of this hype is widespread. We may have had three or four big killings related to >tfwnogf men, but we've also had a killing by a mentally stunted schizo who wanted to die and become a ghost girl. Hell, so great is the paranoia that we've had an incident of an innocent man being framed for a shooting because he uploaded some quasi-incel content online.





    And "virgin-shaming" is not actually misandry, but rather it's misogyny that treats women as prizes and says that the guy that doesn't get that "prize" is a loser.
    Oooh wow, a nominal distinction. I guess I'm btfo now. Can't complain about something that might affect me because another group owns it!

    Is this how all you keyboard-enabled trilobites really think about social issues? As if social groups are always at such odds that their interests can absolutely never overlap, and they can never wish to solve the same problems?


    What do you "win", if you get laid...?
    Is strawmanning a reflex for you, or do you think you'll "win" something by making the right accusation? If you still think my answer to this retarded question isn't "nothing," you lack the reading comprehension for this conversation.



    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    yeah, but it's funny to see how the ones who want respect for the virgin guys are not granting the same basic respect for the girls who are sexually active.
    I don't have a great enough sample size of opinions to comment one way or another, but suffice to say, the ones who hold this double standard just aren't thinking about the issue critically enough. Usually the people who put the most pressure on males to be disposable soldiers and cumpumps are the same ones who pressure the females to be chaste and repressed.
    Last edited by Grendel; 07-24-2019 at 10:01 PM.

  37. #37
    perpetuus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    664
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
    No, he felt entitled to social acceptance. Which he was. As everyone is. His family and friends began to lose respect for him because he wasn't active enough in getting laid, and he came to truly believe no one would accept him until he completed that rite of passage. And the fact that something so delicate and chaotic as sexual action is seen as a rite of passage for men in the first place is why these situations are so precarious.
    His fixation wouldn't have been on the women he obviously had no skill in appealing to if not for externally imposed perceptions.

    People like you who treat the symptom of violence but not the cause are the reason there's ongoing strife in the world.
    The social malaise lies in the fact that male sexual aggression is still the script and the expectation, in a time when that behavior's increasingly obsolete. If you don't address the malaise itself, and just start killing or restricting people only when they start damaging your precious systems, the pressure that is still there will burst out at some other point, because you refused to do anything to relieve it.
    hell, I remember subtle shaming from my sister and mom when they would wonder aloud at family functions why I didn't have a steady girlfriend at one period in my life. It wasn't something I was particularly focused on attaining at the time, but suddenly I was wondering if something was wrong with me and I started to obsess over my lack of an SO. I remember another instance when a female friend of mine had called my house in tears when I wasn't home to answer the call, and she proceeded to cry to my sister because I simply didn't share her feelings (women get friendzoned too). I actually remember my sister scolding me and asking if I was gay due to my refusal to date someone I had no romantic interest in, and frankly just didn't find attractive to me in any sense that would warrant pursuing a relationship.

    I don't compare this in equivalence to what women have to go through in being shamed for failing to "find a man" or "settle down" before a certain age, but I do think our society shames males to some extent when they either refuse to seek monogamy or cannot get a date.

    Or, when we are dating but want to take our time or simply don't want to take it to the next level (i.e. engagement), males tend to be shamed as being "afraid of commitment." It's not the same as what women go through, just to clarify before @Singu or someone accuses me again of saying men have it worse (which I never once said in this thread, to be clear). This is one area where there's still a big double standard. We tend to encourage and applaud women for keeping their options open or taking it slowly, but scold men for doing the same. I'm not saying women shouldn't have the choices and understanding, just pointing out an obvious double standard.

    I get it, it's kind of trivial shit, and again, not saying ladies don't overall have it worse in the expectations placed upon them.

    An aside, it really sucks when you have to make that disclaimer in every goddamn post mentioning anything dudes experience, but it's always the case in these sort of discussions that even mentioning something males experience always seems to result in "but de wammens have it worse so shut up". Yeah no shit. Empathy doesn't need to be a zero-sum game, there's plenty to go around. Those "yeah, but.." responses get pretty old and generally derail these discussions and divert the focus.

    Divert to my nutsack.
    Last edited by perpetuus; 07-24-2019 at 05:07 PM.

  38. #38

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    1,024
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ''The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.''

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    4,562
    Mentioned
    91 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Not pressuring men to have sex is a good idea even if insane men are going to be insane anyways.

  40. #40
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,050
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    objectively, women have been tamed/shamed/attacked for millennia because of their "weakness"; it is cruel and not fair, especially if to do so are the "stronger" men. but in a proper balance of things it's the "stronger" party that gets what they can handle better. if you want power, brace yourself. and women have a millennial history of segregation to draw upon.. "because weakness is a great thing, and strength is nothing".

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •