So you see the goal of feminism as to support the rights women currently have?
Both are horrible human beings, and the fact that they've managed to attain power doesn't strike me as something that should be praised.Thanks to feminism we have a woman as Vice President and a woman running the House of Representatives.
Yeah, because I don't believe that complete equality is something that can ever be achieved in reality (what I mean by is that we strive towards a goal of equality, and not just be content once we have appeared to have achieved it).
I would say that the MRA's claims are less legitimate, because there is little to no systematic or structural misandry. I would also not agree with their worldview that feminists are misandrists.
There are some support groups and movements that promote healthy men's growth and lifestyles. But MGTOW/Red Pill aren't one of them. At best it's a destructive movement that's based on hate and supremacy. It's absurd to put them on the same level as overall feminism.
It's pretty obvious that virtually all modern societies are designed from the grounds up by men, for men. I'd suppose not necessarily because they're sexist, but because they were men and simply didn't know any better. If a bunch of women had gotten together and designed a society around women, then it would be pretty different than what we have now. Not more harmful or destructive, but different. Right now, it's simply easier for most men to live in it since it's designed around men. More women are now speaking up so that it's easier for women to live in it, too. Well that's democracy for you. You can't only be concerned with your OWN rights, because you also share the same space with other people.
Assuming overall sinister and pessimistic motives to women like what the MGTOW is doing, is obviously absurd, plain sexist and harmful. Neither with assuming that women can't do as well of a job as men can. Their obsession with being cheated on and somehow screwed over seems to show lack of overall trust in women, or even the legal system or the society at large.
This is a load of bullshit. There's little evidence of this- but a lot of evidence to the contrary. Most modern society is built for heterosexual female "Karens", by other straight blue collar males looking to get laid. At least in the USA. In other countries I'm sure they are a lot crueler and harsher to women.It's pretty obvious that virtually all modern societies are designed from the grounds up by men, for men.
School system is heavily biased to females. The education system is good for girls and young women but often fails boys and young men. Criminal justice system biased towards females. Workplace- obviously biased towards female's sensitivities. Too 'male like' behavior is an instant call to the HR department. Women are generally innocent until proven guilty (and even then you will have people saying they are innocent) Men- are generally guilty until proven innocent.
Women probably still earn less, which isn't fair- but then again, males are expected to spend all their money on their families and girlfriends anyway. "The man should pay for a date with his money!" is the common attitude.
Yet this post isn't to get down on women or say that men don't suck- because we clearly do. A lot of these privliges are precisely because women tend to be compassionate and sweet and it makes people want to build things for them and protect them. But to say society is anti-female instead of anti-male is laughable. Males are expendable. Females are not. (Objectively speaking)
#wow #woah
The most extreme opinions within MGTOW are also the most interesting, especially the advocacy for science fiction-y stuff like artificial incubators, intended to help achieve full emancipation from women, and which doesn't sit that well with traditional conservatives. In that way, they're like ISIS; a lot of their charm and charisma comes from the fact that everybody (across the political spectrum) really hates them.
I buy some of it - like that some women seek out Alpha males (not in the socionics sense) and only use sensitive men, but I don't know if I fully believe in their ideology. The problem is that I don't feel that all women are to blame. I feel it's only a certain minority that honestly come off as something like EIE to me. OTOH even certain men that I've typed as ILE bother me, and I wonder why they would act like a lunatic. (These are my feelings about Richard Feynman and my problems with the Feynman Lectures that I specified in another thread to xerx, not anyone on the forum.)
Last edited by jason_m; 06-12-2021 at 09:28 AM.
The Feynman Lectures are not Ti. When I first read them, I was struck by how completely different they were from all of my previous Ti Physics texts.
At first, to my Ti-adapted mind, they seemed to be a nearly incomprehensible mess. It was only on my third reading that I realized that they were brilliant. Deeply, profoundly brilliant.
It took that long to get the hell out of Ti-land.
Feynman stated flat out the conceptual problems that our descriptions of the real world have. These problems were never addressed in other physics texts. Those other texts basically said, "Here is the equation. You can use it to make calculations." Nothing at all about what that equation implies about the world or our perceptions of it.
I have heard time and time again that these are not for beginners and not easy. I just loved the man so much from his youtube presence, and then I got into his lectures and I learned that I am not good with them at all. Even when I started a thread about having problems with the movie Back to the Future, I lied. It was about him and his lectures.
Another guy traumatized by The Feynman Lectures here. I got swamped by all the words, I guess. But I haven't completely given up yet. I'll show those books who's the boss.
It took me about eight years to appreciate them. Don't take them as textbooks. You should learn the math and the equations from other books. The Feynman Lectures are less about logical procedures for solving problems and more about how to think about the problem. But in order to be able to productively think about the problem, you need to have already completely mastered the Ti equations. Otherwise, the Lectures don't make much sense.
1. Girl fucks alphafux chad in high school or college, lets him ejaculate into every orifice.
2. Girl gets abortion.
3. Girls is 28 and decides to settle down, picks a betabux provider.
4. Chads are slowly weeded out of the gene-pool via a disguised eugenics programme.
There. Liberalism fixes itself in the end.
I know that I said that I'll keep an eye on this shit, but I'm so done with it. The manosphere, in general, is just so depressing, and I feel bummed out reading these people's stories. I'm gonna "go my own way" and live a happy life (around girls).
Last edited by xerx; 06-15-2021 at 06:53 AM. Reason: ...
Feynman lectures belong to the Te brand of Captain Obvious.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
I've thought about it: has anyone heard of Linus Pauling and his set of notes? I think they were titled 'General Chemistry.' I understand chemistry very well, but I cannot understand that book. They remind me of Feynman's book. I also remember my local bookstore used to print a whole bunch of books under the title 'Dover' that were incredibly hard, maybe graduate level texts. Of course, General Chemistry was published under this title. There was not even a single Dover book that I was fluent in, and that's what I thought of before that I'm even forgetting now. Really: why didn't they just print the Feynman Lectures under the 'Dover' title and just be done with it? Anyone who has studied that series would understand, and most amateurs wouldn't even bother with it. That would have really solved the problem for me...
Here is the Dover version of Linus Pauling's book:
https://archive.org/details/generalchemistry00paul_0
The first few chapters couldn't get anymore into quantum mechanics, so I just returned it immediately...
Quantum Chemistry AFAIK builds on top of subset of quantum physics and takes few liberties. Like let's not care about nucleus etc. Computational chemistry is very much about electron densities and stuff (bond formation, strength etc).
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
I'm just waiting until they actually go their own way.
So, according to these data scientists, there has been a massive exodus from MRA and PUA communities towards Incel and MGTOW communities. With Incel and MGTOW communities being even more vitriolically misogynistic than the former, this trend is very likely detrimental to any notion of a more altruistic politics. Far more innocuous Internet communities lead down Alt-Right rabbit holes.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.07600
Last edited by xerx; 07-09-2021 at 03:04 AM. Reason: ............
We need to teach young boys better social skills, especially where it concerns the ability to discern body language, which may have to be taught in the same way that we teach a foreign language. A lack of progress in establishing relationships breeds a sense of futility, which in turn breeds resentment.
I don't know the extent to which this is already the case in modern schools, but boys need to participate in more joint activities with girls in order to gain better familiarity, as this is really the best way of developing the required communicative skills. The exact same principle applies to the relationship between majorities and minorities, as well as to the relationship between native-born populations and immigrants (inhabitants of cosmopolitan areas are much more accepting of immigrants, for obvious reasons).
Last edited by xerx; 07-09-2021 at 03:17 AM. Reason: ..
The thing about body language is that it's not that precise. There's cultural and personal things happening. You cannot base anything on mine, I have no idea of how I come off nor why.
Learning that people are people and that relationships require learning a person makes more sense to me than any sort of generic body language that may be misunderstood easily. I'd prefer direct questions rather than someone trying to guess I don't know what based on the position of my feet as I likely just stopped moving there and that's it.
We should also teach young women that just because they feel sexually aroused by a "Chad" or Alpha Male that doesn't mean a relationship is going to work out. And we should stop coddling their fantasies so much that it can. People shouldn't try to make women feel bad for their natural primal attractions- but we should stop coddling this delusion just to be PC or blue pill or something. Many women confuse lust feelings with feelings of love, but they're really just turned on. The female brain and how it integrates being turned on with 'being in love' so much is often the problem. It is the driving catalyst for what is making men going their own way in the first place - not a man's "social skills." Maybe we're both right, but it's just too easy and blue pill ish and dumb to condescend to the man and his 'social skills' and what he's doing - it's kind of bullshit to me, since females are naturally more social than males on a genetic level. So what you essentially are asking for is to feminize men and that won't really work. Even being gayer and more effeminate than most males- my own social skills are nowhere near the level of a Pure Str8 Female.™
If the man is actually supporting her, paying child support- and being a good dad- in addition to being the alpha male that she wants- there's nothing wrong. But feeling only primal lust and then making a relationship work out of that lust often never works out. It is working well for the women who it happened to work for, but many women are bitter, single and jaded because it hasn't worked for them.
A man having better social skills means nothing if it doesn't help him get laid. You can have 'the best social skills in the world' but if you lack an animalistic presence that women and gay men tend to want you're not going to get very far. A relationship requires a healthy balance between animalistic magnetic attraction and heartfelt love feelings.
The exotic is erotic. Doing this will just make the sexes hate each other even more I think. Often times the more we get to know each other the more we're repulsed and repelled by each other- not the other way around. The fact men and women heterosexually like each other- is often because there's some sort of 'mysterious ideal' thing going on there. Forcing them to interact too much would just make everybody homosexual or lesbian probably. Everybody would go their own way to complete gayness- and Earth would die out because there would be no more straight people left to make anybody.I don't know whether or not this is already the case in modern schools, but boys need to participate in more joint activities with girls in order to develop better familiarity.
A Beta Male that goes on a date with a woman hoping that the woman will feel primal lust for him even though he's Beta... He's counting on this 'mysterious ideal' aspect to give him a fighting chance at success even though he probably subconsciously knows the odds are against him. I respect what you say, but this is going to just make the problem worse.
And we should really use common redneck village sense if you want to help males. When homophobes juvenile-y do that thing with legos where they say two males won't go together cuz it would be clash-y- they're not completely wrong or anything. It's just overly simplistic and misguided. The logic of why this occurs is the same thing of why two bottoms or two tops don't work.
Maybe teach Beta Males that they probably are going to have to date and go after 'alpha females' or females who are kinda dykey and more manly themselves & really don't mind being strong to naturally complement their Beta Male boyishness. This is an exception to the rule however, because most females are passive and prefer being in the background and aren't tough or forward. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT- THAT'S JUST HOW WOMEN USUALLY ARE- IT'S OKAY THAT THE SEXES ARE DIFFERENT. The Hollywood Masculinization of Women is probably the most truly misogynistic thing on the planet when you think about it lol. It wants to turn all women into witty gay males or something instead of respecting that they are women and different.
Yet Beta Males often think they're not a man unless they get these IEI sub freak women who only will ever truly respond to a SLE Alpha Male that's really forward and not their dorky Beta Male ass. They should be encouraged to at least to date a woman with 4D Se- even then they need to make a lot of the first moves and have 'confidence' - and it's still not a guarantee or anything- but it's a much better chance then trying to appeal to an IEI female. I sometimes don't get why straight men are always so obsessed over the IEI female mystique anyway - but then I think how it's like the default cookie cutter 'Female' and it makes sense on a global scale ((like Adam Strange says nature always cares more about the well-being of a population rather than individuals or whatever)) - IEI females are probably like... 'The World's Mother' or something you know? There is a strong biological Freudian imperative to fuck the mother, make kids with her - and populate the world. Most IEI str8 females I know in real life are incredibly fertile so I think there's evidence of this.
I'm not asking for men to be "feminized" but for the sexes to have more contact. Boys need to learn to talk to girls somehow, and they're not getting that from video games. There are lots of below average-looking guys with girlfriends, and that's because social skills and charisma do matter.