You are right and I am wrong, and therefore I should follow what you say without question. That is its "logic".Originally Posted by Carolus
You still think that this has nothing to do with "masculinity"?
You are right and I am wrong, and therefore I should follow what you say without question. That is its "logic".
You still think that this has nothing to do with "masculinity"?
There's nothing wrong with masculinity.
What do you do about violence and this apparent problem of "dominance"? Close your eyes and wish it away? That dominant violent disposition that you refer to is millions of years of evolution. The weak """nice""" males were killed or ignored by females. Is it because all women are evil, shallow, unfair bitches as a weak incel may believe? No, it comes down to the potential of a male to protect and provide for the woman as she is in her most vulnerable period (pregnancy) and care for the children after. A male that is easily intimidated or too weak to fend off predators will possibly cost the female and even her offspring's lives (which is more likely to happen since fertile females are a valuable resource and a strong male will likely claim her).
This is the way things have worked, a...(gasp)...patriarchy! Up until now where women are fooled into thinking they're strong and independent of men. Nature will rear its ugly head to these fools at certain points. A jar needs opened, a larger stronger man is threatening her, or the all too inconvenient pregnancy. Women are dependent on men because their role is to have children and care for them, men protect women and their children.
Women should be treated with respect and shouldn't be treated as they have been in the past. They should be free to pursue their dreams and potential, but it should always be secondary to motherhood. Just as a man shouldn't prance around and think of himself "good" and "moral" when he's too weak and incompetent to protect any of his loved ones. A man should be a fighter and when freaks come around and try to kill as many people as they can see, that man should be capable of explosive and effective violence to kill that freak as fast as possible. If the man is afraid of confrontation, that is his role to fill regardless, just as when a woman wants to shirk her role and flush all her babies down the drain. She must be a mother regardless of how she feels about it.
The social fabric of a society depends upon the sanctity of marriage and the bonds of family. When that degrades you have degeneration. We've seen the results of this "Me" culture, the family is nonexistent, and who suffers the most? The children, they are forgotten, abandoned. My generation, along with my parent's generation, has been left to rot and forgotten about. I live in a part of America that is nothing but decay and addiction. Our infrastructure is literally crumbling, I see it every day when I drive into work. Its a disgrace and it's all because we have no connection to our community, we take no ownership of it. Its all about "ME ME ME" "What I want", "What's in it for me?". When women and men can't fulfill their most basic social roles (mother and father) society will turn into a daycare of overgrown children crying because they cant get dessert for dinner.
There's nothing wrong with masculinity and thinking there is one means you're a part of the problem.
Except that it's the universal rights and laws that protect women from violence, and not the supposed "heroic" spouse of a marriage or whatever, which the feminists fought for as recently as in the 1970s and 1980s. Which is why a woman is still beaten by their own spouses every nine seconds in the US.
You seem to have a fairy-tale view of men and women, where all these good and heroic men on white horses bravely protect women. #NotAllMen, of course, but reality and history paints a different picture, where much of it has been that of violence, cruelty, hypocrisies and injustices. No wonder that women had been oppressed for thousands of years of our history.
You are the one in the fairy tale, who do you think enures that those wonderful "universal rights" are enforced and followed. Men who are able to apply force on those that can't comply, ie dominance, ie the very thing you're against.
Who else can stop those men from beating their wives? Not women.
Who can stop "oppressing" women? Only men, that's why women have been liberated at the behest of men by your own account of history.
All the rights women the have been afforded to them are given to them and enforced by men; feminism itself relies on the beneficence of the male gender to act in a certain moral way.
This is why I think the overall direction is a positive one because the enlightenment of consciousness regarding this issue has spread to both genders. We are more than just animals, which is the whole point here.
It's like you're un-ironically expressing patriarchal views and justifying subjugation of women.
It's this exact kind of idiotic obsession with needing men to come on top and dominate women that is the problem.
Did you grow up with brothers or sisters? Or are you an only child. I'm sensing you are an only child. Nothing wrong with that, just seems to lack some unconscious knowledge at the level of frame work. Goes without saying sort of dealio.
Yes, I thought I made that apparent that I have patriarchial views. It's not about a need for men to be on top, they just are in situations of force and dominance because it differs to their strengths. Women are authorites in elements of life and men are authorites in others. I'm not talking about intellectual fields or even professional ones, I'm talking about gender roles.
Women need a good man in their life that will give their children to be happy and fulfilled. That is politically incorrect but it's true just look at how those spinsters treat their pets like the children they never had.
I agree with this, but I was making a point about the need for a dominating masculine force to ensure ideology is being followed.
Well you're the exact kind of person that will start to abuse, threat, harass, assault, rape and even murder women, the moment they start acting independently on their own and deviating from your control. Because this is what it's about: it's about control of women. That is its logical premise.
You think that you ought to control women, and if you can't control them, then there's something wrong with the world.
Violence against women, or even violence in general, is about controlling the other person.
A woman who can taze you up the ass should be able to.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote