Support NeoGAF

[ivysaur12]

I think that the pill has a lot to do with it. It allows women to be "pumped and dumped" by men that will never, ever, stick around for anything more than sex. It is fine, but these same women can't complain about there not being any good men. The good men are right in front of them, but they have been led to believe that the good men are men that were out of their league in the first place.

Ahhhhhhhhhhh oh my god.

 

[ZaCH3000]

haha seriously follow this circular logic

Feminist are to somewhat to blame for certain male failures... for reinforcing indisputable statistics about the dramatic inequality of women and men in this country? Females/feminists are supposed to be concerned about ringing the alarm bell about these fucked up injustices and somehow tone down how vigilant they are at trying to change it because some men might not respond well to it? Only a man could truly believe that someone who has suffered endless generations of injustice must somehow mute/reduce their cries for change because it's hurting other men. Truly fucking outrageous.

Fuck right off with that shit. Those men DESERVE to fail then. I'd say the fact that there has been like 200,000 straight years of shriveled dick assholes using fear, power and pure bullshit to dominate the opposite sex means it's time for them to deal with facing down the harsh reality of the environment they've created for women.

Lol you are an idiot.

 

[GringoSuave89]

The "good men" argument reminds me of the indignation and shock that terrible audition contestants on American Idol express.

That's always how I've viewed it. "You mean even though I give you attention and affection, you still don't want to engage in a relationship that I want? Wtf"

I think that the pill has a lot to do with it. It allows women to be "pumped and dumped" by men that will never, ever, stick around for anything more than sex. It is fine, but these same women can't complain about there not being any good men. The good men are right in front of them, but they have been led to believe that the good men are men that were out of their league in the first place.

Oh my fucking God, you cannot be for real.

 

[RedShift]

I wrote it once already. When I went with my son to his first day at school, I saw tons of divorced single moms and the teachers were almost all exclusively women. We have a generation of young boys who are raised almost exclusively by women. Do you honestly think that it is a coincidence that boys are struggling in our education system while girls don't?

Ugh, possibly inadvertent Fight Club quotes. I do agree we need more male teachers, especially in a primary schools though.

Oh, they definitely recognize them, but as long as the top ten or so percent of men give them attention, they will ignore them and complain about these top men not staying in relationships with them.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

I think that the pill has a lot to do with it.

These threads never stop amazing me.

 

[Stinkles]

Lol you are an idiot.

Great comeback. I doubt Ami has the intellectual fortitude to respond. I bet he's at home licking his wounds.

 

[hidys]

Oh, they definitely recognize them, but as long as the top ten or so percent of men give them attention, they will ignore them and complain about these top men not staying in relationships with them.

I'm just gonna leave this here because you clearly don't understand what he means by "nice guy."

http://www.shakesville.com/2007/12/explainer-what-is-nice-guy.html

 

[MaschinenZimmer]

More women are more comfortable with being the breadwinner then men are with them being the bread winner so maybe don't blame women for like everything eh?

Yes, this is a good thing. No, I don't blame women for shit. My wife helped me when I was in serious trouble and stayed with me even in bad times. But I always assumed having lucked out just by seeing co-worker getting their life destroyed. I hate the fact that you are automatically in the MRA drawer the moment you dare to say that something ain't right with our system. Our divorce laws are based off a time when women didn't work and a divorce was equal to a death sentence. But those times are over. I mean, nobody can't deny the unfair treatment of men after divorce, right? Even the European Court of Justice acknowledged that a few years ago.

This is not a "but men have it bad too" post. It is a honest reaction I had when I read the article yesterday. Coming from a lower working class family, I always feel very angry when people starting to throw the higher education argument. It's simply not for everyone and the article was stating that those men that can't work their way up on the ladder are simply not worthy for the modern women. I mean, it's not clearly written down but it's the gist of the argument. And I'm not the only one thinking that way. Just check out the economist comment section.

 

[Amir0x]

AmirOx, you seem unnecessarily hostile and mean here!?

I think you should have sympathy for people who are ignorant. I know a lot of guys who are not bad people, but who really, really struggle with academia, and I have lil brother who is on ADHD because he can't adjust to school. They are all abysmal failures, and want to get degrees. They have a lot of advantages, but that doesn't make people exempt from not being able to make a good adjustment into a adulthood.

You're right that none of these things have anything to do with women, and boys own failings is there own fault, but making fun of them or calling them out "comically" doesn't help nobody. Boys and men are really losing in education and it sucks.

Lashing out at other people (like feminists), I think, is just a response, people who have bad lives often perform. They see other groups of people winning, and then they become the target of their frustration, because they can't be responsible for their own fuck ups.

Once again, my problem is merely with men who try to use females/feminists as an excuse for their failings.

Some people aren't good at school. Still others thrive in environments that are more hands on. Still some others have talents that school isn't necessary for at all. There is no problem with any of this. I love that human beings are so diverse that a person can be born to any one of hundreds of thousands of potential destinies.

My issue are the people who are trying to claim that the reason they don't want to go to college is because the environment is hostile to men because they're taken over by a gaggle of feminists/women or some shit.

First, it's a factually untrue statement in any event. But also... Sorry, men. Nope. Your ineptitude is your own fault. Stop trying to cast blame on a group of people who have been subjugated for your own insecurities for thousands of years.

There is a distinct difference between "I am dealing with the aftereffects of slavery" and "I am currently dealing with slavery." You seem to be suggesting that nothing has changed. Yes, there are still problems that need to be corrected. But, no, women are not subject to all of the same disadvantages that they once were. At least in Western countries.

Things have changed and nothing in my comment suggested otherwise; women nonetheless are still dealing with the residual effects of thousands of years of injustice and inequality continues to thrive. Nobody is saying that progress hasn't been made. If progress hadn't been made, women would still always be in the kitchen without a vote to their name.

But simply because progress has been made does not change the tragic reality of the continued inequality/injustice that exists today, nor does it change the indisputable fact that women who are alive - whether they overcome these issues or not - are still playing in a field that resonates negatively from thousands of years of painful injustice toward the group.

Women have nothing to do with male education or incarceration rates? What? Women still disproportionately do the majority of child rearing. They are also the majority of educators, especially in elementary. Of-fucking-course they have something to do with the outcomes of their male children and students.

I'm sorry, do you have some actual point to be made about how you think mothering is responsible for the incarceration rates and male education? What specifically are mothers doing wrong that leads to mass incarceration?

Women are not responsible for these failings of men as a group. Individual women just like individual men may make mistakes in the process that may impact individual men or women (protip: women are raised by women disproportionately too, so it still would not explain the difference in any event) but collectively as a group they do not. It would not explain male incarceration or education failings. So unless you can establish some correlation that is supported by any statistic or can propose some theory about what aspect of mothering has changed/failed men, it's simply pontificating on nonsense. It's a theory that is not remotely useful to discuss, because it's not supported by anything concrete. And frankly I'm not interested in your unsupported theories about why things are the way they are.

This is a topic about the problems unique to men and boys in education and subsequent employment. This isn't "but men too." This is a real problem that men face. It's not made up to "combat" the issues that women face. In fact, and as noted in the article, this problem of men is having effects on women too. So it's not just limited to being a male-only problem. Why are you being dismissive of it?

You miss the point. The conversation ended up where it did because certain posters were saying feminists/females have created a hostile environment in college, and that explains some of the failings of men or why some men have lost interest in attending college. Women and feminists are not at fault, period.

You then suggested that a "controversial" opinion you had would be that perhaps feminists are partially responsible for specific male failures, because of how they're framed in their role in society and for continually reinforcing it over and over. To which I said that's fucking nonsense, because you're essentially saying that an oppressed group needs to somehow reduce their cries for change because some men might take that weight on psychologically and fail.

Too bad for those fucking idiot men then that can't face the harsh reality of the environment their gender helped create for women.

 

[Amir0x]

Lol you are an idiot.

My gods, such an amazing argument. I don't know how I ever was misguided into believing the GREAT FEMINIST CONSPIRACY.

 

[Assanova]

I'm just gonna leave this here because you clearly don't understand what he means by "nice guy."

http://www.shakesville.com/2007/12/explainer-what-is-nice-guy.html

I find it interesting that some are assuming that I am the "nice guy". Anyone care to post a counter argument outside of a drive-by insult?

 

[ChouGoku]

Nice guy comments? Is this what goes on here? A girl doesnt like you, move on, take your L and keep moving

 

[The Technomancer]

I find it interesting that some are assuming that I am the "nice guy". Anyone care to post a counter argument outside of a drive-by insult?

It is fine, but these same women can't complain about there not being any good men. The good men are right in front of them, but they have been led to believe that the good men are men that were out of their league in the first place.

"Women can't see how good I would be for them even though I'm right in front of them"

 

[Amir0x]

"Women can't see how good I would be for them even though I'm right in front of them"

It's always depressing and amusing to me just how much dripping animosity these "nice guys" actually have toward women. It's genuinely pathetic.

 

[lazygecko]

The education system, especially the universities, are now a hostile place for men. It's been for a while which is why men are avoiding it and checking out. I know I wouldn't go now, though I'd just do everything as possible online.

It's long, but watch & listen to Christina Sommers @ Hillsdale College from a couple days ago.
Victims, Victims Everywhere: Trigger Warnings, Liberty, and the Academy

I am genuinely having a hard time listening to this thanks to the sound. It's like they went way overboard with the noise reduction/gate and it's actually cutting off words as it starts and stops.

 

[Amir0x]

I am genuinely having a hard time listening to this thanks to the sound. It's like they went way overboard with the noise reduction/gate and it's actually cutting off words as it starts and stops.

Don't worry the shitty sound is doing you a favor then. Listening to Christina Sommers for too long causes brain cells to start disintegrating.

 

[MaschinenZimmer]

Women are not responsible for these failings of men as a group. Individual women just like individual men may make mistakes in the process that may impact individual men or women (protip: women are raised by women disproportionately too, so it still would not explain the difference in any event) but collectively as a group they do not. It would not explain male incarceration or education failings. So unless you can establish some correlation that is supported by any statistic or can propose some theory about what aspect of mothering has changed/failed men, it's simply pontificating on nonsense. It's a theory that is not remotely useful to discuss, because it's not supported by anything concrete. And frankly I'm not interested in your unsupported theories about why things are the way they are.

There was a study being made here in Germany not long ago. They found out that female teachers tend to choose topics in dictation tests that were more suited for the female pupils. Then they did something revolutionary. They gave the female teachers dictation tests about stuff like soccer or stories about two boys getting into a fight with each other and other 'male' topics. And lo and behold, the boys got better grades than the girls.

 

[Amir0x]

There was a study being made here in Germany not long ago. They found out that female teachers tend to choose topics in dictation tests that were more suited for the female pupils. Then they did something revolutionary. They gave the female teachers dictation tests about stuff like soccer or stories about two boys getting into a fight with each other and other 'male' topics. And lo and behold, the boys got better grades than the girls.

So what theory are you proposing? That female teachers choose female-slanted topics and that's the problem? That's the mantle you'd like to place male incarceration and education failings on?

I'm just waiting to see how far we want to take this, given the reality of our male dominated society.

 

[Assanova]

"Women can't see how good I would be for them even though I'm right in front of them"

Yes, I know about those arguments. I am not as naive or as nice as some are assuming. I am stating what I see from an objective point of view. And again, so far, only drive-by insults and assumptions about who I am or what goes on in my personal life.

 

[Sai-kun]

what is objective about thinking that women are only having sex with a specific percentage of the male population

 

[The Technomancer]

Yes, I know about those arguments. I am not as naive or as nice as some are assuming. I am stating what I see from an objective point of view. And again, so far, only drive-by insults and assumptions about who I am or what goes on in my personal life.

But your point of view is subjective. And its hard to ascribe that particular subjective point of view to anything other than feeling like "one of the passed over men"

 

[CornBurrito]

I don't disagree that men send idiotic messages, however, I think it is a response to longer, well thought-out messages not getting a response at all.

What exactly is the problem with women not responding to male messages on online dating sites? In my mind calling it a problem suggests that it requires fixing, or that some fix is even available. But if someone isn't interested that isn't exactly fixable.

 

[Assanova]

....wow, not only do you sound JUST like twerpers (TRP) with their 20/80 conspiracy (20% of men are getting 80% of the sex of something), you also think it's WORSE.

@_@

Yeah, only 10% of the male population is getting sex with the ladies.

......

There are some really frightening ideas in here about school, but I suppose the ONE good thing about society's insistence a girl should "shut up and do what we tell you" is that we tend do better in an academic environment.

(Anecdotal story: I'm taking one online class right now, and our professor allows us to post/do assignments ahead of time in a public forum. For the one assignment due next week before class actually began, there have already been three submissions, and all three are chicks.)

(More anecdotes: I actually do know 6 people that dropped out of college. All of them were men. 3 were Asian men. One of them had to work too much and couldn't keep up with his demanding major [engineering]. But the rest simply played way too many videogames and skipped way too many classes, and a couple of them were in "soft" majors as well- sociology, psychology, etc. I mean, there was a point in my undergrad degree when I was actually really close to getting maybe dropped out for the same reason (didn't go to class at all and just played WoW all day, for two and a half semesters), but I got scared and actually quit gaming for a semester to get my grades back up.)

Of course I am generalizing about the 20%. This okcupid experiment might explain things better:

http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction-dating/cupid-on-trial-a-4-month-online-dating-experiment/

The bottom three men get almost no attention. There is another chart floating around somewhere that I can't find at the moment.

 

[Amir0x]

Yes, I know about those arguments. I am not as naive or as nice as some are assuming. I am stating what I see from an objective point of view. And again, so far, only drive-by insults and assumptions about who I am or what goes on in my personal life.

You said this:

I think that the pill has a lot to do with it. It allows women to be "pumped and dumped" by men that will never, ever, stick around for anything more than sex. It is fine, but these same women can't complain about there not being any good men. The good men are right in front of them, but they have been led to believe that the good men are men that were out of their league in the first place.

Frankly, you're lucky people are even responding to you this way. This is a grotesque, backwardass perspective on reality that paints you as a monster of a human being incapable of grasping even the most tenuous emotional and psychological reality of your female counterparts. It makes you seem a bitter man lashing out wildly to find any excuse for why you have been rejected/ignored in the past, embarrassingly thinking that somehow these women are turned off by "good men" and not just by sick dudes who believe they're entitled to some cooch because they wandered after some chick like a lost dog for a few years.

 

[Assanova]

What exactly is the problem with women not responding to male messages on online dating sites? In my mind calling it a problem suggests that it requires fixing, or that some fix is even available. But if someone isn't interested that isn't exactly fixable.

There is absolutely no problem with it at all. I am saying that you can't have your cake and eat it too. In other words, don't complain about the lack of men if you aren't going to bother responding to the majority of them.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Of course I am generalizing about the 20%. This okcupid experiment might explain things better:

http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction-dating/cupid-on-trial-a-4-month-online-dating-experiment/

The bottom three men get almost no attention. There is another chart floating around somewhere that I can't find at the moment.

Online dating is not a good indication of the population as a whole. If your argument is based on dating websites, it is faulty by default.

There is absolutely no problem with it at all. I am saying that you can't have your cake and eat it too. In other words, don't complain about the lack of men if you aren't going to bother responding to the majority of them.

Switch this around. How much messages do you think guys sent to women that are not that attractive. Hint: a whole damn lot less. It goes both ways. That's online dating.

 

[Condom]

Yes, I know about those arguments. I am not as naive or as nice as some are assuming. I am stating what I see from an objective point of view. And again, so far, only drive-by insults and assumptions about who I am or what goes on in my personal life.

There is no objectivity if you don't have the numbers to back it up. Online dating is one thing but what about offline dating?

Unless numbers appear describing what you are claiming here then this discussion is based on nothing but speculation.

Since we are in a thread that clearly focuses on objective/scientific arguments, then your point is nothing but futile really.

 

[MaschinenZimmer]

So what theory are you proposing? That female teachers choose female-slanted topics and that's the problem? That's the mantle you'd like to place male incarceration and education failings on?

I'm just waiting to see how far we want to take this, given the reality of our male dominated society.

No, I don't believe in conspiracy theories and I doubt those female teachers are doing it with the intend to harm our boys. The obvious solution to this problem is to bring more male teacher into the workforce, but that is easier said than done since it 'seems' that men have not much interest in this work.

There are interesting aspects that need to be tackled tho. For example we have a lot of Turkish emigrants here in Germany. The boys with their Turkish roots are struggling hard in our system, every German here can attest that. I think it is largely because those boys don't see much of great positive examples of men that made it here in Germany. For example: I would love to see the Crytek guys getting invitations to our schools to show how Germans with Turkish roots can live a successful life by not adapting some 'gangsta' attitude and throwing their lives away, but by believing in their abilities and concentrating on their positive male skills: like creation of new things and taking calculated risks.

 

[Assanova]

There is no objectivity if you don't have the numbers to back it up. Online dating is one thing but what about offline dating?

Unless numbers appear describing what you are claiming here then this discussion is based on nothing but speculation.

Since we are in a thread that clearly focuses on objective/scientific arguments, then your point is nothing but futile really.

I provided numbers. Online dating, but they are numbers. Anyone care to post numbers that run counter to what I posted, or are we going to continue to move the goal posts?

 

[Hollycat]

sounds true enough to me. My dad never finished tenth grade, and he sucks at technology (demands everyone do everything manually) and I'm pretty sure he doesn't know what feminism is.

 

[Assanova]

You said this:



Frankly, you're lucky people are even responding to you this way. This is a grotesque, backwardass perspective on reality that paints you as a monster of a human being incapable of grasping even the most tenuous emotional and psychological reality of your female counterparts. It makes you seem a bitter man lashing out wildly to find any excuse for why you have been rejected/ignored in the past, embarrassingly thinking that somehow these women are turned off by "good men" and not just by sick dudes who believe they're entitled to some cooch because they wandered after some chick like a lost dog for a few years.

Please don't come at me with this "but feelings" drivel. There is nothing insulting about what I said outside of maybe "pumped and dumped", and it does not make someone a monster. What do you prefer I say? Used for sex? Same difference.

 

[CornBurrito]

I provided numbers. Online dating, but they are numbers. Anyone care to post numbers that run counter to what I posted, or are we going to continue to move the goal posts?

How do we know a guy is a nice guy from your post about online dating. Women get more messages than they respond to. That is all you've shown thus far. How do you know the kind of guy the women do respond to?

 

[Amir0x]

Please don't come at me with this "but feelings" drivel. There is nothing insulting about what I said outside of maybe "pumped and dumped", and it does not make someone a monster. What do you prefer I say? Used for sex? Same difference.

The fact that you cannot understand just how bullshit and insulting what you said was and the implications it has for the person who said it says just about all anyone needs to know about how disconnected you are from reality.

You have draconian views of females and you do not even remotely comprehend the opposite sex. That's why you don't get laid by those girls, and that's why others don't get laid by them - not because they only want bad guys, and not because they ignore nice guys. It's because these people aren't actually nice at all, but are vile pieces of human shit incapable of comprehending that they're not entitled to anything and that human kindness does not mean you're owed anything from anyone.

 

[The Technomancer]

I provided numbers. Online dating, but they are numbers. Anyone care to post numbers that run counter to what I posted, or are we going to continue to move the goal posts?

Your numbers barely support your own argument. Clearly men are being selective as well, since three of the five women barely recieved any messages. What those numbers show is that, even online, men have to be more proactive, not that women are somehow unusually selective. The men were clearly being selective as well

 

[Assanova]

The fact that you cannot understand just how bullshit and insulting what you said was and the implications it has for the person who said it says just about all anyone needs to know about how disconnected you are from reality.

You have draconian views of females and you do not even remotely comprehend the opposite sex. That's why you don't get laid by those girls, and that's why others don't get laid by them - not because they only want bad guys, and not because they ignore nice guys. It's because these people aren't actually nice at all, but are vile pieces of human shit incapable of comprehending that they're not entitled to anything and that human kindness does not mean you're owed anything from anyone.

Eh, more assumptions about me and who I am. And I agree, that there are a large number of men that are sexual frustrated and bitter towards women. I, am not one of them, but continue to make your assumptions.

 

[Amir0x]

Eh, more assumptions about me and who I am. And I agree, that there are a large number of men that are sexual frustrated and bitter towards women. I, am not one of them, but continue to make your assumptions.

Then stop saying shit that suggests you are one of them. Nobody is going to invent a version of you that is not implied through your posts.

Maybe you want to reframe your grotesque statements about women and nice guys so that we can form a new opinion of your perspective and yourself?

 

[Assanova]

How do we know a guy is a nice guy from your post about online dating. Women get more messages than they respond to. That is all you've shown thus far. How do you know the kind of guy the women do respond to?

It looks to be based on physical attractiveness, which I mentioned in a previous post. My argument was never about nice guys or bad boys, but others have tried to turn it into that.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Eh, more assumptions about me and who I am. And I agree, that there are a large number of men that are sexual frustrated and bitter towards women. I, am not one of them, but continue to make your assumptions.

Kinda do seem like one, sorry to say it.

It looks to be based on physical attractiveness, which I mentioned in a previous post. My argument was never about nice guys or bad boys, but others have tried to turn it into that.

Which goes both ways. Of course the attractive men and women are getting more attention. That's nothing new or surprising.

 

[Chococat]

Women have nothing to do with male education or incarceration rates? What? Women still disproportionately do the majority of child rearing. They are also the majority of educators, especially in elementary. Of-fucking-course they have something to do with the outcomes of their male children and students.

And why is that women dominate education and child rearing? Because the majority of men choose not to participate in those roles- not because they are lacking. It is part of the existing patriarchal society mind set that that education and child-rearing is "women work". So women do the work they are that they do well, and are now blamed for the woes of men? Bullshit.

Men need to become part of the solution instead of just blaming women for participate in society. Does boys eduction need to be balance with girls? Absolutely. Do male parental right laws need to be strengthen? Yes. Those are laws. But what really needs to change is how men treat other men/boys.

Men who want to be educators should not be looked down upon by his peers or society (no more "those who can, DO; those who cannot ,TEACH") or as some pervert. Men need to be taught being smart is just as cool as being good at sports. And that there are many ways to be smart (the current model of only selective book smarts is detrimental to boys and girls- trades are good).

And men need to value children. For too many, they are just a obstacle to sex and a financial drain. There nothing wrong with not wanting to have kids or waiting to have them. But when children are so devalued by many men, young boys and girls internalize that message and bring the baggage into their relationships. (yes their are horrible women/mothers too, but I focusing on what guys can do themselves. Guys are not the single source of childhood woes)

 

[Assanova]

Your numbers barely support your own argument. Clearly men are being selective as well, since three of the five women barely recieved any messages. What those numbers show is that, even online, men have to be more proactive, not that women are somehow unusually selective. The men were clearly being selective as well

But support them, they do. I could go find another study, but that one was one of the first I remember that popped up. And yes, men are also selective, but not the the extent that women are, which was kind of my point.

 

[Amir0x]

My argument was never about nice guys or bad boys, but others have tried to turn it into that.

.

I think that the pill has a lot to do with it. It allows women to be "pumped and dumped" by men that will never, ever, stick around for anything more than sex. It is fine, but these same women can't complain about there not being any good men. The good men are right in front of them, but they have been led to believe that the good men are men that were out of their league in the first place.

In this comment, "good" is equivalent to "nice", and the statement is reinforcing the same bullshit narrative that the "nice guy" tries to push. Similarly draconian in their views of women, similarly entitled and the same precise implication: that these men are not actually good or nice at all, but exist in the orbit of these women purely as a way to eventually fuck them.

 

[Sai-kun]

It looks to be based on physical attractiveness, which I mentioned in a previous post. My argument was never about nice guys or bad boys, but others have tried to turn it into that.

huh???

I think that the pill has a lot to do with it. It allows women to be "pumped and dumped" by men that will never, ever, stick around for anything more than sex. It is fine, but these same women can't complain about there not being any good men. The good men are right in front of them, but they have been led to believe that the good men are men that were out of their league in the first place.

 

[Assanova]

Kinda do seem like one, sorry to say it.


Which goes both ways. Of course the attractive men and women are getting more attention. That's nothing new or surprising.

Some took what is essentially one post, maybe one sentence in a post, and caught feelings over it. It's not my fault that some put on blinders and went on a witch hunt based on one sentence, that really isn't all that offensive, IMO. It's not like I referred to women as whores, sluts, or bitches. I simply stated that they are used for nothing more than sex by the most attractive men.

 

[Zornack]

But also... Sorry, men. Nope. Your ineptitude is your own fault. Stop trying to cast blame on a group of people who have been subjugated for your own insecurities for thousands of years.

This simply isn't the case. More and more data and research is pointing towards early childhood education being biased towards girls, especially among minorities, a bias which has long lasting socioeconomic effects.

 

[CornBurrito]

Some took what is essentially one post, maybe one sentence in a post, and caught feelings over it. It's not my fault that some put on blinders and went on a witch hunt based on one sentence, that really isn't all that offensive, IMO. It's not like I referred to women as whores, sluts, or bitches. I simply stated that they are used for nothing more than sex by the most attractive men.

Is there a correlation between being attractive and not being a good person?

 

[Amir0x]

Some took what is essentially one post, maybe one sentence in a post, and caught feelings over it. It's not my fault that some put on blinders and went on a witch hunt based on one sentence, that really isn't all that offensive, IMO. It's not like I referred to women as whores, sluts, or bitches. I simply stated that they are used for nothing more than sex by the most attractive men.

Look at this deflection. First you said everybody else made it about nice guys and bad boys, when there is indisputable evidence that you mentioned it and started pushing the same garbage philosophy as the abhorrent "nice guys."

Now you're trying to say it was only one sentence at best, and it wasn't that bad because you didn't call them sluts or whores (no, you only implied that taking the pill was a problem because it allows for more sexual promiscuity with men who only want to fuck them. Jesus. Christ.)

And you're NOT one of these so-called "nice guys"? You're doing a wonderful job convincing us, that's for sure.

 

[cyclonekruse]

Things have changed and nothing in my comment suggested otherwise; women nonetheless are still dealing with the residual effects of thousands of years of injustice and inequality continues to thrive. Nobody is saying that progress hasn't been made. If progress hadn't been made, women would still always be in the kitchen without a vote to their name.

But simply because progress has been made does not change the tragic reality of the continued inequality/injustice that exists today, nor does it change the indisputable fact that women who are alive - whether they overcome these issues or not - are still playing in a field that resonates negatively from thousands of years of painful injustice toward the group.

Your original statement was about "someone who has suffered endless generations of injustice." That is different than what you are saying now which is more akin to "someone who has suffered from endless generations of injustice toward woman." Which I do not find as problematic a statement. I want to make sure you differentiate between what has happened and what is currently happening. The men today are not to blame for the injustices of generations past.

I'm sorry, do you have some actual point to be made about how you think mothering is responsible for the incarceration rates and male education? What specifically are mothers doing wrong that leads to mass incarceration?

Women are not responsible for these failings of men as a group.

Given what I've read of your statements in the past, I know you're not really this obtuse but that it's just because I disagree with you that you're asking these questions that have nothing to do with what I said.

What I've consistently said in this topic is that the way that men are brought up in society has a lot to do with their actions later. And I've noted that women are generally the caretakers of our children, even today. Now, that doesn't mean I'm blaming women for boys' ills. But I am saying that women are not blameless. That it's not just up to men to fix this. We need to adjust everyone's expectations of men. I don't see why that's controversial to you.

Individual women just like individual men may make mistakes in the process that may impact individual men or women (protip: women are raised by women disproportionately too, so it still would not explain the difference in any event) but collectively as a group they do not.

That presupposes that boys and girls are raised the same way or treated the same by mothers and teachers (and, yes, fathers too). That's demonstrably not the case. We give boys and girls different clothes and toys. We engage in physical contact differently. We talk to girl babies differently than boy babies (or young children). We clearly raise the genders differently.

You then suggested that a "controversial" opinion you had would be that perhaps feminists are partially responsible for specific male failures, because of how they're framed in their role in society and for continually reinforcing it over and over. To which I said that's fucking nonsense, because you're essentially saying that an oppressed group needs to somehow reduce their cries for change because some men might take that weight on psychologically and fail.

First off, don't confuse "feminists" and "women." Feminists can be men, who are not an oppressed group.

But more to the point, any group that advocates equality should be troubled if (and I admit it's a big if) their ideologies are causing (or reinforcing) the inequality they are fighting. Perhaps a smaller focus on "patriarchy" and implicitly blaming males and more on "kyriarchy" and simply blaming those in power.

Too bad for those fucking idiot men then that can't face the harsh reality of the environment their gender helped create for women.

Again, I don't see why you're blaming men today for the environment in which they were raised. They had control over neither past atrocities nor their own upbringing. They are merely products of them. You seem to be ascribing more agency to men then women. Bear in mind that a lot of these men are low-class and/or minorities. They don't actually have a lot of power and are a victim of the system. Just like women.

 

[The Technomancer]

But support them, they do. I could go find another study, but that one was one of the first I remember that popped up. And yes, men are also selective, but not the the extent that women are, which was kind of my point.

I really don't think they support your point

So when a women messaged a man, the distribution across those five men was 70%, 22%, 4%, 2%, 0%
When a man messaged a woman the distribution was 48%, 38%, 7%, 4%, 1%
If these numbers can be used for any kind of comparative analysis (which is dubious considering the sample size) they would indicate that men and women are roughly equally likely to direct their attentions towards "attractive" profiles and ignore "unattractive ones", the only difference is in which group is more likely to make contact in the first place

 

[Assanova]

.



In this comment, "good" is equivalent to "nice", and the statement is reinforcing the same bullshit narrative that the "nice guy" tries to push. Similarly draconian in their views of women, similarly entitled and the same precise implication: that these men are not actually good or nice at all, but exist in the orbit of these women purely as a way to eventually fuck them.

And if you read my previous comments, then you would clearly see that I am referring to women going after men out of their league when it comes to physical attractiveness. If there is a misunderstanding as to what my comments are the equivalent to, then you could always ask me to clarify, or you know, not put on blinders and bother to read my other posts. And no man is entitled to anything, ever.

 

[kirblar]

And why is that women dominate education and child rearing? Because the majority of men choose not to participate in those roles- not because they are lacking. It is part of the existing patriarchal society mind set that that education and child-rearing is "women work". So women do the work they are that they do well, and are now blamed for the woes of men? Bullshit.

Men need to become part of the solution instead of just blaming women for participate in society. Does boys eduction need to be balance with girls? Absolutely. Do male parental right laws need to be strengthen? Yes. Those are laws. But what really needs to change is how men treat other men/boys.

Men who want to be educators should not be looked down upon by his peers or society (no more "those who can, DO; those who cannot ,TEACH") or as some pervert. Men need to be taught being smart is just as cool as being good at sports. And that there are many ways to be smart (the current model of only selective book smarts is detrimental to boys and girls- trades are good).

And men need to value children. For too many, they are just a obstacle to sex and a financial drain. There nothing wrong with not wanting to have kids or waiting to have them. But when children are so devalued by many men, young boys and girls internalize that message and bring the baggage into their relationships. (yes their are horrible women/mothers too, but I focusing on what guys can do themselves. Guys are not the single source of childhood woes)

To get men into these positions, eliminating the predator stereotype people have when seeing men with children is a pretty necessary thing.