MGTOWrama : A FEMINIZM CONSEQUENCE
Options
Comments
-
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »lol silly girl as a general rule men don't date down we ? down No man really wants an emotionally unstable woman but we will have sex with one.
Younger women generally look better that's why many men prefer them...... also no man wants an old haggard ? with a 100000 miles on her ? .
Lol
Boy bye
See it every day
Looks are important yes
But there are a lot of men who like having the advantage when dating -whether it be financial, personality-based, or looks-wise
Rather then date the young girl with looks and drive they go after the young irresponsible girl with looks who needs saving... Who will put up with ? when her light bill needs to be paid
I know men who have a lot to offer a woman but prefer not to date 10s because they are "trouble"...aka they are intimidated by her looks... scared they can't keep her attention when they know other ? are going to be getting at her
Theres the rkellys of the world who like young women not because of their looks but because they are easier to control
Or they prey on the women who are insecure or traditionally unattractive because they are "more grateful" , "less work"
Yall not just these simple creatures yall like to pretend to be
And its not always about control ...men in general like to feel needed
First of all r.kelly really wants girls not legal age women so leave him out of this
Those men you know that are intimidated by 'LOOKS" really just don't want to deal with all the possible personality flaws usually come with 10"S and has nothing to do with them wanting to be with a girl who need saving. if those men can find a young woman that is a 10 and doesn't have those flaws they will 90% of the time prefer her over an older woman that has hit the wall.
The only men who want women who need saving are " captain save a hoes" and other men despise these kinds of men because they are insecure weaklings
You and your girlfriends are probably guilty of doing what you accuse men of doing, you go after these weak insecure ? of all stripes because you know that NO stable and mentally secure man will put up with your liberated woman feminist ?
women are guilty of there own ?
but there are lot of "captain save a hoes" out here
sometimes its just about the circles they run in and proximity...maybe its even just chemistry
but let's not act like the appeals of dating dating down goes beyond looks for a lot of men
my overall point being men, like women, struggle with insecurity, can be manipulative, can be exploitative, are self sabotaging, etc
*shrugs*
MEN don't date down we don't conceive of it that way. YOU are filtering your perspective through a female lens and apply the "up" or "down" hypergamous females instincts to male dating.
WHEN seriously looking for a mate no man looks around and says " let me find the most ? up woman I can find so that I can control her" Why??? BECAUSE no matter the who is chosen MEN expect to be the heads of their households and leaders. SO my girlfriend could have a million and one degrees or she could be a check cashing girls it would make no difference to how I expect to be treated.
-
Getting your assets stripped from divorce remind me of a Big Boi verse from Wheels Of Steel "It take a ? nine months to make it but it only take 30 minutes for someone to take it"
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »There's an important difference. Females dont study men. They look at men and impose narratives. They project these false narratives and turn them into "generalizations" but it's more or less sweeping accusations.
Men have studied women in accordance to biology psychology history in accordance to modern civilization to extrapolate data and information. To essentially understand the nature of females to draw reason for seemingly unreasonable action.
Not the same.
Can you prove the bold?
Answered in the body
lol No it wasn't. You seem to have a poor understanding of what proof is. You stating what you think women do is not proof that women don't have any formal studies of men. If I had to guess, I'd say you're probably closer to right than wrong, but you didn't provide proof.
Ironically, your "proof" seems to be the same thing you're accusing women of doing.
No it's not.
For comparison
Feminist theories
Patriarchy: debunked
universal oppression of women: debunked
? culture: debunked
Wage gap: debunked
These are the four cornerstones of feminist theory which were posited as immutable fact that is the foundation for numerous policies and legislation. Later to be found out as being at best rife with confirmation bias, at worst malicious sex based crusade.
Meanwhile the cornerstones of mgtow philosophy as aforementioned in my last post have been proven. Have not been debunked and are in fact the very tools used to deconstruct feminism.
I'm confused. He asked you to prove that women haven't studied men. While I'd agree that a lot of holes have been shot in feminist theories (though saying all of them has been debunked is a stretch. The fact that historically the U.S. and other countries have been patriarchies is indisputable), that doesn't mean that female scholars haven't studied men. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the best female scholars don't actually consider themselves feminists given the problems with feminism.
And the MGTOW philosophy does not prove the huge generalizations made by many that hold it. The leaps that some of those MGTOW dudes make with their assaults on women aren't that much better than the dumb ? the extreme feminists say. In some ways they are like opposite ends of the spectrum. Hell, I believe @LEMZIMUS_RAMSEY even admitted that the MGTOW ? is basically a byproduct of ? feminist practices. -
? just won't stop with this false equivalence
-
-
? just won't stop with this false equivalence
No one is making an equivalence. I didn't say MGTOW and Feminism is the same thing. I'm pointing out that there are problems with some of the arguments made and tactics used by those who subscribe to MGTOW, and many of those bad arguments and tactics are also used by feminists.
Case in point, 39 seconds into that video, the speaker already pulls some ? . He falsely characterizes feminism as being about female supremacy and uses that as the foundation for differentiating MGTOW from it. That's a straw man. Even as a critic of feminsim, I would not describe it as being about female supremacy. While some extreme feminists probably believe women are superior, that doesn't mean the greater movement is defined by that belief. So the guy is spitting some truth, but that truth is undermined by his mischaracterization of the other side. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »? just won't stop with this false equivalence
No one is making an equivalence. I didn't say MGTOW and Feminism is the same thing. I'm pointing out that there are problems with some of the arguments made and tactics used by those who subscribe to MGTOW, and many of those bad arguments and tactics are also used by feminists.
Case in point, 39 seconds into that video, the speaker already pulls some ? . He falsely characterizes feminism as being about female supremacy and uses that as the foundation for differentiating MGTOW from it. That's a straw man. Even as a critic of feminsim, I would not describe it as being about female supremacy. While some extreme feminists probably believe women are superior, that doesn't mean the greater movement is defined by that belief. So the guy is spitting some truth, but that truth is undermined by his mischaracterization of the other side.
oh good lord that's what you get from that video?? You did not pay attention. he did not say feminism is female supremacy. He said that one of the criticism of feminism is that it's a female supremacist movement and that these same critics say mgtow is about male supremacy,
right after that he says now that's not true -
Now he does not say in that video that feminism is about female supremacy but in effect it really is
-
39 pages? Bruh...
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »There's an important difference. Females dont study men. They look at men and impose narratives. They project these false narratives and turn them into "generalizations" but it's more or less sweeping accusations.
Men have studied women in accordance to biology psychology history in accordance to modern civilization to extrapolate data and information. To essentially understand the nature of females to draw reason for seemingly unreasonable action.
Not the same.
Can you prove the bold?
Answered in the body
lol No it wasn't. You seem to have a poor understanding of what proof is. You stating what you think women do is not proof that women don't have any formal studies of men. If I had to guess, I'd say you're probably closer to right than wrong, but you didn't provide proof.
Ironically, your "proof" seems to be the same thing you're accusing women of doing.
No it's not.
For comparison
Feminist theories
Patriarchy: debunked
universal oppression of women: debunked
? culture: debunked
Wage gap: debunked
These are the four cornerstones of feminist theory which were posited as immutable fact that is the foundation for numerous policies and legislation. Later to be found out as being at best rife with confirmation bias, at worst malicious sex based crusade.
Meanwhile the cornerstones of mgtow philosophy as aforementioned in my last post have been proven. Have not been debunked and are in fact the very tools used to deconstruct feminism.
The only thing in question is the issue of the wage gap...which differs when you break down the numbers for specifics within the study...ironically the same thing you're saying Monk is wrong for doing with divorce stats...but the other things you claim are debunked aren't hard to take note of. Men still by and large run society. There's no real question about that. Just look at the people who make major decisions around the globe. Majority are men. We have and do live in a society that has typically made either light of sexual assault/? or flat out making it hard to prove without in some way blaming the victim as well. See no further than judges who have said in court what ? victims should have done to prevent a ? or people who will go as far as to blame children for their own molestation...and you're blatantly ignoring history if you say women haven't been placed lower on the totem pole than men. Just look at the ways in which the role of what a women should or shouldn't be has often not been defined by women themselves until very recently thus causing the current shift we see today with women speaking up about the issues they do. The things you're saying are debunked have been studied for decades now. If you choose to ignore them that's on you but you're being intellectually dishonest to say they've been flat out debunked
You really believe America has a ? culture and that women are universally oppressed??? can you look yourself in the mirror each has and actually affirm that you believe this
Yeah..it's not hard to prove -
Where in the hell do yall come up with this idea that ? is considered ok? I seriously don't get that ? . In a society where sexual allegations are propping up on a daily basis and the accused men are pretty much immediately ostracized, based on the words of the accuser alone. You'd have to be naive or outright ignorant to believe that to be true.
This whole thread has turned into fuckery for the most part due to some white night ? going on. Some of yall wanna counter argue just to be disagreeable. Like every thread of this nature you got the usual male feminists coming in arguing what amounts to little more than conjecture.
Nobody thinks ? or sexual assault is "ok"...but to say that certain depictions or conversations about it can't be head scratching would be a lie. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »There's an important difference. Females dont study men. They look at men and impose narratives. They project these false narratives and turn them into "generalizations" but it's more or less sweeping accusations.
Men have studied women in accordance to biology psychology history in accordance to modern civilization to extrapolate data and information. To essentially understand the nature of females to draw reason for seemingly unreasonable action.
Not the same.
Can you prove the bold?
Answered in the body
lol No it wasn't. You seem to have a poor understanding of what proof is. You stating what you think women do is not proof that women don't have any formal studies of men. If I had to guess, I'd say you're probably closer to right than wrong, but you didn't provide proof.
Ironically, your "proof" seems to be the same thing you're accusing women of doing.
No it's not.
For comparison
Feminist theories
Patriarchy: debunked
universal oppression of women: debunked
? culture: debunked
Wage gap: debunked
These are the four cornerstones of feminist theory which were posited as immutable fact that is the foundation for numerous policies and legislation. Later to be found out as being at best rife with confirmation bias, at worst malicious sex based crusade.
Meanwhile the cornerstones of mgtow philosophy as aforementioned in my last post have been proven. Have not been debunked and are in fact the very tools used to deconstruct feminism.
The only thing in question is the issue of the wage gap...which differs when you break down the numbers for specifics within the study...ironically the same thing you're saying Monk is wrong for doing with divorce stats...but the other things you claim are debunked aren't hard to take note of. Men still by and large run society. There's no real question about that. Just look at the people who make major decisions around the globe. Majority are men. We have and do live in a society that has typically made either light of sexual assault/? or flat out making it hard to prove without in some way blaming the victim as well. See no further than judges who have said in court what ? victims should have done to prevent a ? or people who will go as far as to blame children for their own molestation...and you're blatantly ignoring history if you say women haven't been placed lower on the totem pole than men. Just look at the ways in which the role of what a women should or shouldn't be has often not been defined by women themselves until very recently thus causing the current shift we see today with women speaking up about the issues they do. The things you're saying are debunked have been studied for decades now. If you choose to ignore them that's on you but you're being intellectually dishonest to say they've been flat out debunked
You really believe America has a ? culture and that women are universally oppressed??? can you look yourself in the mirror each has and actually affirm that you believe this
Yeah..it's not hard to prove
Then you really are a unrepentant cuck.... WHO does not understand what a culture is. For America to have a ? culture the act of ? would have to be essential and normative within American culture. -
The real problem is not women or even feminist women. The real problem is feminist men and men who enforce gynocentrism at the expense of both men and women.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »? just won't stop with this false equivalence
No one is making an equivalence. I didn't say MGTOW and Feminism is the same thing. I'm pointing out that there are problems with some of the arguments made and tactics used by those who subscribe to MGTOW, and many of those bad arguments and tactics are also used by feminists.
Case in point, 39 seconds into that video, the speaker already pulls some ? . He falsely characterizes feminism as being about female supremacy and uses that as the foundation for differentiating MGTOW from it. That's a straw man. Even as a critic of feminsim, I would not describe it as being about female supremacy. While some extreme feminists probably believe women are superior, that doesn't mean the greater movement is defined by that belief. So the guy is spitting some truth, but that truth is undermined by his mischaracterization of the other side.
oh good lord that's what you get from that video?? You did not pay attention. he did not say feminism is female supremacy. He said that one of the criticism of feminism is that it's a female supremacist movement and that these same critics say mgtow is about male supremacy,
right after that he says now that's not true
You're adding words. He didn't say anything about criticism. He said that people tend to think that MGTOW is feminism for men "the way feminism is about female supremacy, MGTOW is about male supremacy." He then so those people were wrong, but he wasn't talking about their characterization of feminism. He was talking about the equivalence between feminism and MGTOW and he went on to explain why they were wrong. Now he may have meant what you're suggesting, but he didn't say that and certainly didn't say anything counter to that. That's not what I got from the whole video, I'm just pointing out that the foundation of his discussion was built on a misrepresentation of feminism.
Past that, he made some fair criticisms of feminism while saying a lot of sexist ? . He clings to this notion that females are biologically inferior and refers to jobs in the work force as being men's jobs. From a physical standpoint, we should all be able to agree on that. However, what research does he have that shows that on average men are biologically better suited for other jobs. For example, he'd probably say being a doctor is a man's job since he thinks females are intellectually inferior. Do you know of any data that shows that on average men are better doctors than women? Also, you have to appreciate the irony of him saying that MGTOW is not about male supremacy, but then spending half the video arguing and, in some cases outright saying, that men are superior. lol -
Where in the hell do yall come up with this idea that ? is considered ok? I seriously don't get that ? . In a society where sexual allegations are propping up on a daily basis and the accused men are pretty much immediately ostracized, based on the words of the accuser alone. You'd have to be naive or outright ignorant to believe that to be true.
This whole thread has turned into fuckery for the most part due to some white night ? going on. Some of yall wanna counter argue just to be disagreeable. Like every thread of this nature you got the usual male feminists coming in arguing what amounts to little more than conjecture.
Nobody thinks ? or sexual assault is "ok"...but to say that certain depictions or conversations about it can't be head scratching would be a lie.
Before you said it's typically taken lightheartedly though. That's a lie and we both know it.
The depictions and conversations are head scratching because of the nature of the crime. It's horrendous and nobody wants to believe a woman would lie about it or embellish details. Therefore, ppl are super sensitive to it. Problem is, as ? up as it comes across, we have to gather all the facts first before we punish the accused. I mean this supposed to be a innocent until proven guilty society right? So absent some ? obvious physical assault, we have to get the facts.
Unfortunately, a very loud extreme group of fems have created this narrative where due process is construed to "victim blaming". So we're just supposed to take every ? accusers words at unequivocal face value? Along with that no one better dare put any kind of responsibility into the equation because that's saying "she deserved it". So basically we're supposed to NOT raise our daughters to understand it's not a good idea to be certain places, at certain times with high levels of alcohol for example. This does not at mean one is deserving of being taken advantage of but it's been twisted to make ppl believe that that is what's being insinuated. Purposely.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »? just won't stop with this false equivalence
No one is making an equivalence. I didn't say MGTOW and Feminism is the same thing. I'm pointing out that there are problems with some of the arguments made and tactics used by those who subscribe to MGTOW, and many of those bad arguments and tactics are also used by feminists.
Case in point, 39 seconds into that video, the speaker already pulls some ? . He falsely characterizes feminism as being about female supremacy and uses that as the foundation for differentiating MGTOW from it. That's a straw man. Even as a critic of feminsim, I would not describe it as being about female supremacy. While some extreme feminists probably believe women are superior, that doesn't mean the greater movement is defined by that belief. So the guy is spitting some truth, but that truth is undermined by his mischaracterization of the other side.
oh good lord that's what you get from that video?? You did not pay attention. he did not say feminism is female supremacy. He said that one of the criticism of feminism is that it's a female supremacist movement and that these same critics say mgtow is about male supremacy,
right after that he says now that's not true
You're adding words. He didn't say anything about criticism. He said that people tend to think that MGTOW is feminism for men "the way feminism is about female supremacy, MGTOW is about male supremacy." He then so those people were wrong, but he wasn't talking about their characterization of feminism. He was talking about the equivalence between feminism and MGTOW and he went on to explain why they were wrong. Now he may have meant what you're suggesting, but he didn't say that and certainly didn't say anything counter to that. That's not what I got from the whole video, I'm just pointing out that the foundation of his discussion was built on a misrepresentation of feminism.
Past that, he made some fair criticisms of feminism while saying a lot of sexist ? . He clings to this notion that females are biologically inferior and refers to jobs in the work force as being men's jobs. From a physical standpoint, we should all be able to agree on that. However, what research does he have that shows that on average men are biologically better suited for other jobs. For example, he'd probably say being a doctor is a man's job since he thinks females are intellectually inferior. Do you know of any data that shows that on average men are better doctors than women? Also, you have to appreciate the irony of him saying that MGTOW is not about male supremacy, but then spending half the video arguing and, in some cases outright saying, that men are superior. lol
YES HE DID mention criticism. watch the video he at 0:22 says " one of the more common criticism is that mgtow is just like feminism" and then he continues on talking about those criticisms. therefore he was clearly talking about the characterizations of feminism. You practice sophistry of the highest order
he has a ton of videos and I am pretty sure in some of them he gives his thoughts on jobs that are better suited for men. But obviously one example where it appears that men are biologically better suited for the work force is in I.T OR anything physical or martial. SOCIETY has cut the physical standards for military service and for decades has thrown money at women to go into I.T and they still cannot cut it.
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »? just won't stop with this false equivalence
No one is making an equivalence. I didn't say MGTOW and Feminism is the same thing. I'm pointing out that there are problems with some of the arguments made and tactics used by those who subscribe to MGTOW, and many of those bad arguments and tactics are also used by feminists.
Case in point, 39 seconds into that video, the speaker already pulls some ? . He falsely characterizes feminism as being about female supremacy and uses that as the foundation for differentiating MGTOW from it. That's a straw man. Even as a critic of feminsim, I would not describe it as being about female supremacy. While some extreme feminists probably believe women are superior, that doesn't mean the greater movement is defined by that belief. So the guy is spitting some truth, but that truth is undermined by his mischaracterization of the other side.
oh good lord that's what you get from that video?? You did not pay attention. he did not say feminism is female supremacy. He said that one of the criticism of feminism is that it's a female supremacist movement and that these same critics say mgtow is about male supremacy,
right after that he says now that's not true
You're adding words. He didn't say anything about criticism. He said that people tend to think that MGTOW is feminism for men "the way feminism is about female supremacy, MGTOW is about male supremacy." He then so those people were wrong, but he wasn't talking about their characterization of feminism. He was talking about the equivalence between feminism and MGTOW and he went on to explain why they were wrong. Now he may have meant what you're suggesting, but he didn't say that and certainly didn't say anything counter to that. That's not what I got from the whole video, I'm just pointing out that the foundation of his discussion was built on a misrepresentation of feminism.
Past that, he made some fair criticisms of feminism while saying a lot of sexist ? . He clings to this notion that females are biologically inferior and refers to jobs in the work force as being men's jobs. From a physical standpoint, we should all be able to agree on that. However, what research does he have that shows that on average men are biologically better suited for other jobs. For example, he'd probably say being a doctor is a man's job since he thinks females are intellectually inferior. Do you know of any data that shows that on average men are better doctors than women? Also, you have to appreciate the irony of him saying that MGTOW is not about male supremacy, but then spending half the video arguing and, in some cases outright saying, that men are superior. lol
YES HE DID mention criticism. watch the video he at 0:22 says " one of the more common criticism is that mgtow is just like feminism" and then he continues on talking about those criticisms. therefore he was clearly talking about the characterizations of feminism. You practice sophistry of the highest order
he has a ton of videos and I am pretty sure in some of them he gives his thoughts on jobs that are better suited for men. But obviously one example where it appears that men are biologically better suited for the work force is in I.T OR anything physical or martial. SOCIETY has cut the physical standards for military service and for decades has thrown money at women to go into I.T and they still cannot cut it.
Yo, you're being disingenuous. The criticism he's talking about is the relationship between feminism and MGTOW. His whole point is that MGTOW isn't the same thing as feminism. He characterizes feminism as female supremacy, and then argues that the critics assume that MGTOW must be about male supremacy, which he says is untrue. Nowhere does he state or imply that feminism as female supremacy is an unfair characterization. I'm not practicing sophistry. I'm just not adding interpretation to his words the way you are.
I've already agreed that anything physically taxing is better suited for men. However, the IT argument isn't as cut an dry. It's not so much that women aren't suited for IT as that they aren't as interested in it. As a result, you don't always get the best and brightest women going into the field. You get the women that choose it because they have money thrown at them. You see this in other engineering and science fields too. So it's still a problem, because better qualified men are being cut out to support the semblance of equality. But it's a different argument than saying women aren't intellectually capable to do the job. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »? just won't stop with this false equivalence
No one is making an equivalence. I didn't say MGTOW and Feminism is the same thing. I'm pointing out that there are problems with some of the arguments made and tactics used by those who subscribe to MGTOW, and many of those bad arguments and tactics are also used by feminists.
Case in point, 39 seconds into that video, the speaker already pulls some ? . He falsely characterizes feminism as being about female supremacy and uses that as the foundation for differentiating MGTOW from it. That's a straw man. Even as a critic of feminsim, I would not describe it as being about female supremacy. While some extreme feminists probably believe women are superior, that doesn't mean the greater movement is defined by that belief. So the guy is spitting some truth, but that truth is undermined by his mischaracterization of the other side.
oh good lord that's what you get from that video?? You did not pay attention. he did not say feminism is female supremacy. He said that one of the criticism of feminism is that it's a female supremacist movement and that these same critics say mgtow is about male supremacy,
right after that he says now that's not true
You're adding words. He didn't say anything about criticism. He said that people tend to think that MGTOW is feminism for men "the way feminism is about female supremacy, MGTOW is about male supremacy." He then so those people were wrong, but he wasn't talking about their characterization of feminism. He was talking about the equivalence between feminism and MGTOW and he went on to explain why they were wrong. Now he may have meant what you're suggesting, but he didn't say that and certainly didn't say anything counter to that. That's not what I got from the whole video, I'm just pointing out that the foundation of his discussion was built on a misrepresentation of feminism.
Past that, he made some fair criticisms of feminism while saying a lot of sexist ? . He clings to this notion that females are biologically inferior and refers to jobs in the work force as being men's jobs. From a physical standpoint, we should all be able to agree on that. However, what research does he have that shows that on average men are biologically better suited for other jobs. For example, he'd probably say being a doctor is a man's job since he thinks females are intellectually inferior. Do you know of any data that shows that on average men are better doctors than women? Also, you have to appreciate the irony of him saying that MGTOW is not about male supremacy, but then spending half the video arguing and, in some cases outright saying, that men are superior. lol
YES HE DID mention criticism. watch the video he at 0:22 says " one of the more common criticism is that mgtow is just like feminism" and then he continues on talking about those criticisms. therefore he was clearly talking about the characterizations of feminism. You practice sophistry of the highest order
he has a ton of videos and I am pretty sure in some of them he gives his thoughts on jobs that are better suited for men. But obviously one example where it appears that men are biologically better suited for the work force is in I.T OR anything physical or martial. SOCIETY has cut the physical standards for military service and for decades has thrown money at women to go into I.T and they still cannot cut it.
Yo, you're being disingenuous. The criticism he's talking about is the relationship between feminism and MGTOW. His whole point is that MGTOW isn't the same thing as feminism. He characterizes feminism as female supremacy, and then argues that the critics assume that MGTOW must be about male supremacy, which he says is untrue. Nowhere does he state or imply that feminism as female supremacy is an unfair characterization. I'm not practicing sophistry. I'm just not adding interpretation to his words the way you are.
I've already agreed that anything physically taxing is better suited for men. However, the IT argument isn't as cut an dry. It's not so much that women aren't suited for IT as that they aren't as interested in it. As a result, you don't always get the best and brightest women going into the field. You get the women that choose it because they have money thrown at them. You see this in other engineering and science fields too. So it's still a problem, because better qualified men are being cut out to support the semblance of equality. But it's a different argument than saying women aren't intellectually capable to do the job.
I did not interpret anything what he said is clear for most people but you however are twisting his words to fit your interpretation. the bold is another example of you twisting words, I never indicated that women were incapable of doing i.t work I indicated that they were not biologically suited for it. There is a significate difference between being biologically suited for something and being intellectually capable.
of course women can code and do engineering jobs but apart from the actual work are they suited for the career and the other aspects of the "job"??? no it does not seem so because they typically are not as interested as their male counterparts and drop the ? out after a few years because they don't have the drive for it.
-
jetlifebih wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »lol silly girl as a general rule men don't date down we ? down No man really wants an emotionally unstable woman but we will have sex with one.
Younger women generally look better that's why many men prefer them...... also no man wants an old haggard ? with a 100000 miles on her ? .
Lol
Boy bye
See it every day
Looks are important yes
But there are a lot of men who like having the advantage when dating -whether it be financial, personality-based, or looks-wise
Rather then date the young girl with looks and drive they go after the young irresponsible girl with looks who needs saving... Who will put up with ? when her light bill needs to be paid
I know men who have a lot to offer a woman but prefer not to date 10s because they are "trouble"...aka they are intimidated by her looks... scared they can't keep her attention when they know other ? are going to be getting at her
Theres the rkellys of the world who like young women not because of their looks but because they are easier to control
Or they prey on the women who are insecure or traditionally unattractive because they are "more grateful" , "less work"
Yall not just these simple creatures yall like to pretend to be
And its not always about control ...men in general like to feel needed
First of all r.kelly really wants girls not legal age women so leave him out of this
Those men you know that are intimidated by 'LOOKS" really just don't want to deal with all the possible personality flaws usually come with 10"S and has nothing to do with them wanting to be with a girl who need saving. if those men can find a young woman that is a 10 and doesn't have those flaws they will 90% of the time prefer her over an older woman that has hit the wall.
The only men who want women who need saving are " captain save a hoes" and other men despise these kinds of men because they are insecure weaklings
You and your girlfriends are probably guilty of doing what you accuse men of doing, you go after these weak insecure ? of all stripes because you know that NO stable and mentally secure man will put up with your liberated woman feminist ?
women are guilty of there own ?
but there are lot of "captain save a hoes" out here
sometimes its just about the circles they run in and proximity...maybe its even just chemistry
but let's not act like the appeals of dating dating down goes beyond looks for a lot of men
my overall point being men, like women, struggle with insecurity, can be manipulative, can be exploitative, are self sabotaging, etc
*shrugs*
I agree but we know there isn’t a 50/50 split as to who puts who through more ?
So , who in your opinion has more ? to deal with?
who has more ? to deal with? expound. as far as dating and relationships go?
speaking from the pov of a blk woman, the simple fact we live in a society that places european standards of beauty on a pedestal, and considering blk women out number blk men, i would argue you have an advantage
from the pov of just being a woman, i'm discouraged from being open about my past and exploring my sexuality
a pregnancy occurs, i have to carry the baby requiring i put my career on hold and not partake in certain activities that i enjoy. if i abort i'm shamed and face long/short term health risks... while man do not and can just walk away after getting someone pregnant. historically men could do so without any dire consequences. now we have these ? cs laws which are ineffective. but america is generally a ? place to raise children period. parents are not given the proper support, especially working single mothers. no coincidence working single mothers are disproportionately likely to be poor
marriage, it really depends on the individuals, and where u live... and at the end of the day marriage is a choice
in general?
as a woman i was born with the disadvantage of being physically weaker and being perceived to be the lesser sex. my word carries less weight because women are "dramatic". held to higher moral standard than my male counterparts. being a blk woman i have to worry about racism
but to avoid making this into a contest, i'll say we are all exploited, and discriminated against in some ways. and at the same time, we’re also privileged in other ways as well
i don't have to worry as much as you would with dealing with the police being a blk man, for instance
that said, as i've always argued think a lot of our complaints derive from societal gender norms and resulting expectations of how a man or woman should and should not behave
for ex, statistics suggest men commit way more acts of violence than women. even taking into account the possibility that many crimes in which a woman commits violence go unreported, the disparity can't be dismissed. it would take scores of unreported violent acts to even up the numbers. but opposed to actually having an open and honest convo about the reasons for the disparity, historically the discussion usually starts and ends with the argument that men are genetically disposed to be aggressive
further more, because we are still resigned to the old “boys will be boys” attitude, we don't expect boys to speak up about their feelings, to apologize when they need to, to express themselves civilly. but we expect them to be immature, reckless, promiscuous, etc. obviously this becomes problematic especially when these boys grow to become men
as discussed, gender norms, can hurt fathers pursing custody of their children
things are beginning to change fortunately
-
Many men do become red pills after personal hardship.
But that philosophy takes shape as man after man begins to tell the same story about being screwed over in court or being used.
It is men who are trying to understand why things happen to shed reason.
You on the other hand seem content with believing in the random chance of occurrences.
Human beings are not random. They like every other organism are creatures of habits.
@sunlord
@LordZuko
Would you either of you mind breaking down what exactly is meant by red pill, blue pill, and purple pill?
I've heard this terminology a lot throughout this thread, but I'm not quite sure I have a clear understanding of it.
From what I can tell, they're referring to different types of MGTOW........but the rest of it is kind of confusing. -
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »lol silly girl as a general rule men don't date down we ? down No man really wants an emotionally unstable woman but we will have sex with one.
Younger women generally look better that's why many men prefer them...... also no man wants an old haggard ? with a 100000 miles on her ? .
Lol
Boy bye
See it every day
Looks are important yes
But there are a lot of men who like having the advantage when dating -whether it be financial, personality-based, or looks-wise
Rather then date the young girl with looks and drive they go after the young irresponsible girl with looks who needs saving... Who will put up with ? when her light bill needs to be paid
I know men who have a lot to offer a woman but prefer not to date 10s because they are "trouble"...aka they are intimidated by her looks... scared they can't keep her attention when they know other ? are going to be getting at her
Theres the rkellys of the world who like young women not because of their looks but because they are easier to control
Or they prey on the women who are insecure or traditionally unattractive because they are "more grateful" , "less work"
Yall not just these simple creatures yall like to pretend to be
And its not always about control ...men in general like to feel needed
First of all r.kelly really wants girls not legal age women so leave him out of this
Those men you know that are intimidated by 'LOOKS" really just don't want to deal with all the possible personality flaws usually come with 10"S and has nothing to do with them wanting to be with a girl who need saving. if those men can find a young woman that is a 10 and doesn't have those flaws they will 90% of the time prefer her over an older woman that has hit the wall.
The only men who want women who need saving are " captain save a hoes" and other men despise these kinds of men because they are insecure weaklings
You and your girlfriends are probably guilty of doing what you accuse men of doing, you go after these weak insecure ? of all stripes because you know that NO stable and mentally secure man will put up with your liberated woman feminist ?
women are guilty of there own ?
but there are lot of "captain save a hoes" out here
sometimes its just about the circles they run in and proximity...maybe its even just chemistry
but let's not act like the appeals of dating dating down goes beyond looks for a lot of men
my overall point being men, like women, struggle with insecurity, can be manipulative, can be exploitative, are self sabotaging, etc
*shrugs*
I agree but we know there isn’t a 50/50 split as to who puts who through more ?
So , who in your opinion has more ? to deal with?
who has more ? to deal with? expound. as far as dating and relationships go?
speaking from the pov of a blk woman, the simple fact we live in a society that places european standards of beauty on a pedestal, and considering blk women out number blk men, i would argue you have an advantage
from the pov of just being a woman, i'm discouraged from being open about my past and exploring my sexuality
a pregnancy occurs, i have to carry the baby requiring i put my career on hold and not partake in certain activities that i enjoy. if i abort i'm shamed and face long/short term health risks... while man do not and can just walk away after getting someone pregnant. historically men could do so without any dire consequences. now we have these ? cs laws which are ineffective. but america is generally a ? place to raise children period. parents are not given the proper support, especially working single mothers. no coincidence working single mothers are disproportionately likely to be poor
marriage, it really depends on the individuals, and where u live... and at the end of the day marriage is a choice
in general?
as a woman i was born with the disadvantage of being physically weaker and being perceived to be the lesser sex. my word carries less weight because women are "dramatic". held to higher moral standard than my male counterparts. being a blk woman i have to worry about racism
but to avoid making this into a contest, i'll say we are all exploited, and discriminated against in some ways. and at the same time, we’re also privileged in other ways as well
i don't have to worry as much as you would with dealing with the police being a blk man, for instance
that said, as i've always argued think a lot of our complaints derive from societal gender norms and resulting expectations of how a man or woman should and should not behave
for ex, statistics suggest men commit way more acts of violence than women. even taking into account the possibility that many crimes in which a woman commits violence go unreported, the disparity can't be dismissed. it would take scores of unreported violent acts to even up the numbers. but opposed to actually having an open and honest convo about the reasons for the disparity, historically the discussion usually starts and ends with the argument that men are genetically disposed to be aggressive
further more, because we are still resigned to the old “boys will be boys” attitude, we don't expect boys to speak up about their feelings, to apologize when they need to, to express themselves civilly. but we expect them to be immature, reckless, promiscuous, etc. obviously this becomes problematic especially when these boys grow to become men
as discussed, gender norms, can hurt fathers pursing custody of their children
things are beginning to change fortunately
Hear you go. You always coming in these thread with these same half truths.
First off. Whose fault is it that this society places euro beauty standards on a pedestal? I mean, do you ever talk to your fellow black women about loving their natural selves? Because last I checked, there are a lot of sistas who will cut you over their store bought blonde hair, fake nails and contacts. Meanwhile, Kendrick got backlash for saying "Show me something natural"
Next, if you don't want to put your career on hold, don't get pregnant. It's literally that ? easy. If a man doesn't want to settle down and be a father, he's always criticized if he ends up being one and still trying to live the single life. Are you really arguing this point? "Give up certain things I enjoy" as if somebody is forcing you to have kids? Come on now. Really?!!!! And then your turn around and say if you abort it you're "shamed". So murdering a child because "you're not ready" although you had a multitude of ways to prevent it is not something to be ashamed of huh? So tell, what socially acceptable option to be 100% absolved of the child raising responsibility does a man have if he decides after the fact that he doesn't want to put his career on hold and give up certain things he enjoys?
Continuing, I don't see women complaining about being the physically weaker sex when that grass need cut. How bout when that snow need to be shoveled? Or them construction jobs where I see women standing around holding stop signs while the men are breaking their backs. Are they paid any less? How about those jobs where lifting a certain amount is a requirement, yet women go get their male counterparts to do the lifting.
-
That's why I asked if dudes were talking about their own experiences earlier. Because using this idea that people just wake up and want a divorce as an argument for mgtow is ridiculous.
I understand that anecdotal evidence isn't great for making an argument, but the generalizations y'all are making makes it seem like y'all little personal experience with women.
From what I can gather, MGTOW is just as much........if not more.........about the state and government as it is about relationships.
In particular, how the system consistently favors women over men in cases of alimony, child support, custody, divorce, spousal support, common law marriages, false ? accusations, etc.
MGTOW dudes are basically taking themselves out of the game because they're trying to minimize the risk of any of those things happening to them. -
Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »jetlifebih wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »Madame_CJSkywalker wrote: »lol silly girl as a general rule men don't date down we ? down No man really wants an emotionally unstable woman but we will have sex with one.
Younger women generally look better that's why many men prefer them...... also no man wants an old haggard ? with a 100000 miles on her ? .
Lol
Boy bye
See it every day
Looks are important yes
But there are a lot of men who like having the advantage when dating -whether it be financial, personality-based, or looks-wise
Rather then date the young girl with looks and drive they go after the young irresponsible girl with looks who needs saving... Who will put up with ? when her light bill needs to be paid
I know men who have a lot to offer a woman but prefer not to date 10s because they are "trouble"...aka they are intimidated by her looks... scared they can't keep her attention when they know other ? are going to be getting at her
Theres the rkellys of the world who like young women not because of their looks but because they are easier to control
Or they prey on the women who are insecure or traditionally unattractive because they are "more grateful" , "less work"
Yall not just these simple creatures yall like to pretend to be
And its not always about control ...men in general like to feel needed
First of all r.kelly really wants girls not legal age women so leave him out of this
Those men you know that are intimidated by 'LOOKS" really just don't want to deal with all the possible personality flaws usually come with 10"S and has nothing to do with them wanting to be with a girl who need saving. if those men can find a young woman that is a 10 and doesn't have those flaws they will 90% of the time prefer her over an older woman that has hit the wall.
The only men who want women who need saving are " captain save a hoes" and other men despise these kinds of men because they are insecure weaklings
You and your girlfriends are probably guilty of doing what you accuse men of doing, you go after these weak insecure ? of all stripes because you know that NO stable and mentally secure man will put up with your liberated woman feminist ?
women are guilty of there own ?
but there are lot of "captain save a hoes" out here
sometimes its just about the circles they run in and proximity...maybe its even just chemistry
but let's not act like the appeals of dating dating down goes beyond looks for a lot of men
my overall point being men, like women, struggle with insecurity, can be manipulative, can be exploitative, are self sabotaging, etc
*shrugs*
I agree but we know there isn’t a 50/50 split as to who puts who through more ?
So , who in your opinion has more ? to deal with?
who has more ? to deal with? expound. as far as dating and relationships go?
speaking from the pov of a blk woman, the simple fact we live in a society that places european standards of beauty on a pedestal, and considering blk women out number blk men, i would argue you have an advantage
from the pov of just being a woman, i'm discouraged from being open about my past and exploring my sexuality
a pregnancy occurs, i have to carry the baby requiring i put my career on hold and not partake in certain activities that i enjoy. if i abort i'm shamed and face long/short term health risks... while man do not and can just walk away after getting someone pregnant. historically men could do so without any dire consequences. now we have these ? cs laws which are ineffective. but america is generally a ? place to raise children period. parents are not given the proper support, especially working single mothers. no coincidence working single mothers are disproportionately likely to be poor
marriage, it really depends on the individuals, and where u live... and at the end of the day marriage is a choice
in general?
as a woman i was born with the disadvantage of being physically weaker and being perceived to be the lesser sex. my word carries less weight because women are "dramatic". held to higher moral standard than my male counterparts. being a blk woman i have to worry about racism
but to avoid making this into a contest, i'll say we are all exploited, and discriminated against in some ways. and at the same time, we’re also privileged in other ways as well
i don't have to worry as much as you would with dealing with the police being a blk man, for instance
that said, as i've always argued think a lot of our complaints derive from societal gender norms and resulting expectations of how a man or woman should and should not behave
for ex, statistics suggest men commit way more acts of violence than women. even taking into account the possibility that many crimes in which a woman commits violence go unreported, the disparity can't be dismissed. it would take scores of unreported violent acts to even up the numbers. but opposed to actually having an open and honest convo about the reasons for the disparity, historically the discussion usually starts and ends with the argument that men are genetically disposed to be aggressive
further more, because we are still resigned to the old “boys will be boys” attitude, we don't expect boys to speak up about their feelings, to apologize when they need to, to express themselves civilly. but we expect them to be immature, reckless, promiscuous, etc. obviously this becomes problematic especially when these boys grow to become men
as discussed, gender norms, can hurt fathers pursing custody of their children
things are beginning to change fortunately
My comment was a response to your previous comment, at the end you said
Men and women are manipulative,struggle with insecurity, self sabotaging, and exploitative
I was asking, in your experience, who shows more of these symptoms, and maybe you can elaborate on these symptoms in a relationship, dating, and just in general
I agree with everything you said just about
But you look at your birth sex as a disadvantage when i can point at twice as many advantages for being a woman, as you probably can point out some advantages for being a man....
But if you had to choose, who would it be? -
That's why I asked if dudes were talking about their own experiences earlier. Because using this idea that people just wake up and want a divorce as an argument for mgtow is ridiculous.
I understand that anecdotal evidence isn't great for making an argument, but the generalizations y'all are making makes it seem like y'all little personal experience with women.
From what I can gather, MGTOW is just as much........if not more.........about the state and government as it is about relationships.
In particular, how the system consistently favors women over men in cases of alimony, child support, custody, divorce, spousal support, common law marriages, false ? accusations, etc.
MGTOW dudes are basically taking themselves out of the game because they're trying to minimize the risk of any of those things happening to them.
exactly feminist however are trying to rig the system and in fact they have already rigged the system -
I did not interpret anything what he said is clear for most people but you however are twisting his words to fit your interpretation. the bold is another example of you twisting words, I never indicated that women were incapable of doing i.t work I indicated that they were not biologically suited for it. There is a significate difference between being biologically suited for something and being intellectually capable.
of course women can code and do engineering jobs but apart from the actual work are they suited for the career and the other aspects of the "job"??? no it does not seem so because they typically are not as interested as their male counterparts and drop the ? out after a few years because they don't have the drive for it.
Come on man, the guy literally saidOne of the more common criticisms is that MGTOW is just like feminism. It's essentially the male version of feminism. Not exactly male feminism. That's just a bunch of cucks with manginas. But the equivalent of feminism. Basically how feminism is about female supremacy, MGTOW is about male supremacy. Now, that's not true.
That's what he said verbatim. He does not say that others criticize feminism as being female supremacy. That's something you're inferring. He simply defines feminism as female supremacy and concludes that the critics believe something analogous about MGTOW.
And the rest of your post is agreeing with what I said, so why couldn't you just say I agree and move on?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiODc8vS31U
