its like the "what would you do" segment on abc news, where a man was beating a woman and practically everyone who walked by decided to help the girl because they viewed the guy as a psycho, where when the woman was beating the man people walked right by viewing the woman as justified, men are seen as being the cause of all problems and women are angels sent to maintain peace and love
It takes all types to make the world work. If everyone were a feminist, no one would be. If everyone were masculinist, no one would be. If everyone were gay or lesbian, no one would be. If everyone were pro- natal, no one would be. Why? Because they'd have no opposition. They wouldn't have any defining factors to set them apart from the rest of society.
1.Take any sentence made by a feminist that involves the word man.
2. Replace the word man with the word jew.
All of the sudden it sounds kind of racist right?
Feminism is not about equal rights anymore, its about demonizing men and promoting women regardless of their individual actions through hate propaganda.
Same methods as religious fundamentalism or any dictatorship of the past.
Dude i dont consider myself very sensitive, and there is serioulsy nothing wrong with that, but you are right on every point. Feminism is no different from the bullshit opression that happened to women and individuals with more melanin in their skin. Its funny that alot of girls who hate opression and would speak out on it dont seem to speak out on feminism. The girl you are responding to is an intelligent person. Empathy is the key to our species advancing.
Your views are ideal and fair... thanks for atleast recognizing some of mens issues. there are many other women also speaking against the injustice against men.. search for anti-feminist women or ex feminist women they are all over youtube some have actually grouped together to point out the fallacy in certain modern beliefs about the ignored gender (males).
Men are worth less than women, generally speaking women are better at multitasking, they are better communicators, they are stronger emotionally, more mature, genetically they have more DNA information (X chromosome is more dense than the Y) women look better, eat healthier, live longer, and from my experience men act like 2D cartoon characters that are some limited in what interests they are allowed, or how they can act or speak, I'm tired of it.
Emotionally stronger (Being emotion-driven does not amount to EQ).
The Y chromosome? You're going to invoke the Y instead of the manifest reality that supplies you with the entire civilization of technological convenience?
Most of the things you say are misinformation/misinterpretation. Others are explained by cultural imperatives, most of which are assigned... BY women.
Seriously, hang up your manhood. You don't speak for shit.
There's a distinct possibility that at some juncture, you'll graduate from your mire of auto-exacerbating self-loathing and do some constructive thinking. Your first port of call might be the universal framework of a single word: Causality.
It's valid to cherry-pick some of your glib examples, for how they signify the rest as an extrapolation of merit.
Live longer? Let's forward simply one example to fry your mainframe. 95+% of workplace deaths are men. And if they didn't do it, who would?
@KadrickNinness There is a even higher possibility that he will stick to his principles. And whether or not he improves himself in terms of skill sets or workplace competency depends on how much he works for it, not on whether or not he shares your view on "social imperatives".
If you're so tired of it, there are surgeons who can resolve your sexual identity crisis. Or, was your solution what, that the rest of us should succumb to your irrational encapsulation of what we are, and/or ought to be? The only question it arouses in me, is who the hell are the males in your life? More causality? How many male teachers/mentors did you have?
It's not our fault you can't establish a decent network. Unless, you want in ours? Because your list of bunkum does NOT reflect us.
@KadrickNinness I believe he isn't telling you to "succumb" to his "encapsulation" of what "we" are. He is merely explaining his views and principles with a STRONG resolve.
It also struck me what is signified in the way you frame one of your absurd criticisms.
"Are somewhat limited in what they are allowed".
You do realize that "allowed" refers to an external source, yes? Allowed by who? I suspect you're probably a male, like many, with limitation male-social-intelligence owing to a lack of male mentorship. Males aren't entitlement driven. They're respect driven. Social women test men. Socially however, men test each other. The alpha imperative. Nature.
@KadrickNinness Everyone is entitled to their own view of "social imperatives". But when it comes to unalienable and civil rights none has the right to detract from others, or impose their views.
I've talked extensively with this person outside the frame of this forum. I won't address this now, aside from some thrust. Whoever said "imperatives" were a good thing? You seem to be confusing it with "responsibility" which is less debatable, yet more obscure. Imperatives are a matter of era, but not especially a matter of opinion. Fuss over the details all you like, but the biological lineage has sweeps of imparted characteristic that remain influential.
@KadrickNinness You talked extensively with this person? Hehe. "Imperatives" or "responsibility", he gets to choose what he wants to be as long as nobody imposes on nobody.
And if biological lineage has imparted characteristic that don't die, then you wouldnt have to defend it.
Yes, everyone is free. That includes free to INFLUENCE. Masculinity is the reason you're here to discuss: Masculinity. If you wish for the expressionism of civil culture to supersede biological imperative, that is your right and empowered option. These imperatives are far from obsolete, however. Their relevance is just denied.
I don't have to defend it. I'm handing a clue on a platter to the ignorant.
What would I defend? Something obviously functioning everywhere, every day?
"Hehe"? I don't get the punchline of the "Hehe" part. Is this some form of sarcastic doubt? Or barely veiled mockery in sympathy to him?
The syntax of your sentiment seems a little muddled. "That don't die"? Haven't died? Won't die? Can't die? Never mind the fallacy of your axiom, the rationale of your leap, is of itself, not even specious let alone valid.
You speak of truth and reality as if isn't variably (mis)interpretted, even en masse.
@KadrickNinness But to be completely honest, what I think is that, some men, especially those with a male ego complex, will stop at nothing because somehow something makes them feel like losers when they don't do what a "man" must do. Including fending off what they deem is the slightest "emasculation" of their "glorious male image".
To be completely honest, you sound indoctrinated by the misguidance of imperatives as a social construct. Your mockery of the "Glorious Male Image" is absurdist on many levels.
First, you seem to imply some general disposition to phallic impartation.
The "Male Ego Complex" is a Feminist fraud. Males are curious creatures as, they are lumbered with the performance imperative in biology which sees them overtly compete. However, they aren't as ego oriented as women
@KadrickNinness so if it ain't phallic issue you're having here, why does this guy in the video need to embrace masculinity in order to better himself? He can equally do well without any notion of masculinity, demanding equal treatment for men and women, and to better himself without being one damn bit like you, nor having an "alpha imperative".
Don't deflect the conversation, it is about him. I don't give a damn about feminist and fashionistas,
Any earnest and objective psych grad, adherent to empirical integrity knows how to distil the indicators of Ego orientation, and women display these traits far more prominently than men. Especially the PRIMARY indicator of Ego: Sensitivity to criticism. If this were the result of evolution as meme, it's no doubt a mechanism of species survivalism. Although the males are the primary competitor, the natural selection occurs in discarding the line of the deterred.
I could easily get tied up in and carried away with this matter, but shall mostly refrain.
Other indicators of diversity in Ego Orientation, are the means by which women seek to attain power within the social construct. Print Media makes no secret of this pursuit. If Estee Lauder, Victoria's (not so) Secret or Vera Wang aren't vanguards of the female ego, then just try rejecting a fashionista in the scene, and see how it rates next to the average rejected male.
@KadrickNinness I don't just judge a person by their sense of fashion, but their morality, character and principles. So it makes no difference to me if women are more fashion prone. Anyway, fashionistas with no brains, might still have a chance in getting a shot at money, because some men have ichy dicks, that what I think. Other than that I don't see the slightest difference between then and the "average rejected male". heheh.
I suspect you probably don't "see" the difference between the average rejected male and the average rejected female. Women, whether innately or by social suggestion view themselves as "the prize". And that the male is typically pursuer. That's an aside, however.
My experience, and the available reference on this is far more broad than the social scene. Women are more sensitive to and less interpretive of criticism in general. To a point of night and day at times.
@KadrickNinness Women being "the prize" and men being the pursuer, is also a prescriptive norm. In today's world, successful women with lots of money want good looking young men who aren't necessarily rich for companion. And thus, the women "feeds" the man. I am in no position to judge about who's the failure in this scenario.
And in Thailand, this is actually happening on a large scale. The average working class woman has about at least twice the disposable income than men.
It IS a prescriptive norm, because MOST people carry on with their lives, in disregard for the political process or the progressive sway that defines law. Sugar mamas are dynamically no different to sugar-daddies. Don't expect an intrinsic submission to this dynamic, however.
Females possess 70% of the wealth in America. What is the relevance of this to anything? Women and feminists like to cherry pick misrepresented figures without the whole picture behind it.
Longest lifespan? Incidence of homelessness? Impact of recession because their jobs aren't socially funded?
When you eliminate the BIG picture, the details are meaningless. They only have meaning in context. Anyone who denies the diversity of gender impetus upon the social outcomes is completely delusion.
If men are in ascension "it's prejudiced! It must change!". Even if Affirmative Action aids the rise of women? "See! It's because women are awesome!"
@KadrickNinness That's is because men like you hold on to the so call "gender impetus" of which you speak off.
Men are more ashamed to come out and say that they are being alienated, just like they tend not to report being raped. Men don't come together and discuss their rights like women because they feel it is emasculating.
Thus, extreme feminism has been having its way. I for one, am not a man who is ashamed to bring up mens' issues.
I don't hold onto or endorse the "gender imperative". I simply refer to it's historical significance, and it's contemporary influence. The fact that I speak of it, is in denial of it. Stoicism IS a masculine trait. And biologically it's been an important one for complex reasons. The same way women's "broadcasted feelings" have been a useful imperative.
I openly discuss these matters even though it puts me at risk of social demonizing.
@KadrickNinness Haha. I don't care if some men think that men out to be stoicism. Let their testicles boil in lava while they gag themselves with a stiff upper lip.
You see, I don't have such impedance when it comes to voicing my concern.
And it is because of their "stoic/stiff upper lip" complex, that extreme feminism has been having its way.
And maybe the whole idea of extreme feminism is to kick mens' balls in such a way? hahaha. what an irony.
I agree. Social stoicism is NOT a virtue. It's value is drummed into men, though. Look, the more divided society becomes, who is raising these boys? Single mothers and 95% female school teachers. It's not entirely their fault. It's a tide that must be turned by the WISE men among us. We are NOT on a different page here.
The best impact men can have, is to discuss these issues with other MEN. It's they who have the power they don't realize to reverse the problems they don't realize.
@KadrickNinness@KadrickNinness It it is indoctrinated it is bad. If it is due to some inherent Oedipus complex of some sort, it is still bad. But I believe it is a reciprocation of both.
Men have the "size matters' complex while women don't. And as such that constituted an impedance for mens' liberation. HAHAHA what an irony.
To me to treat a women like a lady is to acknowledge that women are motivated by love. Not give them preferential treatment like opening doors.
The "male ego complex" is not an empirical reality.
It's merely a specious shaming weapon.
I've had some odd experiences in recent times on the matter of ad hominem tactics. The only time I've had males employ them lately, is on behalf of women they were chivalrously coming to the aid of.
All demographies use them. Women however make the male ad hominem deployment in everyday life, pale in comparison. It's not even in the exhaustion of options. It's reflexive.
@KadrickNinness I am against chivalry, both personally and on a systemic level. But I have no say in other mens' life as to whether or not they want to practice chivalry as long as it is not systematically imposed on me.
But as far as I'm concerned men with chivalry OFTEN have "male ego complex" as well. I'll back that up in a moment.
And since I'm an "equal" person, I abhor both systemic chivalry and feminism.
Ok, so you oppose chivalry. Is it because you endorse equality? Me too. But it's also at the expense of many people's prized conception of "romance". Are you familiar with the Orwell expression of "double think"? You are operating from a platform of your own developed insight. At a street level, it is chaos. Aggregate women are engaged in huge amounts of double-think, as a passing, normative ethos.
@KadrickNinness But unlike you, I oppose chivalry, not by means of masculinism, but by the plain fact that everybody has unalienable rights under Bill of Rights, and they are endowed by their Creator certain unalienable rights, and the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness, men or women.
Double-think women are like double-think men, hehe. Maybe you have not met enough objective women in your life.
I've met plenty of objective women. Inside each person is two people however.
Two profound adages relate: "Careful what you wish for". "Talk is cheap". I've spoken with women, who when you discuss matters with them, will rationally endorse fair measures. When opportunity or crisis emerges however, they either do, or threaten to employ the prejudiced means made available to them by feminist petitioning.
So the real question of individuals boils down to being "tested"
@KadrickNinness When I say objective women, I obviously meant women who don't flip flop their principles when crisis emerges.
If they do, they are obviously waiting for chivalrous help, and it is obvious hypocrisy. I mean the kind who are absolutely responsible for what they say.
What you may find curious about me however, is that I give women the option of a standard. Not a DOUBLE standard, just a standard. And they acknowledge that the option alone is one that men don't have.
If they want to be treated "like a lady", then in practice, don't pursue a semantic line of "equality". Equal opportunity, sure. Many women hate feminism and it's byproducts.
If they hop on board the feminism train, then don't cry when you get treated "like a man".
@KadrickNinness In other words, what I'm saying is the chivalry practiced during times like WW2 is just stupid. Imagine if you are born a boy and were suddently treated like a disposable dog?
I've even seen many EMPLOYED social coaches/advisers obliviously endorsing double-think: "Yes we want to be treated as EQUALS, but we still want to be treated LIKE WOMEN. It's polite for a man to hold a door and pay for dinner". No, that is not a paraphrase.
The outcomes realities of society are mysterious to ideologues. But nowhere near as mysterious to them as the CAUSAL PRINCIPALS. And those are a complex handle for even the sharpest thinkers. Let alone mindless harpies.
@KadrickNinness Those kinds of women can finger themselves. As long as no one is handicapped, old or pregnant, I won't give up a seat for them.
The reason they can still demand such things is because there is a certain percentage of men that practices such chivalry. I don't give a damn for such women, I have enough problems of my own already. hehe. Let alone commit into a marriage with an unobjective person.
What you're saying that I agree with, is that MEN are contributors to the reason MEN'S rights are shit on.
And the conflict between the mentality of society, vs the practical reality for men, is stunning. Women are given the message that their life is hard because men shit on them (even in trivial journalism: Housework? etc).
The reality is, that women are walking all OVER men, because men's pandering to women, ENABLES it. Chivalry can be cute, yet the lethal ENEMY of men.
@KadrickNinness You it advocate to some biological factor. But yes chivalry is uncalled for from the very beginning of time.
Therefor that can only mean that men are suffering from a certain complex, which I've been proposing all along. That same thing that sigmund frued said.
From the beginning of time is a different causal premise. The imperatives that were defined by survivalist evolution, aren't very compatible with civilized political jostling.
The imperatives were highly valuable and honed. Not always individually fair, but that's not what creates survivable species. Enlightenment bestows individual value. I don't endorse it, I just oppose it being devalued in it's fullest context as some form of pathology.
@KadrickNinness Let's make this clear. Men and women are both human beings with equal faculty. I don't buy into that "survivalist evolution" game that some people think needs to be played.
Even if we are cave dwellers I would still be abiding by this principle.
The survivalist evolution isn't a game. Think of it this way.
There are 100 men and 100 women in the world. The men go to war with bears to defend their territory. Only 2 survive. For the sake of the species, whose lives are desperately essential to protect. The men right? If they die, the species is gone. Until that happened though, who was it more essential to protect. If there's only 2 women left, who easily can the species repopulate? Group oriented reality.
@KadrickNinness Haha. To me it is simply. Both men and women can fight (men have more upper body strength on average, and women have better flexibility and lower body stamina recovery), and can be trained to fight. A man and women is needed to reproduce and if either one is absent that cant repopulate. Therefore both are equally important for reproduction.
Men have superior total body strength. And men's flexibility potential is just as high. Their hip structure is a little different and not designed for birthing. The only athletic advantage women have is that their fat cells can be more buoyant.
Go watch the best female "Parkour" practitioners. Then watch the guys... Flexible much?
@KadrickNinness There is a scientific research that prooves that women have better lower body stamina RECOVERY.
Women bulk up in muscle size less then men because they are not androgen dominant. Aside from pelvic structure, slight difference in cranial, and different genitals, pretty much everything else is due to post-pubertal hormones. Of course if I start invoking chromosomes you might not like it. But women do have the same capabilities as men.
You aren't cottoning onto the repopulation dynamic. Both are essential on a one to one basis. However, 1 man can impregnate a hundred women. If there's only one woman, 100 men can only impregnate- 1 woman. Thus the biological preciousness of the female when applying group mentality.
@KadrickNinness So just because women are the child bearers they suddenly become the prize?
Or come on, we are monogamous, unless you choose to have an itchy dick. Of which case, women are also prone to promiscuity.
I don't give women any option. They are equals and that's it. If they want into fall into the chivalrous hands of other men that that's their problem. I am an INDIVIDUAL in my own right. And if she can't love me for that she ain't loving me. What social imperative?
@KadrickNinness You don't endorse enlightenment and individual value? That is the very thing that makes us HUMAN. That is what the human sentience is all about. Complete autonomy, and moral reasoning. It is within my conscience that we are all equal and to be treated otherwise violates my conscience.
Btw, do you know that women can be honed to become deadly fighters as well?
They can be. But on average, they're nowhere near as well suited to the training to become one. There's also logistical problems (pregnancy) and cohesiveness impacts. There are many reasons why women in the military is a bad idea. But in the interests of individual fairness, there is no ideal. It's a bad idea that must happen. On the plus side, it broadens the pool of potential talent, and presents women with a reality check.
@KadrickNinness Very simply, it is like one of those futuristic shows, like Avatar, for an example. Men and women make up for each others weakness, and that doesn't mean women can't be on the front line. A woman's life is no more precious than a man's life. If a particular scenario requires the relative strength of one, than one helps the other. That is cohesion, no 2 person a the same.
For pregnancy threres maternity leave. hahahahahahaha
@KadrickNinness I disagree. As species under threat, individual value and principles becomes even more important. When one fights for freedom with his/her own will, he/she is more likely to outperform a conscript. Humans perform best when not imposed.
That's is because you still can't see to potential women can have in battle. Yes women are more delicate, but they are not the weaker sex as far as capabilities are concerned.
@KadrickNinness When you have doubts about the capabilities of women in battle you could still use the "no 2 persons are the same" argument. Or the "normal distribution curve argument". But then again, I think women are highly capable.
I never said women aren't capable. I said on average, and by biological make-up, they aren't AS capable. They also aren't as mentally equipped as most men. Not intellectually, but emotionally. Are you aware the most 14 year old boys can physically outperform most adult women?
If they want in, fine. But the "normalizing" bullshit has to go. There should be NO acknowledgement of gender at all. Same test requirements for EVERY body.
All I'm seeing is a testimonial. I'm way to weathered in this business to apply some ultimate gravitas to someone's testimonial. She also says at the end "women can drive much better than men". Do I apply significance to that, too?
I've seen some miraculous distortions of reality when it comes to different peoples "accounts" of versions of events. And the problem with this kind is it's like a Domestic Violence article. There's no counterpoint.
@KadrickNinness Don't take it out of context. She doesn't mean that literally. She is a kick ass driver let me tell you that. "women can drive much better than men" is a counter argument to the men who foul played here because shes better. That statement is meant to taunt. Some men with ego cant stand getting beat by women.
My original purpose is to show you women's talent. You should research on how famous she is.
I know it's a taunt. I don't take it seriously. I take all people on their individual merits. What I'm doing is putting the dubiousness of a testimonial into the context of the rest of her remarks.
If I take her testimonial as gospel, who elses do I take as such? What would those involved have to say for their own account? Even an interpretation of ALL accounts can make the truth slippery. But ONE account, with obviously extreme (true or not) overtones reliable?
@KadrickNinness You seem to be caught in a dichotomy. Of wanting equal rights because you can't take the feminist overzealousness while wanting to preserve your masculinity and be a masculinist.
Full autonomy VS alpha imperative
It is hard to be a equal person and a masculinist without some sort of contradiction deep within. hehe
Maybe you should show some of your masculinist friends the videos I posted you. I would like to hear what's their views on that.
I'm not caught in anything. I'm not the one assigning or promoting a preference or standard. I'm just the one describing the falsity of the ones expected.
My "masculinist friends" would tear those videos apart, anywhere it was possible to do so. Which is plenty of ways.
@KadrickNinness Well, that leaves me curious about one thing. It seems then that masculinist have some innate predisposition to want to tear up those videos, even if it constitutes sufficient and rational rebuttal to their beliefs? Can I safely say that they are absolutists then?
How does one tear that apart, I know there are various ways, but an example would be helpful if you don't mind.
They don't need to be predisposed. A predisposition will seek a reason where it isn't warranted. The way that insipid gender-orientation in media paints a target on the back of the subject makes them fair-game... And easy pickings.
I re-re-post:
"ok, so if your a chick, hot, and can jump 75ft. you get a factory deal!! fuck, i wish it was that easy for guys. i would have been pro at 15."
There's a hilariously bad quote from a feminist dunce Charlotte Whitton: “For a woman to get half as much credit as a man, she has to work twice as hard,
and be twice as smart. Fortunately, that isn't difficult."
Ironically the reverse is true. Female achievements are lavished with novel value. A female in a field can measure up to male mediocrity and be considered elite. She's "more equal" and awesome, yet mostly deemed relative to her gender peers.
@KadrickNinness I know that women sometimes overate themselves and that's because they do not have a good reality check on things. But if it weren't for chivalry in the first place, women would be expected to deliver the same performance as men. Many women still engage double think because traditional gender expectations still exist.
This has nothing to do with female potential or aptitude, and everything to do with semantic hypocrisy and practical standards. For most women with some kind of professional contract, there's often a hundred or a thousand (or more) guys that can do it better, but not as comparable to their relative peer. Universality dematerializes and the world "normalizes". They get attention for how good they are, AND their being female while doing it.
@KadrickNinness "For most women with some kind of professional contract, there's often a hundred or a thousand (or more) guys that can do it better....). Really? I think that is rather bigoted. But basing on statistics at this moment, that statement does have weight. But because of what? Is the more appropriate question. Expectations, semantics, culture and habits is the actual reason for the discrepancy.
The best female golfer in the world (Sorensen) took it upon herself to Tee-Off with the guys a while back. She didn't even make the cut. Why everyone is so hung up on these counter-comparatives is beyond me. A cheetah can run faster than a human. Is acknowledging this fact bigoted towards humans? Achievement is RELATIVE because of the foundational form of who is doing the achieving. Ergo, female weightlifters, don't compete with men.
@KadrickNinness Most men would shrug at the abstract idea that a women can do just as good as men in any given area. Rationalization becomes an auxiliary process, rather. Whenever I talk to men of various intellectual levels, I love to test their psyche when it comes to this subject.
@KadrickNinness We are pretty much on agreement when it comes to men's rights and are both humanists in general. The only thing I'm not happy with is that women are perceived as the weaker sex, and as such should be given options. If masculinism does involve getting rid of the social perception that men are more predisposed to violence as well as conscription, etc., then I'm all for it.
@KadrickNinness I've just looked up the masculinism in wiki, and found out it is pretty much very in sync with what humanism actually is. I might have mistaken it on some fronts. So let's just say I agree with everything you said except the "survalist evolution/alpha-imperative" stuff, and about women being the weaker sex. To me, women are not the weaker sex.
I never said women are the weaker sex. But if you're going to make it about physical aptitude, they are. This is an unavoidable aggregate fact. This has no relation whatsoever to inferiority or superiority. Just physiology.
Women ARE weaker. If you're going to avoid or refute this, welcome to delusion.
@KadrickNinness Pertaining to the physical aptitude and physiology of men and women, there are differences of course. The fact that one is androgen dominant and the other is estrogen dominant is bound to create differences. But differences as PERCEIVED and differences in actuality may be different.
Men have more brute strength on average. Women have better stamina recovery after long periods of physical exertion. Welcome to facts.
You're confusing this with the issue of accountability. Women should be held JUST as accountable for their violence. Gender should be entirely removed from law. Look at it this way, you can even have the law DISCRIMINATE on the basis of features that are presently accommodating women, and if it's true in the specific case, women will still be accommodated, only fairly.
A big, strong person terrorizing a smaller, weaker one, is heinous, irrespective of gender.
@KadrickNinness Yes, I'm glad you brought up the disposition that I'm neither one of the above. I do not believe in evolution. But I think survivalist imperatives, is still a different thing from the alpha-imperative, even in the evolutionary context. But I guess, in evolution, one is allowed to make associations, some of which may be right and some plain conjectures.
Delving further into "masculism" (which is not a term I self-apply) you might be surprised however, at how fair-minded, articulate, and ironic they are.
Ironic in that, they are the outright reverse of all the muddle-headed, privilege endorsing that feminism amounts to. Ironic in that, feminism is not what it's believed to be (a good thing), and masculism is not what it's believed to be (a bad thing).
@KadrickNinness So are you in anyway linking this "irony" to embedded social imperatives that is driving the human psyche, both males and females, to such perceptions. The so called alpha imperative? While I may still agree with you that the psychological complexes of men and women are different and may be what gives rise to this phenomena, I would not go so far as to implicate it as alpha imperative.
@KadrickNinness And it has been proven that the male hypothalamus is indeed wired differently from females, and that gives rise to the male sexuality and sexual behavior. That in itself generates psychosexual complexes. This is what I would attribute it to rather than the "alpha imperative". I prefer plain biological science over evolutionary biology.
As for expectations, the expectations from women will increase as women become more proficient in these currently male dominated activities and the gap reduced. Albeit with men and women still retaining their respective psychical advantages.
And I also believe, that as women become more involve in these activities, the understanding of the female physique will increase, together with the knowledge on how to tweak women physiology for certain sports.
Are you somehow inferring that female athletes are being deprived of the opportunity to maximize their performance output? And that as this tweaking ensues, the gender gap will close or vanish?
If so, I think that's a super theory. We'll call it the Sports Glass Ceiling.
@KadrickNinness You seem not to have read my statements properly and have taken it out of context. I never said they have been deprived of their opportunity, but rather still have plenty of room for further improvements. This ain't intergalactic age yet so don't act like we've already know what the ceiling is.
I never said the gap will vanish because I said both genders have their own respective advantages. There will be gaps in areas or else then there would be NO difference.
Yeah. There's room for improvements, and the improvements are gradually being made. Yep. ON BOTH SIDES.
I don't have time to address much of this right now.
The remark was arbitrary, and contextualized with "practically". Acrobatic sports are "form" sports, and as such, they are competing for mastery of their OWN form. No ability to run faster, further and generate more power.
The competition is within themselves, and then compared.
@KadrickNinness But when a "form" sport requires pulling 8Gs and 3-dimentional maneuvers, maintaining sense of direction and aircraft control amidst all that harshness, as well as mastery of the machine itself, you'd still want to take it as a purely "form" sport. Men are also allowed express their "form" here, so it's the same vice versa. Talk about spatial and technical abilities... you're gonna throw that out and replace it with just "form"? hehe
"But when a "form" sport requires pulling 8Gs and 3-dimentional maneuvers, maintaining sense of direction and aircraft control amidst all that harshness" how did we get to this from Acrobatics?
And the best AERObatic pilots in the world are men. Should they be? Should I care why they are? Either way, they are.
I could just as easily toss your own rationale back at you in this scenario, but it would be cheap and dismissive to do so. And like I said, I'm too preoccupied to address this substantially.
Scenario would be that "gymnastics and acrobatics" draws on a far more restrictive pool of male talent, because the social pressure opposing males doing such "girly" passtimes as gymnastics and ballet, is causal in it.
I could also remark that I have no familiarity with it.
@KadrickNinness And to refute your earlier allegation that in just in every field of sports, there's a hundred or thousand or more guys that can perform better than any professional female. Now that I've remembered her name, Patty Wagstaff was the 3 year consecutive defender of the US National Acrobatic champion title. Where men and women compete in the same category. After her, women constitute 5 out of the top ten. During that 3 year, there was not a single man that could beat
The "alpha imperative" and "survivalism" are different things that are causally inseparable. A basic comprehension of evolutionary mechanics illuminates why; And the mechanic is all over the map in nature.
Considering the extent of my involvement in departments of sporting science, and witnessing first-hand the brutally uncompromising rigor with which scientific dedication is milking the potential of female physiology, I'm not sure what further endeavor of "tweak" you refer to.
@KadrickNinness And in cases in Thailand, where women earn more than twice as much as men, you can't attribute that to modern feminism. It is unfair, they worked hard for it.
There are also studies that show that women on average are more diligent somehow (statistically).
I'm fully with you on the idea that men are treated as disposable. Many women have this delusion that a world "by" men, is a world "for" men. What is the ultimate ideal of civilization? Lifestyle? What is it's spokesman? COMMERCE! And who does commerce pander to? Especially at the expense of men?
Anyway, thanks for talking. I have my own writing that I must attend to or trouble shall befall me. Between that and this, getting RSI!
Things have a light and a dark side. If someone wants to take Christmas as an inconsequential, light-hearted excuse for family gathering and gift-giving, that's fine.
It's it's a mechanism to promulgate confused christian values, and plant a seed in the minds of Children, as an advantageous base to preach Christianity to them, I have a big problem. Not with peoples beliefs, but with this devious mechanism of input.
And my contrast of a "fashionista" and an "average male" is not an accident or a bungle.
Among the relevant demographies, fashion consciousness among women, is at least something approaching a median. I make no reference to the average male consciousness.
Women will sometimes say "I don't dress up for them, I dress up for myself". Uhuh. That's why they like to dress up and stay home, instead of curling up in their pajamas. No?
@KadrickNinness Please, tell me what the hell does this have to do with the guy above not sharing your sense of masculinity. To me women dressing up just because they can, ain't got nothing to do with this guy wanting equal treatment between men and women.
The guy above? In the video? You're way off base. My entire line of discourse is in reference to the person I addressed in the forum, in the first place. The one who was making egregious statements about the values and virtues of women vs men.
Nobody has to embrace a model of masculinity. A cursory glance at my remarks shows this to be a reiteration. The devaluation of a traditional masculine model, however, is as idiotic as enforcing it.
@KadrickNinness So you were talking to betaguy2005 and not the uploader of this video. If it is, my mistake then. I feel that the uploader of this video is completely entitled to his view and he shares the same principles as me.
@KadrickNinness In today's world, social men and women, test social men and women, wherever a distinct statement is concerned. "Social women test men. Men socially test test one another", IS a prescription cultural expectation. If a woman is able to past any test of a distinct statement she will also earn the same respect. Thus, the "alpha imperative" is an arbitrary notion. If it ain't phallocentric, I don't know what it is. heheh.
They've served a vital purpose, but their relevance is contextual. That fact can't be wholly reconciled with the instincts that contend the higher rationale. I'm actually the one fending off his constricted view of masculinity as drastically imposed.
@KadrickNinness Was his anecdote an attack on masculinity per se, or a statement of his personal feelings how how unfair society is to men and women? If masculinity does impose such discrepancies, biological stuff aside, then it is indeed bigoted. Because under the Bill of Rights everyone is free to do what they want with their lives.
That again caused me to wonder what the hell masculinity really is anyway.....
The big myth about "alphaism" which is distributed, is the it's like a hierarchy (I only refer to it because of the invocation in your name). Humans are generally monogamous, and the sexes are pretty evenly distributed. It's less about achieving the center of the pedestal than it is about achieving acceptance from the other males, for your resolute will and aptitude at STANDING YOUR GROUND. Guys will chip away at weaknesses not because they want you to be like them. But to toughen your resolve.
In a social environment, anything distinct is treated as a statement. In a social environment, statements are TESTED. But! If you withstand a test with a distinct statement, you will provoke a greater respect than you otherwise would have. These aren't hardline rules, just general sways of social causality.
All you sound like, is a rhetoric-beaten male, in dire need of feminist-deprogramming.
Let me know when you want a good reason for a better self image. Some friends would like to meet you.
There should not be a battle of the sexes. However, there is a war against men, waged by feminism. This "war" hurts everybody, not just men. So, even if you don't wish to be a "masculist" (I don't call myself that!), you need to understand that men are the bullseye in this war. So, men need to be awakened in a political way, so they can mobilize against feminism, and stop feminism's war which hurts EVERYBODY in the long run.
This needs to start with men, and be controlled by men.
The point of hitting a girl you are right in school I lost my temper after getting beat up by a group of girls I hit one on the arm and got into more trouble than they did for the initial start of the conflict.
men and women need each other, we may fight but really we can't live without each other, even if you are gay you will need female friends and the love of and vice versa, yes we are different but a sensitive man is still a man and a hard woman is still a woman it's not just about sex, we need our opposite to centre us, we need for polarity. that is the fundamental law of nature.
For some reason there tends to be an innate bias against the "Hand that feeds", invents, protects,maintains, etc. by the benefactors. Supported groups tend to feel inferior and so counter by calling themselves 'oppressed'. This ranges from welfare recipiants to spoilt kids to enduring radical feminists. Many bright women rising to their own potential think those feminists are ridiculous.
There can never be true equality because men and women are different!!
It makes me sad to hear you say"you don't want to believe there is a battle of the sexes". Well there isn't one. Men have won that battle hands down from the beginning of time!
The balttle is for your very RIGHTS!!!
right now we are losing......gaining ground......but still losing!
Do not just sit on the fence and observe!! that is the worst thing you can do for yourself and the movement!!!
All the metals that are needed to grow and maintain the telecommunications, electronics, and robotics are still going to be mined!!!!
Men CREATE, INVENT, DEVELOP, DESIGN, AND MAINTAIN "EVERY" ASPECT OF CIVILIZATION!!!
It's why you don't have to go out and kill for your dinner tonight!
It's why you don't have to sew your own clothes today!
It's why you don't have to build your own fire to keep warm or are able to face chat with others without actually having to travel 2000miles just to say hi
"The feminists are winning" But didn't you just say it wasn't a battle?? I'm confused..
However, there are many other women who take the same opinion as itinkuno, myself included. But I mostly agree with your idea of looking at people for who they are, not what they look like. Genetic make-up makes you male or female, but that (as you said) does not mean we have to fall into those stereotypes. I appreciate you taking the time to share this. Thanks.
@ThunderGodCid10 Boston College employed Prof. Mary Daly, one of the Feminist movement's supreme Lesbian idealists. She banned all men from attending her classes.
@Traitorfish Masculism hates sexism? If the language is evolving, consider that masculinism would now be the men's rights movement, and that Feminism is now more akin to female supremacy.
@feministsAreCorrupt Masculism is pro-Feminist, and seeks to de-construct gender from an androcentric position which compliments Feminism's gynocentric position. As Feminism deals with women's issues, Masculism addresses men's issues.
"Men's Rights" and "Masculinism", on the other hand, are idiot buzz-words used by misogynists to bully Feminists, pro-Feminists and Masculists into silence in defence of their hateful and archaic caricature of "proper" gender roles and identities.
@Traitorfish Men's rights are not bully terms. They primarily have to do with the female monopoly on reproduction and the excess of female power in marriage/divorce.
Feminism is about advancing women's issues only. There is no end to female advantage. The term Masculism is fake. I've never heard of it, probably because it is the Feminist ideal of a person with XY. Gender deconstruction is futile academic masturbation, but at least you will have your pick of Feminist tail to tap.
@feministsAreCorrupt I should clarify; the concept of "men's rights" is not inherently misogynistic, but much of its contemporary usage is. It is used to invokes a false, I dare say an absurd narrative of Matriarchal superiority. One which you are apparently invoking now, because you don't actually understand the philosophy which you criticise. But, then, truth is, apparently, defined in terms of what you personally have "heard", which really doesn't leave much room for contradiction, does it?
@Traitorfish I have shelves of books on social issues over the decades from Radical Feminism to the scant works on Men's Issues. If you're able to provide a book specifically on your brand of "Masculism", I will add it to my collection and read it.
@Traitorfish Thanks. I already have a number of Warren Farrell's books including the one you recommend. When I read the book when it hit the market, I didn't distinguish Masculism from Masculinism. Sorry. Anyway, neither term is catching on, but men do not need or want a philosophy with sexist policies, and the term should reflect that.
I agree that men's rights are not inherently misogynistic. They are simply appearing when Feminism has transformed into Female Supremecism.
@ThunderGodCid10 And how does citing SCUM Manifesto undermine my credibility when feminists are the ones who adore it? That's my whole point. Think before you type.
@ThunderGodCid10 Unfortunately, there are people out there who take SCUM seriously. If feminists want to be taken seriously, they should distance themselves from such extremism.
Read SCUM Manifesto, by Valerie Solanas, my friend. That's an excercise in total man-hatred. Many mainstream feminists try to pass it off as some bold political statement. You talk about how people might react if a woman hit you. Their automatic response would be that you "deserved it." That's the way most people think. I like this video, though. Best of luck.
I cant read all these paragraphs.
bruthaflo 1 week ago
its like the "what would you do" segment on abc news, where a man was beating a woman and practically everyone who walked by decided to help the girl because they viewed the guy as a psycho, where when the woman was beating the man people walked right by viewing the woman as justified, men are seen as being the cause of all problems and women are angels sent to maintain peace and love
thechadman1X 2 weeks ago
we need feminists like we i need cancer
TrueBlueCanuck 2 months ago
It takes all types to make the world work. If everyone were a feminist, no one would be. If everyone were masculinist, no one would be. If everyone were gay or lesbian, no one would be. If everyone were pro- natal, no one would be. Why? Because they'd have no opposition. They wouldn't have any defining factors to set them apart from the rest of society.
MsSbolin 2 months ago
I fully support your view, and will lend my intellectual firepower!
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Here is an experiment:
1.Take any sentence made by a feminist that involves the word man.
2. Replace the word man with the word jew.
All of the sudden it sounds kind of racist right?
Feminism is not about equal rights anymore, its about demonizing men and promoting women regardless of their individual actions through hate propaganda.
Same methods as religious fundamentalism or any dictatorship of the past.
PendulumEffecter 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We treat feminism in the same way we treat racism,
We scrutinize any person for feminist opinion,
We refuse to cooperate with a person with feminist opinions,
We ignore and prevent any action from a feminist.
We defend ourselves together against any feminist attack.
We push back the pendulum to that of which feminism has crossed the line.
BUT WE DO NOT MAKE THE FEMINIST MISTAKE OF ATTACKING THE FEMINIST AFTER DEFEATED, WE ONLY BOYCOTT AND STEP AWAY TOGETHER.
PendulumEffecter 2 months ago
Dude i dont consider myself very sensitive, and there is serioulsy nothing wrong with that, but you are right on every point. Feminism is no different from the bullshit opression that happened to women and individuals with more melanin in their skin. Its funny that alot of girls who hate opression and would speak out on it dont seem to speak out on feminism. The girl you are responding to is an intelligent person. Empathy is the key to our species advancing.
imortalsappy 3 months ago
Your views are ideal and fair... thanks for atleast recognizing some of mens issues. there are many other women also speaking against the injustice against men.. search for anti-feminist women or ex feminist women they are all over youtube some have actually grouped together to point out the fallacy in certain modern beliefs about the ignored gender (males).
themaniusedtob 5 months ago
Men are worth less than women, generally speaking women are better at multitasking, they are better communicators, they are stronger emotionally, more mature, genetically they have more DNA information (X chromosome is more dense than the Y) women look better, eat healthier, live longer, and from my experience men act like 2D cartoon characters that are some limited in what interests they are allowed, or how they can act or speak, I'm tired of it.
Betaguy2005 6 months ago
@Betaguy2005
Multitasking? Bogus.
Communicators? Bogus.
Emotionally stronger (Being emotion-driven does not amount to EQ).
The Y chromosome? You're going to invoke the Y instead of the manifest reality that supplies you with the entire civilization of technological convenience?
Most of the things you say are misinformation/misinterpretation. Others are explained by cultural imperatives, most of which are assigned... BY women.
Seriously, hang up your manhood. You don't speak for shit.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
There's a distinct possibility that at some juncture, you'll graduate from your mire of auto-exacerbating self-loathing and do some constructive thinking. Your first port of call might be the universal framework of a single word: Causality.
It's valid to cherry-pick some of your glib examples, for how they signify the rest as an extrapolation of merit.
Live longer? Let's forward simply one example to fry your mainframe. 95+% of workplace deaths are men. And if they didn't do it, who would?
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness There is a even higher possibility that he will stick to his principles. And whether or not he improves himself in terms of skill sets or workplace competency depends on how much he works for it, not on whether or not he shares your view on "social imperatives".
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
If you're so tired of it, there are surgeons who can resolve your sexual identity crisis. Or, was your solution what, that the rest of us should succumb to your irrational encapsulation of what we are, and/or ought to be? The only question it arouses in me, is who the hell are the males in your life? More causality? How many male teachers/mentors did you have?
It's not our fault you can't establish a decent network. Unless, you want in ours? Because your list of bunkum does NOT reflect us.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I believe he isn't telling you to "succumb" to his "encapsulation" of what "we" are. He is merely explaining his views and principles with a STRONG resolve.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
It also struck me what is signified in the way you frame one of your absurd criticisms.
"Are somewhat limited in what they are allowed".
You do realize that "allowed" refers to an external source, yes? Allowed by who? I suspect you're probably a male, like many, with limitation male-social-intelligence owing to a lack of male mentorship. Males aren't entitlement driven. They're respect driven. Social women test men. Socially however, men test each other. The alpha imperative. Nature.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Everyone is entitled to their own view of "social imperatives". But when it comes to unalienable and civil rights none has the right to detract from others, or impose their views.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I've talked extensively with this person outside the frame of this forum. I won't address this now, aside from some thrust. Whoever said "imperatives" were a good thing? You seem to be confusing it with "responsibility" which is less debatable, yet more obscure. Imperatives are a matter of era, but not especially a matter of opinion. Fuss over the details all you like, but the biological lineage has sweeps of imparted characteristic that remain influential.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness You talked extensively with this person? Hehe. "Imperatives" or "responsibility", he gets to choose what he wants to be as long as nobody imposes on nobody.
And if biological lineage has imparted characteristic that don't die, then you wouldnt have to defend it.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
Comment removed
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes, everyone is free. That includes free to INFLUENCE. Masculinity is the reason you're here to discuss: Masculinity. If you wish for the expressionism of civil culture to supersede biological imperative, that is your right and empowered option. These imperatives are far from obsolete, however. Their relevance is just denied.
I don't have to defend it. I'm handing a clue on a platter to the ignorant.
What would I defend? Something obviously functioning everywhere, every day?
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
Comment removed
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Hehe"? I don't get the punchline of the "Hehe" part. Is this some form of sarcastic doubt? Or barely veiled mockery in sympathy to him?
The syntax of your sentiment seems a little muddled. "That don't die"? Haven't died? Won't die? Can't die? Never mind the fallacy of your axiom, the rationale of your leap, is of itself, not even specious let alone valid.
You speak of truth and reality as if isn't variably (mis)interpretted, even en masse.
As if truth needs no defense.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness But to be completely honest, what I think is that, some men, especially those with a male ego complex, will stop at nothing because somehow something makes them feel like losers when they don't do what a "man" must do. Including fending off what they deem is the slightest "emasculation" of their "glorious male image".
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
To be completely honest, you sound indoctrinated by the misguidance of imperatives as a social construct. Your mockery of the "Glorious Male Image" is absurdist on many levels.
First, you seem to imply some general disposition to phallic impartation.
The "Male Ego Complex" is a Feminist fraud. Males are curious creatures as, they are lumbered with the performance imperative in biology which sees them overtly compete. However, they aren't as ego oriented as women
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness so if it ain't phallic issue you're having here, why does this guy in the video need to embrace masculinity in order to better himself? He can equally do well without any notion of masculinity, demanding equal treatment for men and women, and to better himself without being one damn bit like you, nor having an "alpha imperative".
Don't deflect the conversation, it is about him. I don't give a damn about feminist and fashionistas,
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Any earnest and objective psych grad, adherent to empirical integrity knows how to distil the indicators of Ego orientation, and women display these traits far more prominently than men. Especially the PRIMARY indicator of Ego: Sensitivity to criticism. If this were the result of evolution as meme, it's no doubt a mechanism of species survivalism. Although the males are the primary competitor, the natural selection occurs in discarding the line of the deterred.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
I could easily get tied up in and carried away with this matter, but shall mostly refrain.
Other indicators of diversity in Ego Orientation, are the means by which women seek to attain power within the social construct. Print Media makes no secret of this pursuit. If Estee Lauder, Victoria's (not so) Secret or Vera Wang aren't vanguards of the female ego, then just try rejecting a fashionista in the scene, and see how it rates next to the average rejected male.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I don't just judge a person by their sense of fashion, but their morality, character and principles. So it makes no difference to me if women are more fashion prone. Anyway, fashionistas with no brains, might still have a chance in getting a shot at money, because some men have ichy dicks, that what I think. Other than that I don't see the slightest difference between then and the "average rejected male". heheh.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I suspect you probably don't "see" the difference between the average rejected male and the average rejected female. Women, whether innately or by social suggestion view themselves as "the prize". And that the male is typically pursuer. That's an aside, however.
My experience, and the available reference on this is far more broad than the social scene. Women are more sensitive to and less interpretive of criticism in general. To a point of night and day at times.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Women being "the prize" and men being the pursuer, is also a prescriptive norm. In today's world, successful women with lots of money want good looking young men who aren't necessarily rich for companion. And thus, the women "feeds" the man. I am in no position to judge about who's the failure in this scenario.
And in Thailand, this is actually happening on a large scale. The average working class woman has about at least twice the disposable income than men.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
It IS a prescriptive norm, because MOST people carry on with their lives, in disregard for the political process or the progressive sway that defines law. Sugar mamas are dynamically no different to sugar-daddies. Don't expect an intrinsic submission to this dynamic, however.
Females possess 70% of the wealth in America. What is the relevance of this to anything? Women and feminists like to cherry pick misrepresented figures without the whole picture behind it.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Longest lifespan? Incidence of homelessness? Impact of recession because their jobs aren't socially funded?
When you eliminate the BIG picture, the details are meaningless. They only have meaning in context. Anyone who denies the diversity of gender impetus upon the social outcomes is completely delusion.
If men are in ascension "it's prejudiced! It must change!". Even if Affirmative Action aids the rise of women? "See! It's because women are awesome!"
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
The western establishment has been gradually alienating the male population of the schooling system for increasing decades.
And like everywhere else, this double standard applies.
If women excel, it's because they're awesome. Not because they're assisted. If men excel, it's because of patriarchy and the women were held back.
The intrinsic truth in all scenarios is SWAMPED by the unaccountable pandering and hindering.
"Let your sister win a race!"
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness That's is because men like you hold on to the so call "gender impetus" of which you speak off.
Men are more ashamed to come out and say that they are being alienated, just like they tend not to report being raped. Men don't come together and discuss their rights like women because they feel it is emasculating.
Thus, extreme feminism has been having its way. I for one, am not a man who is ashamed to bring up mens' issues.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I don't hold onto or endorse the "gender imperative". I simply refer to it's historical significance, and it's contemporary influence. The fact that I speak of it, is in denial of it. Stoicism IS a masculine trait. And biologically it's been an important one for complex reasons. The same way women's "broadcasted feelings" have been a useful imperative.
I openly discuss these matters even though it puts me at risk of social demonizing.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Haha. I don't care if some men think that men out to be stoicism. Let their testicles boil in lava while they gag themselves with a stiff upper lip.
You see, I don't have such impedance when it comes to voicing my concern.
And it is because of their "stoic/stiff upper lip" complex, that extreme feminism has been having its way.
And maybe the whole idea of extreme feminism is to kick mens' balls in such a way? hahaha. what an irony.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
I agree. Social stoicism is NOT a virtue. It's value is drummed into men, though. Look, the more divided society becomes, who is raising these boys? Single mothers and 95% female school teachers. It's not entirely their fault. It's a tide that must be turned by the WISE men among us. We are NOT on a different page here.
The best impact men can have, is to discuss these issues with other MEN. It's they who have the power they don't realize to reverse the problems they don't realize.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness @KadrickNinness It it is indoctrinated it is bad. If it is due to some inherent Oedipus complex of some sort, it is still bad. But I believe it is a reciprocation of both.
Men have the "size matters' complex while women don't. And as such that constituted an impedance for mens' liberation. HAHAHA what an irony.
To me to treat a women like a lady is to acknowledge that women are motivated by love. Not give them preferential treatment like opening doors.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
The "male ego complex" is not an empirical reality.
It's merely a specious shaming weapon.
I've had some odd experiences in recent times on the matter of ad hominem tactics. The only time I've had males employ them lately, is on behalf of women they were chivalrously coming to the aid of.
All demographies use them. Women however make the male ad hominem deployment in everyday life, pale in comparison. It's not even in the exhaustion of options. It's reflexive.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I am against chivalry, both personally and on a systemic level. But I have no say in other mens' life as to whether or not they want to practice chivalry as long as it is not systematically imposed on me.
But as far as I'm concerned men with chivalry OFTEN have "male ego complex" as well. I'll back that up in a moment.
And since I'm an "equal" person, I abhor both systemic chivalry and feminism.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Ok, so you oppose chivalry. Is it because you endorse equality? Me too. But it's also at the expense of many people's prized conception of "romance". Are you familiar with the Orwell expression of "double think"? You are operating from a platform of your own developed insight. At a street level, it is chaos. Aggregate women are engaged in huge amounts of double-think, as a passing, normative ethos.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness But unlike you, I oppose chivalry, not by means of masculinism, but by the plain fact that everybody has unalienable rights under Bill of Rights, and they are endowed by their Creator certain unalienable rights, and the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness, men or women.
Double-think women are like double-think men, hehe. Maybe you have not met enough objective women in your life.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
I've met plenty of objective women. Inside each person is two people however.
Two profound adages relate: "Careful what you wish for". "Talk is cheap". I've spoken with women, who when you discuss matters with them, will rationally endorse fair measures. When opportunity or crisis emerges however, they either do, or threaten to employ the prejudiced means made available to them by feminist petitioning.
So the real question of individuals boils down to being "tested"
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness When I say objective women, I obviously meant women who don't flip flop their principles when crisis emerges.
If they do, they are obviously waiting for chivalrous help, and it is obvious hypocrisy. I mean the kind who are absolutely responsible for what they say.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
What you may find curious about me however, is that I give women the option of a standard. Not a DOUBLE standard, just a standard. And they acknowledge that the option alone is one that men don't have.
If they want to be treated "like a lady", then in practice, don't pursue a semantic line of "equality". Equal opportunity, sure. Many women hate feminism and it's byproducts.
If they hop on board the feminism train, then don't cry when you get treated "like a man".
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness In other words, what I'm saying is the chivalry practiced during times like WW2 is just stupid. Imagine if you are born a boy and were suddently treated like a disposable dog?
Haha. Again, men's world, men's imposition.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
I've even seen many EMPLOYED social coaches/advisers obliviously endorsing double-think: "Yes we want to be treated as EQUALS, but we still want to be treated LIKE WOMEN. It's polite for a man to hold a door and pay for dinner". No, that is not a paraphrase.
The outcomes realities of society are mysterious to ideologues. But nowhere near as mysterious to them as the CAUSAL PRINCIPALS. And those are a complex handle for even the sharpest thinkers. Let alone mindless harpies.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Those kinds of women can finger themselves. As long as no one is handicapped, old or pregnant, I won't give up a seat for them.
The reason they can still demand such things is because there is a certain percentage of men that practices such chivalry. I don't give a damn for such women, I have enough problems of my own already. hehe. Let alone commit into a marriage with an unobjective person.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
What you're saying that I agree with, is that MEN are contributors to the reason MEN'S rights are shit on.
And the conflict between the mentality of society, vs the practical reality for men, is stunning. Women are given the message that their life is hard because men shit on them (even in trivial journalism: Housework? etc).
The reality is, that women are walking all OVER men, because men's pandering to women, ENABLES it. Chivalry can be cute, yet the lethal ENEMY of men.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness You it advocate to some biological factor. But yes chivalry is uncalled for from the very beginning of time.
Therefor that can only mean that men are suffering from a certain complex, which I've been proposing all along. That same thing that sigmund frued said.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
From the beginning of time is a different causal premise. The imperatives that were defined by survivalist evolution, aren't very compatible with civilized political jostling.
The imperatives were highly valuable and honed. Not always individually fair, but that's not what creates survivable species. Enlightenment bestows individual value. I don't endorse it, I just oppose it being devalued in it's fullest context as some form of pathology.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Let's make this clear. Men and women are both human beings with equal faculty. I don't buy into that "survivalist evolution" game that some people think needs to be played.
Even if we are cave dwellers I would still be abiding by this principle.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
The survivalist evolution isn't a game. Think of it this way.
There are 100 men and 100 women in the world. The men go to war with bears to defend their territory. Only 2 survive. For the sake of the species, whose lives are desperately essential to protect. The men right? If they die, the species is gone. Until that happened though, who was it more essential to protect. If there's only 2 women left, who easily can the species repopulate? Group oriented reality.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Haha. To me it is simply. Both men and women can fight (men have more upper body strength on average, and women have better flexibility and lower body stamina recovery), and can be trained to fight. A man and women is needed to reproduce and if either one is absent that cant repopulate. Therefore both are equally important for reproduction.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
"Upper body strength" is a scientific fallacy.
Men have superior total body strength. And men's flexibility potential is just as high. Their hip structure is a little different and not designed for birthing. The only athletic advantage women have is that their fat cells can be more buoyant.
Go watch the best female "Parkour" practitioners. Then watch the guys... Flexible much?
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness There is a scientific research that prooves that women have better lower body stamina RECOVERY.
Women bulk up in muscle size less then men because they are not androgen dominant. Aside from pelvic structure, slight difference in cranial, and different genitals, pretty much everything else is due to post-pubertal hormones. Of course if I start invoking chromosomes you might not like it. But women do have the same capabilities as men.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
You aren't cottoning onto the repopulation dynamic. Both are essential on a one to one basis. However, 1 man can impregnate a hundred women. If there's only one woman, 100 men can only impregnate- 1 woman. Thus the biological preciousness of the female when applying group mentality.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness So just because women are the child bearers they suddenly become the prize?
Or come on, we are monogamous, unless you choose to have an itchy dick. Of which case, women are also prone to promiscuity.
I don't give women any option. They are equals and that's it. If they want into fall into the chivalrous hands of other men that that's their problem. I am an INDIVIDUAL in my own right. And if she can't love me for that she ain't loving me. What social imperative?
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness You don't endorse enlightenment and individual value? That is the very thing that makes us HUMAN. That is what the human sentience is all about. Complete autonomy, and moral reasoning. It is within my conscience that we are all equal and to be treated otherwise violates my conscience.
Btw, do you know that women can be honed to become deadly fighters as well?
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
They can be. But on average, they're nowhere near as well suited to the training to become one. There's also logistical problems (pregnancy) and cohesiveness impacts. There are many reasons why women in the military is a bad idea. But in the interests of individual fairness, there is no ideal. It's a bad idea that must happen. On the plus side, it broadens the pool of potential talent, and presents women with a reality check.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Very simply, it is like one of those futuristic shows, like Avatar, for an example. Men and women make up for each others weakness, and that doesn't mean women can't be on the front line. A woman's life is no more precious than a man's life. If a particular scenario requires the relative strength of one, than one helps the other. That is cohesion, no 2 person a the same.
For pregnancy threres maternity leave. hahahahahahaha
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
As a fellow endorser of the value of the individual I agree. And that's why the "gender war" is stupid and divisive.
Individual value is a luxury that is enabled by the species not being under threat, though. And that's certainly not the case ;-)
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I disagree. As species under threat, individual value and principles becomes even more important. When one fights for freedom with his/her own will, he/she is more likely to outperform a conscript. Humans perform best when not imposed.
That's is because you still can't see to potential women can have in battle. Yes women are more delicate, but they are not the weaker sex as far as capabilities are concerned.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness When you have doubts about the capabilities of women in battle you could still use the "no 2 persons are the same" argument. Or the "normal distribution curve argument". But then again, I think women are highly capable.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I never said women aren't capable. I said on average, and by biological make-up, they aren't AS capable. They also aren't as mentally equipped as most men. Not intellectually, but emotionally. Are you aware the most 14 year old boys can physically outperform most adult women?
If they want in, fine. But the "normalizing" bullshit has to go. There should be NO acknowledgement of gender at all. Same test requirements for EVERY body.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Let me show you what real Oedipus complex is. And also women's capabilities.
Cut and paste these following videos:
Sabine Schmitz behind the scenes video
(pay particular attention to 2:20)
and also:
Elena Myers
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
"that's like so typical".
All I'm seeing is a testimonial. I'm way to weathered in this business to apply some ultimate gravitas to someone's testimonial. She also says at the end "women can drive much better than men". Do I apply significance to that, too?
I've seen some miraculous distortions of reality when it comes to different peoples "accounts" of versions of events. And the problem with this kind is it's like a Domestic Violence article. There's no counterpoint.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Don't take it out of context. She doesn't mean that literally. She is a kick ass driver let me tell you that. "women can drive much better than men" is a counter argument to the men who foul played here because shes better. That statement is meant to taunt. Some men with ego cant stand getting beat by women.
My original purpose is to show you women's talent. You should research on how famous she is.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I know it's a taunt. I don't take it seriously. I take all people on their individual merits. What I'm doing is putting the dubiousness of a testimonial into the context of the rest of her remarks.
If I take her testimonial as gospel, who elses do I take as such? What would those involved have to say for their own account? Even an interpretation of ALL accounts can make the truth slippery. But ONE account, with obviously extreme (true or not) overtones reliable?
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness This ain't the best but is what I can find:
watch?v=EMrhQweazSI&feature=related
watch?v=KfYqPKR0hog&feature=fvwrel
watch?v=OmAQgI6aefU&feature=related
Plenty more where that came from
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness You seem to be caught in a dichotomy. Of wanting equal rights because you can't take the feminist overzealousness while wanting to preserve your masculinity and be a masculinist.
Full autonomy VS alpha imperative
It is hard to be a equal person and a masculinist without some sort of contradiction deep within. hehe
Maybe you should show some of your masculinist friends the videos I posted you. I would like to hear what's their views on that.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
No time to be extensive now.
I'm not caught in anything. I'm not the one assigning or promoting a preference or standard. I'm just the one describing the falsity of the ones expected.
My "masculinist friends" would tear those videos apart, anywhere it was possible to do so. Which is plenty of ways.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Well, that leaves me curious about one thing. It seems then that masculinist have some innate predisposition to want to tear up those videos, even if it constitutes sufficient and rational rebuttal to their beliefs? Can I safely say that they are absolutists then?
How does one tear that apart, I know there are various ways, but an example would be helpful if you don't mind.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AndrewChan84
They don't need to be predisposed. A predisposition will seek a reason where it isn't warranted. The way that insipid gender-orientation in media paints a target on the back of the subject makes them fair-game... And easy pickings.
I re-re-post:
"ok, so if your a chick, hot, and can jump 75ft. you get a factory deal!! fuck, i wish it was that easy for guys. i would have been pro at 15."
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
There's a hilariously bad quote from a feminist dunce Charlotte Whitton: “For a woman to get half as much credit as a man, she has to work twice as hard,
and be twice as smart. Fortunately, that isn't difficult."
Ironically the reverse is true. Female achievements are lavished with novel value. A female in a field can measure up to male mediocrity and be considered elite. She's "more equal" and awesome, yet mostly deemed relative to her gender peers.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I know that women sometimes overate themselves and that's because they do not have a good reality check on things. But if it weren't for chivalry in the first place, women would be expected to deliver the same performance as men. Many women still engage double think because traditional gender expectations still exist.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
This has nothing to do with female potential or aptitude, and everything to do with semantic hypocrisy and practical standards. For most women with some kind of professional contract, there's often a hundred or a thousand (or more) guys that can do it better, but not as comparable to their relative peer. Universality dematerializes and the world "normalizes". They get attention for how good they are, AND their being female while doing it.
*Shrug* just the way it is
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness "For most women with some kind of professional contract, there's often a hundred or a thousand (or more) guys that can do it better....). Really? I think that is rather bigoted. But basing on statistics at this moment, that statement does have weight. But because of what? Is the more appropriate question. Expectations, semantics, culture and habits is the actual reason for the discrepancy.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
Bigotted? It's a DEMONSTRABLE FACT.
The best female golfer in the world (Sorensen) took it upon herself to Tee-Off with the guys a while back. She didn't even make the cut. Why everyone is so hung up on these counter-comparatives is beyond me. A cheetah can run faster than a human. Is acknowledging this fact bigoted towards humans? Achievement is RELATIVE because of the foundational form of who is doing the achieving. Ergo, female weightlifters, don't compete with men.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
These women are showing some excellent talent, btw. I'm just not sure what it's supposed to surprise me with, illuminate me about or convince me of.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Most men would shrug at the abstract idea that a women can do just as good as men in any given area. Rationalization becomes an auxiliary process, rather. Whenever I talk to men of various intellectual levels, I love to test their psyche when it comes to this subject.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness We are pretty much on agreement when it comes to men's rights and are both humanists in general. The only thing I'm not happy with is that women are perceived as the weaker sex, and as such should be given options. If masculinism does involve getting rid of the social perception that men are more predisposed to violence as well as conscription, etc., then I'm all for it.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I've just looked up the masculinism in wiki, and found out it is pretty much very in sync with what humanism actually is. I might have mistaken it on some fronts. So let's just say I agree with everything you said except the "survalist evolution/alpha-imperative" stuff, and about women being the weaker sex. To me, women are not the weaker sex.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I never said women are the weaker sex. But if you're going to make it about physical aptitude, they are. This is an unavoidable aggregate fact. This has no relation whatsoever to inferiority or superiority. Just physiology.
Women ARE weaker. If you're going to avoid or refute this, welcome to delusion.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Pertaining to the physical aptitude and physiology of men and women, there are differences of course. The fact that one is androgen dominant and the other is estrogen dominant is bound to create differences. But differences as PERCEIVED and differences in actuality may be different.
Men have more brute strength on average. Women have better stamina recovery after long periods of physical exertion. Welcome to facts.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84 And that's assuming that both have the same physical lifestyle and age.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
Comment removed
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
You're confusing this with the issue of accountability. Women should be held JUST as accountable for their violence. Gender should be entirely removed from law. Look at it this way, you can even have the law DISCRIMINATE on the basis of features that are presently accommodating women, and if it's true in the specific case, women will still be accommodated, only fairly.
A big, strong person terrorizing a smaller, weaker one, is heinous, irrespective of gender.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
This isn't even getting into the specialized weapons of stigma that women deploy, and well, I'm not going to.
Men have the average weapons. Women have their different average weapons.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
You're free to deny the causal implications of Survivalist Imperatives. Everyone has a right to be wrong.
Presumably you're neither an evolutionary biologist, a sociologist or a psych major.
It is indisputable, axiomatic reality.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Yes, I'm glad you brought up the disposition that I'm neither one of the above. I do not believe in evolution. But I think survivalist imperatives, is still a different thing from the alpha-imperative, even in the evolutionary context. But I guess, in evolution, one is allowed to make associations, some of which may be right and some plain conjectures.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Delving further into "masculism" (which is not a term I self-apply) you might be surprised however, at how fair-minded, articulate, and ironic they are.
Ironic in that, they are the outright reverse of all the muddle-headed, privilege endorsing that feminism amounts to. Ironic in that, feminism is not what it's believed to be (a good thing), and masculism is not what it's believed to be (a bad thing).
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness So are you in anyway linking this "irony" to embedded social imperatives that is driving the human psyche, both males and females, to such perceptions. The so called alpha imperative? While I may still agree with you that the psychological complexes of men and women are different and may be what gives rise to this phenomena, I would not go so far as to implicate it as alpha imperative.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness And it has been proven that the male hypothalamus is indeed wired differently from females, and that gives rise to the male sexuality and sexual behavior. That in itself generates psychosexual complexes. This is what I would attribute it to rather than the "alpha imperative". I prefer plain biological science over evolutionary biology.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Btw, I'm only continuing this conversation from this point onwards because I think it is fun, and by no means an imposition on you.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
As for expectations, the expectations from women will increase as women become more proficient in these currently male dominated activities and the gap reduced. Albeit with men and women still retaining their respective psychical advantages.
And I also believe, that as women become more involve in these activities, the understanding of the female physique will increase, together with the knowledge on how to tweak women physiology for certain sports.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AndrewChan84
"Welcome to facts".
A strange statement to make after you've just announced that you don't believe in the pivotal hub of modern biology: Evolution.
It is real: Welcome to facts.
"I prefer plain biological science over evolutionary biology."
Is that like preferring a discussion about artefacts, to one about paleoliths?
Evolutionary biology IS science.
What better motivation is there than: Fun?
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Are you somehow inferring that female athletes are being deprived of the opportunity to maximize their performance output? And that as this tweaking ensues, the gender gap will close or vanish?
If so, I think that's a super theory. We'll call it the Sports Glass Ceiling.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness You seem not to have read my statements properly and have taken it out of context. I never said they have been deprived of their opportunity, but rather still have plenty of room for further improvements. This ain't intergalactic age yet so don't act like we've already know what the ceiling is.
I never said the gap will vanish because I said both genders have their own respective advantages. There will be gaps in areas or else then there would be NO difference.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Yeah. There's room for improvements, and the improvements are gradually being made. Yep. ON BOTH SIDES.
I don't have time to address much of this right now.
The remark was arbitrary, and contextualized with "practically". Acrobatic sports are "form" sports, and as such, they are competing for mastery of their OWN form. No ability to run faster, further and generate more power.
The competition is within themselves, and then compared.
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
@KadrickNinness But when a "form" sport requires pulling 8Gs and 3-dimentional maneuvers, maintaining sense of direction and aircraft control amidst all that harshness, as well as mastery of the machine itself, you'd still want to take it as a purely "form" sport. Men are also allowed express their "form" here, so it's the same vice versa. Talk about spatial and technical abilities... you're gonna throw that out and replace it with just "form"? hehe
Different form, same judge...
AndrewChan84 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AndrewChan84
"But when a "form" sport requires pulling 8Gs and 3-dimentional maneuvers, maintaining sense of direction and aircraft control amidst all that harshness" how did we get to this from Acrobatics?
And the best AERObatic pilots in the world are men. Should they be? Should I care why they are? Either way, they are.
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
@AndrewChan84
I could just as easily toss your own rationale back at you in this scenario, but it would be cheap and dismissive to do so. And like I said, I'm too preoccupied to address this substantially.
Scenario would be that "gymnastics and acrobatics" draws on a far more restrictive pool of male talent, because the social pressure opposing males doing such "girly" passtimes as gymnastics and ballet, is causal in it.
I could also remark that I have no familiarity with it.
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
Comment removed
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
Comment removed
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A real world hypothetical could put your money where your mouth is.
We're trapped in a house-fire. There is one male and one female fire"fighter" battling to rescue us. You take her, I'll take him. Deal?
Hey, it could all work out. And you live up to your own ethos.
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
@AndrewChan84
I've run this hypothetical past MANY women.
There's one answer I've never seen ANY woman give.
KadrickNinness 1 month ago
@KadrickNinness And to refute your earlier allegation that in just in every field of sports, there's a hundred or thousand or more guys that can perform better than any professional female. Now that I've remembered her name, Patty Wagstaff was the 3 year consecutive defender of the US National Acrobatic champion title. Where men and women compete in the same category. After her, women constitute 5 out of the top ten. During that 3 year, there was not a single man that could beat
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The "alpha imperative" and "survivalism" are different things that are causally inseparable. A basic comprehension of evolutionary mechanics illuminates why; And the mechanic is all over the map in nature.
Considering the extent of my involvement in departments of sporting science, and witnessing first-hand the brutally uncompromising rigor with which scientific dedication is milking the potential of female physiology, I'm not sure what further endeavor of "tweak" you refer to.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AndrewChan84
Response from ONE person in forum, rightly focusing on the female advantage of displaying ANY aptitude.
"ok, so if your a chick, hot, and can jump 75ft. you get a factory deal!! fuck, i wish it was that easy for guys. i would have been pro at 15."
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
Try this one on for size
watch?v=ERwzqvs7vvU
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Why do you have to show me an incapable woman as a response to a capable woman? haha
how's this for size then?
watch?v=yP0bCoYB72Q&feature=related
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Okey then, here's one girl who doesn't talk shit, if you hate shit talking.
watch?v=UjZGAc_FVAo
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness And in cases in Thailand, where women earn more than twice as much as men, you can't attribute that to modern feminism. It is unfair, they worked hard for it.
There are also studies that show that women on average are more diligent somehow (statistically).
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
I'm fully with you on the idea that men are treated as disposable. Many women have this delusion that a world "by" men, is a world "for" men. What is the ultimate ideal of civilization? Lifestyle? What is it's spokesman? COMMERCE! And who does commerce pander to? Especially at the expense of men?
Anyway, thanks for talking. I have my own writing that I must attend to or trouble shall befall me. Between that and this, getting RSI!
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
It's kind of like my attitude towards Christmas.
Things have a light and a dark side. If someone wants to take Christmas as an inconsequential, light-hearted excuse for family gathering and gift-giving, that's fine.
It's it's a mechanism to promulgate confused christian values, and plant a seed in the minds of Children, as an advantageous base to preach Christianity to them, I have a big problem. Not with peoples beliefs, but with this devious mechanism of input.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness I'm not a psych grad, don't be a smart ass.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
And my contrast of a "fashionista" and an "average male" is not an accident or a bungle.
Among the relevant demographies, fashion consciousness among women, is at least something approaching a median. I make no reference to the average male consciousness.
Women will sometimes say "I don't dress up for them, I dress up for myself". Uhuh. That's why they like to dress up and stay home, instead of curling up in their pajamas. No?
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Please, tell me what the hell does this have to do with the guy above not sharing your sense of masculinity. To me women dressing up just because they can, ain't got nothing to do with this guy wanting equal treatment between men and women.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
The guy above? In the video? You're way off base. My entire line of discourse is in reference to the person I addressed in the forum, in the first place. The one who was making egregious statements about the values and virtues of women vs men.
Nobody has to embrace a model of masculinity. A cursory glance at my remarks shows this to be a reiteration. The devaluation of a traditional masculine model, however, is as idiotic as enforcing it.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness So you were talking to betaguy2005 and not the uploader of this video. If it is, my mistake then. I feel that the uploader of this video is completely entitled to his view and he shares the same principles as me.
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness In today's world, social men and women, test social men and women, wherever a distinct statement is concerned. "Social women test men. Men socially test test one another", IS a prescription cultural expectation. If a woman is able to past any test of a distinct statement she will also earn the same respect. Thus, the "alpha imperative" is an arbitrary notion. If it ain't phallocentric, I don't know what it is. heheh.
A man
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
@AndrewChan84
They've served a vital purpose, but their relevance is contextual. That fact can't be wholly reconciled with the instincts that contend the higher rationale. I'm actually the one fending off his constricted view of masculinity as drastically imposed.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness Was his anecdote an attack on masculinity per se, or a statement of his personal feelings how how unfair society is to men and women? If masculinity does impose such discrepancies, biological stuff aside, then it is indeed bigoted. Because under the Bill of Rights everyone is free to do what they want with their lives.
That again caused me to wonder what the hell masculinity really is anyway.....
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
Comment removed
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
The big myth about "alphaism" which is distributed, is the it's like a hierarchy (I only refer to it because of the invocation in your name). Humans are generally monogamous, and the sexes are pretty evenly distributed. It's less about achieving the center of the pedestal than it is about achieving acceptance from the other males, for your resolute will and aptitude at STANDING YOUR GROUND. Guys will chip away at weaknesses not because they want you to be like them. But to toughen your resolve.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness but when "resolve" contradicts moral principles, then the true problem begins
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
In a social environment, anything distinct is treated as a statement. In a social environment, statements are TESTED. But! If you withstand a test with a distinct statement, you will provoke a greater respect than you otherwise would have. These aren't hardline rules, just general sways of social causality.
All you sound like, is a rhetoric-beaten male, in dire need of feminist-deprogramming.
Let me know when you want a good reason for a better self image. Some friends would like to meet you.
KadrickNinness 2 months ago
@KadrickNinness So anyone who does not conform to a typical man's view on 'social imperatives' has been subject to feminist-programming?
AndrewChan84 2 months ago
There should not be a battle of the sexes. However, there is a war against men, waged by feminism. This "war" hurts everybody, not just men. So, even if you don't wish to be a "masculist" (I don't call myself that!), you need to understand that men are the bullseye in this war. So, men need to be awakened in a political way, so they can mobilize against feminism, and stop feminism's war which hurts EVERYBODY in the long run.
This needs to start with men, and be controlled by men.
fidelbogen 6 months ago
you are just a dear, is what you are
HAAAAAAATTTEE 7 months ago
The point of hitting a girl you are right in school I lost my temper after getting beat up by a group of girls I hit one on the arm and got into more trouble than they did for the initial start of the conflict.
merpmeep 7 months ago
Great vid! No man wants to admit that they feel "hurt" or say that they're "emotional" or weak or anything. And women just bitch alot...
yamasta103 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Look, it's simple. You are either a feminist, or a non-feminist.
Forget about the word "masculism", okay?
To get started on your learning curve, go to
gynotheory dot blogspot dot com
Also check out my blog, and the vids on my YouTube channel.
Remember that FEMINISM IS YOUR ENEMY.
And you need to get MAD about it.
fidelbogen 9 months ago
Well said man, and this is from a woman. Feminism and Masculinism both have their pros and cons. But yeah, society's really unfair to men as well.
aqualovr9 10 months ago
men and women need each other, we may fight but really we can't live without each other, even if you are gay you will need female friends and the love of and vice versa, yes we are different but a sensitive man is still a man and a hard woman is still a woman it's not just about sex, we need our opposite to centre us, we need for polarity. that is the fundamental law of nature.
simyan2008 11 months ago 5
@simyan2008 i need my dog. main thing is to get love
isometric85 3 months ago
For some reason there tends to be an innate bias against the "Hand that feeds", invents, protects,maintains, etc. by the benefactors. Supported groups tend to feel inferior and so counter by calling themselves 'oppressed'. This ranges from welfare recipiants to spoilt kids to enduring radical feminists. Many bright women rising to their own potential think those feminists are ridiculous.
heavenseek 11 months ago
#2
There can never be true equality because men and women are different!!
It makes me sad to hear you say"you don't want to believe there is a battle of the sexes". Well there isn't one. Men have won that battle hands down from the beginning of time!
The balttle is for your very RIGHTS!!!
right now we are losing......gaining ground......but still losing!
Do not just sit on the fence and observe!! that is the worst thing you can do for yourself and the movement!!!
sunset305 1 year ago
All the metals that are needed to grow and maintain the telecommunications, electronics, and robotics are still going to be mined!!!!
Men CREATE, INVENT, DEVELOP, DESIGN, AND MAINTAIN "EVERY" ASPECT OF CIVILIZATION!!!
It's why you don't have to go out and kill for your dinner tonight!
It's why you don't have to sew your own clothes today!
It's why you don't have to build your own fire to keep warm or are able to face chat with others without actually having to travel 2000miles just to say hi
sunset305 1 year ago
Great points thanks for speaking up more men need to speak out about these issues.
Chevrobert 1 year ago
Good video. We can use more guys like you : )
Red0660 1 year ago
Dude, you just look like a young Roger Waters !! :)
zooropah82 1 year ago 3
"The feminists are winning" But didn't you just say it wasn't a battle?? I'm confused..
However, there are many other women who take the same opinion as itinkuno, myself included. But I mostly agree with your idea of looking at people for who they are, not what they look like. Genetic make-up makes you male or female, but that (as you said) does not mean we have to fall into those stereotypes. I appreciate you taking the time to share this. Thanks.
XXSeekerXX1 1 year ago
Great video.
UnusualTastes 1 year ago
@ThunderGodCid10 Boston College employed Prof. Mary Daly, one of the Feminist movement's supreme Lesbian idealists. She banned all men from attending her classes.
feministsAreCorrupt 1 year ago
Masculinism =/= Masculism. The latter hates sexism, the former hate women. Different things, folk and folkettes!
Traitorfish 1 year ago
@Traitorfish Masculism hates sexism? If the language is evolving, consider that masculinism would now be the men's rights movement, and that Feminism is now more akin to female supremacy.
feministsAreCorrupt 1 year ago
@feministsAreCorrupt Masculism is pro-Feminist, and seeks to de-construct gender from an androcentric position which compliments Feminism's gynocentric position. As Feminism deals with women's issues, Masculism addresses men's issues.
"Men's Rights" and "Masculinism", on the other hand, are idiot buzz-words used by misogynists to bully Feminists, pro-Feminists and Masculists into silence in defence of their hateful and archaic caricature of "proper" gender roles and identities.
Traitorfish 1 year ago
@Traitorfish Men's rights are not bully terms. They primarily have to do with the female monopoly on reproduction and the excess of female power in marriage/divorce.
Feminism is about advancing women's issues only. There is no end to female advantage. The term Masculism is fake. I've never heard of it, probably because it is the Feminist ideal of a person with XY. Gender deconstruction is futile academic masturbation, but at least you will have your pick of Feminist tail to tap.
feministsAreCorrupt 1 year ago
@feministsAreCorrupt I should clarify; the concept of "men's rights" is not inherently misogynistic, but much of its contemporary usage is. It is used to invokes a false, I dare say an absurd narrative of Matriarchal superiority. One which you are apparently invoking now, because you don't actually understand the philosophy which you criticise. But, then, truth is, apparently, defined in terms of what you personally have "heard", which really doesn't leave much room for contradiction, does it?
Traitorfish 1 year ago
@Traitorfish I have shelves of books on social issues over the decades from Radical Feminism to the scant works on Men's Issues. If you're able to provide a book specifically on your brand of "Masculism", I will add it to my collection and read it.
feministsAreCorrupt 1 year ago
@feministsAreCorrupt "The Myth of Male Power" by Dr. Warren Farrell.
Traitorfish 1 year ago
@Traitorfish Thanks. I already have a number of Warren Farrell's books including the one you recommend. When I read the book when it hit the market, I didn't distinguish Masculism from Masculinism. Sorry. Anyway, neither term is catching on, but men do not need or want a philosophy with sexist policies, and the term should reflect that.
I agree that men's rights are not inherently misogynistic. They are simply appearing when Feminism has transformed into Female Supremecism.
feministsAreCorrupt 1 year ago
@ThunderGodCid10 And how does citing SCUM Manifesto undermine my credibility when feminists are the ones who adore it? That's my whole point. Think before you type.
MrDusty2112 1 year ago
@ThunderGodCid10 Unfortunately, there are people out there who take SCUM seriously. If feminists want to be taken seriously, they should distance themselves from such extremism.
MrDusty2112 1 year ago
Read SCUM Manifesto, by Valerie Solanas, my friend. That's an excercise in total man-hatred. Many mainstream feminists try to pass it off as some bold political statement. You talk about how people might react if a woman hit you. Their automatic response would be that you "deserved it." That's the way most people think. I like this video, though. Best of luck.
MrDusty2112 1 year ago