It's the NISVS. The tables are on pages 18 and 19. Previous year stats are the most reliable, because of memory reinterpretation. It might interest you that men have been found to often reinterpret or forget sexual victimization because it doesn't fit the social narrative.
cdc. gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a. pdf
@lilbluehersheykiss Table 2.1: Rape, last 12 months female 1.1%. Table 2.2: Made to penetrate, last 12 months male 1.1%.
The survey does not define forced sexual intercourse perpetrated by women on men as rape. It defines it as "other sexual violence". The survey definitions were designed to conceal male victims and female perpetrators.
When you include all sexual violence, the numbers are 6.7% for women, 5.3% for men. Not that big a difference, frankly.
@girlwriteswhat that is over 1% out of what is only a few percent every year. i'd say that's a significant difference. i'm not arguing that men and women are identical. youre misunderstanding my views
@lilbluehersheykiss When you consider that of men who have documented cases of child sexual abuse, only 16% considered their early childhood experiences to be sexual abuse (compared with 64% of women), and the dominant cultural narrative of men rape/women are raped, I would expect that a great deal of sexual violence against men is not captured in surveys. Only 16% of men with documented cases disclosed in a survey designed to capture child sexual abuse, for crying out loud. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat A large percentage of men reinterpret sexual assault and forced sexual intercourse as consensual, to comply with the cultural narrative of "men act, women are acted upon/men perpetrate, women are victims".
So that "greater than 1% difference over a year" may actually be no difference at all. In fact, in perhaps the largest cross-cultural study of sexual coercion in relationships, 3% of men compared with 2.3% of women, reported their heterosexual partner forcing sex on them.
@girlwriteswhat look, you clearly did a lot more research about this than i did, and we can talk percentages and sources all you want (though obviously there are an abundance out there to show women are assaulted far more often). it just doesn't make sense to me on a common sense level. men have a higher sex drive than women. in addition, men are more physically capable of defending themselves from unwelcome sexual advances. it makes absolutely no sense for what you're saying to be true.
@lilbluehersheykiss 1) Men are in the unique position of having a biologically ingrained or culturally socialized reluctance to harm women. When you are psychologically incapable of inflicting harm on your attacker, they no longer need to be physically stronger than you are. One study showed almost 10% of surveyed women admitted to having used force, coercion or incapacitation (drugs/alcohol) to get sex from an unwilling man. Another 5%+ admitted to attempting to do so. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat While men think of sex more frequently than women, women can be every bit as sexually aggressive as men. Research is finding that testosterone is not an aggression hormone, and having a high sex drive does not necessarily make a person sexually aggressive.
2) a great deal of gendered reality defies common sense. This is because it defies our collective perceptions of men and women (perceptions that are homogenous across cultures). (cont)
@girlwriteswhat If you watch my video on systemic gendered violence, you'll maybe see how the way we perceive violence is completely skewed by our instinctive perceptions of men as "the appropriate objects for absorption of violence, hardship and damage", and women as "in need of/deserving of society's protection and support". Because of those perceptions, we think violence against women (25% of ALL violence) is a huge gendered problem, while violence against men (the other 75%) is not. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat In reality, the opposite is true. DV and sexual violence are not significantly gendered, other than in our social narrative, report rates and society's response to it (man hits his wife, he goes to jail; woman hits her husband, we wonder what he did to deserve it). In reality, the only systemic gendered violence is against men--the majority of war deaths, random violence victims, prison rape, protesters killed and beaten, prisoners of war, etc.
@lilbluehersheykiss No, none of those things are exclusive to men, but they are heavily gendered. In the US, 95% of the prison population is men. The vast majority of war-dead soldiers (98%) are male (even though in the Middle East 17% of soldiers are women). 75% of the victims of violent crime (muggings, etc) are men.
Think about that last one for a bit. Women are just as free in their mobility than men, and make easier targets, but muggers still attack men more. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat That says to me that even criminals have a strong reluctance to harm women. In fact, in this supposed rape culture we live in, where sexual violence against women is "normalized and encouraged" accused rapists are often harassed and beaten, even killed, and when they end up in prison (which IS a *male* rape culture) they're the next guys in line after pedophiles to get shivved. EVEN CONVICTS who live in a *male* rape culture are largely anti-rape-of-women, ffs.
@girlwriteswhat We humans are hardwired to abhor violence against women. This is why we NOTICE IT when it happens, and this is why our response to it is so out of whack with reality--that we see it as a bigger problem than it really is, exaggerate it, and why quotes like "strike a woman and you strike all of society" resonate with us.
We are hardwired to see men as the appropriate objects for absorbing violence and harm, and as sometimes disposable tools of community protection (cont)
@girlwriteswhat A man dying in war or on the job or throwing his girlfriend to the ground to save her during a shooting is *fulfilling his role as a man*. We do not see this as abhorrent--we see it as beneficial, no big deal, or as just the way things are, because those feelings comply with our instinctive, hardwired perceptions of what men are.
While violence against men is the larger problem, it's invisible to us, while violence against women is not gendered or significant, we believe it is.
@girlwriteswhat but there is a reason for all this. as you said, men and women are different. men are more belligerent, and at the same time more capable of defending themselves.
@girlwriteswhat but there is a reason for all this. as you said, men and women are different. men are more belligerent, and at the same time more capable of defending themselves.
@lilbluehersheykiss Yes, and if we really did live in a culture where violence against women was acceptable, normalized and encouraged, criminals would target the non-belligerent, less-capable-of-defending-themselves WOMEN to target.
Sounds a lot like your comment about men being more belligerent is creeping toward victim blaming. That is also your hardwiring talking--men are perceived as agents who are in control of what happens to them, so when they are assaulted, they must have deserved it.
@lilbluehersheykiss We were not discussing perpetrators. We were discussing victims. Most male victims of muggings and other violent crimes are not behaving belligerently. They are targeted disproportionately--despite being more able to defend themselves--because they are men. Women are targeted less often--despite being easier targets--because they are women.
Please TRY to think with the front of your brain. It's not easy for anyone, but it's the only way to effectively examine these issues.
@girlwriteswhat no, the perpetrators are relevant. perpetrators are men, right? men most often have business with men. gangs, bets, whatever. if the violence has a reason, it is usually because men have beef to pick with men. if it doesn't, it's usually confusion because of which man. or, men, as you said, don't like to attack women because women are WEAKER. just like they dont like attacking kids or old people. it's an honor thing.
@lilbluehersheykiss Story: my bf and his female cousin were standing outside a coffee shop at night, talking. They noticed a drug dealer and his crony shaking down and roughing up a couple teenage mules.
Bf's cousin started freaking out at them, yelling that they had no right to abuse other people that way. It was my bf, who hadn't said a word or made a move, who had a gun pulled on him. My huge, 245 lb former boxer of a bf, not the hostile woman, was the one who almost got shot. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat Again, I direct you to evolution. If men are stronger than women, it's because they evolved that way. They evolved due to evolutionary pressures that were unique to them, caused by their roles within communities.
Why do we have a violence against women act? Why is it not the violence against women and children act? Why--if as you say we protect women because they're weaker--we do not protect even children in the same way? Most female spousal abusers also abuse their kids.(cont)
@girlwriteswhat Most child abuse is perpetrated by women (both raw numbers and rates). Yet our legislation dealing with DV protects female perpetrators from accountability. It ignores male victims who need to remain with their children to protect them, by denying them services that would help them leave WITH their children.
Moreover, it is legal for a battered women's shelter to refuse to shelter sons of battered women if they're over 12. Society would rather protect women than children.
@lilbluehersheykiss Moreover, whatever makes you think that women are not involved in gangs, don't gamble, don't use drugs and get into debt with dealers?
@lilbluehersheykiss It is annoying. But I'm not that interested in having a length, private back and forth with you. It's nothing personal, I just have the feeling that very little I might say, even backed up with reams of evidence, will change your mind. Your belief system is set, and it will likely take something more impactful than a discussion with a stranger on the internet to change it.
I've participated in this thread for the other people reading, whose minds aren't already made up.
@girlwriteswhat haha nobody is seeing this, i privated the video. i'm interested in conversing with you, not for you to try to make me into some sort of caricature of an ignorant bigot for the world to see. the only reason i want to pm you is because it doesn't have a character limit. if all you want to do is preach to me and not have a conversation (since clearly you think my views are far inferior to yours), i'm not interested either.
@lilbluehersheykiss Now you're just being defensive. I don't think you views are "inferior". I think they're normal, and problematic because they do not reflect objective reality, but rather, what our instincts would have us believe. Instinct is bigoted. Most of us are born with a natural fear of snakes and spiders, regardless of how most of them are harmless.
If me presenting evidence (most of it sourced, all of it empirically reliable) is "preaching to you", that's a problem. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat If you like, I can message you a collection of links to studies, reports and analyses, but none of that will matter unless you actually read *and closely examine* them, without any lens in front of your eyes. Not an instinctive lens of gendered perceptions, and not a feminist lens.
Forebrain thinking comes naturally to VERY few people. You have to talk yourself into a state of near-autism in order to do it. Most people are simply not capable of that.
@girlwriteswhat men are more often in these dangerous situations, and men are simultaneously more capable of dealing with them. violence against women is abhorred because they are often weaker
@lilbluehersheykiss Why are men stronger than women? Think about it. Why are women weaker than men?
In order to survive their role since the beginning of humanity, men had to evolve to be physically stronger. Women's roles did not involve acting as agents of community protection, so they did not evolve to be as strong as men are. Their role was being the objects that were protected, not the objects doing the protecting. There was no evolutionary pressure on them to become strong as men. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat Physical differences between genders developed from the differing environments (caused by their different roles through history). Men who were as weak as women did not survive their roles long enough to reproduce, and were selected out of the species.
Women are not the protected gender because they are weaker than men. They are weaker because they've always been the protected gender.
@girlwriteswhat these evolutionary patterns were set in place by nature. testosterone and estrogen? men trend towards stronger, women trend towards weaker. women are weaker because they are weaker.
@girlwriteswhat & even if you're right (which it isnt), it doesn't matter. women are still weaker now. evolution isn't their fault. violence against women is still against the defenseless. message me.
@girlwriteswhat the point of this video is to saymen and women are equal. sure they're different, but they're equal. but women are definitely abused sexually more. men face greater adversity elsewhere
@lilbluehersheykiss You should read that article on the GMP. They're funded by Ms. Magazine, if that helps convince you they're credible. The woman who wrote it is a survivor of female abuse, and she provides plenty of references.
(cont) Power is the ability to place a social boycott against a man by saying that he made you uncomfortable or that he's creepy. Power is when there's a major social movement urging people to just plain believe you when you accuse a man of assault, rape or child abuse.
Watch some girlwriteswhat videos and see how a real woman makes arguments you clueless fembot.
You go from saying that men are more fit for labor positions because they're big to saying "those positions of power". What positions of power? Farmer? Carpenter? Cab driver? Going out and working your ass off every day to provide for your wife and kids isn't power. Power is outliving your husband and spending the money he earned when he's dead. Power is what you've got when violent acts against you are taken WAY more seriously than violent acts against me, because I'm male and you're not (cont)
@knuckledragger1984 ok, i will watch the videos and you learn to argue like a respectful human being. tip for the future, make sure you understand your opponent's arguments before insulting them because otherwise you end up making a tool out of yourself. when i referred to "positions of power", i was talking about CEOs, managers, businessmen, lawyers, politicians, and all the like. what i was saying about cab drivers and carpenters was the exact opposite. they hold no excess of power.
Oh, you were talking about CEOs and managers? That's funny, because you never referred specifically to THOSE jobs. the only jobs you talked about were labor positions and then said "Those higher positions of power". Sorry for listening to what you said instead of what you meant.
You do know that most business is run by women, right? There are still more male CEO's but most men are not CEO's. You are taking a minority of men and using that as proof that men have a mystical power. They do not nor did they ever. You also realize that most of the poor are men. And for those few men at the top... do you actually think there is a secret conspiracy to keep women down; or is it other factors like choice that keep women in the middle?
I agree with knuckledragger1984, you should listen to girlwriteswhat before making your argument. She makes some very good points that disprove your “power” argument among others. You should also listen to Warren Farrell on his “Why men earn more” videos. There are 8 of them but you only have to watch the 1st 5 videos.
The point isn't that men don't get educated so they have shitty jobs. In fact men choose to get educated in different fields then women (mostly physical sciences, engineering and mathematics). On top of this men also hold most of the physical labour positions in the work place. The problem is some females, not everyone, has the idea of undeserved entitlement to everything and thinking that women are better than (not just equal to) men. Then expressing this entitlement through manipulation.
@monzy2 ok i obviously agree that feeling like your race or gender is better than anyone else's is stupid, as is manipulation. however: "men choose to get educated in different fields then women (mostly physical sciences, engineering and mathematics)" are you implying that this means that men are more intelligent than women? or that these professions are more honorable?
@lilbluehersheykiss We have been through this argument before. Men and women are of equal intelligence, but just have different preference. This was detailed in the book written by a feminist Dr. Warren Farell PhD titled "Why men earn more". Now instead of arguing about this, check out the book first and then come back and post your view.
@Manoffriendship do you think the US funds this program because they believe men and women are of equal physical strength, or because the US is a financial supporter of Israel and wants Israel to have a strong army so that it can defend itself from Jordan and the like, and the US doesn't have to send its own forces in? they have different preference, yes. the premise of my voting argument is that they have the same intelligence, so that doesn't disprove anything. (cont)
@lilbluehersheykiss FYI: It's been found that the more egalitarian and wealthy a society is, the more gendered men and women's choices of work are. Women in India are more likely to go into tech fields than women in Sweden, because women in India are more likely to take a job based on income rather than fulfilment. The ratio seems to hold at 90/10 for "gendered" jobs--10% engineers being female and 10% of hairdressers men. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat Having inherent differences in interests is not an evil. One Cambridge study found that you can find gendered differences in newborns--boys look longer at mechanical objects, and girls longer at faces. At 9 months, toy preferences are clear--boys go more for mechanical objects and girls more for "organic" things like dolls and stuffed animals. They actually use the toy test to accurately assign gender in babies with ambiguous genitalia.
@girlwriteswhat i'm sure the situation in india is not that the women are engineers but that they're manual laborers. for the former to be true, you need to be socially liberal and accepting.
@lilbluehersheykiss The situation in India is that no one is really free to pick and choose the careers or jobs they want. And when people are not free, they take what they can get. In modern, egalitarian societies, where people have much more freedom to choose, they choose along gendered lines. Efforts in Norway to recruit female engineers would generate a minute increase for a year or two, then things would go back to 90/10.
Why does it upset you that women and men have different interests?
@Manoffriendship (cont) and no, im not going to read a book for the sake of a youtube argument. what do you mean these differences are taken into account? they are not at all. in the army, as the woman who wrote that article described, women are not only treated as equals to men but actually sexually harassed and assumed to be sluts. women are not given lighter "rucks" during ruck runs or given any kind of advantage, as they shouldnt be because the enemy that wants to kill them definitely won't.
So essentially you are saying women are weak. That is sexist, several women hold positions of power and when they don't they influence their husbands and hold that power indirectly
@lilbluehersheykiss You talk just like a radical feminist. First you justify the deaths of men in wars, then you suggest that women cannot perform in the army at an acceptable standard after i gave you very strong evidence. Do you even look into by evidence or do you just stick to your beliefs ? Do you not respect the risk and death rate that men have to go through?
Without all that manual labour you deride you wouldn't be talking into that screen. Remember, a poor African MAN might well have died gathering the minerals together to have your circuits and computer parts made. Looking down on manual labour is a cop-out and I say this as someone who has done both manual labour and non-manual and has 2 masters degrees. Get serious.
Don't feel bad that he blocked you. He blocked me too as did other MRA's. They only want women hating men to be able to view their videos. They're able to post these vids due to free speech but they feel that free speech is really only for themselves and for those who believe that they do. They have a very narrow and externalized point of view and ironically play the victim card. The same victim card they say that feminists play which make them hypocrites to say the least!
I forgot to block. Probably won't. Before I go, his video means to say that women need to stop manipulating men to get what they want. We may have physically built the world, and a lot of good, influential women are indeed high up there in the spotlight of fame. I agree that men can be oppressive, but saying women can't be oppressive is like saying only men can take a piss. I have nothing against women and am all for the "equal rights" movement.
@potsythewise But you can't have equal rights when you call out men like this. We, as men, if we ever insulted a woman in public, would be shunned. Because we're "picking on a helpless" girl. Then she will go around and insult men, and without a word everyone supports. As girlwriteswhat says in one of her videos, "Why do you think men get pissed and beat on us? They do so much and then we turn around and call them assholes." <-- not actual words, but very close to it.
@potsythewise Furthermore, I wish that some women would rise to the top and represent women a lot more. I've seen some women do a lot better than guys with a lot of things, and I would like more of that in this world. Then there'd be equal rights. I'm all for women on the front lines, as long as men understand that you can't just go for her first.
After that, nobody wants to hear anything about how hard you are working or how it's a "man's job." You wanted the job, just do it.
@potsythewise Men may physically abuse women, and sometimes mentally and emotionally, but I've seen women completely ruin lives. Just, you know, for your information.
How can there not be girls like this? She hasn't lived in the real world, so kids her age base most of their world view on what they've seen on TV and in movies - where fictitious women show fictitious men how to fix their computers and cars and run corporations.
@bloodshedder021 not exactly. he's implying that these women don't exist. he said they're fictitious. 1) in order to prove wrong a polar statement like he made, you only need one exception. 2) just by way of statistics, if i as one person already know several women like this, there must logically be more out there, unless i'm weirdly lucky or something.
@lilbluehersheykiss He did not imply that. He stated that that was not the norm, despite it being portrayed fictionally as the norm. You misunderstood him. The existence of these few women merely serves to reinforce the false notion that they are more prevalent than they really are.
@bloodshedder021 it's not portrayed fictionally as the norm. at all. in many movies, women are portrayed as eye candy. in other movies, women are shown in successful careers. the film industry is as versatile as life.
I'm not blocking you because you're female. I'm blocking you because what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this web page is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
@potsythewise OH GOD. you blocked me. i was hoping to go on your page, subscribe to you, leave 43 fan comments on all your videos, and make your youtube page my home screen. what will i do now? TELL ME. also, don't be a drama queen. my points are reasonable, you just don't like them.
There are a few problems with the logic in this video, though I see you have made some good points. Such as men working in the same office jobs. The first fault I see is female babies have the same muscle mass as males. Boys aren't born for manual labor. Second, in the 80's the government started the proactive scholarship program because they noticed fewer girls in college. Now in 2012, 53% of graduates are woman, and 73% of students are women, yet they still only have this program for WOMEN.
@AcidReflux27 the muscle mass of boys and girls changes drastically as hit puberty, so that point is still valid. your second point has little to do with what i was saying. like, everyone on here is really keen on pretending like this video was about how women are discriminated against and oppressed. this video is about calling out the idiocy of a very sexist and aggressive man who made a video dehumanizing and insulting all women.
@lilbluehersheykiss Muscle mass doesn't change that much at puberty. You are talking about muscle mass from the influx of testosterone. This is only a boost of around 9-12% Otherwise you would see muscle eating disease such as AIDS, and HIV kill woman much faster then women due to the lack of body mass for the virus to consume, While both parties lose weight, they both lose weight at about the same rate. Just ask my friend Mike and his wife. They had both Cancer and AIDS
@AcidReflux27 it definitely does. are you really arguing that men don't genetically have more muscle. 9-12% is a significant amount. like, any medical website will tell you that men have more muscle than women. it's really not a disputable fact.
@lilbluehersheykiss Then maybe you can explain to me how women live longer then men. Is it because of the better healthcare they receive, such as evident by the fact that women breast cancer is much more popular then mens prostate cancer despite the death rate for prostate cancer being higher? Is it because 98% of all workplace accidents happen to men. but you still haven't explained how Mike and his wife are still alive after both cancer and aids, she should be dead
@AcidReflux27 it's biology. one, men take more risks. they pick occupations that have more risk to them, and they engage in riskier activities for leisure. also (and mostly), it's just biology. here, read the time magazine article about why women live longer (google it). it just explains why women live longer, like iron deficiency, estrogen, etc.
@lilbluehersheykiss So it's biology that women don't build skyscrapers, or roads, or briges, or dig coal mines or work on offshore oil rigs.OK I'll give that to you, but if it's biology, then why don't women DESIGN these things? Why is it all of these things were designed by men? Everything in your house was designed by men. The computer your typing your response to this message was designed by men. The software was written by men. The numbers should be equal in this area
@AcidReflux27 women do design these things. this is actually something i even addressed in my video. women are entering engineering and programming and architectural fields in increasing numbers. it's just that until fairly recently, these areas were seen as predominantly male, but now that we're being more conducive to both genders taking high level math/science, we're seeing more women go into these fields. i personally know a number of friends who want to beprogrammers/engineers
@AcidReflux27 however, i doubt the numbers will even out because, in general, men have more strengths in the visual-spatial reasoning fields, as opposed to women who have strengths in communication, verbal comprehension, and the more humanities based fields.
@lilbluehersheykiss If what your saying is true, where were the women who helped bring the dark ages to the renaissance? Where were the female composers, and play writers.
@AcidReflux27 as i said, only very recently was it seen as socially acceptable and rewardable for women to venture outside the home. definitely as early as the renaissance, a respectable woman, one who was revered by her parents and friends, was one who kept a tidy home, raised many children, and was submissive and supportive of her husband. women who wanted to write or compose or even make art were seen as rebellious and too "manly". that is why.
I fucking hate people who criticize labour intensive careers. Especially since those two jobs you picked as examples are essential to modern society, most office workers not so much.
@TrueMetis 1) find better reasons to hate people. there are much better ones out there, believe me. 2) i never said that those jobs weren't essential or important. i said that being a construction worker doesn't put you above anybody else.
@lilbluehersheykiss "Maybe you wouldn't have to get up in the morning and be a textile mill worker or a deliveryman if you *condescending pause and shrug* had gotten a better education in college. It's not a merit to have a manual labour job if anything it's a burden." This implies two things, one manual job workers are uneducated, and yes that having a job that required a degree is more important than one that doesn't.
@TrueMetis well, manual job workers are often less formally educated than other workers. a job that requires a degree requires more specialized skill and trained intelligence than one that doesn't, yes. obviously manual jobs are very necessary. they're just usually filled with people who don't have a choice because of a lack of formal education.
@lilbluehersheykiss What about uni student who are doing construction/mining part-time ? Many famous male actors, lawyers, doctors, engineers studying did construction work, mining, steel work, garbage collector, sewage cleaning. Jackie Chan, RDJ, Tom Welling, Matt Damon are some of the actors of the top of my head.
@Manoffriendship yes, they had to do that because they didn't have enough specialized skill to do anything else. that only supports my point. as soon as they got their big break in acting, none of these people said oh no, i'll just stay with my construction job. that's because it is not a very desirable profession. it requires the least specialized skill. any pair of strong arms can do it.
@lilbluehersheykiss "as soon as they got their big break in acting, none of these people said oh no, i'll just stay with my construction job." <--Does this same rule apply for doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, commerce students? (Rhetorical question) . They were just studying and did this as a part-time job because they were guaranteed a job after uni/college, they could have chosen something else, but choose this, simply as that.
@Manoffriendship yes, they were doing those things because, until they graduated college, they could not get other jobs because their education was incomplete (though i know of very few serious college students who work in construction). the reason they choose those jobs, if they can and have time to, is because they have a skill that others don't: physical strength. for the use of this skill, they get paid more than convenience store clerks their age.
@lilbluehersheykiss "yes, they were doing those things because, until they graduated college, they could not get other jobs because their education was incomplete " <-- good, so we both agree that construction workers are not necessarily incapable of being uneducated and are actually smart,. BTW, I know plenty of studying males in top fields who do construction work particularly engineering student.
@lilbluehersheykiss Only about 40% of people who get a college or university degree actually work in the field they studied. Which suggest that about 60% of jobs don't actually require any real specialized skill. A lot labourers make equal or better money than people who went to college. This isn't fastfood or other low end jobs, most manual labour position requires years in either a trade school or as a apprentice.
@TrueMetis haha no you're misinterpreting that statistic. the people who didn't get a job in their exact field are still using their college degree, it's just in a field that branches off from the one they studied. few manual laborers make better money than college graduates. it's hard work for little money, nobody WANTS to do it.
@lilbluehersheykiss No, by and large they are in fields that have nothing to do with their chosen field of study and often don't even requite a degree. And bullshit, construction workers, plumbers, roofers, and most manual labourer jobs make very good money. The reason people don't want to do it is people like you. I can make $15-20 an hour just cleaning up on a construction site.
@TrueMetis that's not a true statement. the first thing you said. most jobs require at least an associate's degree in some field. and, a plumber needs a college degree. besides, the point was not to demean laboring jobs, it was to say that being a physical worker doesn't make you a better or more important person that anyone else.
@lilbluehersheykiss I think one of out issues here may be difference between out countries, in Canada plumbers do not need to go to college, they need to apprentice or go to a trade school. And if that was indeed your point try saying that rather than condescendingly talking about how people should have gotten a better education.
@TrueMetis "I can make $15-20 an hour just cleaning up on a construction site." I at-least 30 fork-lift drivers from my work place and they make 30-35 and hour for driving a fork-lift around and moving things. Not a single one of those fork-lift drivers are female. So when i went around asking how come not female forklift drivers were there, they told me that every year out of 1000 forklift drivers, only 5-6 are actually female. This was an actual statistic.
@TrueMetis Trust me mate, I was thinking the same thing, but I don't want to receive another annoying notification about not staying on topic. When my fingers get better I will start applying for a forklift license as well, My Law degree goes to waste but I'll be earning more money per hour having fun a the same time :D
@killerchops yeah you do, because i've had a logical response to everything "everyone" has said. so how about you fight your own battles. you don't get to ride on the backs of those more intelligent than you for a win by default, sorry.
@lilbluehersheykiss You haven't had a reasonable response to anything anyone has said. If you did, it would go like this: "You're right. I'm sorry. I will immediately change my erroneous opinions and apologize to those I have offended."
@bloodshedder021 no, because the things people have said haven't been correct. of course that's what you'd like me to do, but i'm not going to agree when people say that women aren't deserving of rights or are less intellectually capable than men, because that's just a scientifically false statement.
@lilbluehersheykiss I believe what you mean is "These people have said things that contradict my flawed and somewhat bigoted viewpoints, but instead of learning, I'm going to pretend that they said something completely different."
@bloodshedder021 right. saying that men and women are equally capable and deserving of a full and unhindered life is.... bigoted. ok, you say stupid things like that and my viewpoint is the one that's flawed? yes people have contradicted me. i've had rebuttals. i don't pretend people say different things, and if i ever misinterpret their words they are quick to correct me. are you going to argue or just sit there and make offhanded statements about me and my debating skills?
@lilbluehersheykiss You aren't saying that at all. You are ignoring very real problems and very precise and evidence-based counter-arguments, and saying that everyone who disagrees with you is saying something other than what they are to frame it in as negative a light as possible to avoid coming off as the more bigoted person.
@bloodshedder021 i'm not ignoring problems, i'm saying that yes there is sexism out there for both genders, yes we need to work on it, but nobody is the victim in this world. we've gotten to a place in society where everyone more or less has the same shot at a good life as everyone else. it's time to stop pointing fingers and just chill.
@lilbluehersheykiss and some of those people will have logical responses to what you have said. Its not about me fighting my own battles, but more about me not having to watch your video and find your points and then search for facts to refute your points. It would be much easier if you typed out why you think your right in a way that is structured and added to your description.
@lilbluehersheykiss Its kind of ironic that you put that I don't get to ride on the backs of those more intelligent than me, but that's exactly what women do in society
@killerchops haha nope. false statement. women have not been proven less intelligent than men by any conclusive study. the only correlation that was found between intelligence and another factor was very loosely with height. actually, when controlled for height women were found to be slightly more intelligent than men. men and women have different intellectual strengths (visual spatial vs. comprehensive), but they are equally capable.
@bloodshedder021 no he said women ride on the backs of those more intelligent than them. implying that men are more intelligent than women. you just watered down his statement to make it less objectionable.
@lilbluehersheykiss you seemed to have missed the point, it was that men built society. I'll give you the point that women are part of the reason humans reproduce but other than reproducing women have done almost nothing to build society thus they have been "riding on the backs" of men
@killerchops AZT. Radioactivity. Matriarchal lineage dominance in tribal african cultures. Reality is the way it is because men and women have made it that way.
@killerchops there are two reasons for this. 1) in the past, the only skill that was needed was physical strength [which most women lacked]. other than this, to have a position of power you needed to be wealthy. 2) when specialization of jobs extended from just being strong to requiring intelligence and frugality, women were put down socially. it wasn't seen as socially normal for a women to venture outside the home. and that is why men [used to be the ones that] built this society.
@lilbluehersheykiss actually you just explained why women are riding on the backs of men. the first reason is because they are not physically strong, the second reason is because women didn't venture outside the home.
@killerchops no i explained why women didn't build this society not through some fault of their but because of genetics and the way their society was constructed (by men). obviously it was more convenient to have stay at home moms, so women were pushed towards that for hundreds of years. but society wasn't interested in making sure every human being could live the life they wanted. one group was trying to make life easier for themselves at the expense of another.
@lilbluehersheykiss Dont care about who is at "fault" for women not building society, the point is women didn't build society and therefor were carried on the backs of men. Even if they were kicking and screaming on the backs of men, they were still carried by men.
@killerchops ok but how you phrased your statement had a very negative connotation about it. "carried on the backs of those more intelligent than them." it made it sound like women just laid back, forced men to do everything, and never once objected to it. the reality is, men, as you said, picked women up kicking and screaming, slung them over their shoulder, and carried them. until recently when finally women were set down and can carry themselves.
YT MRAs are known for blocking anybody that has a different opinion that theirs. Take a look at any pinegrove33's video and all the "comment removed" u see is someone who has been blocked for disagreeing with him. They are very thinned skinned, I think I was blocked for calling National review a necon rag. You have to totally agree with them or you are a white knight and its a one way trip to BLOCK city.
@uche007us yep. a lot of people are really afraid to be disagreed with. which i don't understand. like, i enjoy making videos where i get into arguments with people in the comments (though not when people get childish and start hurling insults). it's eye opening and interesting. when you block your comments, it's like your putting your hands over your ears and going LALALALALA. very juvenile.
@uche007us yeah, and not to mention Barborossaa's channel, that was temporarily suspended because it was flagged as "Spreading hateful messages" or some shit like that... Oh wait, his channel is for MRA and MGTOW's. I guess some women and Feminists like to partake in Censorship as well, only they're not just blocking and deleting messages, they are trying to take down an entire channel, and websites for MGTOW's.
Eh, build a battle ship or a skyscraper, or invade a country by only using swords...and....ah fuck that....How about you just build a brick wall. Can you do that?
Build a brick wall, and then you can talk shit about men in general.
Otherwise, shut yur yap and get back in the kitchen were ya belong.
Note, boys/girls--men/women learn differently, however the college/universities cater to the activities that girls/women excel at, therefore men have been disenfranchised by the over whelming rule of feminized education. Remember the rule of Marxism, invade an organization and rule it, command it, change its core principles and use it to pursue the invaders doctrines. Feminists run our educational system.
Male students are dropping out of college/universities at an alarming rate. Male students have a 65% drop out rate in contrast female students have a drop out rate of only 30%. The implication according to some scientific studies are: Men are dropping out of college/universities as a result of feminism/anti-male policies/education/teaching and anti-male learning activities.
@Manoffriendship the school system has been fundamentally the same since it was founded by thomas jefferson. based on reading books, studying, and taking tests. you're trying to say that boys being less dedicated to education than girls and dropping out isn't caused by any fault of theirs, but by "anti-male teachings"? hahaha. what a load of shit.
@lilbluehersheykiss LOL, you must read and research Christina Hoff Summers, feminist , and read her book " the war on boys". This book counters you point completely and will make you take back you low level question " what a load of shit. ".
@Manoffriendship how about instead of me reading a book, you refute what i said about thomas jefferson and how our school system is fundamentally the same with your own brain, not christina hoff's.
@lilbluehersheykiss Funny you say that, because Christina actually refute "thomas jefferson and how our school system is fundamentally the same with your own brain" with the aforementioned points in my previous post. BTW, I missed this comment by accident.
@lilbluehersheykiss Actually, in the 80s and 90s (after women had almost overtaken men in post-secondary, no less) feminists published the "results" of a study done on educational outcomes by gender, suggesting girls were being shortchanged. They only made public the results, because the data in the study didn't support their conclusions. Because of this research, new, girl-friendly methods were developed to teach reading, and implemented in public schools. (cont)
@girlwriteswhat They went from synthetic phonics to "whole language", and suddenly girls started surpassing boys in reading. The problem is, as a recent study in the UK has just shown, whole language handicaps both boys and girls--it just handicaps boys MORE than girls. Boys were reading slightly better than girls before. Now both genders are reading at lower levels, but girls are doing better than boys, so it's seen as a victory.
@Manoffriendship what is an anti-male policy. what is anti-male learning/teachings. i'm pretty sure there are no classes called "Men Suck." what specifically are you referring to?
@lilbluehersheykiss Boys learn through "critical thinking" and girls learn through "memorization". A lot of work was done in the 70s t improve girls i n the science and maths( a males strong areas of thinking) but boys were sidelined even though it was known that boys were behind girls in English/lit/languages, but noting was done about this, so there was 40 years of progressive work aims at girls in education, then you have sexist banner;"Girls are better than Boys".
@lilbluehersheykiss (cont.)This is even evident when left-winged Labor MP, Diane Abbott , who was in a position to know the education would cause deliberate harm, sent her son to a boy's only private school. Even the statistics prove that, in UK, USA, and Australia, academic achievement is greater in males who studies in male only private schools, because the male only schools have only male only teachers and teach in a male way- critically , practically, firm discipline.
you proved his whole point that most women do not know what it really takes to keep the gears of your entitled opulence greased and going. and how that would end if men were to say you know what I had enough of this shit do it yourself. But because this work has no merit it is somehow beneath you and so many other women out there so therefore not worth doing. The gears would come to a grinding hault, and you opulence would come to an end.
@mraNewfoundland and i am not entitled to any "opulence." everything i have or will have is going to be earned through work and capability. the only times things are just given to people in this world is when they already have very little (like welfare).
@lilbluehersheykiss so what do you call Alimony? why does a woman feel like she still deserves a man's money.. err agh I mean support, after they are divorced? I thought women were independent. that doesn't sound very independent to me. or what about the fact that a woman can file for a No-Fault Divorce and get 50(+)% of a man's liquidated assets. btw. 51% of marriages end in divorce, approx. 70% of divorce is filed by women, and approx. 80% of those divorces are filed under No-Fault.
@lilbluehersheykiss Yes and with all the benifits of affirmative action, an education system that looked out for you as a girl establishing programs that are geared toward girls and college system that is increasingly hostile to men and more programs for women to utilize to access higher education. Yeah you go girl.
As for talking off the top of your head and what you saying not being scripted I would suggest that is reveals more of the way you think, you may not want to think this way but
@mraNewfoundland with more women than men in college now, affirmative action for middle class white females basically doesn't exist anymore. the rest of what you said is just wrong. the education system we have is the same fundamentally as it has been since thomas jefferson invented it. there are no special programs geared towards girls or anti-male teachings as some people have said. trust me, i'm in this school system now haha. (cont)
@lilbluehersheykiss Affirmative action is in place, just read U.S. gov affirmative action policies and you find find upon closer inspection that it actually hinders men. The same this is happening in the U.K, and Australia.
@lilbluehersheykiss Could not find my previous comment to reply to. Depends which course you apply for. In the UK, if your a female who applied for IT or engineering( male dominated fields ), you get a $7000 scholarship going towards your fees and materials. In Australia it is $5000 for the aforementioned fields<-- this does not make much sense. If a male applied for nursing, he would get nothing.
It's the NISVS. The tables are on pages 18 and 19. Previous year stats are the most reliable, because of memory reinterpretation. It might interest you that men have been found to often reinterpret or forget sexual victimization because it doesn't fit the social narrative.
cdc. gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a. pdf
A good breakdown of the issues is given here:
goodmenproject. com/ethics-values/gender-and-sexual-violence-manufacturing-victimhood-marginalizing-victims/
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat correct me if i'm wrong, but what i'm getting from these charts is that women are sexually violated in much greater numbers than men.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Table 2.1: Rape, last 12 months female 1.1%. Table 2.2: Made to penetrate, last 12 months male 1.1%.
The survey does not define forced sexual intercourse perpetrated by women on men as rape. It defines it as "other sexual violence". The survey definitions were designed to conceal male victims and female perpetrators.
When you include all sexual violence, the numbers are 6.7% for women, 5.3% for men. Not that big a difference, frankly.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat that is over 1% out of what is only a few percent every year. i'd say that's a significant difference. i'm not arguing that men and women are identical. youre misunderstanding my views
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss When you consider that of men who have documented cases of child sexual abuse, only 16% considered their early childhood experiences to be sexual abuse (compared with 64% of women), and the dominant cultural narrative of men rape/women are raped, I would expect that a great deal of sexual violence against men is not captured in surveys. Only 16% of men with documented cases disclosed in a survey designed to capture child sexual abuse, for crying out loud. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat A large percentage of men reinterpret sexual assault and forced sexual intercourse as consensual, to comply with the cultural narrative of "men act, women are acted upon/men perpetrate, women are victims".
So that "greater than 1% difference over a year" may actually be no difference at all. In fact, in perhaps the largest cross-cultural study of sexual coercion in relationships, 3% of men compared with 2.3% of women, reported their heterosexual partner forcing sex on them.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat look, you clearly did a lot more research about this than i did, and we can talk percentages and sources all you want (though obviously there are an abundance out there to show women are assaulted far more often). it just doesn't make sense to me on a common sense level. men have a higher sex drive than women. in addition, men are more physically capable of defending themselves from unwelcome sexual advances. it makes absolutely no sense for what you're saying to be true.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss 1) Men are in the unique position of having a biologically ingrained or culturally socialized reluctance to harm women. When you are psychologically incapable of inflicting harm on your attacker, they no longer need to be physically stronger than you are. One study showed almost 10% of surveyed women admitted to having used force, coercion or incapacitation (drugs/alcohol) to get sex from an unwilling man. Another 5%+ admitted to attempting to do so. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat While men think of sex more frequently than women, women can be every bit as sexually aggressive as men. Research is finding that testosterone is not an aggression hormone, and having a high sex drive does not necessarily make a person sexually aggressive.
2) a great deal of gendered reality defies common sense. This is because it defies our collective perceptions of men and women (perceptions that are homogenous across cultures). (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat If you watch my video on systemic gendered violence, you'll maybe see how the way we perceive violence is completely skewed by our instinctive perceptions of men as "the appropriate objects for absorption of violence, hardship and damage", and women as "in need of/deserving of society's protection and support". Because of those perceptions, we think violence against women (25% of ALL violence) is a huge gendered problem, while violence against men (the other 75%) is not. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat In reality, the opposite is true. DV and sexual violence are not significantly gendered, other than in our social narrative, report rates and society's response to it (man hits his wife, he goes to jail; woman hits her husband, we wonder what he did to deserve it). In reality, the only systemic gendered violence is against men--the majority of war deaths, random violence victims, prison rape, protesters killed and beaten, prisoners of war, etc.
Common sense is not reality.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat none of the things you said are exclusive to men. women are very very often violence victims, aped in prison, and prisoners of war.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss No, none of those things are exclusive to men, but they are heavily gendered. In the US, 95% of the prison population is men. The vast majority of war-dead soldiers (98%) are male (even though in the Middle East 17% of soldiers are women). 75% of the victims of violent crime (muggings, etc) are men.
Think about that last one for a bit. Women are just as free in their mobility than men, and make easier targets, but muggers still attack men more. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat That says to me that even criminals have a strong reluctance to harm women. In fact, in this supposed rape culture we live in, where sexual violence against women is "normalized and encouraged" accused rapists are often harassed and beaten, even killed, and when they end up in prison (which IS a *male* rape culture) they're the next guys in line after pedophiles to get shivved. EVEN CONVICTS who live in a *male* rape culture are largely anti-rape-of-women, ffs.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat We humans are hardwired to abhor violence against women. This is why we NOTICE IT when it happens, and this is why our response to it is so out of whack with reality--that we see it as a bigger problem than it really is, exaggerate it, and why quotes like "strike a woman and you strike all of society" resonate with us.
We are hardwired to see men as the appropriate objects for absorbing violence and harm, and as sometimes disposable tools of community protection (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat A man dying in war or on the job or throwing his girlfriend to the ground to save her during a shooting is *fulfilling his role as a man*. We do not see this as abhorrent--we see it as beneficial, no big deal, or as just the way things are, because those feelings comply with our instinctive, hardwired perceptions of what men are.
While violence against men is the larger problem, it's invisible to us, while violence against women is not gendered or significant, we believe it is.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat but there is a reason for all this. as you said, men and women are different. men are more belligerent, and at the same time more capable of defending themselves.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat but there is a reason for all this. as you said, men and women are different. men are more belligerent, and at the same time more capable of defending themselves.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Yes, and if we really did live in a culture where violence against women was acceptable, normalized and encouraged, criminals would target the non-belligerent, less-capable-of-defending-themselves WOMEN to target.
Sounds a lot like your comment about men being more belligerent is creeping toward victim blaming. That is also your hardwiring talking--men are perceived as agents who are in control of what happens to them, so when they are assaulted, they must have deserved it.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat no, it's perpetrator blaming, because most perpetrators of muggings/beatings/robberies are men.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss We were not discussing perpetrators. We were discussing victims. Most male victims of muggings and other violent crimes are not behaving belligerently. They are targeted disproportionately--despite being more able to defend themselves--because they are men. Women are targeted less often--despite being easier targets--because they are women.
Please TRY to think with the front of your brain. It's not easy for anyone, but it's the only way to effectively examine these issues.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat no, the perpetrators are relevant. perpetrators are men, right? men most often have business with men. gangs, bets, whatever. if the violence has a reason, it is usually because men have beef to pick with men. if it doesn't, it's usually confusion because of which man. or, men, as you said, don't like to attack women because women are WEAKER. just like they dont like attacking kids or old people. it's an honor thing.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Story: my bf and his female cousin were standing outside a coffee shop at night, talking. They noticed a drug dealer and his crony shaking down and roughing up a couple teenage mules.
Bf's cousin started freaking out at them, yelling that they had no right to abuse other people that way. It was my bf, who hadn't said a word or made a move, who had a gun pulled on him. My huge, 245 lb former boxer of a bf, not the hostile woman, was the one who almost got shot. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat Again, I direct you to evolution. If men are stronger than women, it's because they evolved that way. They evolved due to evolutionary pressures that were unique to them, caused by their roles within communities.
Why do we have a violence against women act? Why is it not the violence against women and children act? Why--if as you say we protect women because they're weaker--we do not protect even children in the same way? Most female spousal abusers also abuse their kids.(cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat Most child abuse is perpetrated by women (both raw numbers and rates). Yet our legislation dealing with DV protects female perpetrators from accountability. It ignores male victims who need to remain with their children to protect them, by denying them services that would help them leave WITH their children.
Moreover, it is legal for a battered women's shelter to refuse to shelter sons of battered women if they're over 12. Society would rather protect women than children.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Moreover, whatever makes you think that women are not involved in gangs, don't gamble, don't use drugs and get into debt with dealers?
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat please private message me with your next reply! this is really annoying
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss It is annoying. But I'm not that interested in having a length, private back and forth with you. It's nothing personal, I just have the feeling that very little I might say, even backed up with reams of evidence, will change your mind. Your belief system is set, and it will likely take something more impactful than a discussion with a stranger on the internet to change it.
I've participated in this thread for the other people reading, whose minds aren't already made up.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat haha nobody is seeing this, i privated the video. i'm interested in conversing with you, not for you to try to make me into some sort of caricature of an ignorant bigot for the world to see. the only reason i want to pm you is because it doesn't have a character limit. if all you want to do is preach to me and not have a conversation (since clearly you think my views are far inferior to yours), i'm not interested either.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Now you're just being defensive. I don't think you views are "inferior". I think they're normal, and problematic because they do not reflect objective reality, but rather, what our instincts would have us believe. Instinct is bigoted. Most of us are born with a natural fear of snakes and spiders, regardless of how most of them are harmless.
If me presenting evidence (most of it sourced, all of it empirically reliable) is "preaching to you", that's a problem. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat If you like, I can message you a collection of links to studies, reports and analyses, but none of that will matter unless you actually read *and closely examine* them, without any lens in front of your eyes. Not an instinctive lens of gendered perceptions, and not a feminist lens.
Forebrain thinking comes naturally to VERY few people. You have to talk yourself into a state of near-autism in order to do it. Most people are simply not capable of that.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat men are more often in these dangerous situations, and men are simultaneously more capable of dealing with them. violence against women is abhorred because they are often weaker
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Why are men stronger than women? Think about it. Why are women weaker than men?
In order to survive their role since the beginning of humanity, men had to evolve to be physically stronger. Women's roles did not involve acting as agents of community protection, so they did not evolve to be as strong as men are. Their role was being the objects that were protected, not the objects doing the protecting. There was no evolutionary pressure on them to become strong as men. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat Physical differences between genders developed from the differing environments (caused by their different roles through history). Men who were as weak as women did not survive their roles long enough to reproduce, and were selected out of the species.
Women are not the protected gender because they are weaker than men. They are weaker because they've always been the protected gender.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat these evolutionary patterns were set in place by nature. testosterone and estrogen? men trend towards stronger, women trend towards weaker. women are weaker because they are weaker.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat & even if you're right (which it isnt), it doesn't matter. women are still weaker now. evolution isn't their fault. violence against women is still against the defenseless. message me.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat message me, i have a 200 character limit here.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss if you refresh the page, you'll probably get your 500 limit back.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat the point of this video is to saymen and women are equal. sure they're different, but they're equal. but women are definitely abused sexually more. men face greater adversity elsewhere
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss You should read that article on the GMP. They're funded by Ms. Magazine, if that helps convince you they're credible. The woman who wrote it is a survivor of female abuse, and she provides plenty of references.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
knuckledragger1984 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
knuckledragger1984 2 weeks ago
(cont) Power is the ability to place a social boycott against a man by saying that he made you uncomfortable or that he's creepy. Power is when there's a major social movement urging people to just plain believe you when you accuse a man of assault, rape or child abuse.
Watch some girlwriteswhat videos and see how a real woman makes arguments you clueless fembot.
knuckledragger1984 2 weeks ago
You go from saying that men are more fit for labor positions because they're big to saying "those positions of power". What positions of power? Farmer? Carpenter? Cab driver? Going out and working your ass off every day to provide for your wife and kids isn't power. Power is outliving your husband and spending the money he earned when he's dead. Power is what you've got when violent acts against you are taken WAY more seriously than violent acts against me, because I'm male and you're not (cont)
knuckledragger1984 2 weeks ago
@knuckledragger1984 ok, i will watch the videos and you learn to argue like a respectful human being. tip for the future, make sure you understand your opponent's arguments before insulting them because otherwise you end up making a tool out of yourself. when i referred to "positions of power", i was talking about CEOs, managers, businessmen, lawyers, politicians, and all the like. what i was saying about cab drivers and carpenters was the exact opposite. they hold no excess of power.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lilbluehersheykiss
Oh, you were talking about CEOs and managers? That's funny, because you never referred specifically to THOSE jobs. the only jobs you talked about were labor positions and then said "Those higher positions of power". Sorry for listening to what you said instead of what you meant.
knuckledragger1984 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
knuckledragger1984 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss
You do know that most business is run by women, right? There are still more male CEO's but most men are not CEO's. You are taking a minority of men and using that as proof that men have a mystical power. They do not nor did they ever. You also realize that most of the poor are men. And for those few men at the top... do you actually think there is a secret conspiracy to keep women down; or is it other factors like choice that keep women in the middle?
NoMorThanMost 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss @knuckledragger1984
I agree with knuckledragger1984, you should listen to girlwriteswhat before making your argument. She makes some very good points that disprove your “power” argument among others. You should also listen to Warren Farrell on his “Why men earn more” videos. There are 8 of them but you only have to watch the 1st 5 videos.
NoMorThanMost 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
monzy2 2 weeks ago
The point isn't that men don't get educated so they have shitty jobs. In fact men choose to get educated in different fields then women (mostly physical sciences, engineering and mathematics). On top of this men also hold most of the physical labour positions in the work place. The problem is some females, not everyone, has the idea of undeserved entitlement to everything and thinking that women are better than (not just equal to) men. Then expressing this entitlement through manipulation.
monzy2 2 weeks ago
@monzy2 ok i obviously agree that feeling like your race or gender is better than anyone else's is stupid, as is manipulation. however: "men choose to get educated in different fields then women (mostly physical sciences, engineering and mathematics)" are you implying that this means that men are more intelligent than women? or that these professions are more honorable?
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss We have been through this argument before. Men and women are of equal intelligence, but just have different preference. This was detailed in the book written by a feminist Dr. Warren Farell PhD titled "Why men earn more". Now instead of arguing about this, check out the book first and then come back and post your view.
Manoffriendship 2 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship do you think the US funds this program because they believe men and women are of equal physical strength, or because the US is a financial supporter of Israel and wants Israel to have a strong army so that it can defend itself from Jordan and the like, and the US doesn't have to send its own forces in? they have different preference, yes. the premise of my voting argument is that they have the same intelligence, so that doesn't disprove anything. (cont)
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss FYI: It's been found that the more egalitarian and wealthy a society is, the more gendered men and women's choices of work are. Women in India are more likely to go into tech fields than women in Sweden, because women in India are more likely to take a job based on income rather than fulfilment. The ratio seems to hold at 90/10 for "gendered" jobs--10% engineers being female and 10% of hairdressers men. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat Having inherent differences in interests is not an evil. One Cambridge study found that you can find gendered differences in newborns--boys look longer at mechanical objects, and girls longer at faces. At 9 months, toy preferences are clear--boys go more for mechanical objects and girls more for "organic" things like dolls and stuffed animals. They actually use the toy test to accurately assign gender in babies with ambiguous genitalia.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat i'm sure the situation in india is not that the women are engineers but that they're manual laborers. for the former to be true, you need to be socially liberal and accepting.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss The situation in India is that no one is really free to pick and choose the careers or jobs they want. And when people are not free, they take what they can get. In modern, egalitarian societies, where people have much more freedom to choose, they choose along gendered lines. Efforts in Norway to recruit female engineers would generate a minute increase for a year or two, then things would go back to 90/10.
Why does it upset you that women and men have different interests?
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat it doesn't haha, i never said it did
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship (cont) and no, im not going to read a book for the sake of a youtube argument. what do you mean these differences are taken into account? they are not at all. in the army, as the woman who wrote that article described, women are not only treated as equals to men but actually sexually harassed and assumed to be sluts. women are not given lighter "rucks" during ruck runs or given any kind of advantage, as they shouldnt be because the enemy that wants to kill them definitely won't.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
Maybe you need to watch your own videos to see what you said
plasmasnake402 2 weeks ago
So essentially you are saying women are weak. That is sexist, several women hold positions of power and when they don't they influence their husbands and hold that power indirectly
plasmasnake402 2 weeks ago
@plasmasnake402 hahaha. i don't know if you're trolling but no, that is clearly not what i said.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss You talk just like a radical feminist. First you justify the deaths of men in wars, then you suggest that women cannot perform in the army at an acceptable standard after i gave you very strong evidence. Do you even look into by evidence or do you just stick to your beliefs ? Do you not respect the risk and death rate that men have to go through?
Manoffriendship 2 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship ok, i will look into it.
lilbluehersheykiss 2 weeks ago
Without all that manual labour you deride you wouldn't be talking into that screen. Remember, a poor African MAN might well have died gathering the minerals together to have your circuits and computer parts made. Looking down on manual labour is a cop-out and I say this as someone who has done both manual labour and non-manual and has 2 masters degrees. Get serious.
Stardusk 3 weeks ago
@Stardusk i never once looked down on manual labor, i only said that it did not make anyone more worthy or respectable than anyone else.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't feel bad that he blocked you. He blocked me too as did other MRA's. They only want women hating men to be able to view their videos. They're able to post these vids due to free speech but they feel that free speech is really only for themselves and for those who believe that they do. They have a very narrow and externalized point of view and ironically play the victim card. The same victim card they say that feminists play which make them hypocrites to say the least!
rainbowbrainhead 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
rainbowbrainhead 3 weeks ago
sigh
I forgot to block. Probably won't. Before I go, his video means to say that women need to stop manipulating men to get what they want. We may have physically built the world, and a lot of good, influential women are indeed high up there in the spotlight of fame. I agree that men can be oppressive, but saying women can't be oppressive is like saying only men can take a piss. I have nothing against women and am all for the "equal rights" movement.
potsythewise 3 weeks ago
@potsythewise But you can't have equal rights when you call out men like this. We, as men, if we ever insulted a woman in public, would be shunned. Because we're "picking on a helpless" girl. Then she will go around and insult men, and without a word everyone supports. As girlwriteswhat says in one of her videos, "Why do you think men get pissed and beat on us? They do so much and then we turn around and call them assholes." <-- not actual words, but very close to it.
potsythewise 3 weeks ago
@potsythewise Furthermore, I wish that some women would rise to the top and represent women a lot more. I've seen some women do a lot better than guys with a lot of things, and I would like more of that in this world. Then there'd be equal rights. I'm all for women on the front lines, as long as men understand that you can't just go for her first.
After that, nobody wants to hear anything about how hard you are working or how it's a "man's job." You wanted the job, just do it.
potsythewise 3 weeks ago
@potsythewise Men may physically abuse women, and sometimes mentally and emotionally, but I've seen women completely ruin lives. Just, you know, for your information.
potsythewise 3 weeks ago
How can there not be girls like this? She hasn't lived in the real world, so kids her age base most of their world view on what they've seen on TV and in movies - where fictitious women show fictitious men how to fix their computers and cars and run corporations.
MoneyIsSilver 3 weeks ago
@MoneyIsSilver nope, no fiction involved. i personally know women who hold these jobs.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Logical fallacy of generalization from anecdotal evidence much?
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@bloodshedder021 not exactly. he's implying that these women don't exist. he said they're fictitious. 1) in order to prove wrong a polar statement like he made, you only need one exception. 2) just by way of statistics, if i as one person already know several women like this, there must logically be more out there, unless i'm weirdly lucky or something.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss He did not imply that. He stated that that was not the norm, despite it being portrayed fictionally as the norm. You misunderstood him. The existence of these few women merely serves to reinforce the false notion that they are more prevalent than they really are.
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@bloodshedder021 it's not portrayed fictionally as the norm. at all. in many movies, women are portrayed as eye candy. in other movies, women are shown in successful careers. the film industry is as versatile as life.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
I'm not blocking you because you're female. I'm blocking you because what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this web page is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
potsythewise 3 weeks ago
@potsythewise OH GOD. you blocked me. i was hoping to go on your page, subscribe to you, leave 43 fan comments on all your videos, and make your youtube page my home screen. what will i do now? TELL ME. also, don't be a drama queen. my points are reasonable, you just don't like them.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
There are a few problems with the logic in this video, though I see you have made some good points. Such as men working in the same office jobs. The first fault I see is female babies have the same muscle mass as males. Boys aren't born for manual labor. Second, in the 80's the government started the proactive scholarship program because they noticed fewer girls in college. Now in 2012, 53% of graduates are woman, and 73% of students are women, yet they still only have this program for WOMEN.
AcidReflux27 3 weeks ago
@AcidReflux27 the muscle mass of boys and girls changes drastically as hit puberty, so that point is still valid. your second point has little to do with what i was saying. like, everyone on here is really keen on pretending like this video was about how women are discriminated against and oppressed. this video is about calling out the idiocy of a very sexist and aggressive man who made a video dehumanizing and insulting all women.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Muscle mass doesn't change that much at puberty. You are talking about muscle mass from the influx of testosterone. This is only a boost of around 9-12% Otherwise you would see muscle eating disease such as AIDS, and HIV kill woman much faster then women due to the lack of body mass for the virus to consume, While both parties lose weight, they both lose weight at about the same rate. Just ask my friend Mike and his wife. They had both Cancer and AIDS
AcidReflux27 3 weeks ago
@AcidReflux27 it definitely does. are you really arguing that men don't genetically have more muscle. 9-12% is a significant amount. like, any medical website will tell you that men have more muscle than women. it's really not a disputable fact.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Then maybe you can explain to me how women live longer then men. Is it because of the better healthcare they receive, such as evident by the fact that women breast cancer is much more popular then mens prostate cancer despite the death rate for prostate cancer being higher? Is it because 98% of all workplace accidents happen to men. but you still haven't explained how Mike and his wife are still alive after both cancer and aids, she should be dead
AcidReflux27 3 weeks ago
@AcidReflux27 it's biology. one, men take more risks. they pick occupations that have more risk to them, and they engage in riskier activities for leisure. also (and mostly), it's just biology. here, read the time magazine article about why women live longer (google it). it just explains why women live longer, like iron deficiency, estrogen, etc.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss So it's biology that women don't build skyscrapers, or roads, or briges, or dig coal mines or work on offshore oil rigs.OK I'll give that to you, but if it's biology, then why don't women DESIGN these things? Why is it all of these things were designed by men? Everything in your house was designed by men. The computer your typing your response to this message was designed by men. The software was written by men. The numbers should be equal in this area
AcidReflux27 3 weeks ago
@AcidReflux27 women do design these things. this is actually something i even addressed in my video. women are entering engineering and programming and architectural fields in increasing numbers. it's just that until fairly recently, these areas were seen as predominantly male, but now that we're being more conducive to both genders taking high level math/science, we're seeing more women go into these fields. i personally know a number of friends who want to beprogrammers/engineers
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@AcidReflux27 however, i doubt the numbers will even out because, in general, men have more strengths in the visual-spatial reasoning fields, as opposed to women who have strengths in communication, verbal comprehension, and the more humanities based fields.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss If what your saying is true, where were the women who helped bring the dark ages to the renaissance? Where were the female composers, and play writers.
AcidReflux27 3 weeks ago
@AcidReflux27 as i said, only very recently was it seen as socially acceptable and rewardable for women to venture outside the home. definitely as early as the renaissance, a respectable woman, one who was revered by her parents and friends, was one who kept a tidy home, raised many children, and was submissive and supportive of her husband. women who wanted to write or compose or even make art were seen as rebellious and too "manly". that is why.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
I fucking hate people who criticize labour intensive careers. Especially since those two jobs you picked as examples are essential to modern society, most office workers not so much.
TrueMetis 3 weeks ago
@TrueMetis 1) find better reasons to hate people. there are much better ones out there, believe me. 2) i never said that those jobs weren't essential or important. i said that being a construction worker doesn't put you above anybody else.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss "Maybe you wouldn't have to get up in the morning and be a textile mill worker or a deliveryman if you *condescending pause and shrug* had gotten a better education in college. It's not a merit to have a manual labour job if anything it's a burden." This implies two things, one manual job workers are uneducated, and yes that having a job that required a degree is more important than one that doesn't.
TrueMetis 3 weeks ago
@TrueMetis well, manual job workers are often less formally educated than other workers. a job that requires a degree requires more specialized skill and trained intelligence than one that doesn't, yes. obviously manual jobs are very necessary. they're just usually filled with people who don't have a choice because of a lack of formal education.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss What about uni student who are doing construction/mining part-time ? Many famous male actors, lawyers, doctors, engineers studying did construction work, mining, steel work, garbage collector, sewage cleaning. Jackie Chan, RDJ, Tom Welling, Matt Damon are some of the actors of the top of my head.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship yes, they had to do that because they didn't have enough specialized skill to do anything else. that only supports my point. as soon as they got their big break in acting, none of these people said oh no, i'll just stay with my construction job. that's because it is not a very desirable profession. it requires the least specialized skill. any pair of strong arms can do it.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss "as soon as they got their big break in acting, none of these people said oh no, i'll just stay with my construction job." <--Does this same rule apply for doctors, lawyers, pharmacists, commerce students? (Rhetorical question) . They were just studying and did this as a part-time job because they were guaranteed a job after uni/college, they could have chosen something else, but choose this, simply as that.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship yes, they were doing those things because, until they graduated college, they could not get other jobs because their education was incomplete (though i know of very few serious college students who work in construction). the reason they choose those jobs, if they can and have time to, is because they have a skill that others don't: physical strength. for the use of this skill, they get paid more than convenience store clerks their age.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss "yes, they were doing those things because, until they graduated college, they could not get other jobs because their education was incomplete " <-- good, so we both agree that construction workers are not necessarily incapable of being uneducated and are actually smart,. BTW, I know plenty of studying males in top fields who do construction work particularly engineering student.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Only about 40% of people who get a college or university degree actually work in the field they studied. Which suggest that about 60% of jobs don't actually require any real specialized skill. A lot labourers make equal or better money than people who went to college. This isn't fastfood or other low end jobs, most manual labour position requires years in either a trade school or as a apprentice.
TrueMetis 3 weeks ago
@TrueMetis haha no you're misinterpreting that statistic. the people who didn't get a job in their exact field are still using their college degree, it's just in a field that branches off from the one they studied. few manual laborers make better money than college graduates. it's hard work for little money, nobody WANTS to do it.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss No, by and large they are in fields that have nothing to do with their chosen field of study and often don't even requite a degree. And bullshit, construction workers, plumbers, roofers, and most manual labourer jobs make very good money. The reason people don't want to do it is people like you. I can make $15-20 an hour just cleaning up on a construction site.
TrueMetis 3 weeks ago
@TrueMetis that's not a true statement. the first thing you said. most jobs require at least an associate's degree in some field. and, a plumber needs a college degree. besides, the point was not to demean laboring jobs, it was to say that being a physical worker doesn't make you a better or more important person that anyone else.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss I think one of out issues here may be difference between out countries, in Canada plumbers do not need to go to college, they need to apprentice or go to a trade school. And if that was indeed your point try saying that rather than condescendingly talking about how people should have gotten a better education.
TrueMetis 3 weeks ago
@TrueMetis "I can make $15-20 an hour just cleaning up on a construction site." I at-least 30 fork-lift drivers from my work place and they make 30-35 and hour for driving a fork-lift around and moving things. Not a single one of those fork-lift drivers are female. So when i went around asking how come not female forklift drivers were there, they told me that every year out of 1000 forklift drivers, only 5-6 are actually female. This was an actual statistic.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship Rather than thinking about the small number of female forklift drivers my thought was "shit I should get a forklift license."
TrueMetis 3 weeks ago
@TrueMetis Trust me mate, I was thinking the same thing, but I don't want to receive another annoying notification about not staying on topic. When my fingers get better I will start applying for a forklift license as well, My Law degree goes to waste but I'll be earning more money per hour having fun a the same time :D
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
its funny how wrong you are. Its even funnier how right you think you are.
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops it's funny how certain you are that i'm wrong and how you have given me no intelligible thought of your own as to why i am.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss like I need to restate what everyone has already said to prove you wrong
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops yeah you do, because i've had a logical response to everything "everyone" has said. so how about you fight your own battles. you don't get to ride on the backs of those more intelligent than you for a win by default, sorry.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss You haven't had a reasonable response to anything anyone has said. If you did, it would go like this: "You're right. I'm sorry. I will immediately change my erroneous opinions and apologize to those I have offended."
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@bloodshedder021 no, because the things people have said haven't been correct. of course that's what you'd like me to do, but i'm not going to agree when people say that women aren't deserving of rights or are less intellectually capable than men, because that's just a scientifically false statement.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss I believe what you mean is "These people have said things that contradict my flawed and somewhat bigoted viewpoints, but instead of learning, I'm going to pretend that they said something completely different."
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@bloodshedder021 right. saying that men and women are equally capable and deserving of a full and unhindered life is.... bigoted. ok, you say stupid things like that and my viewpoint is the one that's flawed? yes people have contradicted me. i've had rebuttals. i don't pretend people say different things, and if i ever misinterpret their words they are quick to correct me. are you going to argue or just sit there and make offhanded statements about me and my debating skills?
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss You aren't saying that at all. You are ignoring very real problems and very precise and evidence-based counter-arguments, and saying that everyone who disagrees with you is saying something other than what they are to frame it in as negative a light as possible to avoid coming off as the more bigoted person.
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@bloodshedder021 i'm not ignoring problems, i'm saying that yes there is sexism out there for both genders, yes we need to work on it, but nobody is the victim in this world. we've gotten to a place in society where everyone more or less has the same shot at a good life as everyone else. it's time to stop pointing fingers and just chill.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss and some of those people will have logical responses to what you have said. Its not about me fighting my own battles, but more about me not having to watch your video and find your points and then search for facts to refute your points. It would be much easier if you typed out why you think your right in a way that is structured and added to your description.
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Its kind of ironic that you put that I don't get to ride on the backs of those more intelligent than me, but that's exactly what women do in society
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops haha nope. false statement. women have not been proven less intelligent than men by any conclusive study. the only correlation that was found between intelligence and another factor was very loosely with height. actually, when controlled for height women were found to be slightly more intelligent than men. men and women have different intellectual strengths (visual spatial vs. comprehensive), but they are equally capable.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss You again, deliberately misunderstood his statement. What he said was "women exploit intelligent men" which is true.
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@bloodshedder021 no he said women ride on the backs of those more intelligent than them. implying that men are more intelligent than women. you just watered down his statement to make it less objectionable.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss you seemed to have missed the point, it was that men built society. I'll give you the point that women are part of the reason humans reproduce but other than reproducing women have done almost nothing to build society thus they have been "riding on the backs" of men
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops AZT. Radioactivity. Matriarchal lineage dominance in tribal african cultures. Reality is the way it is because men and women have made it that way.
bloodshedder021 3 weeks ago
@killerchops there are two reasons for this. 1) in the past, the only skill that was needed was physical strength [which most women lacked]. other than this, to have a position of power you needed to be wealthy. 2) when specialization of jobs extended from just being strong to requiring intelligence and frugality, women were put down socially. it wasn't seen as socially normal for a women to venture outside the home. and that is why men [used to be the ones that] built this society.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss good job, you aren't denying that men built society.
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops good job, you aren't addressing the fact that i just explained why women are not, in fact, riding on anyone's backs.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss actually you just explained why women are riding on the backs of men. the first reason is because they are not physically strong, the second reason is because women didn't venture outside the home.
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops no i explained why women didn't build this society not through some fault of their but because of genetics and the way their society was constructed (by men). obviously it was more convenient to have stay at home moms, so women were pushed towards that for hundreds of years. but society wasn't interested in making sure every human being could live the life they wanted. one group was trying to make life easier for themselves at the expense of another.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Dont care about who is at "fault" for women not building society, the point is women didn't build society and therefor were carried on the backs of men. Even if they were kicking and screaming on the backs of men, they were still carried by men.
killerchops 3 weeks ago
@killerchops ok but how you phrased your statement had a very negative connotation about it. "carried on the backs of those more intelligent than them." it made it sound like women just laid back, forced men to do everything, and never once objected to it. the reality is, men, as you said, picked women up kicking and screaming, slung them over their shoulder, and carried them. until recently when finally women were set down and can carry themselves.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
YT MRAs are known for blocking anybody that has a different opinion that theirs. Take a look at any pinegrove33's video and all the "comment removed" u see is someone who has been blocked for disagreeing with him. They are very thinned skinned, I think I was blocked for calling National review a necon rag. You have to totally agree with them or you are a white knight and its a one way trip to BLOCK city.
uche007us 3 weeks ago
@uche007us yep. a lot of people are really afraid to be disagreed with. which i don't understand. like, i enjoy making videos where i get into arguments with people in the comments (though not when people get childish and start hurling insults). it's eye opening and interesting. when you block your comments, it's like your putting your hands over your ears and going LALALALALA. very juvenile.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@uche007us yeah, and not to mention Barborossaa's channel, that was temporarily suspended because it was flagged as "Spreading hateful messages" or some shit like that... Oh wait, his channel is for MRA and MGTOW's. I guess some women and Feminists like to partake in Censorship as well, only they're not just blocking and deleting messages, they are trying to take down an entire channel, and websites for MGTOW's.
thecurse23 3 weeks ago
Eh, build a battle ship or a skyscraper, or invade a country by only using swords...and....ah fuck that....How about you just build a brick wall. Can you do that?
Build a brick wall, and then you can talk shit about men in general.
Otherwise, shut yur yap and get back in the kitchen were ya belong.
FlankerVT 3 weeks ago
@FlankerVT i've built a brick wall. now what?
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
your not making much sense
fuckingwiththestars 3 weeks ago
@fuckingwiththestars you're not spelling very correctly.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
Note, boys/girls--men/women learn differently, however the college/universities cater to the activities that girls/women excel at, therefore men have been disenfranchised by the over whelming rule of feminized education. Remember the rule of Marxism, invade an organization and rule it, command it, change its core principles and use it to pursue the invaders doctrines. Feminists run our educational system.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago 2
Male students are dropping out of college/universities at an alarming rate. Male students have a 65% drop out rate in contrast female students have a drop out rate of only 30%. The implication according to some scientific studies are: Men are dropping out of college/universities as a result of feminism/anti-male policies/education/teaching and anti-male learning activities.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship the school system has been fundamentally the same since it was founded by thomas jefferson. based on reading books, studying, and taking tests. you're trying to say that boys being less dedicated to education than girls and dropping out isn't caused by any fault of theirs, but by "anti-male teachings"? hahaha. what a load of shit.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss LOL, you must read and research Christina Hoff Summers, feminist , and read her book " the war on boys". This book counters you point completely and will make you take back you low level question " what a load of shit. ".
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship how about instead of me reading a book, you refute what i said about thomas jefferson and how our school system is fundamentally the same with your own brain, not christina hoff's.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lilbluehersheykiss Funny you say that, because Christina actually refute "thomas jefferson and how our school system is fundamentally the same with your own brain" with the aforementioned points in my previous post. BTW, I missed this comment by accident.
Manoffriendship 2 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Actually, in the 80s and 90s (after women had almost overtaken men in post-secondary, no less) feminists published the "results" of a study done on educational outcomes by gender, suggesting girls were being shortchanged. They only made public the results, because the data in the study didn't support their conclusions. Because of this research, new, girl-friendly methods were developed to teach reading, and implemented in public schools. (cont)
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@girlwriteswhat They went from synthetic phonics to "whole language", and suddenly girls started surpassing boys in reading. The problem is, as a recent study in the UK has just shown, whole language handicaps both boys and girls--it just handicaps boys MORE than girls. Boys were reading slightly better than girls before. Now both genders are reading at lower levels, but girls are doing better than boys, so it's seen as a victory.
girlwriteswhat 2 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship what is an anti-male policy. what is anti-male learning/teachings. i'm pretty sure there are no classes called "Men Suck." what specifically are you referring to?
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Boys learn through "critical thinking" and girls learn through "memorization". A lot of work was done in the 70s t improve girls i n the science and maths( a males strong areas of thinking) but boys were sidelined even though it was known that boys were behind girls in English/lit/languages, but noting was done about this, so there was 40 years of progressive work aims at girls in education, then you have sexist banner;"Girls are better than Boys".
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss (cont.)This is even evident when left-winged Labor MP, Diane Abbott , who was in a position to know the education would cause deliberate harm, sent her son to a boy's only private school. Even the statistics prove that, in UK, USA, and Australia, academic achievement is greater in males who studies in male only private schools, because the male only schools have only male only teachers and teach in a male way- critically , practically, firm discipline.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
you proved his whole point that most women do not know what it really takes to keep the gears of your entitled opulence greased and going. and how that would end if men were to say you know what I had enough of this shit do it yourself. But because this work has no merit it is somehow beneath you and so many other women out there so therefore not worth doing. The gears would come to a grinding hault, and you opulence would come to an end.
mraNewfoundland 3 weeks ago
@mraNewfoundland and i am not entitled to any "opulence." everything i have or will have is going to be earned through work and capability. the only times things are just given to people in this world is when they already have very little (like welfare).
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss so what do you call Alimony? why does a woman feel like she still deserves a man's money.. err agh I mean support, after they are divorced? I thought women were independent. that doesn't sound very independent to me. or what about the fact that a woman can file for a No-Fault Divorce and get 50(+)% of a man's liquidated assets. btw. 51% of marriages end in divorce, approx. 70% of divorce is filed by women, and approx. 80% of those divorces are filed under No-Fault.
thecurse23 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Yes and with all the benifits of affirmative action, an education system that looked out for you as a girl establishing programs that are geared toward girls and college system that is increasingly hostile to men and more programs for women to utilize to access higher education. Yeah you go girl.
As for talking off the top of your head and what you saying not being scripted I would suggest that is reveals more of the way you think, you may not want to think this way but
mraNewfoundland 3 weeks ago
@mraNewfoundland with more women than men in college now, affirmative action for middle class white females basically doesn't exist anymore. the rest of what you said is just wrong. the education system we have is the same fundamentally as it has been since thomas jefferson invented it. there are no special programs geared towards girls or anti-male teachings as some people have said. trust me, i'm in this school system now haha. (cont)
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Affirmative action is in place, just read U.S. gov affirmative action policies and you find find upon closer inspection that it actually hinders men. The same this is happening in the U.K, and Australia.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago
@Manoffriendship send me one. i know that when i apply to college where i am now, affirmative action for my gender will not be much of a help.
lilbluehersheykiss 3 weeks ago
@lilbluehersheykiss Could not find my previous comment to reply to. Depends which course you apply for. In the UK, if your a female who applied for IT or engineering( male dominated fields ), you get a $7000 scholarship going towards your fees and materials. In Australia it is $5000 for the aforementioned fields<-- this does not make much sense. If a male applied for nursing, he would get nothing.
Manoffriendship 3 weeks ago