Men need to stop making everything about themselves.

[–]Trancetastic16No Pill Non-Binary Male 13 points14 points15 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Imagine if you told women this during the first waves of the Feminism movement.

Now men are rightfully bringing up the imbalance of University attendance when the same imbalance in the opposite direction was considered a problem to help women with, the male suicide rates, men’s groups being shut-down, men being told to open-up but then the latest Feminist “experts” writing articles about “Mankeeping”, how many Inkcels are Autistic, Trans-women and Bisexual men (63% of straight women don’t want to date them) who experience genuine discrimination and social exclusion for not being traditionally masculine, that a male being ráped and impregnating the woman must pay for child support, etc.

And all this in one of the most egalitarian eras in human history, and we still aren’t doing enough and complaining too much?

A lot of your complaints are highly anecdotal and lacking statistical evidence.

Otherwise, what more specifically are you asking for here?

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Strider291 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Fandangho -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PSXSnack09AntiPorn | No Pill Man - Blue pill fatigue 14 points15 points16 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DietTyronePurple Pill Man (Red Leaning) 23 points24 points25 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Men need to stop making everything about themselves.

Ladies first.

"I just want a virgin or a low body-count women, why is that so bad?" because women aren't here for *you*

We'll stop having standards the moment women also stop having standards, so basically never.

No one gives a shit what some random man wants in a women,

You cared enough to make this post complaining about it. Why do you care so much about what men's standards are?

The men vs bear debate really highlighted the selfishness and entitlement of young men too.

How come when men state their standards it's selfishment and entitlement, but when women do the same it's "never settle" and "know your worth kween 💅🏾"

Who gives a shit what some random woman on the internet picks? its her choice based on her own experiences. getting offended because she didn't pick *you*

Literally replace woman with man in this sentence and take your own advice. The lack of self awareness in this post is crazy.

[–]Maffioze26M altruistic individualist 33 points34 points35 points 5 months ago (82 children) | Copy Link

I keep finding these types of takes on the man vs bear debate to be incredibly ironic and deeply lacking in self-awareness.

You call young men selfish and entitled for responding negatively to it, but you are yourself responding negatively to their reaction by calling them selfish and entitled. Which suggests you yourself are selfish and entitled by your own logic as you don't allow them to respond based on their own experiences either. You're suggesting women are entitled to expressing opinions morally shielded from criticism, but men are not.

The backfire example also doesn't really prove women respect men's choices more than vice versa. Comparing someone to a tree is less offensive than comparing them to a violent animal (which yes, means it's dumb for men to bring it up, I agree with that), and doesn't have the whole historical baggage of it being associated with bigotry and dehumanisation behind it. Neither have young women had to deal with decades of being told their identity is the ultimate problem in society and a threat/danger the way young men have had to deal with in the past decades. All this proves is that men are more sensitive to being seen as a threat than women because that's been a common lived experience that has hurt them through shame that women haven't had to deal with to the same degree.

Maybe you don't understand this and this is a better explanation?

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (67 children) | Copy Link

Man vs bear is a moral intuition test, not an actual moral argument. People are taking man vs bear way too literally… That’s why women don’t respond emotionally to men picking trees over women; not responding emotionally is “passing” the moral intuition test. It’s just a rhetorical strategy. Yesterday you were talking about strategic use of words on subs like these yourself as well. You do it to inspire for rethinking. Man vs bear is that. A test to inspire rethinking.

The point isn’t “men are worse than bears”. The point is how you react when a hypothetical implies moral suspicion. If your first response is: “So you think all men are monsters?”, “This is misandry”, “Women are irrational” …

…congrats, you became the data!!!

It’s intellectually weak but socially revealing. The rage proves the mechanism works. Women aren’t making a risk calculation, they’re signaling distrust in accountability and seeing whether men can sit with that implication for 5 seconds without centering themselves. Taking it literally is missing the point. Getting defensive is the point. You don’t have to like the prompt because it’s dumb on purpose. But pretending it’s a serious claim about bears instead of a provocation or rage bait says more about the person being baited than the person posting it.

It’s testing whether you can sit with what women are signaling. Shifting to “What about men?”immediately suggests discomfort with the implication rather than engagement with it. The test isn’t about vilifying men. It is about listening without immediately formulating a defensive response. Re-centering men in response suggests you couldn’t tolerate the implication long enough to examine it. That’s why the person who centers men as a response to men vs bear “failed” the moral intuition test, because they avoided the emotional content of the scenario.

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 12 points13 points14 points 5 months ago (20 children) | Copy Link

You do it to inspire for rethinking. Man vs bear is that. A test to inspire rethinking.

I don't believe that that is what it is. I believe it is a dogwhistle for a bigoted belief system.

It’s intellectually weak but socially revealing. The rage proves the mechanism works. Women aren’t making a risk calculation, they’re signaling distrust in accountability and seeing whether men can sit with that implication for 5 seconds without centering themselves.

Imo it reveals that the women who say that themselves don't understand how many times men have already been told this and have had to sit with it. I don't think that in this case men "centering themselves" is a bad thing. They are just responding to unproductive takes meant to shame them again. Women who then take that defensiveness as proof that they are right are also "centering themselves". It reveals more blindness on their side than anything else.

instead of a provocation or rage bait says more about the person being baited than the person posting it.

I don't agree, as I see it as a dogwhistle. The fact that so many people don't see it as that is a consequence of the fact that people are blind for bigotry when it's aimed at men.

It’s testing whether you can sit with what women are signaling. Shifting to “What about men?”immediately suggests discomfort with the implication rather than engagement with it. The test isn’t about vilifying men. It is about listening without immediately formulating a defensive response

That's just because you interpret what it is very positively. I also reject the idea that I have to listen to people who use this type of language. I think a defensive response to something like this is the justified response to give, and I'd say the same thing if someone said something similar to women.

Re-centering men in response suggests you couldn’t tolerate the implication long enough to examine it.

That's not accurate for me whatsoever. I grew up as a feminist and have examined this topic plenty of times. I still think the response men have given to it is appropriate.

That’s why the person who centers men as a response to men vs bear “failed” the moral intuition test, because they avoided the emotional content of the scenario.

So a person who pushes back on emotional abuse that's been aimed at them for decades failed a moral intuition test? But the person who takes that as evidence that they were justified in doing that passed it?

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

I think a defensive response to something like this is the justified response to give, and I'd say the same thing if someone said something similar to women.

This sort of defensiveness is never healthy, neither morally justified. Whether from women or men. When someone signals something, you don’t center yourself in response. Period. You hold that space for them.

And your strong response to what I said is kinda proving my point…

Not being able to sit with these implications is in fact failing the test. Why? Because it means you can’t separate your personal self from the group you belong too. It means men can’t separate who they are as individuals from the group “men”.

I’ll mirror the example. I’m a feminist. If I hear criticism about feminists, I’ll surely investigate what they mean and if they mean all feminists, but in no way am I feeling under personal attack. I know who I am and what I stand for. Even further; I can comprehend some criticism to some feminists, I even share that criticism. The thing is, men perceive it as “most feminists”. I think that is not rooted in reality, but I also don’t judge them for thinking it because the loud binary thinking feminism is predominant online these days.

Back to the men vs bear. If a woman would say “I pick the bear” and tell a man it’s because she had only negative experiences with men in her life, the point isn’t for the man to ask “but is this the majority of men?”. It’s not. It’s not the majority of men. The majority of men are not being harmful towards women and are not bad intentioned. But women perceive a majority of men to be dangerous, because the majority of women have encountered dangerous men. The majority of women have stories about sexual assault or situations where they felt extremely unsafe. So they perceive “most men” even if it isn’t. That’s the implication the “not so dangerous men” are asked to sit with.

Just like you yourself would want “not so binary thinking” feminists (like me) to sit with the implication that a lot of men experience “most feminists”. You want that. Deep down you want that acknowledging from feminists. You want them to acknowledge that indeed, it is understandable men perceive a majority of feminists to be this specific way. Men vs bear is the exact same intuition test. It’s asking men too to acknowledge why women perceive a majority of men to be this way. It’s not saying “you all are…”. It’s saying “maybe you are not… but please see why I would feel this way”.

You responding in defense here, is the same mechanism as a feminist responding in defense to “a lot of feminists appear to be this way”. You’re doing the same thing you don’t like from feminists.

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

This sort of defensiveness is never healthy, neither morally justified. Whether from women or men. When someone signals something, you don’t center yourself in response. Period. You hold that space for them.

So when someone signals to you that they think women are awful and belong in the kitchen, should have their rights taken away etc your response is to hold space for them? Not defensiveness? Not moral concern?

Because it means you can’t separate your personal self from the group you belong too. It means men can’t separate who they are as individuals from the group “men”.

No it means I don't think I should separate my personal self from that group, as I have been hurt by the things they are saying about an immutable identity I have. Why would this even be a moral thing to do?

The thing is, men perceive it as “most feminists”. I think that is not rooted in reality, but I also don’t judge them for thinking it because the loud binary thinking feminism is predominant online these days.

Being a feminist is a choice, being a man is not. I also don't think the problem is merely online, and the analogy doesn't work. The men who physically abuse women are a smaller fraction of men than the fraction of feminists who have problematic beliefs.

So they perceive “most men” even if it isn’t. That’s the implication the “not so dangerous men” are asked to sit with.

Your trauma is not the responsibility of other, innocent people who have nothing to do with it. I can't sit with something like that, when there is a whole ideology out there that considers my gender the root of evil and that tries to shame men for existing. Holding men responsible for not sitting with that is a misattribution of the main responsibility. The main responsibility lays with the women who communicated this terribly, who do not understand men's lived experiences themselves, and who support harmful ideologies that have male defensiveness as a logical and predictable consequence.

It’s asking men too to acknowledge why women perceive a majority of men to be this way. It’s not saying “you all are…”. It’s saying “maybe you are not… but please see why I would feel this way”.

But I don't have a problem with women not trusting men. I have a problem with comparing men to violent animals.

I also don't think the analogy works again. Men are more justified in perceiving the majority of feminists in this way than women are in perceiving the majority of men in this way. Because more feminists validate those perceptions than men who validate those perceptions.

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

So when someone signals to you that they think women are awful and belong in the kitchen, should have their rights taken away etc your response is to hold space for them? Not defensiveness? Not moral concern?

Category error. That’s a direct moral and political claim about what women should be allowed to do (rights, obligations, explicit political view). That’s not a symbolic comparison used as emotion signaling.

You appear to not really notice a difference between: 1) Saying “men are violent animals” (= moral accusation) 2) Saying “I statistically feel safer with X” (= risk perception) 3) Saying “my lived experience makes me distrustful” (= emotional signal)

You make a category error collapsing these into one. The bear prompt is crude but interpreting it as a moral claim that men are inherently evil is adding a layer that isn’t there. As I said before the analogy is made to signal 2) and most of all 3) I want to signal I feel unsafe.

But I don't have a problem with women not trusting men. I have a problem with comparing men to violent animals.

Again, comparison is doing symbolic work, not biological equivalence. You treat symbolism as a literal comparison.

No it means I don't think I should separate my personal self from that group, as I have been hurt by the things they are saying about an immutable identity I have. Why would this even be a moral thing to do?

Moral maturity = the ability to tolerate group-level critique without personalizing it.

when there is a whole ideology out there that considers my gender the root of evil

And also. Your argument relies entirely on assumptions you chose to accept. You assume that rhetorical provocation about group-based fear = collective moral blame. That doesn’t logically follow. Acknowledging that women generalize under repeated harm is not the same as holding individual men morally responsible for harm they didn’t commit?

The men who physically abuse women are a smaller fraction of men than the fraction of feminists who have problematic beliefs.

Men are more justified in perceiving the majority of feminists in this way than women are in perceiving the majority of men in this way.

Now you also say that more feminists validate harmful ideology than men validate harmful behavior, which is a comparative claim in nature as well as a quantitative claim. Without data… that’s an assumption too.

Your moral instinct seems to prioritise protecting individuals from collective suspicion. My moral instinct prioritises acknowledging why collective suspicion emerges in the first place… (you have that moral instinct as well when it comes to feminists).

Nobody is asking men to accept guilt? But we’re asking whether it’s possible to tolerate hearing “some women feel unsafe” without immediately reframing it as ideological abuse.

Being a feminist is a choice, being a man is not.

It’s not a choice to me. I can’t not be a feminist. Moral identity is not always experienced as freely interchangeable. You could argue that once one moves to another country, they simply quit being their previous nationality. Yet for a lot of people this has become a core part to their identity. It’s not that simple. As a high educated woman in the West I know everything that I have in my life (education, career, freedom, reproductive rights, voting rights…) I thank to feminism. Choosing not to be a feminist would be denying reality and betraying my values. I would cease to exist as a person. It’s part of my identity. So to me, personally, it feels immutable more than my gender. I could be more easily non-binary or trans than cease to be a feminist. I realise that’s maybe not everyone’s lived experience, but it’s mine, it’s how I truly feel internally. Feminism is not a choice, it’s part of me.

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Category error. That’s a direct moral and political claim about what women should be allowed to do (rights, obligations, explicit political view). That’s not a symbolic comparison used as emotion signaling.

You appear to not really notice a difference between: 1) Saying “men are violent animals” (= moral accusation) 2) Saying “I statistically feel safer with X” (= risk perception) 3) Saying “my lived experience makes me distrustful” (= emotional signal)

You make a category error collapsing these into one. The bear prompt is crude but interpreting it as a moral claim that men are inherently evil is adding a layer that isn’t there. As I said before the analogy is made to signal 2) and most of all 3) I want to signal I feel unsafe.

You said "any defensiveness of that type is bad" but didn't clarify what you meant by that type. I'm not saying it's a moral claim that men are inherently evil. I'm saying there's enough people who believe that, and that comparing people to violent animals is such a common bigotry tactic associated with dehumanisation that it is unreasonable to expect men to assume it was meant that you think it was meant.

Again, comparison is doing symbolic work, not biological equivalence. You treat symbolism as a literal comparison.

I don't see how this is relevant to what I said.

Moral maturity = the ability to tolerate group-level critique without personalizing it.

I don't think it is group-level critique, neither do I think people have to not personalize it regardless of how the critique is formulated.

Your argument relies entirely on assumptions you chose to accept.

That's equally true about both of us.

You assume that rhetorical provocation about group-based fear = collective moral blame. That doesn’t logically follow.

The opposite doesn't logically follow either. And in my eyes collective moral blame is so common that it is to risky to assume it is not that.

Without data… that’s an assumption too.

I agree, just like your assumption it is not like this.

Your moral instinct seems to prioritise protecting individuals from collective suspicion.

My moral instinct is to protect anyone from dehumanisation.

But we’re asking whether it’s possible to tolerate hearing “some women feel unsafe” without immediately reframing it as ideological abuse.

I tolerate that, when that is actually said. You're yourself framing as something more innocent than it actually is.

As a high educated woman in the West I know everything that I have in my life (education, career, freedom, reproductive rights, voting rights…) I thank to feminism.

I don't think this is correct. Other factors play a role in that as well.

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Dehumanisation? Feels like you didn’t actually read what I wrote. It’s symbolic, not literal. It’s not meant as category 1 (moral accusation = men are violent animals), it’s meant as category 2 and 3 (risk perception and emotional signaling). These are the intentions. They don’t point to dehumanisation. You “perceive it as such”. But it’s not the intention of feminists using the analogy. You’re misreading the intention behind the entire symbolism.

I just don't agree with your whole framing or conceptualisation of what man vs bear is.

In my head you're the one being overly generous in their intentions. There's no way I can reasonably believe category 2 and 3 are the true intentions in the current socio-political context.

And what are my assumptions? And how do they compare in weight to yours?

The the analogies you gave are sufficiently similar, that you understand the intentions of the people who talk about it, that you understand why men respond defensively to it ...

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81374 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BrianBorr23232-1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RandHommanPurple Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]RandHomman2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81373 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RandHomman2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I also think they change their tune based on if the person identifies as a feminist and if the person is a man or not. I've seen a man asking them how to spread feminist messaging in a proper manner as a man and they mocked him for trying to curate his speech. Then a woman later asked the exact same thing, though they didn't mocked her, they told her she shouldn't try to cuddle men and if they don't accept the message then they are both misogynists and don't want to let go their patriarchal privilege... to me this is entertainment gold. A lot of people are just lurking, they are curious about feminism, they go online to learn a little more and all they see is vitriol.

I have many students that their first reaction to feminism is "yuk", even women don't want to associate themselves with the name. Maybe you can help do things about it, just like feminism like to say "men should talk to other men since a man will listen more if it's a man talking" which is false... but maybe feminists that want to better the movement should also do that, as feminist you'd be better to talk to them since "most feminists will not listen to a non feminist"... which again, may be false.

[–]NoBlacksmith81373 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]RandHomman1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81372 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caption291Red Pill Man I don't want a flair 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhiteLotusGauntletPurple Pill Man 10 points11 points12 points 5 months ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrNotSoFunFactBaguette Pilled Man 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]caption291Red Pill Man I don't want a flair 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]caption291Red Pill Man I don't want a flair 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They never meant to put that much logic into it.

Well, they should have. You don't get to say something like that and then act like men are the assholes for not interpreting it 50 times more favorably than women would interpret a similar statement about them from men.

Women have established a very fucking clear pattern about this kind of stuff so they don't get to play dumb they have to sit in it.

It’s just a symbolic statement.

So are most insults. My point was that the symbol was meant to say something about men as a group.

Nobody literally believes an average man is more dangerous than an average bear.

I think plenty of women literally believed it, but that's besides the point because the statement is bad regardless of it's a symbol or not.

The fact that you all are missing the symbolic point being made IS the point.

I think you should consider the possibility that someone understands what women are saying AND think it's stupid.

[–]BrianBorr23232 -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]BrianBorr232320 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81372 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BrianBorr232321 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81372 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BrianBorr232321 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MrNotSoFunFactBaguette Pilled Man 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhiteLotusGauntletPurple Pill Man 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhiteLotusGauntletPurple Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]WhiteLotusGauntletPurple Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WhiteLotusGauntlet1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How is that different than stating any other negative stereotype?

If I go up to a Jewish person in the US and say, "From the river to the sea!", is that ok because I'm just seeing if it gets a reaction out of them? Is that me doing a good thing because they could use the discomfort to wonder internally about their feelings towards Israel and Palestine? Or is it just bigoted making them uncomfortable due to their Jewish faith?

I'd argue the latter.

And a bunch of men had that thought about "why am I reacting so strongly to this?” and the answer was: "because this is a sexist take judging all men based on the actions of a small minority".

It's a test of whether a man is willing to accept misandry, and the sad thing for our society is that for many men the answer is "yes, I'll totally go along with misandry if it makes me look like one of the good ones".

[–]StrugglingSopranoworld’s sluttiest virgin -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]WhiteLotusGauntletPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserByPurple Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserByPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserByPurple Pill Man 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserByPurple Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserBy3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81372 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserBy2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81373 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserBy2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NoBlacksmith81373 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]virtualPasserBy1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Big_J_1865Purple Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Locking your doors at night because you know a lot of dangerous intruders exist and you want to be understandably cautious is a wise and justified precaution.

Locking your doors because you believe that the average person walking down the street is likely going to be a dangerous intruder is far less rational and can be seen as understandably insulting to people around you.

Women "choosing the bear" is reasonable so long as they aren't genuinely claiming that the average man is actually dangerous to them or, "worse than a bear" but instead because the threat of a smaller percentage of dangerous men is so great, and difficult to avoid, that it might make sense to take your chances with a predictable, non sentient animal that can be more easily predicted and avoided. That is unfortunate that women feel that way in the modern era, but it's not unreasonable and it's not women's faults or bigotry for internalizing those lived experiences or perhaps messaging. Personal safety is non negotiable and it's reasonable to take precautions when the threat is so great, even if the odds of a dangerous occurrence are relatively low.

If, on the other hand, the women "choosing the bear" are doing so because they believe the average man is secretly a villain and is simply awaiting his opportunity to hurt a woman, then that is indeed bigotry and is ridiculously irrational.

That distinction is important, as are the symbolic and non-literal angles that you are mentioning. I honestly think that this interpretation is what "man vs bear" was supposed to be about, not specific generalizations about men or women outside of the generalization that "women generally have more to be potentially concerned about vis-a-vis a random man than vice versa."

[–]NoBlacksmith8137Purple 28F 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]caption291Red Pill Man I don't want a flair 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]NullAnvoyd1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Fearless_Trouble_168No Pill 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Guys who don't get it simply don't understand how much scary shit women deal with from men, and worse, they often don't believe us. I've had men tell me I'm lying when I say multiple men have yelled at me for not wanting their number when they randomly approached me in public!

So then why do I understand that and still think man vs bear is bad? I simply think people are responsible for what they say, regardless of their trauma.

If your reaction to women being scared of men is "this sucks for me and is so mean," you need to grow up

My reaction isn't like that, neither is that what I'm reacting to.

I promise that fear impacts women more than it will ever impact you. You've got hurt feelings, women actually get hurt.

That's irrelevant because men who don't abuse women are not responsible for that fear. Neither is it possible to turn normal human responses off like that. It's actually entitled to think men don't have a right to speak about their own feelings and thoughts just because you think women have it worse.

Besides, the idea that fear of men only causes them to get their feelings hurt is not accurate either. It also causes police violence, is heavily connected to racism, to the lack of support for men who are abused and to the arrestment of men who are really victims, etc...

But the fact that I know this is apparently interpreted by some as me thinking women are mean for having fear and hurting my feefees.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 18 points19 points20 points 5 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Comparing someone to a stationary plant is better than an animal mostly used as teddies?

Yes because bear in that example really refers to a teddybear when the example is about violence 🙄🙄🙄

Yeah, this is called moving the goalposts. Men made womens choices about them and just like in your comments tried to play it that men are the real victims here as men can’t find their identity, completely ignoring the violence against women that brought them to picking them bear in the first place.

I'm not playing anything. I'm giving counterpoints to your claim and you're responding with an emotional response. I don't ignore the violence against women, that's what you invented in your head. Neither did I say "men are the real victims here" or do I even think in such a zero sum manner in the first place.

So no I’ll stick up my original, women respect mens choices, men don’t

Predictable, but also disappointing.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 15 points16 points17 points 5 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

I’m sorry if my post or comments made you feel emotional but this is a debate sub so please don’t take things personally.

You're being far more emotional than I am as evident by how much you're reading into what I said that I never actually said. But it's not because you're a woman. The problem is you're not debating in good faith and I find this annoying. When you make a debate post you're supposed to show interest in counterpoints, not dismiss them with made up framings.

And yes, you made womens choices about men, you did ignore the part that women choose the bear based on their own experiences with violent men and made it about offending men instead

I pointed out that men have the exact same right to their own lived experiences as women do. The fact that you don't agree with this makes you more entitled than the people you're calling entitled. The reason why women choose the bear doesn't matter for why your own reasoning is self-defeating. You can't call people entitled for doing something you are doing yourself.

Your whole argument is that women's experiences with violent men entitles them to say anything and that men are not allowed to respond based on their own experiences. That's entitled. And it's benevolent sexism as well.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 17 points18 points19 points 5 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Again dude I’m sorry if your feeling emotional but let’s try to keep our personal responses out of it

Projection.

I’m not here to coddle you,

No but you're supposed to respond to what I actually said. Which is not what you did. Instead you made up all kinds of things because you didn't want to engage with my actual argument.

it’s mostly just personal attacks from men being offended that we don’t care for their opinions

I'm not offended and neither did I make any personal attacks towards you. I think you're leaning on breaking the rules of the subreddit because you don't engage in actual debate. This is what I find annoying.

Men do have their own experiences, that’s why a lot of them picked the tree, but the difference was, women didn’t get offended over it, or even make a big deal out of it.

I already addressed this in my first comment.

They respected that men picked the tree based on his experiences, where’s men started attacking women fir theirs

You're attacking men for their experiences in this post. People are allowed to react to others based on their experiences. Women don't have to be magically protected from reactions to their own words while the same standard is not applied to men.

Again your own reasoning is self-defeating. If young men are selfish and entitled for the reason you gave then you yourself are also selfish and entitled for the same reason. That's not me personally attacking you, because I don't use this reasoning in the first place, but that's the implication of your own reasoning. I'm doing internal critique of your position.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze27m Altruistic Individualist 11 points12 points13 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

did. I’m sorry you didn’t like it snd made you emotional

You didn't. You made one very weak argument that doesn't actually disprove what I said, and an ad hominem about what I'm supposedly doing.

I’m keeping the debate to the actual points, not going off to your own agenda

I disagree. You're keeping the debate to points you can easily dismiss. Else you respond with ad hominems.

I’m not attacking men, I’m saying unless asked, we don’t want your opinions, and stop making our choices about you. Women are entitled to express themselves and their own choices snd shouldn’t be attacked for it.

Again, you are attacking men, if men are attacking women by how they respond to man vs bear and we keep consistent standards of what attacking looks like. If you calling young men selfish and entitled is not attacking men, then men calling women who pick the bear sexist/dehumanizing/bigoted are also not attacking women.

If men think it’s ok to react violently against that, they should be locked up

Now that's called moving the goalposts. Yes if men engage in violence they should be held accountable since that's a crime.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze7 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You and others are trying to steer it to suit your own personal agendas. If you can’t argue my points then stop wasting both our time.

I am arguing your points. You just don't want to "lose" the debate because you know they make too much sense for you to easily dismiss them. So you make ad hominems instead.

You’ve also tried to make it personal and tried to dismiss it as emotional, this is another tactic to avoid my actual points

I have called an emotional response what it was; an emotional response. As it didn't respond to what I said and instead attacked my character. And you continue to ignore my arguments after I explained them multiple times.

You're right through, this is a waste of time. But it's not because of me.

You can consider this last sentence as a formal mod warning. If you continue to engage in bad faith like this your comments and posts might be removed. If it wasn't for my personal rule that I don't mod conversations I'm personally involved in for the sake of protecting my own integrity, I would have already removed multiple of your comments. And that's all I will say about this, I'm checking out.

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze5 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043-1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Exactly which is why your warning me here instead of just removing because you know you’ll break the code of contact but also by warning me here you are abusing your own power to silence me.

It's the exact opposite. I do not want to make anyone feel silenced which is exactly why I do not mod my own comment chains. This is not even against the rules for the mods, it's something I impose on myself. But you kept doubling down further, so I had to at least say something.

If I wanted to silence you and abuse my power I would have just removed your comments. And I'd have removed these ones too.

You seem to be under the impression other moderators can't read these comments. But they can, and they can message me if they disagree with my conduct. But it's not like the mods here have the time to challenge each other's decision when a comment is removed. In fact, if I removed your comment it would have been less likely someone else would have looked at it. So if my goal was abusing my power and silencing you, I'd have done that instead.

Also, you don't have to be silent you just have to engage more productively. It's not like you are not allowed to disagree with my arguments, it's that you don't respond to them and instead make ad hominems. And not just to me, to other people on your post as well.

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Maffioze6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If your not trying to make anyone feel silenced, what was the goal of telling you’d remove my comments as a mod had you not been personally involved.

The goal was letting you know you're breaking rules and giving a chance to do something about it. I don't remove comments or ban people quickly compared to other mods. I give them a chance to improve.

If you removed my comments I would challenge them and then other mods would get involved too snd they would see you are abusing your power.

No most likely then your comments would just be removed and nothing further would happen. And the fact that I don't remove them, shows I am not abusing my power. I can't threaten you, as I'm not moderating a single comment of yours on this post, that's for other mods to do.

Again, not enjoying my style of debating or not being able to move the debate to your own personal agenda is not breaking any rules.

Anyone can say that in any situation to claim they are not breaking the rules. Doesn't mean it's true.

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Henchboy10 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]PM_ME_CODE_CALCS 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MrNotSoFunFactBaguette Pilled Man 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZabadoodudeRed(ish) Pill Man 20 points21 points22 points 5 months ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ZabadoodudeRed(ish) Pill Man 19 points20 points21 points 5 months ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 13 points14 points15 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]NullAnvoyd1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MistaCreepzPurple Pill Man 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Psykotyrant4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]zeboy981 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 10 points11 points12 points 5 months ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

you’re not giving room for a 3rd “box.” you’re implying that people can either decide if abortion should be banned in its entirety or not at all or confused between the two. the option should be that neither PL or PC is right in its entirety, because if they were it would mean that abortion must be banned completely or not at all, don’t you find that a bit extreme? is there not a possible healthy medium between the two? youre giving a third option but the option is just a check box for undecided, or conflicted perhaps, meaning that there really is no third option because the third is based on the approval or denial of PL/PC & nothing more. so to make it more clear, i believe the third option should be separate from any PL or PC stance. although the third option can have things that are in PL/PC, it doesn’t mean it is based off either option because basing an option on either PL/PC means right or wrong & no in between. hope that makes sense, im way too wordy, im sorry.

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxobig mama who’ll take any pill when convinced [score hidden] 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]purenonsense2757Grey Pilled Man 16 points17 points18 points 5 months ago (90 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (87 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 18 points19 points20 points 5 months ago (86 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 11 points12 points13 points 5 months ago (66 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (65 children) | Copy Link

[–]middleoftheroad133Purple Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 14 points15 points16 points 5 months ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 12 points13 points14 points 5 months ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot 5 months ago [recovered] (28 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 15 points16 points17 points 5 months ago (26 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80437 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80439 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80437 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot5 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80436 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80436 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80434 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NiaMiaBia5 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Routine-Present-36765 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Routine-Present-36764 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

OP said "Men get offended when they are treated as sexual predators"

I treat OP as a sexual predator. OP reports me.

I'm not throwing a punch. I am acting in accordance with what OP insists it's wrong to be offended by.

I am not the one who believes people should be treated as sexual predators without a serious piece of evidence. That's OP. Argue with her if you don't like my accusation.

men get offended if women treat him as a sexual predator

Is she supposed to wait until he’s attacking her before she treats him as a threat?

My stance is clear: don't treat people as sexual predators unless they are sexual predators.

And, as an offshoot, it's completely reasonable to not like being treated like a sexual predator without proof.

If that's too outlandish for you, then at this stage you're a bit too far gone.

[–]Routine-Present-36762 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]PurplePillDebate-ModTeam[M] -1 points0 points1 point 5 months agolocked comment (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (31 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]DrunkOnRamenNoodle Pilled Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DrunkOnRamen1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go5 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Maomisu2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

There is, however, a qualitative difference between being treated like a potential predator and being treated like a predator.

There is. I'm not convinced that men, as a whole, understand the difference.

calling the police because I'm sitting at a park "close to children" is treating me like a criminal

I agree. When the only factor at play is the fact that he's a man, that is absolutely unacceptable. (All bets are off if his behavior is reasonably concerning. I'm assuming yours was not.)

I would say that calling for help, screaming, running away at full speed, or brandishing a firearm/taser/pepper spray, with no other reason, would constitute treating a person as tho they are a confirmed threat.

Given my experiences, and likely yours as well, there's no reason to assume that men reporting that behavior are in agreement on what constitutes caution and are reliable judges of their own behavior. In the absence of a standard definition, and given the amount of resentment we see concerning preventative caution, we can't assume that, "I'm treated like a criminal," isn't referring to reasonable behavior. A man committing harassment until his target's use of pepper spray is appropriate is far less likely to recognize or admit that he was a credible threat than to say it came out of nowhere.

That isn't to say it's made up, at all. Only that it's reasonable to consider it to be a problem being given a disproportionate image, until we have better data.

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_go2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Given my experiences, and likely yours as well, there's no reason to assume that men reporting that behavior are in agreement on what constitutes caution and are reliable judges of their own behavior.

I agree. I'm also sure you agree that there's no reason to assume women doing that behavior are in agreement of what constitutes a reasonable threat. Which is why messages like "Assume all men are sexual predators" is one to be pushed back and the nuance between potential attacker and attacker is not to be ignored.

The OP references the bear hypothetical. It's about women using preventative caution when it comes to random men.

Let's really not get into the bear hypothetical. It says very little good things about women that hopped in that particular wagon.

But it's common for men to insert themselves

Men don't need to insert themselves; they are already inserted.

[–]the_scar_when_you_go2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I'm also sure you agree that there's no reason to assume women doing that behavior are in agreement of what constitutes a reasonable threat.

Girls are intentionally taught what to look for, and how to respond, so that they can stay as safe as possible. That doesn't mean every woman has that education. But the fact that the subject of interpreting men's behavior to know when to defend oneself makes appearances in public schools, churches, online, and in standard "talks" suggests that most women do. I would expect a random woman to be able to identify whether or not a man is coercing, pushing boundaries, trying to intimidate, etc.

What men consider to be threatening to women appears to be conditional. The exact same behavior can be considered serious or harmless, depending on who's doing it. And the standard for a harmless man has a lot to do with the freedom to assume the best intentions and his sense of his own safety. The fact that a situation involves himself, someone he knows, or someone he doesn't feel threatened by, is expected to alter her behavior.

It says very little good things about women that hopped in that particular wagon.

How quickly we go from, "I consider any woman who refuses to meet me in a non-public space smart and reasonable," to judging women as unreasonable for being unwilling to be alone and isolated with a random man. Js.

Men don't need to insert themselves; they are already inserted.

Nope. The example being given, as much as you may dislike it, is a hypothetical involving a random man - a symbol of the entire demographic of men and the statistical risks that the demographic presents. Many men took it as an opportunity to remove the random man and insert themselves... Which meant they engaged with an entirely different hypothetical, applied their conclusions to the first hypothetical, missed the point, and got so defensive that they accidentally reinforced the point.

I really don't think it's healthy to be unable to separate themselves from their demographic when discussing widespread issues. Seems like a pretty solid way to veer away from understanding and into turmoil.

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

How quickly we go from, "I consider any woman who refuses to meet me in a non-public space smart and reasonable," to judging women as unreasonable for being unwilling to be alone and isolated with a random man. Js.

I don't "go from" one point to the other. Both coexist. I generally stay away from the "man bear" conversation, but you insist, so let's.

"Being unwilling to be alone and isolated with a random man" is, again, reasonable.

Implying that a random man is more dangerous that a random bear is an indicative of at least one of three things:

1- Wildly disconnected from reality and extremely poor at understanding statistics. No matter how you slice it, statistically, encountering a bear is orders of magnitude more dangerous than encountering a man.

2- Disingenuously framing a purely emotional argument in a statistical manner. "It feels more dangerous". This is linked to the disconnection from reality, and it paints those women as the worst version of the "emotional decision making" stereotype.

3- Seriously (again, by orders of magnitude) underestimating the number of encounters with men they have a day, by only registering the men that are dangerous or attractive, and hence being completely off statistics wise.

[–]the_scar_when_you_go1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

encountering a bear is orders of magnitude more dangerous than encountering a man

I live in bear country, in an area that sees a couple million tourists a yr, largely camping and hiking. The bears are an attraction. They come into the city pretty consistently. They hold up traffic. Everybody sees the bears.

We have about 2k bears rn. Over 300 "negative encounters" are reported per yr. Those are instances in which a bear tries to get into a dumpster, mock charges to protect cubs, wanders around a cabin, etc. In almost 95 yrs of the area's preservation as a state park, there have been 2 fatal attacks, and 3 non-fatal attacks. That's not just bc they don't get the opportunity. There are thousands of opportunities per yr. They are fundamentally different from humans, including men, and that is reflected in the number of high-risk individuals in a population.

It's prob more illustrative to approach the numbers from the other direction.

In the US, there are 11 instances of violence from 33k brown bears per yr, and half of one instance of violence from about 400k black bears. Assuming full lifespans, we can expect .06% and .0015% of those bear populations to be violent with a human at some point during their lives, respectively. It's reasonable to conclude that less than 1% of US black and brown bears I could encounter are, or will be, at a point at which some motivation for violence toward a human wins. For simplicity, I'll go with 1%.

The Ten for Men study suggests that 10% of Australian men can be expected to be violent toward a woman, at some point during their life. I'm in the US, and don't have the benefit of that kind of comprehensive data, but the violence rates are very similar and the culture is similar in many ways. It's reasonable to conclude that a similar proportion of men I could encounter are, have been, or will be, at a point at which some motivation for violence toward a woman wins. But I have no problem with low balling, and even numbers are easy, so I'll slide it down to 2%.

Each time I encounter one of those populations, there's a chance that the individual in question is part of the subset that poses the most risk to us. If I encounter one unique bear and 24 unique men per week on avg (2 dozen seems reasonable), I have a 40% chance of encountering a bear in that subset per yr, and an effective certainty of encountering a man in that subset per yr. (99.99999999885%)

Importantly, the question isn't what the brute numbers are. It's what the woman answering would rather experience. It's subjective. Preferring one scenario over the other takes more than one factor into consideration.

The encounter experience is completely different. Bears are predictable, with straightforward body language and behavior. She doesn't need to worry about whether or not it's trying to trick her. It won't get upset if she doesn't wanna get closer, or wants to leave. She doesn't have to give any kind of performance to placate it. Communicating directly that contact is unwanted is overwhelmingly reliable in ending the encounter without even minor complication. There's no chance of it circling around to the parking lot and waiting by her car to try to force more interaction. It can't find out where she lives. It can't conceal weapons. It can't abduct. None of those concerns apply.

And, to be blunt, bears don't rape. Sexual violence is uniquely psychologically damaging. Considering rates of PTSD, suicidality, and substance abuse, it has a deeper impact than other forms of violence and near-death experiences, including long-term IPV and active combat. It affects a person's ability to develop relationships, have sex, carry/birth/raise children, and get medical care, to varying degrees. It's a significant risk factor for developing agoraphobia. Any resulting pregnancies are understandably deeply traumatic. For a woman who would rather die than experience it (or experience it again), being mauled is preferable.

Statistically, a person is likely to survive being mauled, so there's an aftermath to both worst cases. That aftermath is also different. There's no reason to expect the public to suggest that she was asking for it by being in the woods or wearing hiking shorts, wanted it at the time but changed her mind after, or made it up for attention. She can be confident that no one would wanna destroy the medical evidence or threaten her into not reporting. She can be confident that her choice in appropriate medical care won't result in social or legal judgement. The park service has never declined to deal with a violent bear, even if it had a bright future ahead of it. There's no likelihood of another very high-risk bear orchestrating encounters under the guise of official assistance. There's no reason to anticipate social, familial or religious ostracism. There's no reason for anyone to publicize her sexual history in an attempt to discredit her.

If she decides to stay out of the woods, or only hike in a group, she won't be shamed for living in fear. If she goes back to solo hikes, she won't be told she deserves the next one for not learning her lesson. If she doesn't wanna deal with bears unless she has to, she isn't bitter and riddled with baggage. If she's automatically more nervous or vigilant around bears than she used to be, she's not a bigot. If she carries bear spray, just in case, she's not assuming the worst of all bears. (Bonus: if a bear sees her bear spray, it won't get offended and become more aggressive.) Whatever she chooses to do moving forward, there's no reason for her to expect to be treated poorly for it.

All of that matters. It's not just about the likelihood that an individual is high-risk, or that a high-risk individual will become violent in a given encounter. It's about the encounter itself, the type of risk posed, and the way our lives can be expected to change if violence were to happen.

Given that, is it fair to say that most men are not taking those factors into account when thinking about their own responses? Is it fair to say that most men's expectations for women's responses are heavily influenced by their own responses?

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Only the thing is "scammers" don't look like scammers, and don't act like scammers. There is really no difference between a man who say that he is interested in relationship because he is, and a man who says the same thing to sleep with me. You can easily put the starting of abuse in pretty package of caring or simply having some faults, and it will look just as it would with someone who cares or have some faults, until it escalates.

With princes there is an easy tell, it's too ridiculous, too out of nowhere. With men, we date you, and we don't know who is who.

So yes, it is disingenuous. You blame women for distrust, and at the same time you blame women for trust. And then you blame women for not being mind reader. And for being too cautious. In the world where there are men predators, you simply ignore their existence and blame women for anything.

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXredder than dudes (lady mod) 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]caption291Red Pill Man I don't want a flair 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXredder than dudes (lady mod) 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]caption2911 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GridReXX1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GridReXXredder than dudes (lady mod) 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]GridReXX2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]middleoftheroad133Purple Pill Woman 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]middleoftheroad133Purple Pill Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ohnoes_in_distressPurple Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]middleoftheroad133Purple Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jedi1joshPurple Pill Man 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So I want to address your question and not all the responses already given. For me I think a man making everything about himself (at least on a dating site) is fine, it's also fine for a woman's profile to make everything about herself, because people in search of love tend to have requirements, and that's perfectly okay.

I know back when I used dating sites, I used to include things like (no rednecks or women who like country music please) only to receive messages from women who wanted to rant at me for having that requirement. My response would always be "why would you want to be with a guy who doesn't want to be with you?"

It's not that hard a concept to know that for each person in a relationship they're going to have certain things they want out of that relationship. If their requirements are too high, well then they'll have a tougher time finding their partner, but that shouldn't affect you.

[–]Ego73 15 points16 points17 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]PuzzleheadedGrab8375No Pill Men 15 points16 points17 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ego73 14 points15 points16 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ego73 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ego73 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Competitive_Side6301 -1 points0 points1 point 4 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Competitive_Side6301 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Competitive_Side6301 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I live in bear country. That's untrue. I can expound if you like, but the bottom line is fairly simple.

Bears in the woods don't prey on humans, generally only attack if threatened, are predictable, and can only cause a couple types of harm. Men can have any number of goals and ulterior motives, are not predictable, and have more options that are arguably more damaging. The way society views bear attacks and treats their victims is completely different from the way society views gendered violence and treats their victims. The statistical probability that a random bear will have, and act on, an urge to attack a person during its life is lower than the statistical probability that a random man will have, and act on, an urge to attack a woman during his life.

The point is that gendered violence shapes the lives of women in ways that aren't intuitive for men. We are all navigating the same world, with the same systemic and cultural factors, but we are not impacted in the same ways. Not just individually, but between demographics. As members of the dominant demographic, men are in the best position to change things for the better. But only if they can recognize and acknowledge that there are issues.

Weird how it became so common to say, "I trust strange men to be alone and isolated with my gf/wife/mom/daughter, and she should, too," but only if it's worded like, "women shouldn't choose the bear." Tbf, those men think they're saying, "I trust myself to be alone and isolated with a strange woman, and she should, too." Still unreasonable, unless she's psychic, but a very, very different statement.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Fandangho -1 points0 points1 point 3 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lucky-Seaweed6807 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]IgorXYMan, late 20s 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (47 children) | Copy Link

[–]NeomeniaWizard [score hidden] 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]PSXSnack091 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (52 children) | Copy Link

[–]IgorXYMan, late 20s 16 points17 points18 points 5 months ago (43 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (49 children) | Copy Link

[–]BigBlackMuscles 9 points10 points11 points 5 months ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]BigBlackMuscles 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]BigBlackMuscles 10 points11 points12 points 5 months ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80430 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caption2911 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caption2911 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caption2910 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

No, it highlights that you don’t want to acknowledge my point.

How? My point is that if the logic of your point was true it would lead to conclusions that you don't agree with.

If you don’t have any relationship experiences, why do you think you get to comment?

Partly, because like food, relationships are an area where the absence of experience is an experience in itself. Also, because large scale trends in relationships are observed not experienced. Also people that are smart and paying attention tend to make better predictions about relationship dynamics than people who have a lot of relationship experience.

To give a basic example: a woman who's last 5 relationships were with guys in the top 20% of height claiming it's just a coincidence is neither intelligent or paying attention so her understanding of her own relationships is essentially just a worthless collection of her feelings branded as "facts" which makes her opinion less valuable than if she didn't have those experiences.

Since I'm assuming you're trying to make things personal: I'm not describing myself, I'm choosing to not bring my own experiences in the mix, but one I've shared on here would be my rejection of a girl I found attractive that chased me for 5 years. I'm not the person you assume I am to dismiss my arguments, it wouldn't matter if I was but I don't think there's a way to get that trough your skull from outside your paradigm.

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BigBlackMuscles1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BigBlackMuscles3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lemme try again. Women can do whatever they want. Women are also just as quick to silent men who say things they don't like. Or they get other men to do it for them.

In this very specific example of a woman venting about an ex and an incel making stuff up, the incel is in the wrong 100%.

But generally speaking, if a woman says that men are bad because my ex did this, then a man says actually women are bad because my ex did this, it's a net negative. Both could be lying or telling the truth or maybe one of them is making it up.

The result is the same. Men receive hate and women receive hate.

I'm not saying women should stop complaining about men. I'm just explaining the effect.

Right now men and women hate each other. It seems that feminism aims for men to take the high road and stop hating on women first and then the women would stop hating on men in response. That's delusional. In an ideal world, men and women stop hating each other simultaneously. Also delusional.

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Competitive_Side63011 point 4 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wtknight1 point 3 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]caption2911 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Competitive_Side63011 point 4 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wtknight1 point 3 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXYMan, late 20s 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]IgorXYMan, late 20s 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (21 children) | Copy Link

UN News: On balance, is the world in a better place, when it comes to gender relations?

Lydia Alpizar: Yes, absolutely. In the countries where I work, gender relations have been transformed and the world is a different place for women and gender non-conforming people.

Ther is hope, but we're concerned about the challenges we face right now.

Laura Turquet: There has been significant progress since 1995. The proportion of women in parliaments has doubled, violence against women is on the political agenda in a way that it wasn’t thirty years ago, and maternal mortality has declined by a third.

But there's still so much to do. We need to make sure that 2025 is the year that we don't back down, that we continue to fight for justice, and we continue to march forward for the rights of women and girls.

Does this look like "the rise" for you?

Links 3 and 4 are just UK's call for online moderation, nothing new.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]IgorXYMan, late 20s 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terrible_Mixture_7596 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80434 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY5 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY5 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80433 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80430 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]IgorXY3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MrNotSoFunFactBaguette Pilled Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Competitive_Side6301 0 points1 point2 points 4 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PuzzleheadedGrab8375No Pill Men 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The men vs bear debate really highlighted the selfishness and entitlement of young men too

Hell nah, people got triggered by a rage bait? That truly never happened before and wont ever happen again.

Saying men make everything about themselves is kinda valid. Many men do. But women do as well. Feminism claims to be concerned about all gender equality problems, yet focus solely on how men should change to accommodate gender equality.

It is deeply disingenuous to say men would only care about themselves and women not. If you say men need to stop doing that, start with yourself first. Maybe you even get feminists to acknowledge the things women have to change to get to gender equality.

And after you made the changes necessary to lead by example, you can request from men again to make the necessary changes as well.

[–]Outside_Memory5703 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Grow_peace_in_BedlamMarried Leftist Red-Purple Man, late 30s, DeCrowist 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Outside_Memory5703 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Grow_peace_in_BedlamMarried Leftist Red-Purple Man, late 30s, DeCrowist 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Outside_Memory5703 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (55 children) | Copy Link

[–]LysanderAegisOld-Red Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (80 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (78 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (77 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (76 children) | Copy Link

I operate under the condition that people want to be liked and find the best partner(s) they can.

That said, I still fail to see how that forces anyone to do anything.

I'm going to take your example. Saying I (or most men, actually) are attracted to women that have had less sexual partners doesn't force anyone to do anything.

I'll translate it:

This is an attribute I both care about and seen other people care about. If you want to improve your chances with that particular collective, then you should avoid that behavior.

This is hardly gendered, and it's useful to listen to. I made a considerable effort to improve my dressing skills because I figured out women gave a lot of importance to that, and I wanted to be attractive to women.

Now, unless you're a considerable moron, you don't take the comments of a single person as truth. But enough people saying what they prefer will let you make a good average out of it. Better yet, observing what they react to better, as people can be really deceitful if what they prefer doesn't paint them in good light.

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (75 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (74 children) | Copy Link

I gave you an example. I'll spell it out again:

I don't give a fuck about how I dress. For me, clothes are literally a way to avoid cold in winter and prison time for exhibitionism in summer. I'd throw anything on top of me and call it a day.

I was struggling with dating. I realized women really cared about how you dressed, I struggled less.

This is specially important when there is someone encouraging you to do the opposite, or deceiving you about how things really work.

So, while it wasn't the case, if there were a number of people hell bent into telling me that women really didn't care about attire and that only inferior women would reject a man for dressing like a pauper, then it would be way more useful to have a bunch of women saying "Nope, dress well, we really care".

That's, incidentally, the case with your example. Men do care about sexual history. Most won't say it aloud, or even admit it, but a majority will treat women differently when said woman has had seven hook ups in the previous six months and when she's only had a couple of stable partners.

And again, most women want to be treated like the latter. So it's fairly good advice to say "If you seek X treatment, Y behavior will help"

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (73 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (63 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (62 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80433 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80433 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80430 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80430 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Being wary and treating them all like full-blown predators are two different things, and that is literally what I am trying to get at here.

My stove example; the right answer would've been that i shouldve came to the idea that I ought to be wary rather than make an assumption based on my experiences and act on that assumption alone, like straight touching the hot stove. I must see something before deciding if it is an absolute threat or not. I came up to the stove knowing that, despite my experiences, there is still a chance the stove will be cold. All I have to do is look and see, rather than act on assumption only, and that I have no way of knowing if it is hot or cold until I look and see if it is on or off.

The correlation: You can assume a man may be a danger based on your or others' experiences, but you must see clear indications before deciding that for a fact. Not all stoves are on 24/7 or hot, and not all men are dangerous.

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80430 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, I am not a fan of putting anything personal online, but I will just do it to further prove my point here.

I have been assaulted 3 times in my life; only once was it by a man. The other 2 times were women, women whom I had considered friends & thought I could trust. Using experiences is not valid enough for an argument because the experiences differ for everyone, never consistent. It was extremely confusing for me growing up, trying to understand how "all men" are threats when, in my case, it was women assaulting me more often than men. Pushing the idea that someone is dangerous solely based on their gender creates a false sense of safety. One that if i hadnt heard, I maybe would've been able to predict these things prior to them happening and would've been able to avoid them entirely. It is all people, not all, not some, and not even most men.

[–]TermAggravating80432 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I said she is not wrong for how she feels, but looking at the bigger picture, she is. I am not living off of my experiences anymore...I used to refuse to have sleepovers growing up and still struggle sharing a bed with someone. But yk what I tell my friends, I say I know that you are more than likely not to touch me, but based on my past experiences with women i cannot make myself share a bed with you, that I cannot comfortably share a bed with anyone, not because of who they are but because of my past experiences. I am now able to share a bed with my close friend when needed, but it took a lot of learning and understanding to get there for me to truly realize she is not a threat to me just because she is a woman, esp when she only ever indicated that she was kind & caring friend and actually saw where i was coming from, even when she was offended at first. She never told me I was wrong until I asked. She was respectful about how I felt, but explained to me that I offended her because I treated her a certain way based on an assumption when she would never be capable of doing such a thing. To me i felt like I was just being wery and cautious, but she explained to me that if I was only that, i wouldnt have made my assumption based on her being a woman. that i wouldve been comfortable before sharing a bed with her because i seen what kind of person she was, but i wasnt able to look past her being a woman. I am around women more than men, and I cannot continue to live my life in fear based on past experiences.

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043-1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NiaMiaBia1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]NiaMiaBia1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZabadoodudeRed(ish) Pill Man 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallotRed Pill Man 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot7 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]anonymousppd123123Red Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AutoModerator[M] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Hi OP,

You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. PPD has guidelines for what that involves.

OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.

An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:

Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;

Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;

Focusing only on the weaker arguments;

Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.

Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]MrNotSoFunFactBaguette Pilled Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lesliecarbone1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7933 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]wtknightBlue-ish Married Passport Bro ♂︎[M] -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]wtknightBlue-ish Married Passport Bro ♂︎[M] -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]wtknightBlue-ish Married Passport Bro ♂︎[M] -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man [score hidden] 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wtknightBlue-ish Married Passport Bro ♂︎[M] 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AlarmingArm9919 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

do you have any idea how exhausting it actually is to be culturally groomed into making everything about yourself?

because the thing is, most men don't want to give a shit but we're raised to see everything about us personally.

so whether "I hate men" is meant for me or someone else or men generally or just blowing off steam? it will be taken by me as "I hate YOU".

Inb4 - "oh that's such a whiny problem to have, think of all the shit we deal with"

I'm not making a comparison, I'm laying out the mechanics here and why this shit goes the way it does.

you attack men as a group, many will see it as an attack on them individually

I'm sure some women take it the same way when the reverse happens, but it seems much less common for many of the same reasons women also have it worse in other areas.

[–]DGenerationMCNo Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReasonConfident4541Red Pill Man 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (74 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (70 children) | Copy Link

[+]Educational_Area_167 -10 points-9 points-8 points 5 months ago (69 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 13 points14 points15 points 5 months ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+]Educational_Area_167 -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1671 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80434 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1670 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]HonestForever66761 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]BarneysparkyNo Pill woman 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]GuitarCoBrain 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GuitarCoBrain1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 9 points10 points11 points 5 months ago (42 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 [score hidden] 5 months ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[+]alchemicorePurple Pill Man -6 points-5 points-4 points 5 months ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]alchemicore0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alchemicorePurple Pill Man -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 months ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepart 5 months ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_gecko3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]bondepart2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_gecko1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]bondepart2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]alchemicorePurple Pill Man -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_geckoWoman (blue) 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]alchemicore1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_gecko4 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alchemicore1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_gecko3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alchemicore1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_gecko3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alchemicore0 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lemon_gecko2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]alchemicore1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 [score hidden] 5 months ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 10 points11 points12 points 5 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 [score hidden] 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 8 points9 points10 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_167 [score hidden] 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1671 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]bondepart6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1671 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]bondepart6 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1671 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]bondepart3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1671 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]bondepart3 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Educational_Area_1671 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Creative_cactiChill Pill Woman 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]oiiiprincessProud Feminist 4B 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReasonConfident4541Red Pill Man -4 points-3 points-2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (47 children) | Copy Link

Good luck with this.

The fact is men have to accept no one is coming to save them and be a bit selfish. Women have the luxury of always having someone that will pick them up (homeless stats demonstrate this).

The most self-sacrificial men (you know, the ones you’re trying to curate) live quiet lives of desperation and are the ones likely to self delete.

What you begin to pick up as a man who has a lot of experience with women is that this covert contract mentality is a trap. Expecting anything of anyone really is (this is why marriage is an outdated institution). So the key is to treat women as they treat you: replaceable.

My wife knew from the start of us dating I was anti-marriage and would only do so because it’s statistically best for kids. I fully understand our marriage could fail and if that were to happen would act and move on accordingly. There is no “one” and I could have a great marriage with a number of women (women hate this line but they live it all the time through their eat, pray, love-isms). Guess what? It makes our relationship better because

a) I only do things I truly want to do. I don’t expect shit in return. It avoids me building resentment or anger for what is happening in my life.
b) I truly have the full autonomy to do whatever I want and my life is what I make it. It prevents me from being passive because expecting something from nothing is r3tarded.
c) my wife knows that her ticket to the best relationship with me possible is to act in my best interest because I will act accordingly. There’s no obligation for anything other than what we act upon. So she is sure to facilitate the things that will maintain the relationship and keep both of us happy, and I do the same

This whole idea that men need to shut up and comply is only more confirmation that feminisms of this ilk is a revenge fantasy for times those women can’t even frame correctly and have to LARP out to keep momentum going.

[–]Creative_cactiChill Pill Woman -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]Creative_cactiChill Pill Woman -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 -2 points-1 points0 points 5 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73901 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73901 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73901 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73901 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]ResponsibilityAny217Purple Pill Woman 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73903 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful7931 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ResponsibilityAny217Purple Pill Woman 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ok_Beautiful793 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Icy_Ad_4544<< WOMAN >> 💖*~ Chad’s Mom ~*💖 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-7390Red Pill Man 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Icy_Ad_45442 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73902 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Icy_Ad_45441 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]No-Rough-73902 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Axis_ControlMeow Pill 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]society0002 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]bondepartPostgender Woman 9 points10 points11 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Grow_peace_in_BedlamMarried Leftist Red-Purple Man, late 30s, DeCrowist 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]abaxeronRed Pill Man; put the cake down each time you downvote me 5 points6 points7 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WebNew9978Black Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThatBitchAMarried ♀️ w/High Standards 💍 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Grow_peace_in_BedlamMarried Leftist Red-Purple Man, late 30s, DeCrowist 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ThatBitchAMarried ♀️ w/High Standards 💍 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Neptune-JnrMan enjoying the decline 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]504090No Pill 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ThatBitchAMarried ♀️ w/High Standards 💍 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]funfacts_82Red Pill Man - or bear maybe 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Terrible_Mixture_759No Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RevolutionaryJob79087 / 10 Attractive Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ViolentShallot1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]brazenbull091 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Men need to stop making everything about themselves.

"This theme keeps coming up over and over, Men continuously telling women what they should be to make men attractive to them or shaming women for not being the ideal for a man. "I just want a virgin or a low body-count women, why is that so bad?" because women aren't here for *you*"

Riiight because women have NEVER even told men about what they should be to make themselves more attractive and have never shamed men for not being those things

"No one gives a shit what some random man wants in a women, put it on your dating profile, stop shoving your preferences onto the world, we don't care, its not about you."

Same thing could be said to women ngl. Especially in the modern day where women are so eager on making it know how they dont need men anymore.

"ok, I don't you should be telling your feelings to a stranger anyway"

Do you not know what a therapist is???

"If men really want to go their own way and stop being obsessed with controlling women, why can't they just go already."

I assume you're referring to MGTOW which died such a long time ago it's hilarious you're even bringing it up now.

OP you have no idea how much this happens to men as well, a good example is mens mental health month. Instead of keeping to themselves women always find a way to make it about themselves too.

You, just like many other people, are operating on bias. You filter out the times when women do the very thing you're complaining about.

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male -3 points-2 points-1 points 5 months ago (48 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ohnoes_in_distressPurple Pill Man 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ohnoes_in_distressPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

gender-exclusive

Again, intersectionality matters. And it's disingenuous to remove gender from the discussion.

The assumption that criticism of patriarchal constructs means men are never harmed is false.

The establishment of the paternal inheritance we're familiar with, a few thousand yrs ago, absolutely did solidify the pressure for men to have heirs. (Tho it started long before, as kids were always free labor, and a side effect of sex.) That absolutely led to comphet couples and the expectation of procreative sex.

And that structure was designed to secure privilege for men over women. It created environments in which men exclusively received generational wealth and resources, giving them baseline benefits of independence, autonomy, family status, and opportunity for growth. Wives and children were expected dependents. They also provided the aforementioned labor, access to desired sex, status, the ability to pass wealth along later, and opportunities to create beneficial connections between households.

A thing doesn't have to be without harm for one group to harm another.

[–]Ohnoes_in_distressPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Both genders were harmed by the system, but at the same time both genders were given certain benefits. Women, for example, were not forced to perform military duties. To this day there is a significant cultural belief that women need to be protected. In some cases, there are legal leftovers - in the UK's law a woman cannot rape a man, in my country women can retire five years earlier (60 vs 65).

This is why I discard the word 'patriarchy'. It has become a loaded term, used to create a delusional strawman that men have exclusively been the opressors and women have exclusively been the oppressed. These days I consider 90% cases of using this word to be in bad faith.

Instead, I prefer 'toxic gender roles'. It is neutral and so much closer to the reality, where both genders had some gender-specific benefits, but at the same time both suffered some gender-specific harm.

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't agree with the legal definition of rape in the UK. However, it's not true that women cannot be prosecuted for sexual harm, which is the implication there. The SOA of 1956, which was revised again in 2003, specifically recognized sexual harm committed by women. Prior to that point, prosecution was possible under local laws that the SOA consolidated.

It's important to note that SA has historically been considered a property crime against a woman's husband or father. That's why marital rape wasn't recognized until relatively recently. (The Soviet Union was the first in 1922, about 6 generations ago. 60% of countries still don't recognize it.) A man cannot be prosecuted for a property crime when it's his property and the basis for prosecution is unauthorized use.

Earlier retirement for women is arguably justified via health differences for ppl in female bodies, most of whom are women. Women are twice as likely to develop Alzheimer's, and associated middle-age changes have earlier onset for women. (Women also outpace men in musculoskeletal and autoimmune disorders, and chronic pain conditions. 50% of women experience osteoporotic bone breaks later in life.)

Women are much more likely to retire early to be caregivers for sick or disabled husbands than the inverse, as well. However, allowing for shifts in legal retirement ages due to circumstance would of course be so much more ideal. Men who must or choose to be full-time caregivers deserve equal accomodation, regardless of lower pressure and numbers.

While "toxic gender roles" is def a useful term, I would say it's insufficient in describing many aspects of gendered inequity. Tho men have always been at different strata, socially and legally, due to intersectional factors, men consistently occupy levels with privilege over women who also share those intersectional factors. The differences are historically, socially and legally codified in consistent ways that are, I think, not adequately described as roles.

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]the_scar_when_you_goBlue Pill Woman 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Government isn't gonna snatch them away. I'm not sure about those rules since I'm not from American lands. They don't force us here but for the hypothetical context.

It's 5 yrs in prison, and a $250k fine. And a felony record. Depending on where you are, that can remove your right to vote temporarily or permanently. It also prevents you from serving on a jury, owning a firearm, receiving federal grants/loans, holding govt jobs and participating in govt training programs. You can be refused by any employer or landlord over a felony. If you're already a citizen, you can't lose that status, but if you're in the process, you can be permanently denied. And a lot of countries, like Canada, won't let you visit.

That's why the draft is a huge point of contention between men and women here. Without an adjustment to the law, women wouldn't be drafted. (Men are also not drafted if they claim conscientious objection, don't pass the physical, are a minister/priest/politician/skilled worker with high domestic demand, can show that their absence would be an undue financial hardship for their dependents, or have lost a parent or sibling in military service - death or MIA. Theoretically, said exceptions could be suspended, but that would have to be a truly dire situation.)

Still compliance isn't a bad thing.

It is when there's no choice. That's not consent. It's force. Doesn't matter what a person would've chosen if there was no force. I like pizza and it would be horrible for someone to make me eat pizza with a gun to my head. The gun to my head matters.

If you can get three meals a day, a roof is a bad deal for privileged modern women idk.

With that standard, men should be eager to go to prison. That's not even just meals and a roof. Here, you'd get access to libraries, classes, a church if you choose, sports/activities, medical care, and TV, as long as your crime isn't super bad.

Modern women don't want to work hard, have kids, look after family etc. Maybe 10 % of the world was like that

It's currently mandatory here for men to register for the draft when they turn 18. It's not enforced very strictly, bc we don't anticipate using it anytime soon, so the funding for enforcement isn't there.

But we used to check for registration if men applied for federal college financial aid. So, if they wanted a chance at college thru that program, they had to register. 20% of men who registered did so right before applying. As soon as we took that requirement off, registration compliance immediately dropped. We went from almost 90% of 18-yr-olds registering to just over 40% in 4 yrs.

We could draw a couple of conclusions from that. Maybe a lot of the men who were registering before were only doing it bc they had to, and wouldn't have chosen to do so if they weren't forced. Or maybe those men really wanted to register, and modern men just don't wanna work hard, grow a spine, and do what's right.

What's more likely?

[–]cuddly--suar1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That's a lot of information. But yeah i think people don't want work hard these days but women more so. Modern men still have more spine and work hard to their counter parts.

It is when there's no choice. That's not consent. It's force. Doesn't matter what a person would've chosen if there was no force. I like pizza and it would be horrible for someone to make me eat pizza with a gun to my head. The gun to my head matters.

I would prefer to eat pizza it doesn't matter. If they are feeding me with a gun to my head or not. As long as they don't pull the trigger. It's not that bad of a deal

With that standard, men should be eager to go to prison. That's not even just meals and a roof. Here, you'd get access to libraries, classes, a church if you choose, sports/activities, medical care, and TV, as long as your crime isn't super bad.

It does sound nice but committing a crime is a huge price. Unlike it's stealing car or something

[–]the_scar_when_you_go1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 6 points7 points8 points 5 months ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 months ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 7 points8 points9 points 5 months ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxoi, lord cooter, take all pills 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo1 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80431 point 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]tomsolinxo2 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating80430 points 5 months ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]TermAggravating8043Stacey's mum[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]zeboy98No Pill 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PrecisionHatPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ohnoes_in_distressPurple Pill Man 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]badgersoniceWoman -cing the Stone 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Peaceful? Bro we are the brink of a world war. Although it won't happen for a few decades at least. We have weapons now, enough to finish all of our LIVING BEINGS on earth. Our ancestors did far better than us. Take care of nature and ourselves.

And even women and children are being killed in some places by so called developed nations.

But anyway by getting along i meant "man and woman", not by entirety of the human race. We are still competitive in that regard ofc.

You don’t know how good you’ve got it now to be complaining that… a woman talking… is such a horrible torture to you.

Women don't know what we men who don't get laid, go through. It's easy for women

I definitely don't want to hurt women. I just want friendly with them and maybe more. If that is a huge ask for modern women. They are even liking women nowadays of the same gender i mean wtf, what are we going to do. If it goes like this society will crash

[–]badgersoniceWoman -cing the Stone 4 points5 points6 points 5 months ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

Peaceful? Bro we are the brink of a world war.

Yes, this is legit as peaceful as it fucking gets for humans. When specifically do you think was more peaceful?

We have weapons now, enough to finish all of our LIVING BEINGS on earth.

And the Cold War was actually the world on the brink of global thermonuclear annihilation. Today is actually less insane than 50 years ago.

Our ancestors did far better than us. Take care of nature and ourselves.

Our ancestors are literally how we got to where we are. They enslaved, murdered, brutalized, tortured, raped, and pillaged. And no, they didn’t take care of nature either.

And even women and children are being killed in some places by so called developed nations. I didn’t say there isn’t any violence today? I said it is actually more peaceful than the past. When in all of fucking history do you think women and children were not being killed?

Seriously, what was this utopia you keep claiming “used to” exist. You just vaguely gesture wistfully at some fantasy of “the past”, but you’re not being specific at all. The past was very often extremely brutal.

But anyway by getting along i meant "man and woman", not by entirety of the human race.

And what era is that where you think men and women just “got along”? You think that because women were not allowed to object or write down their objections. Men historically don’t show much evidence that they had any interest in what women wanted either way. You must think women in Afghanistan are having a great time: they’re not complaining today either… of course, that’s because they’ll be stoned if they don’t “get along”, but you do not care about that as long as a dude gets his dick wet.

Women don't know what we men who don't get laid, go through. It's easy for women

And there we finally get to it. You think it is literally violence for a woman to refuse sex.

just for the record here, you are arguing that a woman not spreading her legs for you like a slut is somehow in the same lane of discussion as nuclear weapons. Do you not get how insane that sounds?

I just want friendly with them and maybe more.

No you don’t. You want to go back to a time when you could force a woman to fuck you.

If it goes like this society will crash

You don’t like women or society, what do you care? Women are nothing to you but an obstacle in the way of sex.

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It definitely was far peaceful before the industrial revolution began. It's just been a down hill since. I agree with you, hopefully a nuclear winter doesn't happen. But the world is in the hands of a few megalomaniacs. From east to west.

And what era is that where you think men and women just “got along”?

Since when feminism began? you will have the answer. It's a very recent development. Some women groups wanted to dominate men and there began the birth of a movement wanting to defeat men.

Maybe they thought they were too good to spend their time cooking and washing clothes. I can only speculate.

you are arguing that a woman not spreading her legs for you like a slut is somehow in the same lane of discussion as nuclear weapons

I have said it before and I'll say it again. My comment had nothing to do with race wars. You brought in that and I had to take that direction but i clarified it in my last comment. Don't know if you skipped that.

I believe consent is very hot. As much as you want to paint every man as a demon. Women are the obstacle and prize and so are men to women. We are meant to embrace each other, share our love.

[–]badgersoniceWoman -cing the Stone 3 points4 points5 points 5 months ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

It definitely was far peaceful before the industrial revolution began.

Your actual objection seems to be a hatred of modern technology… yet you blame women for “not getting along”. Why?

And really, you think the world world before 1769 is your ideal? The seven years war (known as the french and Indian war in the US) was a massive global war fought between European superpowers. People were brutally kidnapped and enslaved from Africa in that era, and women had zero rights. You could only think that time period is superior to today if you do not care about the health and wellbeing of black folks or women. And don’t give a shit about people dying of smallpox and plague.

Your primary complaint seems to be about technology, yet the wars that killed the biggest fractions of living humans were the mongol conquests, which killed an estimated 10% of the world’s population, and the Taiping rebellion, which killed around 3.6%. Both far more lethal than 2026, and without modern weaponry.

It's just been a down hill since.

No it hasn’t. You can only think this because if you either do not know much about history… or if what you’re really after is the subjugation of women.

Since when feminism began? you will have the answer. It's a very recent development.

Feminism began in the mid-1800s, but that’s only when some women began organizing and gaining public infuence. The organized because it sucked for women before that too— you, again, just don’t care because what you are actually after is female servility and obedience, not “getting along”.

You seriously want the era of witch trials, when women who didn’t obediently perform femininity as submissive, obedient servants, were hung or burned to death for it. Yeah, maybe think logically about why a lot of women didn’t speak out about injustice in an era when women got hung for not fitting in and being submissive enough.

Maybe they thought they were too good to spend their time cooking and washing clothes.

Why are you too good to do this yourself? Why do you think you should have the right to force women to serve you just because you’re too lazy to make a sandwich.

It’s also quite clear you don’t respect those women of the past one bit, if you think all they ever did was “cooking and washing clothes”.

I have said it before and I'll say it again. My comment had nothing to do with race wars.

Yes I know you want women to be slaves to men and to have no rights. You have expressed your desire to go back to a time when men dominated and defeated women. No wonder you assume feminism is about “dominating and defeating men”— it is your deepest desire to brutalize and oppress women yourself, and you view any woman not under your personal thumb as a problem.

> As much as you want to paint every man as a demon

Don’t bullshit me. Most men are not like you. I have no problem criticizing your tyrannical, woman-hating views, however. You sit here and claim to hate all modern women for not obediently fucking you on command… but like dude, most men are not like you.

Most men don’t want to go back in time and treat their wives like groveling disrespected servants they use for “cooking and cleaning”. You have no respect for those women of the past either, dude.

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male -1 points0 points1 point 5 months ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Where did i blame women? I just was saying how difficult for a modern man to be with a woman.

I'm talking about time period maybe 10 century or before. You can pick a violent regime and say this that but they didn't have nuclear weapons like we do now. That can damage entire earth

I'm not after curbing womens right I emphasize on that again. It might be some misunderstanding.

You seriously want the era of witch trials, when women who didn’t obediently perform femininity as submissive, obedient servants, were hung or burned to death for it. Yeah, maybe think logically about why a lot of women didn’t speak out about injustice in an era when women got hung for not fitting in and being submissive enough.

I certainly don't want to go to such times. But it's not a bad thing for women to feminine. Isn't that what women expect from men, to be masculine?

Since when did that change. Modern women have changed everything and want to break everything apart instead of living in cohesion.

Why are you too good to do this yourself? Why do you think you should have the right to force women to serve you just because you’re too lazy to make a sandwich.

No I'm not all I'm asking is women have looked after men for centuries. Women are quick to judge our character i suppose. What if they make better food than us? I don't have rights to force them nor anyone should

You sit here and claim to hate all modern women for not obediently fucking you on command… but like dude, most men are not like you.

What did I even command women? to get such a scathing response. Women want to hit even innocent men these days. That's exactly why I'm fighting against feminist women

[–]badgersoniceWoman -cing the Stone 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm talking about time period maybe 10 century or before.

Even if you weren’t in an active war, it was still a lot more violent! Robberies by highwaymen were the expected norm for travelers and pilgrims. And don’t forget— women had minimal rights and were regularly burned at the stake if they didn’t conform to societal feminine expectations.

What you don’t realize is that your desire for female compliance and submission is a desire for a more violent brutal world. You don’t care about women and men getting along fairly as equals— you want women brutalized into silent submission.

Your goal is male domination of women and nothing short of that.

I'm not after curbing womens right I emphasize on that again. It might be some misunderstanding.

Yet you’re whining that you don’t live in a world where women had no rights and where you don’t have a clue what they thought at all. You don’t care as long as men got to fuck them.

Modern women have changed everything and want to break everything apart instead of living in cohesion.

You earlier: “where did I blame women??”

You later in the same comment: “i blame women!! Women are horrible and ruined everything! Things were way better when women were silent and could be beaten for no doing what men told them to!!”

What if they make better food than us?

Haha, you don’t believe that. Anyone can learn to cook. You just think it’s lowly womanly work that’s beneath your manly dignity.

I don't have rights to force them nor anyone should

And yet you want to live in a world where women were forced to. I don’t believe your protests that you don’t want to take away women’s rights.

But it's not a bad thing for women to feminine.

It is a bad thing for feminine women to be forced into obedient submission, no matter how much you object that it’s our natural state of being. And notice— you have no problem with a society that murders any women who don’t perform the role perfectly.

Women were viewed as actually inferior and evil in the era you adore. Religion in Europe viewed women as weak and the ideal tool for Satan to use to manipulate and harm men. Women were burned at the stake for simple things like being healers.

And yet you think this is “not a bad thing” for feminine women. Insanity. You make it truly and utterly clear you view all women as your enemy: not just “feminists”, all women.

What did I even command women? to get such a scathing response.

You are literally whining that you don’t live in a society where you cannot beat your wife for not fucking you on your command. Yes, you deserve a scathing response. Your belief is that everything was hunky-dory between the sexes as long as women can be forced into obedient submission.

I disagree. You don’t give a shit about the well being or freedoms or rights of women. You just want them to shut up and obey and for men to dominate them brutally— that’s why you want to live in some 10th century, male-dominated patriarchy. And yes, western societies in the 10th century were actualy patriarchies.

Seriously, you sound like the Taliban.

Women want to hit even innocent men these days. That's exactly why I'm fighting against feminist women

What is this nonsense. I am not “hitting” you, I am not “feminist”. But your horrible views absolutely deserve to be torn to shreds. It is abhorrent that you want a life where women were brutally dominated.

[–]cuddly--suarAlpha male 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (1 child) | Copy Link

you want women brutalized into silent submission.

Your goal is male domination of women and nothing short of that.

I really feel like you are brainwashing me to dominate women.

Yet you’re whining that you don’t live in a world where women had no rights

I didn't consider the part where women were suffering they still are. They get killed even now in remote places for witchcraft and what not. I'm not your enemy bro.

You later in the same comment: “i blame women!! Women are horrible and ruined everything! Things were way better when women were silent and could be beaten for no doing what men told them to!!”

You really wished i would say it ig but not. I never even intended I can't even hurt an ant. How can I beat a women?

Anyone can learn to cook. You just think it’s lowly womanly work that’s beneath your manly dignity.

No really all these years women had withheld the skill from men. Because they all would have thought we would be independent and we wouldn't need women anymore. They made us dependent. Now they are also complaining about cooking.

It is a bad thing for feminine women to be forced into obedient submission

I didn't say the word forced. I just said it's natural to be feminine. Where are people murdering women cause they were not feminine?

You make it truly and utterly clear you view all women as your enemy: not just “feminists”, all women.

I really can't change your perception if you are so anti male. I can only show my pov the best I can

You are literally whining that you don’t live in a society where you cannot beat your wife for not fucking you on your command.

Where did I say this? Please quote me on that. Even you know it's not true you are just adding spice into my words so that would suit your narrative of men being bad.

You just want them to shut up and obey and for men to dominate them brutally

If it is consensual, what's wrong in dominating my wife? I'm sure you would be offended by it pain me as an evil goon

What is this nonsense. I am not “hitting” you, I am not “feminist”. But your horrible views absolutely deserve to be torn to shreds. It is abhorrent that you want a life where women were brutally dominated

I believe you. If only I could know "horrible views" you say I have. I'm not even dominating women wildly as you claim. As long as it's consensual idk, what is the issue?

[–]badgersoniceWoman -cing the Stone 0 points1 point2 points 5 months ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I really feel like you are brainwashing me to dominate women.

No, I’m calling you out on the failures of your wishful fantasy of believing the 10th century was some kind of genuine egalitarian loving utopia between men and women.

Like dude, you don’t know the first thing about how women were treated then, and you don’t have a clue how women themselves thought of their own situation then. You have read nothing about those women— you merely assume they were happy because you assume men were all getting laid.

You are showing how incredibly little you give a shit about women’s happiness or well-being. You don’t care that the time period was incredibly violent, that it was a brutal overbearing patriarchy, or that women then had no voice, few legal protections, and no rights as independent people.

You do not care about women. You want a time when women really truly were oppressed because that era of forced female obedient submission is what you are saying would make you happy.

How else can I interpret your claim? You want women to live like it’s the tenth century, but you totally support their equality? Those things are 1000% incompatible. You cannot want equality and also expect women to be docile obedient slaves. Your stated desires do not make any logical sense at all.

I never even intended I can't even hurt an ant. How can I beat a women?

I didn’t say you personally want to beat women. But you are the one saying you want to live in a society where you have the right to do it, and where other men’s violence will cow women into submission. Wanting a woman to be obedient, silent, and submissive to you put of fear that other men will murder her for being outspoken or independent Is not the moral high ground you think it is.

The world you want is one of female subjugation. You say that’s exactly what you want by asking to go back in time to the Middle Ages… you just also don’t want to get your own hands dirty to oppress women into obedient, submissive silence you want.

No really all these years women had withheld the skill from men.

No they didn’t. Male cooks and chefs existed for a very long time. All the most famous chefs in the world historically were male. Cooking schools were for men only originally.

Where did I say this? Please quote me on that.

You said you want the gender relations of the 10th century. Thats what that means— male brutal domination over women, with women having almost no freedoms or rights. You hate feminists because they sought equality, because your goal is total dominion over women.

If it is consensual, what's wrong in dominating my wife?

It is not consensual if it is brutally enforced by the law, bro. Welcome to the 10th century you adore. You want your wife to fear disagreeing with you. “Consent” my ass.

As long as it's consensual idk, what is the issue?

What is your evidence that women in the 10th century were “consenting” to have no rights?

Title	Men need to stop making everything about themselves.
Author	TermAggravating8043
Upvotes	0
Comments	589
Date	February 19, 2026 9:06 AM UTC (5 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1r8uf1x/men_need_to_stop_making_everything_about/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/men-need-to-stop-making-everything-about.1573802 https://theredarchive.com/post/1573802

Comments