~ archived since 2018 ~

How to tame men

PeterWrightMGTOW

September 28, 2014

17 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	How to tame men
Author	PeterWrightMGTOW
Upvotes	17
Comments	25
Date	September 28, 2014 4:26 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/mensrights/comments/2ho9il/how-to-tame-men/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/how-to-tame-men.1621472 https://theredarchive.com/post/1621472

Comments

[–]Thefckingduck5 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]EndlessTosser1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZombieOmNom2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZombieOmNom0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZombieOmNom2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You were predicting a couple subjects. Seems to me like that's basically just jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about someone you know nothing about.

Where are they saying women shouldnt be treated equally?

In the bit where they're saying that men need to be tamed, that men are boorish thugs, that women are morally superior, that men should be gallant. Did you even read the article? Even if the article writer themselves was not saying these things, then there are still people being quoted within the article who have said them. I think you knew what I was objecting to, and that you simply saw your opportunity to be pedantic and belligerant.

I'm not going to entertain all of your questions because frankly, I don't see the point. You're picking a fight with someone who is progressively in favour of a culture of gender equality.

I'm not some moron who believes statistics that seem to suggest that women get paid less than men, without considering that maybe there are other confounding variables. So don't even go there.

[–]theskepticalidealist1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You were predicting a couple subjects. Seems to me like that's basically just jumping to conclusions and making assumptions about someone you know nothing about.

Then I welcome the surprise. My assumptions are based on hundreds of interactions.

In the bit where they're saying that men need to be tamed, that men are boorish thugs, that women are morally superior, that men should be gallant.

I don't know how you so badly managed to read the article that you actually gleaned the opposite of what they wrote. They arent saying they agree with this, this is the attitude they are against.

Even if the article writer themselves was not saying these things, then there are still people being quoted within the article who have said them.

You cant possibly be saying that you're not allowed to quote people saying something stupid, or talk about what stupid beliefs other people hold, even to criticise them.

You're picking a fight with someone who is progressively in favour of a culture of gender equality

I'm not some moron who believes statistics that seem to suggest that women get paid less than men, without considering that maybe there are other confounding variables. So don't even go there.

That's great, now if you could just read this article properly that'd be great. If you're going to criticise it, at least criticise what's actually there.

[–]ZombieOmNom1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]ZombieOmNom1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Lol seriously? Just because I'm not willing to read this fucking gigantic TLDR wall of text doesn't mean I can't legit find the notion of women superior to men offensive, nor does the fact that the article does not immediately announce it's intent change that fact,

You did the equivalent of reading an anti-KKK website and then accused them of being a pro-KKK website.

and it does not absolve you of having made assumptions yourself.

I did assume you had at least read the article, that is true. I didn't expect you to have read it so badly you interpreted it to be mean the opposite of what it was saying, then posted about how stupid you thought it was on reddit but complain that it was "a fucking gigantic TLDR wall of text" when someone says you should have read it properly.

Which can be read one of two ways, because "not treated equally" can mean betterment just as much as it can mean being worse off.

That's right. Whats your point? Are you really going to show that you STILL dont have any idea what the opinion of the writer/website is?

[–]ZombieOmNom1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Are you really going to show that you STILL dont have any idea what the opinion of the writer/website is?

It's irrelevant to the point. If I'm inadvertently agreeing with a website, why give so much of a shit except to stir an argument? You can't justify your actions by claiming to be acting in the best interests of the website. You in fact cannot justify yourself at all. You did what you did to make a scene because that's the type of character you are. That's far more reprehensible than someone skimming something. You made a bunch of "predictions" (read: assumptions) about what I was going to say next, or that I'm "new here" (I'm not).

Whats your point?

My point is that you can't even ask a straightforward question because you don't fully understand the issue or the nature of equality, or the nature of what you're asking or what I'm saying.

You're so fixed on the fact that I skimmed an article that you've missed facts. You effectively skimmed my intentions. Because you're a troll, you're like a dog with a bone. You've proven yourself that much, and I've enjoyed outing you for who you are.

[–]theskepticalidealist1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]servicestud1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist3 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]servicestud2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You are manipulated all the time even if you don't feel that you are. This happens every day, advertising is a great example. Magicians are masters of manipulation, if they weren't they wouldn't be able to pull off their tricks and you are being manipulated even when you don't notice.

So just because you didnt feel manipulated doesnt mean you weren't, and doesnt mean you aren't. It also doesnt mean your wife is consciously doing it either. I don't presume to know how you proposed but many men dont seem to mind getting an engagement ring, and they dont seem to feel manipulated. Many will tell you they were happy to do it and enjoyed buying it for their spouse. This doesn't mean something like an engagement ring is not still an antiquated absurd expectation that most women seem to have. Don't think this is an attack on only women however, as men perpetrate the same ideas. Society as a whole is divorced from reality and living in a dream world. At the very least even if we dont change our behaviors I hope society will at least become conscious of it.

[–]servicestud1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hm. To me, manipulation requires some level of intent and deception. It is, to me, the stuff of "lesser magic" (an lhp term) and I doubt it's existence as a societal mover on a grand scale.

It is far more likely a confluence of desires, unconsciously acted on. You may believe marriage to be an absurd and/or outdated concept, but it still brings joy and stability to many people. Just like religion (which I find absurd and outdated), it is no single thing and nobody is holding the reigns.

The discourse surrounding it, in this thread and others, reminds me of the ravings of /r/conspiracy (I'm not equating the two) where a nebulous and undefined "they" are manipulating the world in unseen and seemingly omnipotent ways.

I agree with the premise that at least some places (the US comes to mind), the institution is counter productive and needs an overhaul. Hell, I'll even agree that in a sane society it should (could) be an irrelevant fancy among rational partners. But I fail to see the concerted conspiracy to manipulate and subjugate men.

I may have just put words in your mouth and if so, I apologize. I'm still trying to wrap my head around this myself.

[–]theskepticalidealist2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Hm. To me, manipulation requires some level of intent and deception

Not at all. For example babies manipulate their parents and others around them all the time to provide for them when they need something. When people cry they can influence emotions of others to feel bad for them, and maybe those people will provide help. This is also a manipulation. Films manipulate you all the time, in terms of acting, editing choices, cinematography and of course music. Dishonesty or nefarious intentions are just some of many different motivations that can lead to manipulation.

The discourse surrounding it, in this thread and others, reminds me of the ravings of /r/conspiracy[1] (I'm not equating the two) where a nebulous and undefined "they" are manipulating the world in unseen and seemingly omnipotent ways.

Men and women both can be manipulated into behaving and thinking certain ways, gender role expectations is just one cause out of a hundred others. The difference between conspiracy theorists is here the "they" is referring to society itself through learned behavior and biological instincts, or to pervasive feminist attitudes or to feminist researchers or groups or organisations. This is not the same as the idea that a shadowy group of men rule the world which are both incomprehensibly incompetent and genius (to the point of magic) at the same time, where the conspiracy is both small so its easy to keep secret yet massive when they need to keep implicating more and more people when you poke holes in their logic.

But I fail to see the concerted conspiracy to manipulate and subjugate men.

I think as you went on to say you need to read the article again fully in context and see what its actually saying. This is Im afraid simplified to the point of caricature.

[–]servicestud1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]AloysiusC1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]rgeek1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Chezza96-2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]theskepticalidealist1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link