NationStates

The Rich Port wrote:While I would prefer that men's rights, as a non-issue as presented by MRAs, not be discussed, I get the feeling it won't be that simple, since it never is, so, I might as well say my piece.

Men face discrimination, but not from women. Rather, they face discrimination by the conservative patriarchy that has dominated politics for thousands of years. Within that conservative patriarchy lie every single issue that has affected both men and women for those same thousands of years: mental illness as weakness (as if willpower is all that it takes to overcome schizophrenia, for example), the denial of rape of men (because men can't be raped by women, they're physically stronger than women, etc.), excessive punishment (men do more damage to society, they commit more violent crimes, we need to be harsher on criminals, rehabilitation doesn't work), denial of parental rights (a classic, women are the nurturers, they're the ones that stay at home to raise children while men go out to work), and, in the military, the disposable nature of men, the physical superiority of men, the mental superiority of men, the viciousness inherent in men, all of which means they're the "Grunts" that die by the thousands in pointless conflicts to satisfy the same patriarchy of rich, white men, who have been passing around these older-than-dirt stereotypes since the beginning of civilization.

Absolutely the MRM is a reactionary movement, when the denial of the patriarchy and the equality of men and women is something that the Feminist movement has been fighting for and continues to fight for in the contemporary.

By denying that patriarchy, the Men's Rights Movement does more damage to malekind than anything "feminazis" do today.

There's pretty scarce evidence that feminism has been fighting to get female rapistsof men recognized as rapists, female domestic abusers punished, to make child custody more gender neutral, to get more domestic violence shelters that are open to men, to make selective service gender neutral, to undo the stigma regarding males and mental health, to fix the gender gap in the Justice system, to remove the sexism against male teachers, or any of the other issues facing men.

Your claim that feminism fights the patriarchy in this way is suspicious at best and downright delusional at worst.

Internationalist Bastard wrote:

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:I do not cooperate with them. That does not mean that I do not hear them.

You can't solve a problem without cooperation. But just calling someone in asshole for not agreeing with you all the way you will never get help from them

You can solve a problem without cooperation. I have no desire to work with them because they are not kind people. That does not mean that I don't think that they are valid in labeling things as mistreatment. The fact that men are raped nearly the same amount as women, but they feel that they can't report it, or they don't ever get justice, is horrific and comes from discrimination. The fact that men are discriminated in the work place and forced to do certain things just because "you're a man" is mistreatment. That stay at home fathers or house-husbands are often ridiculed is discrimination. That men don't have the freedom to dress as they wish in public is discrimination. I could go on for hours. I can agree with MRAs on the things they fight against but I will not be their ally. I will work on it, but not side-by-side with them.

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:You can't solve a problem without cooperation. But just calling someone in asshole for not agreeing with you all the way you will never get help from them

You can solve a problem without cooperation. I have no desire to work with them because they are not kind people. That does not mean that I don't think that they are valid in labeling things as mistreatment. The fact that men are raped nearly the same amount as women, but they feel that they can't report it, or they don't ever get justice, is horrific and comes from discrimination. The fact that men are discriminated in the work place and forced to do certain things just because "you're a man" is mistreatment. That stay at home fathers or house-husbands are often ridiculed is discrimination. That men don't have the freedom to dress as they wish in public is discrimination. I could go on for hours. I can agree with MRAs on the things they fight against but I will not be their ally. I will work on it, but not side-by-side with them.

That seems fair enough. I don't oppose MRAs, however, because I'm too busy opposing worse things, like -ERFs and stuff.

The Rich Port wrote:While I would prefer that men's rights, as a non-issue as presented by MRAs, not be discussed, I get the feeling it won't be that simple, since it never is, so, I might as well say my piece.

Men face discrimination, but not from women. Rather, they face discrimination by the conservative patriarchy that has dominated politics for thousands of years. Within that conservative patriarchy lie every single issue that has affected both men and women for those same thousands of years: mental illness as weakness (as if willpower is all that it takes to overcome schizophrenia, for example), the denial of rape of men (because men can't be raped by women, they're physically stronger than women, etc.), excessive punishment (men do more damage to society, they commit more violent crimes, we need to be harsher on criminals, rehabilitation doesn't work), denial of parental rights (a classic, women are the nurturers, they're the ones that stay at home to raise children while men go out to work), and, in the military, the disposable nature of men, the physical superiority of men, the mental superiority of men, the viciousness inherent in men, all of which means they're the "Grunts" that die by the thousands in pointless conflicts to satisfy the same patriarchy of rich, white men, who have been passing around these older-than-dirt stereotypes since the beginning of civilization.

Absolutely the MRM is a reactionary movement, when the denial of the patriarchy and the equality of men and women is something that the Feminist movement has been fighting for and continues to fight for in the contemporary.

By denying that patriarchy, the Men's Rights Movement does more damage to malekind than anything "feminazis" do today.

Conservatism vs. Liberalism is a diametric that actually helps to understand that Liberalism stands for progress (although some of their ideas are regressive) and Conservatism stands for keeping the status quo (even though some of their ideas are progressive).

That has nothing to do with established gender roles within a society. Or with how either feminists or MRAs think. Feminists don't think all liberal ideas are fine, and they tend to mix and match conservative beliefs with feminist beliefs. Whereas MRAs are not entirely conservative, although I am sure there's people who are just fine in keeping the status quo within the movement.

Val Halla wrote:

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:You can solve a problem without cooperation. I have no desire to work with them because they are not kind people. That does not mean that I don't think that they are valid in labeling things as mistreatment. The fact that men are raped nearly the same amount as women, but they feel that they can't report it, or they don't ever get justice, is horrific and comes from discrimination. The fact that men are discriminated in the work place and forced to do certain things just because "you're a man" is mistreatment. That stay at home fathers or house-husbands are often ridiculed is discrimination. That men don't have the freedom to dress as they wish in public is discrimination. I could go on for hours. I can agree with MRAs on the things they fight against but I will not be their ally. I will work on it, but not side-by-side with them.

That seems fair enough. I don't oppose MRAs, however, because I'm too busy opposing worse things, like -ERFs and stuff.

As long as there's -ERFs, the more radical aspects of MRAs will be an afterthought.

I just wanted to take the time to put forward a list of how male gender roles affected my life. I was raped my a woman at the age of 11. People do this day laugh at me for it. I was a gay kid who wanted to be an actor. I was beaten up a lot over this. I got so into getting muscular I severely injured myself lifting way to much weight. In high school I got into fights all the time. This gave me a terrible reputation. I gave up on my dreams of being an actor and became I military man. I developed an alcohol problem rather then expressing all of the shit I've been through. That is how sexism affects men,.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:While I would prefer that men's rights, as a non-issue as presented by MRAs, not be discussed, I get the feeling it won't be that simple, since it never is, so, I might as well say my piece.

Men face discrimination, but not from women. Rather, they face discrimination by the conservative patriarchy that has dominated politics for thousands of years. Within that conservative patriarchy lie every single issue that has affected both men and women for those same thousands of years: mental illness as weakness (as if willpower is all that it takes to overcome schizophrenia, for example), the denial of rape of men (because men can't be raped by women, they're physically stronger than women, etc.), excessive punishment (men do more damage to society, they commit more violent crimes, we need to be harsher on criminals, rehabilitation doesn't work), denial of parental rights (a classic, women are the nurturers, they're the ones that stay at home to raise children while men go out to work), and, in the military, the disposable nature of men, the physical superiority of men, the mental superiority of men, the viciousness inherent in men, all of which means they're the "Grunts" that die by the thousands in pointless conflicts to satisfy the same patriarchy of rich, white men, who have been passing around these older-than-dirt stereotypes since the beginning of civilization.

Absolutely the MRM is a reactionary movement, when the denial of the patriarchy and the equality of men and women is something that the Feminist movement has been fighting for and continues to fight for in the contemporary.

By denying that patriarchy, the Men's Rights Movement does more damage to malekind than anything "feminazis" do today.

The MRM response to this would be that we deny patriarchy is the source of sexism.

Are men expected to be in charge? Yes.
But that's just one issue.
Here, this is the same set up with the frame changed.

"No no, that's caused by men being imprisoned too much. Everything is. It's all a result of misandry. It all comes back to that single issue where men are the victim. This one issue isn't a symptom of a larger problem, rather, it's the cause of all of them. All prejudice stems from this issue where men are the victim, Because men are imprisoned too much it results in particular views being made about men and women, which reverberates through society and causes all these other problems. So if we can just get people to stop hating men so much, women will be fine. And that is how you being raped and told it was your own fault is secretly all about me and my problems. We've been very clear telling you what causes your problem, it's the pussy pass. Why are you acting so offended? I think you just have a problem in understanding the pussy pass, it's obvious men are imprisoned too much, Here, let me get my crayons and play doh to explain it to you since you seem unable to understand this concept. Don't you see? Mens rights activists help women too, by destroying gender roles created by the pussy pass. When women don't become CEOs, it's because society hates men and expects them to do all the work while women reap the benefits. All suffering and toil must befall men, and this is caused by the Pussy Pass."

When MRAs say they reject patriarchy, we're rejecting the conflation of it with the axis of sexism.
Many feminists don't seem able to seperate the two claims that are central to patriarchy.

(1) Men are expected to be in charge. (MRAs accept this, and accept is a sexism issue.)
(2) This is the root of all sexism issues. (MRAs reject this.)

Because feminists reject the pussy pass, and thus refuse to fight the traditionalist gynocentrists, they do more harm than good.
(This is basically what you are saying.)

MRAs have no love for Traditional Conservatism either, and would point out that women do form a vital part of the discrimination system. It's not just men discriminating against men.

TradCons get blasted almost as much as feminists do on the MRM forums, to the point that
"Tradcon." has become a sufficient rebuttal to their nonsense. We all know they are wrong.

The Brenne Brown studies show that when women shame men for their gender in a traditionalist manner, it has far more devestating effects on men than when men do it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archiv ... er/275322/

That's before you even get into the actual discrimination the feminist movement causes.

Just because we reject feminisms mumbo jumbo doesn't make us reactionary. All of our policy solutions should make this clear.
What you've just posted bares no resemblance to reality.

Really? Nobody's been able to answer that issue?

Because it's really quite simple.

"Tradcons" aren't a new thing. They've been around, in society and in power, for centuries (containing the conversation to the United States, though really I'm sure that can apply to the rest of the world through some study no problem).

Tradition, religious superstition, and, as a result, traditional sexism and gender roles, have been around for as long as that.

Contemporary liberalism is a very recent invention, and liberalism in general and progressivism, while not new inventions, have been weak and only incrementally powerful against traditional institutions.

It was only as recent as a few decades ago that de jure segregation was ended, that women were allowed in the military. Shit, when was gay marriage, something that really shouldn't have been an issue, de-legalised in this country? A few weeks ago?

MRM is reactionary and ignorant of history. It's that simple.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Soldati senza confini wrote:Is there really a "fence" between feminism and the male rights' movement? Or is it merely a figure of speech?

Because, while I sometimes agree with Ostro and Gallo and other people who agree with male rights' ideas, and sometimes agree with feminists and their ideas, I don't believe that taking sides solves anything other than the way you choose to construct said issue. Feminists say "patriarchy" while MRAs say something entirely different.

That's a fine view to hold. It lines up with MRM thinking on the concept and andro/gynocentrism.

The MRM is explicitly androcentric. We feel mens perspective on the issues needs to be told.
What people like Rich Port are basically doing is asserting that only womens perspective of sexism is acceptable.
They demand acceptance of patriarchy as a fact of life, rather than a description of womens subjective experience and how they have decided to construct their anti-sexist narrative.

Provided you sometimes agree with us, the MRM is more than happy to have you as an ally, especially if you're willing to work with them. You don't need to call yourself one either, provided you keep the faith as it were.

Don't fucking put words in my mouth.

The dominance of conservative traditionalism in the past is a fact of life, and it's insurgency is a fact of life, and it's something both men and women have had to overcome.

Soldati senza confini wrote:

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:I disagree. I consider them on the same page. And I don't want people - like Ostro - to conflate me with those people. I have, in more than a lot of instances, told Ostro that they need to stop bitching at me because I agree that there are issues in regards to the mistreatment of men. But that doesn't mean that I need to work with vile opinions to bring validity to the fact that I want no mistreatment of men.

Here's my problem with that:

If we don't cooperate with assholes we don't exchange ideas and make them think differently. By ignoring them and not collaborating with them you are simply helping in the crystallizing of their ideas, which then becomes even more damaging as a result.

I think this is how separatist movements gained hold, because people were simply ignoring them as loons until they became a notorious minority, which meant enough people bought into their horseshit.

That's true, I suppose.

But, then again, aggressiveness breeds aggressiveness. Misogyny, therefore, has bred misandry.

The Rich Port wrote:

Soldati senza confini wrote:
Here's my problem with that:

If we don't cooperate with assholes we don't exchange ideas and make them think differently. By ignoring them and not collaborating with them you are simply helping in the crystallizing of their ideas, which then becomes even more damaging as a result.

I think this is how separatist movements gained hold, because people were simply ignoring them as loons until they became a notorious minority, which meant enough people bought into their horseshit.

That's true, I suppose.

But, then again, aggressiveness breeds aggressiveness. Misogyny, therefore, has bred misandry.

Hold the fuckin' phone, I am not a misandrist.

Soldati senza confini wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:While I would prefer that men's rights, as a non-issue as presented by MRAs, not be discussed, I get the feeling it won't be that simple, since it never is, so, I might as well say my piece.

Men face discrimination, but not from women. Rather, they face discrimination by the conservative patriarchy that has dominated politics for thousands of years. Within that conservative patriarchy lie every single issue that has affected both men and women for those same thousands of years: mental illness as weakness (as if willpower is all that it takes to overcome schizophrenia, for example), the denial of rape of men (because men can't be raped by women, they're physically stronger than women, etc.), excessive punishment (men do more damage to society, they commit more violent crimes, we need to be harsher on criminals, rehabilitation doesn't work), denial of parental rights (a classic, women are the nurturers, they're the ones that stay at home to raise children while men go out to work), and, in the military, the disposable nature of men, the physical superiority of men, the mental superiority of men, the viciousness inherent in men, all of which means they're the "Grunts" that die by the thousands in pointless conflicts to satisfy the same patriarchy of rich, white men, who have been passing around these older-than-dirt stereotypes since the beginning of civilization.

Absolutely the MRM is a reactionary movement, when the denial of the patriarchy and the equality of men and women is something that the Feminist movement has been fighting for and continues to fight for in the contemporary.

By denying that patriarchy, the Men's Rights Movement does more damage to malekind than anything "feminazis" do today.

Conservatism vs. Liberalism is a diametric that actually helps to understand that Liberalism stands for progress (although some of their ideas are regressive) and Conservatism stands for keeping the status quo (even though some of their ideas are progressive).

That has nothing to do with established gender roles within a society. Or with how either feminists or MRAs think. Feminists don't think all liberal ideas are fine, and they tend to mix and match conservative beliefs with feminist beliefs. Whereas MRAs are not entirely conservative, although I am sure there's people who are just fine in keeping the status quo within the movement.

Pretty much this.
The Rich Port is here making ideological assertions without evidence, and claiming not accepting them is ignorance of history and makes you reactionary.

We oppose Tradcons too rich port. We just don't think they are pure misogynists. They are misandrists too.

And we don't ignore that gender roles existed in societies where women held religious offices, and thus a level of institutional power. The Norse are one such obvious example.

It's not as simple as feminists like to pretend it is.

Women have had a great deal of influence on our history and our society. It isn't just tradcon men. It's tradcon women.
And their motivations are misogynist AND misandrist in nature.

While feminism as an ideology and movement has done good work in combating misogyny (Except the recent wave, which is portraying women as useless feeble minded cretins in my opinion), it has shored up misandry and entrenched it.
That is why we need the MRM.

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
That's true, I suppose.

But, then again, aggressiveness breeds aggressiveness. Misogyny, therefore, has bred misandry.

Hold the fuckin' phone, I am not a misandrist.

Observe Chessmistress long enough and you'll see misandry running amuck. The misandrists are within the radical feminists. They are often so radical that they make you and me look like neutrals in comparison.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

The New Great Roman Empire wrote:Most of the issues listen I have seen feminists advocate for helping but often times that sentiment is pretty much ignored, so I don't find anything wrong with a group fighting for that. But I've found the extremists... to be comically bad.

Can you give an example of what such an extremist might say?

"Legalize rape on private property" Roosh V
And pretty much anything that comes out of Elam's mouth.

Napkiraly wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Can you give an example of what such an extremist might say?

"Legalize rape on private property" Roosh V
And pretty much anything that comes out of Elam's mouth.

Roosh is not an MRA.
He explicitly denies it.
And so do we.
He says he is opposed to us.

That you don't know this suggests you are going to feminists for your sources. That's a bad idea bud. They lie about the MRM consistently.

Elam is a well known fucknut. A casual glance at any MRA forum will have most mentions of him shown to be negative. Which is more than you can say for feminist controversial figures.

At best he is damned by faint praise in that his tracts manage to "attract attention to the movement."

I personally argued on that his site be banned from these forums to the mods. (Or rather, was one of the people to do so.)

I never really approved of the concept of trying to break rights down into groups.

That's why, instead of being a feminist, MRA, etc I am just a libertarian

https://www.google.co.uk/?gfe_rd=cr&ei= ... not+an+mra

Top results:

5 Reasons I Am Not A Men's Rights Activist - Roosh V Forum
The Men's Rights Movement Is Dead - Roosh V
Roosh is an asshole, not an MRA : MensRights - Reddit
Roosh isn't an MRA : MensRights - Reddit


https://twitter.com/rooshv/status/632059238500708352

Roosh Saying he isn't an MRA. etc

The only reason people think he is, is that a lot of feminists routinely lie about the mens rights movement, like they routinely lie in general.

Internationalist Bastard wrote:I just wanted to take the time to put forward a list of how male gender roles affected my life. I was raped my a woman at the age of 11. People do this day laugh at me for it. I was a gay kid who wanted to be an actor. I was beaten up a lot over this. I got so into getting muscular I severely injured myself lifting way to much weight. In high school I got into fights all the time. This gave me a terrible reputation. I gave up on my dreams of being an actor and became I military man. I developed an alcohol problem rather then expressing all of the shit I've been through. That is how sexism affects men,.

Im sorry you have had to go through all of that, and it is a major issue today that most people ignore, the notion that men cant be raped is a fucking stupid one bred out of ignorance and bullshit gender roles, you have to be a "manly man of manliness" and are not allowed to show any emotion or weakness, as that is for women! because you cant get hurt, you cant get raped or anything like that. Its utterly ridiculous and needs to stop.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:I just wanted to take the time to put forward a list of how male gender roles affected my life. I was raped my a woman at the age of 11. People do this day laugh at me for it. I was a gay kid who wanted to be an actor. I was beaten up a lot over this. I got so into getting muscular I severely injured myself lifting way to much weight. In high school I got into fights all the time. This gave me a terrible reputation. I gave up on my dreams of being an actor and became I military man. I developed an alcohol problem rather then expressing all of the shit I've been through. That is how sexism affects men,.

Im sorry you have had to go through all of that, and it is a major issue today that most people ignore, the notion that men cant be raped is a fucking stupid one bred out of ignorance and bullshit gender roles, you have to be a "manly man of manliness" and are not allowed to show any emotion or weakness, as that is for women! because you cant get hurt, you cant get raped or anything like that. Its utterly ridiculous and needs to stop.

Thank you, that was always my point.

The Serbian Empire wrote:

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:Hold the fuckin' phone, I am not a misandrist.

Observe Chessmistress long enough and you'll see misandry running amuck. The misandrists are within the radical feminists. They are often so radical that they make you and me look like neutrals in comparison.

And really, this is what baffles me.

Why are the ramblings of "feminazis", who are apparently few and far between, and MRAs, who are few and far between, to be given credit, when we know where the trouble lies (a blind adherence to conservative tradition)?

Ostroeuropa wrote:And we don't ignore that gender roles existed in societies where women held religious offices, and thus a level of institutional power. The Norse are one such obvious example.

It's not as simple as feminists like to pretend it is.

Women have had a great deal of influence on our history and our society. It isn't just tradcon men. It's tradcon women.
And their motivations are misogynist AND misandrist in nature.

While feminism as an ideology and movement has done good work in combating misogyny (Except the recent wave, which is portraying women as useless feeble minded cretins in my opinion), it has shored up misandry and entrenched it.
That is why we need the MRM.

... Really? The Norse? Where women had nowhere near as much power in the society as men, holding token religious offices that they shared with male priests, and joining raids when the men had no choice but to use women warriors?

Not, I don't know, highly matriarchal societies, like some African tribes that have clung to tradition to their own detriment to this day? That's your example?

I'm going to stop responding to you, because you have indeed shown an ignorance of history.

Sure, some women have had great influence in society, but nowhere near the influence that men have historically had.

You can't deny the negative backwardness of "tradcons" while also saying the past isn't an example of patriarchal dominance.

Seeing as how I've been a feminist for years and have done a lot of feminist work, I can safely say this is only on the Internet. Maybe you should... I dunno, get out and see the world.

Because Feminism is about confronting the patriarchy that has been a disaster for both men and women. So, no, we don't need the MRM.

Stagnant Axon Terminal wrote:

The Rich Port wrote:
That's true, I suppose.

But, then again, aggressiveness breeds aggressiveness. Misogyny, therefore, has bred misandry.

Hold the fuckin' phone, I am not a misandrist.

... I never once referred to you, specifically, so why this post?

I was referring to the many "feminazis". It's to be expected that some people would meet aggressiveness with aggressiveness.

You don't have hundreds of years of feminist struggle without some people going insane from making slow progress in the face of patriarchal conservatism.

Internationalist Bastard wrote:I just wanted to take the time to put forward a list of how male gender roles affected my life. I was raped my a woman at the age of 11. People do this day laugh at me for it. I was a gay kid who wanted to be an actor. I was beaten up a lot over this. I got so into getting muscular I severely injured myself lifting way to much weight. In high school I got into fights all the time. This gave me a terrible reputation. I gave up on my dreams of being an actor and became I military man. I developed an alcohol problem rather then expressing all of the shit I've been through. That is how sexism affects men,.

That's really terrible. Who was this woman?

And, yeah, that sounds about right. It's really common for female teachers, for example, to receive lighter punishments for pedophilia than their male counterparts, or to receive any punishment at all, both attractive and unattractive.

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:I just wanted to take the time to put forward a list of how male gender roles affected my life. I was raped my a woman at the age of 11. People do this day laugh at me for it. I was a gay kid who wanted to be an actor. I was beaten up a lot over this. I got so into getting muscular I severely injured myself lifting way to much weight. In high school I got into fights all the time. This gave me a terrible reputation. I gave up on my dreams of being an actor and became I military man. I developed an alcohol problem rather then expressing all of the shit I've been through. That is how sexism affects men,.

Im sorry you have had to go through all of that, and it is a major issue today that most people ignore, the notion that men cant be raped is a fucking stupid one bred out of ignorance and bullshit gender roles, you have to be a "manly man of manliness" and are not allowed to show any emotion or weakness, as that is for women! because you cant get hurt, you cant get raped or anything like that. Its utterly ridiculous and needs to stop.

Part of the problem is peoples pedestalization of women too.
"Women wouldn't do that" and such.

Where this gets particularly irritating is when they start ranting about "Real Rape Victims" (women) and how you're trying to nefariously undermine their cause.
This is one of the problems a feminist narrative on sexism has caused in our culture. It is imbalanced. Without an MRM narrative weaved into the zeitgeist, people will keep doing this shit.
That's only partially feminists fault though.

The pedestalization of women is what prevents acknowledgement of young boys being molested. There, people don't tend to argue about strength and physicality.

They might congratulate the victim, which is terrible in it's own way. But there the problem is pedestalization, and mens status being attatched to womens approval of them.

That's really terrible. Who was this woman?

And, yeah, that sounds about right. It's really common for female teachers, for example, to receive lighter punishments for pedophilia than their male counterparts, or to receive any punishment at all, both attractive and unattractive.

She worked at my orphanage. The fucked up bitch.

Internationalist Bastard wrote:

That's really terrible. Who was this woman?

And, yeah, that sounds about right. It's really common for female teachers, for example, to receive lighter punishments for pedophilia than their male counterparts, or to receive any punishment at all, both attractive and unattractive.

She worked at my orphanage. The fucked up bitch.

That gels with that study about women rapists. I'll have to find it.
Typically they were in some position of authority over their victims.

I can't remember where I saw it, but prison rape had a substantial number of women guards as perpetrators, for example.

Obviously that's not all of them, but it's the largest portion. Have you spoken to anyone about it, by the way?

One thing pointed out at Shedding of the Ego in a recent article, mostly talking about immigration and how it relates to MGTOW, is that movements such as Feminism, the MRAs and MGTOW is that they can only really develop in nations where most of the population doesn't have to work hard for their basic necessities, as they have time for self-reflection and analyzation. Can't really do that when you need to shut up and shovel the fuckin gravel(to quote the book of Zed, the Zen priest).

Linnk to the Shedding of the Ego article

Obviously I subscribe the MGTOW mindset, one of them anyways, which can more or less be described as committing yourself to being a bachelor at the least, which makes sense when you consider the pros and cons of a relationship, at least for me(legal risks and responsibilities included)

Internationalist Bastard wrote:

That's really terrible. Who was this woman?

And, yeah, that sounds about right. It's really common for female teachers, for example, to receive lighter punishments for pedophilia than their male counterparts, or to receive any punishment at all, both attractive and unattractive.

She worked at my orphanage. The fucked up bitch.

Have you sought maybe a counseling group or any counseling?

I find they help a lot.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Im sorry you have had to go through all of that, and it is a major issue today that most people ignore, the notion that men cant be raped is a fucking stupid one bred out of ignorance and bullshit gender roles, you have to be a "manly man of manliness" and are not allowed to show any emotion or weakness, as that is for women! because you cant get hurt, you cant get raped or anything like that. Its utterly ridiculous and needs to stop.

Part of the problem is peoples pedestalization of women too.
"Women wouldn't do that" and such.

Where this gets particularly irritating is when they start ranting about "Real Rape Victims" (women) and how you're trying to nefariously undermine their cause.
This is one of the problems a feminist narrative on sexism has caused in our culture. It is imbalanced. Without an MRM narrative weaved into the zeitgeist, people will keep doing this shit.
That's only partially feminists fault though.

The pedestalization of women is what prevents acknowledgement of young boys being molested. There, people don't tend to argue about strength and physicality.

They might congratulate the victim, which is terrible in it's own way. But there the problem is pedestalization, and mens status being attatched to womens approval of them.

Smooth, using one man's trauma for political posturing.

Also, the pedestalization of women begun within a patriarchal society, when "feminazis" weren't even a twinkle in Anita Sarkeesian's eye, but whatever.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:She worked at my orphanage. The fucked up bitch.

That gels with that study about women rapists. I'll have to find it.
Typically they were in some position of authority over their victims.

I can't remember where I saw it, but prison rape had a substantial number of women guards as perpetrators, for example.

Obviously that's not all of them, but it's the largest portion. Have you spoken to anyone about it, by the way?

That tends to be the case with pretty much all rapists, they are generally in places of power or related to them as Rape IS about power and dominance. Sexual assault is just the tool used by them to hold control and fear over people.

The Rich Port wrote:

Internationalist Bastard wrote:She worked at my orphanage. The fucked up bitch.

Have you sought maybe a counseling group or any counseling?

I find they help a lot.

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Part of the problem is peoples pedestalization of women too.
"Women wouldn't do that" and such.

Where this gets particularly irritating is when they start ranting about "Real Rape Victims" (women) and how you're trying to nefariously undermine their cause.
This is one of the problems a feminist narrative on sexism has caused in our culture. It is imbalanced. Without an MRM narrative weaved into the zeitgeist, people will keep doing this shit.
That's only partially feminists fault though.

The pedestalization of women is what prevents acknowledgement of young boys being molested. There, people don't tend to argue about strength and physicality.

They might congratulate the victim, which is terrible in it's own way. But there the problem is pedestalization, and mens status being attatched to womens approval of them.

Smooth, using one man's trauma for political posturing.

Also, the pedestalization of women begun within a patriarchal society, when "feminazis" weren't even a twinkle in Anita Sarkeesian's eye, but whatever.

I'm not posturing. I was talking about what I think causes the problems, what typically occurs, and therefore implicitly, how I think it could be solved.
I never claimed pedestalization was a feminist caused issue. Though they certainly maintain it. If you'd asked me about this subject without a person being involved, i'd have said the same thing.

This is a debate forum. While i'm sympathetic to him, he seems capable of discussing it and the topic. I'm not going to treat him with kid gloves.
(Because that always pisses me off when people do it to me.)

The Huskar Social Union wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
That gels with that study about women rapists. I'll have to find it.
Typically they were in some position of authority over their victims.

I can't remember where I saw it, but prison rape had a substantial number of women guards as perpetrators, for example.

Obviously that's not all of them, but it's the largest portion. Have you spoken to anyone about it, by the way?

That tends to be the case with pretty much all rapists, they are generally in places of power or related to them as Rape IS about power and dominance. Sexual assault is just the tool used by them to hold control and fear over people.

of course, but for some reason it's not rarely talked about when women do it because they say they have no power over men because of archaic cultural norms. Men can't be weak, because weakness is associated with being feminine, and when you're feminine you need to be taken care of, and only women can be feminine, hence they can only be weak.

This is for the sake of men celebrating their utility and disposability for the sake of their ego and for a lot of women, their protection and provision.