#MeToo Becomes #LeaveMeAlone

[Des-Bal]

Never denied some people do shitty things. The problem is that pretty much every argument I've seen so far has been predicated on correlating false accusations with real ones (and, again, overportraying how much false accusations actually occur--successfully for that matter). Also, still doesn't address my point that women who publicly make accusations often face harassment, death threats, rape threats, etc. Nbd if it happens to someone who is themselves an asshole, but then misogynists turn right around and use the mere existence of false accusations to argue that all (or most) accusations must thereby be false and so justify taking such actions towards women, regardless of whether the accusation was false or not.

Also, you do realize that pointing out all those false accusers getting caught undermines your argument, right? It shows that it's actually not that easy to pull off a successful false accusation. (Again, as the Robert Muller case that I posted earlier demonstrates.) Do some inevitably slip through? Yes, just like every other crime (including sexual assault/rape--imagine that). It'd be nice if innocent people didn't go to jail. It'd also be nice if all guilty people actually faced punishment for their crimes.


Because that's not what the idea is. The idea is "listen to women." Nobody's arguing that you should assume every single accusation is true, we just want people to stop assuming that every accusation is false.

But, to more overtly answer your question, I can't know 100%, but I'm not worried about it. And I'm definitely not going to stop interacting with women out of some irrational fear that they maybe might possibly accuse me of something I didn't do. (Plus, like I said earlier, it's not actually that easy to falsely accuse someone.)

If you had consensual sex with a woman what possible evidence could you provide that you didn't rape her?

None, but then I also don't have sex with random women. I also don't have sex with drunk women, nor do I drink or do drugs (the majority of sexual assault cases involve alcohol). Couple that with the fact that I'm not physically imposing at all and have no history of legal trouble, as well as a bevy of character witnesses who would jump to my defense. I also know the law, and can use it in my defense. Not sure what they'd really have to gain, anyway. I have no money or power. I think I've already established that I'm not going to accidentally sleep with a crazy woman (I'm not stupid). Again, can't guarantee 100% (no such thing IRL), but the odds are in my favor.


Uh, lightning storms are safe. You know that getting struck by lightning is incredibly rare, right? So rare that to worry about it happening is borderline paranoid. You might as well say you should never go in the ocean cause you might possibly get eaten by a shark (which is rarer than getting struck by lightning). That doesn't mean you should actively seek out lightning storms to try and get struck, but if you're caught outside in one, it's not exactly a death sentence.


Um, I'm sorry to tell you this, but the court of public opinion already held too much power. It literally has since humans became intelligent enough to unfairly judge each other. Being accused of murder or theft is just as damaging, even when you're innocent, but I'm sure that's somehow #MeToo's fault as well, huh?


Literally no one is advocating we should "assume guilt." Like I mentioned above, people use false accusations to try and argue that ALL accusations are false. I'm not saying that's what you're doing (in fact, you're the most level-headed and reasonable one I've seen so far--that's not saying much, admittedly, but at least you don't give me the vibe that I'm talking to Elliot Rodger). I reject the dichotomy that people are generally presenting (that it's a battle of accusers' rights vs rights of the accused). I think that's an oversimplification of a complex issue. Rape and sexual assault are particular crimes that need to be handled in particular ways (and by that I mean completely case-by-case). But when courts try to do that, they're suddenly accused of taking away people's rights. No, that's not how it works. Sexual cases inherently require different standards of evidence exactly because there's so little physical evidence. That doesn't mean you should assume that all men rapists. It also doesn't mean we should assume that women are liars. It means courts should be allowed more flexibility in how they apply the spirit of the law rather than its literal writing, and people need to quite trying to come up with blanket/general statements to describe the whole thing. People are complicated, we need to stop pretending they're not.

The relationship between fake and real accusations is that until the public knows different they treat both exactly the same. What point did you make? Yeah that happens, it changes nothing because we know for a fact that false accusations are real. It's a really shitty thing that people face threats and harassment for making appropriate accusations.

We caught Tawna Brawley because she told an enormous lie about police officers and a lawyer she never met forming a rape gang and writing on people with shit, the lawyer happened to have the resources and will to fight it tooth and nail even though it destroyed him. We found out about Wanetta Gibson because she contacted and apologized in secret to the man she accused (who had the good sense to secretly record her because she never admitted it publicly). We found out Carolyn Bryantz lied because over 60 years after she lied she admitted what she said wasn't true to a reporter. The Mueller hoax was found out because someone other than an accuser tried to set up a criminal conspiracy. Where do you see difficulty here? We find out about false accusations because of crazy circumstances surrounding them, not because its' super hard to pull them off.

Yes, we are totally supposed to assume that any accusation is true- that's why a rape trial that doesn't result in the accused going to prison is treated as a miscarriage of justice. It's why people get upset when someone's career isn't destroyed by a bare accusation. You can say people shouldn't believe every accusation is false, I'd agree with you, but what's happening is not positive.

So it seems that you have nothing to fear because despite the unavoidable risks because of your appearance and lifestyle choices you feel safe. I can't help but note that people who are imposing, people who like drinking and drugs, and people who enjoy casual sex are kind of fucked? Also black men, you know that group that gets shafted by the criminal justice system and title IX rape tribunals but only one of those is a problem? If you could be a recurring character on Leave it to Beaver, I'm sure you have less to worry about but I don't it's fair to ask that of people.

I should also warn you that those character witnesses of yours are totally going to be attacked. They will be harassed, they will receive death threats, they may have their livelihoods suffer. They will be painted as monsters standing by a rapist, it's kind of a thing. Defending the accused will get your shit wrecked.

Lightning storms are not safe. They fucking kill people. "Wasn't me" isn't safety. "Probably won't be me next time" is also not safety. I'm not saying you can't go out in a lightning storm I'm saying you should avoid it whenever practicable and that it's an unhappy situation to have, especially when you happen to be doing something high risk like golfing or to break with the metaphor, being successful. What you should do logically is wait for the storm to pass- which is what people are trying to do by insulaing themselves from women. It's not good.

What you've just done is the equivalent of jumping up and down on the hood of a car because it already has a few dents. Noting a situation is bad does not make it okay to shamelessly make it worse.

When a bare accusation is sufficient to cause someone serious harm and that to oppose that harm is to be siding with a rapist, yes people are saying assume guilt. All cases involve different circumstances, different levels of evidence that are likely to be available. That does NOT mean different standards. The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt" for criminal prosecution. To deny that in the case of rape or sexual assault is nothing less than taking away the rights of the accused.

[Galloism]

Oh my god. Do their share of "courting-work?" So, you're pissed off that women don't just randomly walk up to you and hit on you? Sorry, bud, but even women were to do this, you definitely wouldn't be at the top of the list (women like confident men, not babies who whine about "virgin-shaming" and "courting"--the minute you open your mouth they'd turn right around). Just go talk to women, it's not that goddamned hard. You don't even have to flirt with them, just have a normal conversation like you would with a man. Jesus.

I do find it very interesting how, repeatedly, and without a hint of recognition, you see people arguing both in favor of feminism and simultaneously trying to pin men into the male gender role of stoicism, strength, and never shedding a single tear, and immediately and unironically shaming them for not conforming to said gender role.

It's a fascinating mixture of arguments to behold, and yet, we see it over and over and over again repeatedly.

This is all a natural consequence of feminists and their big fuck up on the topic. They looked at two abusive partners and up and decided one of them was being abusive, then escalated the level of abuse from one partner while minimizing it in the other. MRAs being "One-sided" is a consequence of feminism and its misframing of the issues and the dynamics behind sexism.

Thank you for further illustrating my point that the main opponents of #MeToo are a bunch of whiny, pathetic incels who hate women because they won't sleep with them. I wonder how many people in this thread are just a couple of bad days away from becoming the next Elliot Rodger.

--Signed,

A Normy Cuck (me)

And shaming someone for speaking out about being a victim of domestic violence by calling being a victim of domestic violence being equivalent to a "whiny, pathetic incel" who hates women "because they won't sleep with them".

Stay classy.

[Puldania]

I'm just upset that nobody is taking sexual assault on men seriously yet.

[Vassenor]

I'm just upset that nobody is taking sexual assault on men seriously yet.

And where do you get that idea from?

[Des-Bal]

And where do you get that idea from?

Well there's the fact that people are upset by Spain using multiple crimes instead of multiple degrees and nobody saying shit about the fact a man as a matter of law cannot be raped by a woman in the United Kingdom. We still won't classify "made to penetrate" as rape for statistical purposes. Organizations teach people to downplay the harm done to male victims. So you know, looking at stuff.

[Hirota]

I'm just upset that nobody is taking sexual assault on men seriously yet.

It's why I'm favourable to the idea of metoo and it's original intentions. But people want to hijack it and frame it as a "positive for feminism", that they want it to be about "naming and shaming, about taking down powerful men…" even when the creator says that's wrong.
It's all very tribal and petty. I'd much rather celebrate it and it's original purpose: raising awareness of sexual assault as a issue outside of gender that affects boys and girls and can be perpetrated by men and women on a variety of different socio-economic demographics.

But you know, like Des points out, we get riots in Spain for a perceived miscarriage of justice and silence in the UK for another.

[Galloism]

I'm just upset that nobody is taking sexual assault on men seriously yet.

It's why I'm favourable to the idea of metoo and it's original intentions. But people want to hijack it and frame it as a "positive for feminism", that they want it to be about "naming and shaming, about taking down powerful men…" even when the creator says that's wrong.
It's all very tribal and petty. I'd much rather celebrate it and it's original purpose: raising awareness of sexual assault as a issue outside of gender that affects boys and girls and can be perpetrated by men and women on a variety of different socio-economic demographics.

I actually have no problem with how it started, but like a lot of things, it went from "hey, this is a good idea - everyone should feel free to express what happened to them" to "HOLY FUCK WHAT HAPPENED" in no time flat.

[South Ccanda]

And where do you get that idea from?

Well there's the fact that people are upset by Spain using multiple crimes instead of multiple degrees and nobody saying shit about the fact a man as a matter of law cannot be raped by a woman in the United Kingdom. We still won't classify "made to penetrate" as rape for statistical purposes. Organizations teach people to downplay the harm done to male victims. So you know, looking at stuff.

This, plus, there are some weird laws here in america that favor women. for example, if a woman rapes a man and forces him to ejaculate inside of her, when she has the baby, she can sue for child support.

[Petrasylvania]

And where do you get that idea from?

Well there's the fact that people are upset by Spain using multiple crimes instead of multiple degrees and nobody saying shit about the fact a man as a matter of law cannot be raped by a woman in the United Kingdom. We still won't classify "made to penetrate" as rape for statistical purposes. Organizations teach people to downplay the harm done to male victims. So you know, looking at stuff.

The same Spain where it was ruled a woman wasn't gangraped because she wasn't threatened with violence or physically restrained like in a B movie?

[Hirota]

It's why I'm favourable to the idea of metoo and it's original intentions. But people want to hijack it and frame it as a "positive for feminism", that they want it to be about "naming and shaming, about taking down powerful men…" even when the creator says that's wrong.
It's all very tribal and petty. I'd much rather celebrate it and it's original purpose: raising awareness of sexual assault as a issue outside of gender that affects boys and girls and can be perpetrated by men and women on a variety of different socio-economic demographics.

I actually have no problem with how it started, but like a lot of things, it went from "hey, this is a good idea - everyone should feel free to express what happened to them" to "HOLY FUCK WHAT HAPPENED" in no time flat.

Law of unintended consequences I suppose. Instead of bridging demographics over this issue, it's become more divisive.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Well there's the fact that people are upset by Spain using multiple crimes instead of multiple degrees and nobody saying shit about the fact a man as a matter of law cannot be raped by a woman in the United Kingdom. We still won't classify "made to penetrate" as rape for statistical purposes. Organizations teach people to downplay the harm done to male victims. So you know, looking at stuff.

The same Spain where it was ruled a woman wasn't gangraped because she wasn't threatened with violence or physically restrained like in a B movie?

Different bad things do not cancel each other out.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

I'm just upset that nobody is taking sexual assault on men seriously yet.

And where do you get that idea from?

You know when you want to comment on something, and you want to make big broad statements? Yeah? Check what you're saying to be truthful first.

Being a male rape victim is not fun. Being a female rape victim isn't fun either, but at least female rape victims get societies support. Do you know what being laughed at for telling someone you were raped is like? I know, how about not being able to tell your parents what happened because they judge you for your sexuality. How about having all of your universities sexual assault resources aimed at a group of which you are not a member, how about nobody believing what you say when you break down crying and nobody knows why. Do you know what it's like to lose friends because they believe your attacker over you? Do you know what it's like to be painted as a liar and an actor because you're 'taking it too seriously?' Being laughed at behind your back by homophobic idiots who think that gay men 'have it coming' that's a lot of fun, know anything about that? Oh, and to top it off, do you know anything about how hard it is for a man to access rape counselling services?
No, I didn't think you did.
I do.
Do your fucking homework, and when you have maybe you won't make such broad statements.

[Ostroeuropa]

This is literally a rant about nothing. "Wahh, feminists are the cause of all of my problems!" bell hooks has literally been writing for years about how sexism and misogyny contribute to the oppression of men by other men, but who needs nuance and complexity when you can bitch about your made-up boogeyman, am I right?

No, it was me agreeing with the posters point and noting that feminist discussion of this topic dehumanizes men and treats them as a monolith that doesn't give due consideration to their individual circumstances and that this is characteristic of prejudice and discrimination when done to other groups and so demonstrates feminism is anti-male in this issue, which you have just mischaracterized because you don't actually have a coherent defense of the movement you're a part of beyond being abusive to its critics.

Literally not what feminism is.

Not what feminists angrily and stubbornly keep asserting it is, but unfortunately for you, just because you claim trickle down economics isn't a means to benefit the rich and fuck over the poor doesn't mean reality agrees with you. You think feminism isn't sexist bullshit because you uncritically accept the claims it makes about itself and how reality works and don't bother to pay attention to how it works in practice. Yes, it does in fact cause dysfunctional understanding of reality in the adherent because of its impulsive framing of things as womens issues without due consideration given to men, and these posts are dicussing one good example of it.

Oh my god. Do their share of "courting-work?" So, you're pissed off that women don't just randomly walk up to you and hit on you?

No, i'm noting women do less courting than men do and this places a disproportionate burden on men, which in conjunction with the antipathy to men constitutes an example of misandry. Much like women complaining men don't do their share of housework wouldn't make those women "Whiny bitches who are filthy and grubby and just want someojne to clean up after them" like you characterize me as here. (you fail to notice this double standard because you are a feminist, and it has trained you to ignore your own misandry and internalize the sexist dismissals and responses feminists give to men talking about their issues and conflate their own feminism-induced misandry with equality.)

Sorry, bud, but even women were to do this, you definitely wouldn't be at the top of the list

I do pretty well thankyou, and am currently not single.

(women like confident men, not babies who whine about "virgin-shaming" and "courting"--the minute you open your mouth they'd turn right around).

Couple of things. Firstly, virgin-shaming is a real phenomanae and instance of misandry and your hostility to acknowledging it is a good example of how many feminists don't actually care about men and their issues.

Secondly, again, I do quite well thankyou, and I find it curious you think "Confidence" translates into "Say what feminists think you should and don't have the courage to speak your mind."

Third, I don't talk politics to people unless they demonstrate an interest in politics.

Just go talk to women, it's not that goddamned hard. You don't even have to flirt with them, just have a normal conversation like you would with a man. Jesus.

Here's a good example of how you're ignoring mens diversity of circumstance as a result of your anti-male attitude. Some men are socially disabled, or have anxiety, and so on. You're also acting like its perfectly fine that men are the ones who do this and women don't, showing you have no concern for mens circumstance where it disadvantages them.
You also seem to have a problem in thinking that the only reason someone could oppose feminism is that they personally have something wrong with them, I don't, thanks. I'm noting how inadequate feminists are on this issue from observation, not personal grievance. that you have trouble understanding this is because you're a feminist, and thus a dogmatist, who cannot or will not comprehend people are disagreeing with them for the reasons they say they are, not some secret hidden truth about their motives that reveals everything they said was lies. (This attitude of yours is what makes you unreachable by intellectual discussion. You do not engage with what people are saying, and thus never realize why you are wrong.).

Not sure what this is supposed to be about. Looks like a bunch of random garbage to me.

Its the topic being discussed and why your approach is no good. Ignoring socially disabled and socially inept men, the impact on them and on women by placing the burden of courtship on men rather than dividing it, and what it means that socially disabled and inept women aren't represented in terms of botched and creepy flirtation in society because they remain inactive.

Again, what the hell are you even saying? That feminists think all men are evil because some men catcall women? No, they fucking don't. No well-regarded feminist has ever said anything like that.

No, i'm saying feminisms impulsively framed the issue of catcalling and so on happening disproportionately to women around mens mentalities and behavior because this is what their prejudices tell them should be the case, rather than noting it is rooted in womens lack of participation in courting and the burden of courting falling disproportionately on men while men are also pressured into finding partners through virgin shaming and so on, which means socially disabled/socially inept men are active, thus producing catcalling and the like.

*cue link to random blog where a crazy person makes this claim, followed by "THERE ARE NO WELL-REGARDED FEMINISTS, THEY ARE ALL STUPID AND CRAZY"*

Well so long as we're on the topic, most people don't like feminists, including most women.

Meanwhile, of course, ALL WOMEN hurt men's "wellbeing" by not doing their share in "courting-work" (Jesus, that's still fucking hilarious). Anyway, pot, meet kettle.

Women as a group are doing harm to men as a group, not all women, and not all men.

Lmao MGTOW, aka "guys who claim they're giving up on women who then congregate to bitch about women."

You're assuming that's all MGTOWs do with their lives. Your understanding of them is as vapid as if you were dismissive of therapy because "sitting in a room and talking about your problems isn't a way to stop them taking over your life, you need to do things instead!" and betrays a misunderstanding of the benefits they deliver to their members.

Thank you for further illustrating my point that the main opponents of #MeToo are a bunch of whiny, pathetic incels who hate women because they won't sleep with them.

Literally in my girlfriends bed right now mate. Once again, this is the attitude that makes you beyond the reach of reality and intellectual discourse. By the way, feminism makes you less attractive to the opposite sex.

I wonder how many people in this thread are just a couple of bad days away from becoming the next Elliot Rodger.

Charming.

[Hirota]

And where do you get that idea from?

You know when you want to comment on something, and you want to make big broad statements? Yeah? Check what you're saying to be truthful first.

Being a male rape victim is not fun. Being a female rape victim isn't fun either, but at least female rape victims get societies support. Do you know what being laughed at for telling someone you were raped is like? I know, how about not being able to tell your parents what happened because they judge you for your sexuality. How about having all of your universities sexual assault resources aimed at a group of which you are not a member, how about nobody believing what you say when you break down crying and nobody knows why. Do you know what it's like to lose friends because they believe your attacker over you? Do you know what it's like to be painted as a liar and an actor because you're 'taking it too seriously?' Being laughed at behind your back by homophobic idiots who think that gay men 'have it coming' that's a lot of fun, know anything about that? Oh, and to top it off, do you know anything about how hard it is for a man to access rape counselling services?
No, I didn't think you did.
I do.
Do your fucking homework, and when you have maybe you won't make such broad statements.

Thank you for sharing. I know it's perhaps scant comfort, but the best way to stop this happening to someone else in the future is to try and get the message through that this isn't an issue where one demographic are always the victim and one demographic are always the perpetrator.

This needs to be looked at holistically, without the oppression Olympics bullshit certain people like to peddle, the ones who like to project their own ingrained bullshit biases onto other people by implying that because we think men and women need support for this kind of abuse we must only care aboutmen. I can only hope that if we call them out on their hypocritical bullshit they'll eventually learn.

[Ostroeuropa]

Which I've already said happens, so this comment is pointless.

You strawmanned your opponents in this part and i'm correcting you.

You're the second person now to claim they gain "lots/plenty of things" without actually specifying what exactly they're gaining. Well, admittedly, you did mention a general hypothesis that could literally apply to any situation anywhere. Good job?

So you say it happens and then immediate go about saying there's no reason they ever would. This is an example of you being disingenuous. It's like if I said "Black people are equal" and then spent an entire book talking about things in a way that implies they are inferior.

This is the stupidest fucking thing I've ever seen. Comparing "feminist misandry" (something that only exists in the minds of whiny, entitled little shits who are mad that women don't act like blow-up dolls for them)

There's that attitude of yours again, you should actually engage with criticism and instead accepting what your peers tell you is their motivation, the good old "You just hate jesus" response to evidence of evolution. That's a characteristic of cults and so on, you know.

As for feminist misandry existing, we're talking about examples of it right here. Your problem is that you have accepted it doesn't exist as a fundamental tenet of your worldview and think that merely the fact they claim it doesn't exist is a good enough reason to dismiss evidence of it. Like waving a dinosaur fossil in the face of a creationist who then tells you "That doesn't exist.", you aren't engaging with reality, only the set of scriptures you have internalized and are not willing to critically examine.

We have thousands of examples of institutionalized misandry resulting from feminism. Go to the feminism thread if you want to learn about ones other than the examples relating to this issue.

to racism. Holy fuck are you delusional. Come back to me when you get thrown into a concentration camp for being a man. I'll fucking wait.

You can just as easily use this to dismiss any and all examples of racism except genocide by saying "That's not racism, because concentration camps.". Feminism induced misandry and sexism has measurably negative effects for men and subjects them to unfair circumstance on the basis of their gender in many areas.

And by "sexism" I assume you mean "misogyny," otherwise you're just being redundant.

Sexism is misogyny and misandry.

Misogyny and misandry are at least comparable, but yeah, sorry, misogyny is still the greater issue.

Highly debateable.

Almost universally across the world, women are treated worse than men. One-third of women in the entire world have been abused.

You can't make a comparative claim using only half the data. I can tell you i'm the tallest man in the world at 6'2 and it would be just as ridiculous as the stuff you feminists pull on this constantly, hyour data set here is not comparative so its worthless for what you want it to be. Like literally, you've failed to understand even the task you set yourself to accomplish and what it required.

Now, is female-on-male violence a taboo topic? Definitely, but I have some bad news for you: that's not feminism's fault.

There's plenty of evidence they have heavily contributed to the problem.

That's older than feminism, because men decided that men shouldn't talk about their feelings, and that if a woman beats you up, it means you're "weak" and "not a real man."

This is what feminists assert without evidence is the case, despite the fact there's plenty of evidence to show feminism and feminist theory have been the main cause of the modern crisis on this issue, such as;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth_model

Specifically, the most common form of DV programme in the US is feminist, and shite:

1.
"The feminist theory underlying the Duluth Model is that men use violence within relationships to exercise power and control. This is illustrated by the "Power and Control Wheel," a graphic typically displayed as a poster in participating locations."

2. "By determining that the need or desire for power was the motivating force behind battering, we created a conceptual framework that, in fact, did not fit the lived experience of many of the men and women we were working with. The DAIP staff [...] remained undaunted by the difference in our theory and the actual experiences of those we were working with [...] It was the cases themselves that created the chink in each of our theoretical suits of armor. Speaking for myself, I found that many of the men I interviewed did not seem to articulate a desire for power over their partner. Although I relentlessly took every opportunity to point out to men in the groups that they were so motivated and merely in denial, the fact that few men ever articulated such a desire went unnoticed by me and many of my coworkers. Eventually, we realized that we were finding what we had already predetermined to find."

(Bold/underlined = "We were pre-judging, prejudiced. Our feminist theory is indistinguishable from prejudice, and doesn't actually describe reality.")

3. Their [feminists] ideology also asserts that men were impervious to any therapeutic intervention, courtesy of their deeply ingrained patriarchal privilege. According to this new model they precluded anything but criminal treatment for men’s alleged violence toward women and children. Laws were passed that specifically forbade any couples intervention for men accused.

4. fails to address root psychological or emotional causes of abuse, in addition to completely neglecting male victims and female perpetrators of abuse
Again, your problem is you uncritically accept the claims feminism makes and think them saying something and that thing being internally consistent necessarily means its right, even when reality disproves it. Just like trickle down economics.

This is part of what the feminists call "toxic masculinity"--which refers to ideas of "masculinity" that harmful to both women and men. But, of course, nuance like that gets completely lost in all of the false dichotomies and zero-sum game bullshit about how feminism is responsible for all of men's problems.

No, see,e here's the problem. You are not being misunderstood.
I'll say it again.

You are not being misunderstood.

I understand the shitty theories you guys throw out there. You don't have to tell me about "Job creators" and how the wealth will trickle down. I get it. You are not being misunderstood.

You are being told what you believe does not actually describe reality, just like the trickle down economy guys. Repeating at me the crap about job creators when i show you, hey, it doesn 't work, doesn't change anything.

I haven't said its' responsible for all mens problems. The Klan isn't responsible for all black peoples problems either.

Dude. Stop. Are some feminists assholes? Yep. Does that mean feminism is wrong? No.

No what makes feminism wrong is that they think their ideas produce equality, but because of their anti-male bias, instituting their ideas results in sexism. Sort of like you being wrong about how to design an aircraft if it keeps crashing, but then throwing a fit when people point this out to you and pointing to the shiny badge you designed for yourselves that reads "Aircraft expert.".

Feminism is wrong because it is inept, insular, and chauvinist.

And this notion that "feminists are sexist." No, they're not. For the 50th fucking time: "FEMINISTS DON'T HATE MEN." There is no "battle of the sexes." No one's out to get you.

Here we come back to your refusal to consider bias is the accusation against you, not conscious malice.

Your entire comment is literally useless because it has nothing to do with anything I've said. "You've never bothered to consider feminist bias and prejudice as possible." Yes, I have. Of course I fucking have.

Then why do you flip out and assume we're talking about conscious malice every time it comes up?

The problem is that you've never bothered to consider that maybe feminists aren't a goddamned hivemind. Feminists aren't perfect. No one ever claimed they were. I'm an atheist. I don't agree with everything other atheists say/do. Does that mean I should stop being an atheist? That'd be stupid. You're literally just making ad hominem appeals. Ideals aren't correct/incorrect based on the people supporting them. Every single feminist could be a serial murderer, still wouldn't make feminism bad.

Feminism has notable core beliefs and characteristics that seperate it from other movements and people who support gender equality, most notably the notion that feminism is an equality movement. The sort of person who looks at what feminism gets up to and thinks "Thats an equality movement" instead of "That is misandrous sexism" is the sort of person who would call themselves a feminist. They all share the same trait in that regard. While not a hive mind, there are similarities.

"And the way it's harming them." I wasn't aware feminism was harming me. Oh, wait, it's not, you're just appealing to your battle of the sexes bullshit about how everytime women do anything, it's bad for men everywhere

.

It is harming you, even if you don't know it. On the contrary I want women doing far more stuff. you've once again shown you don't understand your critics and instead default to reciting scripture at them about how demons walk everywhere and will try to tempt you away from the truth.

Feminism isn't harming me, and it's not harming you either, you've just decided that the CEOs in the OP are your buds because they also happen to have penises. You're not the spokesperson of men (and thank god for that).

Not harming you, debatable. Not harming me? You know nothing about me, but yes, yes feminism has harmed me.
No, I didn't decide the CEOs are my buds. I decided their reaction as reasonable and inevitable and articulated why.

Dude, I'm a socialist, try as hard as you want, I'm not gonna feel bad for CEOs.

I'm also a socialist and also don't feel bad for them. I merely don't let emotional incontinence decide my political positions.

Like who?

Most people in general.
https://morningconsult.com/2018/10/11/a ... legations/

You're a member of a fringe hate movement that isn't concerned about mens sitution, thats why you throw out the abusive lies about people who complain about false accusations and accuse them of being rapists in disguise and so on, because you have nothing but vitriol, contempt, and ganging up on people to get them to shut up. You can't convince people on the merits, and so resort to that. Noting that in a situation when confronted with opposition you think its in your tactical interest to become abusive rather than resort to logical argument, speaks volumes about the strength of your argument.

Apparently, you judge it inferior to even the childish insults you throw out, and you're the guy who actually believes in it. Even its best fan thinks its shite, but won't give it up.
Why?
Stubbornness and fear, I have to assume, which explains why feminists have slowly shifted into more vitriol and abuse as the criticism has stacked up over the last couple of years.

Source?

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/a ... es/539361/

Oh look, its a feminist who "cares about men too" knowing fuck all about mens issues.

What? Are you referring to female-on-male rape or suggesting that women are responsible for male-on-female rape (I legitimately can't tell from your wording)? And, if they were held accountable they'd be afraid of false accusations? What? Those two things literally don't correlate. False accusations, by-definition, have nothing to do with accountability. This whole sentence was just word salad.

Women being responsible for female-on-male rape. If they were held accountable they'd be afraid of false accusations because then the accusations could actually damage them, its fairly straightforward. If women were held accountable when they rape men, that would mean false accusations from men become actually damaging, and I bet you suddenly feminist women would give a shit about them.

You keep saying this. Please show me these "plenty of men." In fact, I can think of a couple of men who got accused of rape/assault and it didn't affect their lives, like Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Donald Trump, Robert Mueller.

There's been a string of cases where courts have ruled in the students favor and noted their rights were violated by the university as a result of feminist policy (title 9.). What about all the men who didn't get to that stage and were unfairly tarnished without it being acknowledged? This includes some male rape victims by the way, and there's been at least two "High" profile cases (high profile as in, if you bother to actually look for critics of feminism and what they talk about instead of only listening to the lies feminists tell about their critics, you'll have found them) where a man was raped by a woman, who then reported him to campus tribunals, who then sided with the woman even though their stories were basically "I raped him, please expell him." (Such as the woman who performed oral sex on an unconscious man and got him expelled.).

And what about the women whose lives are ruined by sexual assault and their assaulter is never apprehended? Especially when some institutions are more willing to sweep the whole thing under the rug than deal with the bad PR of a sexual assault case.

That doesn't entitle them, not justify us, ruining other peoples lives. Just because you as a feminist care more about women than men doesn't make it okay to hurt those men on the off chance it helps the women.

Source?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45565684

Correction, only 2-10 are PROVEN to be fake. So you've got:

Lowest possible estimate: 2-10


And only 35% are reported to the police. As I noted, the accusations outside the police force probably have higher ratios of false accusations.

"Curious you've ignored them" when literally no one else (that I've seen) has mentioned them? (Also, nice try at the deflection, but literally every post I've responded to has posited the situation as "men vs. women," so they would be the ones "utilizing a sexist framework," I was responding to what they said).

There's no witch hunt against women perpetrators, so it's apt to call it a mens issue where it's feminists VS men.

More victim complex bullshit. "Mommy, the mean FEMINAZI on the internet is saying rude things to me!" And funny you should mention "gaslighting everyone over their intentions" when that's literally been your entire post vis-a-vis feminism.

No, i'm noting your tactics. Not complaining about them, just pointing out this is how you operate and what it says about you and the type of thing that convinced you to join this movement. I'm here talking about ideas, noting the mechanics of arguments and so on, and you're trying to throw out the most abuse.

Are you as good at it as the feminist who bullied you into joining? After all, you must find this stuff convincing, presumably thats what happened to you.

"The feminist demands." There you go with those buzzwords again. "The feminists are doing this." "The feminists are doing that," because you don't see feminists as human beings right individual thoughts and ideas, you see them as a hivemind out to destroy you,

Feminism imposes a system of governance on a society at the moment, and that system has victims. It's more like "Imperialists are doing that". You're one of those people who thinks its all about trains and making people civilized, i'm pointing out you're full of illogical behavior and ignorant of a lot of things that feminism has done to hurt others, as well as noting that the actual system of imperialism is far more negative and exploitative than you think. "Not all imperialists!"

But I'll answer your question with a question, is allowing rapists to go free not dangerous? And of course, this is an obvious framing device meant to oversimplify the issue and make your position seem more agreeable. Politicians literally do this all of the time.

Letting rapists go free is not as dangerous as de-facto legalising anybody being able to kidnap anyone else and put them in a little box for years. (the erosion of due process.).
"Is not letting a murder get away with it dangerous? That's why I think we should let people shoot anybody they say was about to commit a murder. HOW DARE YOU!!! Look at these pictures of this MURDERED child! You fucking MONSTER for opposing this measure!"

This convinced you. This type of shit. This is what your movement is doing.

"Is violating peoples due process not dangerous?" Of course it is, few people would disagree with that.

Trump shifted title 9 from preponderence of evidence to clear and convincing evidence, and feminist institutions have flipped their fucking lid over it. You're lying when you say few people would disagree. Go ahead and research it. Even he hasn't gone far enough and is actually compromising on it, but its not enough for most of them.

But this situation is more complicated than just due process. Should it be suspended entirely? No, but given the inherently hard-to-prove nature of rape, exceptions do have to be made where necessary.

Oh here we go. So you don't actually care about violating due process, you merely claim you do because you're aware it makes your movement awful but don't want to admit it about yourselves.

There are limits to people's rights. It's the same reason a cop can enter your home when the door's ajar. The same reason police can search kids at schools without a warrant or probable cause. The same reason you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. Now, if you want to discuss where exactly the line should be drawn, that's a fine discussion to have, but positioning it as a battle of "rights vs. no rights" is disingenuous--and you know that.

There is a right to due process in regard to criminal proceedings and proof beyond reasonable doubt. You're merely not considering that your hate movement wants to harm men, not end rape, and so is insistent on a carceral solution. (See above with the duluth model where they pulled similar shit, ensuring more women got battered, but meaning more men went to jail so they got what they actually wanted, to hurt men, not help women.).

You'd rather water down due process and violate peoples human rights to give you an excuse to harm men than you woulld pursue other solutions. Rape is too difficult to prove? Tough fucking shit. Try consent classes from 13+ years old instead of attacking due process. Try defense classes. You're like someone who sneers and says "Black crime is out of control, so we need to start talking about what extra police powers and limiting their rights we should do.", but you've wrapped yourself up in more pretentious moral rhetoric.

Says the guy whose entire argument boils down to, "Look! Feminists hate men! Look at how they're threatening us and taking away our rights!" And, bud, there's no "secretly" about it.

I'm showing you the evidence they are prejudiced against men and noting examples of it, not merely saying "The only reason you'd say something like that is that you want to fuck a horse, you sicko" like you are.

Literally never said nor implied that. Nice try, though.

You repeateedly have, saying the only reason people oppose feminism is that they're incels and stuff, even if they tell you otherwise.

And your paranoid delusions about the evils of the "feminist movement" are just like McCarthyites insisting there's a communist on every corner waiting to take all your FREEDUMZ.

We're discussing evidence. This is that "Fossil" thing again. Why not actually engage with the arguments and evidence? Because you can't. You can only dismiss them out of hand and act abusively to people who criticize you.

More shit about how feminists are trying to take away men's rights, yada yada.

You'd think if you were concerned about men and sexism against them you'd pay attention when people criticise you, but the overwhelming majority of you pull this shit instead. Good allyship there and whatnot.

You've posted literally one link.

We've also discussed plenty of other things such as how your position ignores mens diversity and so on. Words are also evidence where you'e making a case about words.

My "movement?" I wasn't aware I was now the leader of the Global Feminist Movement. My first decree will now be milk and cookies at every meeting! And I know you don't focus on its intent, you focus on the intent you've made up in your mind about how feminists hate men and are trying to commit global male genocide or something stupid like that. Oh no, wait, that's right they're trying to take away our RIGHTS (just like those damn commies!).

No, I focus on the measurable damage its done and note it and draw conclusions about why these failures come about.

"Abusive tactics." Dude, I made fun of you on the internet. Oh my god, you are the whiniest goddamned baby I've seen in a long time. I sincerely hope you never meet an actually dangerous person because you'll probably shit yourself.

I'm noting that this is a norm for your movement and very few of you seem able to actually do anything but act abusive to those who criticize you. You've pulled it again here. You're not actually bothering me, but i'm noting it because of what it says about your values and the type of values your movement causes to come to the fore in you, as well as noting that you routinely indulge in logical fallacies and lash out at people who note your movements inconsistency and failure to do what it claims it does. You don't engage with the criticism, you just lash out, and these tantrums make you feel better about yourself. You can think i'm a monster if you want, go ahead. I can still be right. So engage with the argument instead of just lashing out and acting as though that means anything. Almost all of you act this way, and it shows a lack of self-awareness and attention to how logic actually works.

A jew puts a can in a cupboard, then an hour later comes back to get it and opens the wrong one.
"Wrong cupboard."
Said the Nazi at the desk.
The jew throws a fit and screams "You're just saying that because I'm a jew and you're a fucking NAZI!"

This is the kind of thinking you are engaging in. It's utterly ridiculous, doubly so when you realize i'm not even the bad guy here. I'm not the one shilling for a movement that hurts other people on the basis of their characteristics, you are, but even if you DONT accept that, you're still behaving in a way that is stunningly incompetent and closed off to the world and its criticism of your ideas. THATS why you're so sure of yourself, you don't engage with reality, only your scriptures.

I also love how you think you're being so smart right now. You're not. There's nothing to engage with, because you've made no legitimate critiques. It's literally just been nothing but fearmongering bullshit about how the feminists are coming to take away er RIGHTZ! It's all the same shit that red pillers, incels, and MGTOWs say every time they open their mouths.

No, you've merely dismissed every single fossil i've shown you by saying "But that doesn't exist because my bible says that-" and then at the end of the exhibit smugly declared "See? You don't have any fossils."

You want to hear some actually good criticsms of (some) feminists? Women of color are heavily marginalized in a lot of the feminist movement. In fact, white supremacy is pretty fucking rampant in some areas. Some feminists are extremely elitist and disdainful towards poor women. Some feminists think the sex workers are sub-human. Some feminists are homophobic. Some are transphobic. These are all legitimate problems. You know what isn't, though? Your paranoid delusion that feminists are trying to take away your rights. No one wants to take away your rights. No one gives a shit about you. You literally don't even register for most feminists. In fact, most would just ignore you. There is no great battle of the sexes. Men's rights aren't going anywhere. Quit reading The Red Pill and go out into the real world and actually meet some real life feminists (assuming you can get over your crippling fear of women, of course, but don't worry I believe in you!).

[/quote]

Right, and the same flaws those feminists have on those issues is true of men, and in largely the same way. Bias, lack of concern for their situation and circumstance, advancing solutions that ignore them and their circumstance and thus harm them unjustifiably, etc.
You then say this isn'[t the case becaue "Noone gives a shit about you."

Well you heard it here folks, feminists don't give a shit about men.


I'm not a red piller. I'm not afraid of women and its kind of funny you're again pulling the same shit. Is it fear of being single that makes YOU a feminist? Because you keep coming back to that. Is it your reason and you're projecting your fears that if you weren't feminist, women wouldn't love you?

Because, I hate to break it to you bud, feminists lied to you. Being feminist makes you less attractive to the opposite sex, whether man or woman.

https://twitter.com/SkyData/status/9714 ... ite-sex%2F

[The Blaatschapen]

Oh my god. Do their share of "courting-work?" So, you're pissed off that women don't just randomly walk up to you and hit on you? Sorry, bud, but even women were to do this, you definitely wouldn't be at the top of the list (women like confident men, not babies who whine about "virgin-shaming" and "courting"--the minute you open your mouth they'd turn right around). Just go talk to women, it's not that goddamned hard. You don't even have to flirt with them, just have a normal conversation like you would with a man. Jesus.

I do find it very interesting how, repeatedly, and without a hint of recognition, you see people arguing both in favor of feminism and simultaneously trying to pin men into the male gender role of stoicism, strength, and never shedding a single tear, and immediately and unironically shaming them for not conforming to said gender role.

It's a fascinating mixture of arguments to behold, and yet, we see it over and over and over again repeatedly.

Honest question, have I done this in recent times (last two years)?

I am trying to better myself in that front and would like to know when I expect gender roles from people (as opposed to be adults )

[Rezmaeristan]

My hope is that this eventually reverses the sexual revolution ushering in a new age of cultural conservatism, high fertility rates, and general good feelings.

[USS Monitor]

Holy fuck are you delusional.

Oh my god, you are the whiniest goddamned baby I've seen in a long time. I sincerely hope you never meet an actually dangerous person because you'll probably shit yourself.

Since you decided not to knock off the ad hominems when Lamoni told you to knock it off, here's an official *** warning for flaming ***.

[Des-Bal]

The same Spain where it was ruled a woman wasn't gangraped because she wasn't threatened with violence or physically restrained like in a B movie?

That's what I'm talking about, that didn't happen. They were charged with, convicted of, and sentenced for a serious sex crime but a quirk of the spanish classification system means that instead of calling it "sexual assault in the third degree" they call it "sexual abuse." The entire outrage about Spain is exclusively about what a statute is named while in other countries female perpetrators are actually charged with lesser crimes. It's being so badly ingnored that even when someone says "hey isn't this fucked up" people respond "YEAH BUT SPAIN."

[Vassenor]

My hope is that this eventually reverses the sexual revolution ushering in a new age of cultural conservatism, high fertility rates, and general good feelings.

How will cultural conservatism improve fertility rates?

And how will constant repression make people feel good?

[Ostroeuropa]

The same Spain where it was ruled a woman wasn't gangraped because she wasn't threatened with violence or physically restrained like in a B movie?

That's what I'm talking about, that didn't happen. They were charged with, convicted of, and sentenced for a serious sex crime but a quirk of the spanish classification system means that instead of calling it "sexual assault in the third degree" they call it "sexual abuse." The entire outrage about Spain is exclusively about what a statute is named while in other countries female perpetrators are actually charged with lesser crimes. It's being so badly ingnored that even when someone says "hey isn't this fucked up" people respond "YEAH BUT SPAIN."

This is also interesting to note. There's more effort put into generating and supporting fake outrage that casts women as oppressed than there is into actually combating outrageous things men are subjected to.

If feminist institutions are very publicly and quite often generating a shitstorm over deliberately misrepresenting something to do with sex, why shouldn't CEOs be scared?

[Mzeusia]

My hope is that this eventually reverses the sexual revolution ushering in a new age of cultural conservatism, high fertility rates, and general good feelings.

How will cultural conservatism improve fertility rates?

And how will constant repression make people feel good?

The is that Cultural Conservatism will bring back traditionalist values and therefore people will start having larger families.

[Ostroeuropa]

How will cultural conservatism improve fertility rates?

And how will constant repression make people feel good?

The is that Cultural Conservatism will bring back traditionalist values and therefore people will start having larger families.

Agriculturalism and poor mechanisation led to people having larger families, not values. Even in conservative nations the birth rate is declining rapidly, because we don't need kids to work the farm anymore. Even a sexually repressive backlash to things like this wont increase birth rates.

[Des-Bal]

How will cultural conservatism improve fertility rates?

And how will constant repression make people feel good?

Less uncertainty. A poster just commented that they felt safe from false accusations because they didn't drink, use drugs, or have sex with strange women. The climate is encouraging conservative behaviors, as Jordan Peterson noted that Louis CK could have easily protected himself by keeping sex within the confines of marriage.

[Rojava Free State]

You gotta love how the #MeToo movement claims everyone blames the rape victims for rape.

Uh, no precious, maybe in your alternate universe it's like that, but in this world if someone accuses someone of rape, everyone begins blaming the accused person and basically wants to hang, draw and quarter them without trial. Even if you beat the case, your life is basically over and everyone still thinks you're a rapist. False rape accusations could actually be a lethal weapon if you really dont like someone, akin to the accusation of witchcraft in 1690s salem massachusetts. Someone cut you off in a parking garage? Say they raped you. Your ex boyfriend exposed you for cheating on him? say he raped you. Your teacher gave you an F on your final exam? Say he raped you. A mormon missionary knocked on your door on a sunday at 6 AM and woke u up and now you cant sleep? Say the guy raped you.

Third wave feminists often say "well only 3 to 8% of rape accusations are fake." First, 8% is a large number, alright? 8% of Americans are of Asian heritage, they sure dont seem to be few and far between. Around 5% of American teens have tried cocaine, that seems like alot. That means out of rape accusations, almost 1 out of 10 are fake. That's too much for us to just willy nilly believe victims without any evidence. And those are just the ones proven to be fake. God knows how many more false reports were never discovered. #MeToo was also started by the way by Asia Argento, who recently was outted as a rapist by a young actor who was intoxicated with alcohol by her and then molested at age 17. She claimed it was fake, and that leads me to two points.

#1. What happened to believe all victims?
#2. Is that why she paid him millions of dollars for years to keep quiet.

We could hold that monster down and tattoo "child rapist" on her forehead and it still wouldnt get the point across in full. So now we got a movement that is targeting men accused of rape by as little as one woman without evidence, a movement started by a rapist to begin with and a movement that also accused Aziz Ansari of rape because the girl who gave him head claimed "my mind said no even though i said yes. he shouldve read my body language." It's time to pack up all the Me too quacktivists, load them on a plane and send them all to Jacksonville Florida where they will almost certainly not escape alive.