Men are Screwed (rule 43)

[Emjay]

You're right, it's not about men's rights. It's about women having more rights. You refuse to address this issue and continue to skirt around it.

And somehow that's the only thing you got from this. Not considering why that is. Not considering that where men and women and equally involved it's much more split down the middle.

Sorry - I cannot take your dissection of society seriously when you cannot even properly acknowledge that men commit the overwhelming share of violence. It's rather hilarious actually.

 

[Swa]

Sorry - I cannot take your dissection of society seriously when you cannot even properly acknowledge that men commit the overwhelming share of violence. It's rather hilarious actually.

I can't take you seriously when you can't even acknowledge AT ALL that men are mostly the victims of violence. You haven't taken ANY argument in this thread seriously and have simply poo pooed it as men being too pussy. I do have to agree that you are just here to troll.

Men are much more likely to be in situations where violence may occur. That would make us more likely to be both the perpetrators and victims. When it comes to relationships statistics show us that women have no lack when it comes to the propensity towards violence. Women are just more subtle in the way they kill where it is mostly "accidents", guns for hire, or even poisonings. That would in fact skew the statistics in your favour as a large percentage of these crimes are likely to never be resolved just as a large percentage of domestic violence cases against men are never reported.

 

[Arksun]

Yes, that's what we totally want. All women are secretly into S&M,

Ok, looks like you're not that familiar with metaphors, so I'll put it in words you'll understand.

Feminists want 100% control over men. They want 100% of males of the species into 100% submission and 100% obedience. They will not rest until every male on the planet is on his knees licking the boots of every woman he encounters. Does that make better sense to you?


EDIT: autocorrect

 

[technofool]

This thread was such a productive and peaceful place when men got the chance to say something without being insulted and called names. You get treated the way you allow other people to treat you.

I do have to agree that you are just here to troll.

You have to add an action to the end of that like "I am tired of your bad manners, you are not adding any value to our discussion. Will you please p1ss off now and bother someone else."

But don't worry women are coming to save us.

 

[technofool]

So much of what you guys have been saying is mentioned in this video. Amazing that the issues are the same around the world.

 

[jambai]

Oh, cry me a river. If the usual stereotypes about men were repeated on these forums in the same manner as in this thread, your soy boy posse would have been all over it in short order. This thread is not about men's rights. It's a bunch of MRAs / female feminist equivalents circle jerking.



I see you have run out of school yard insults, and engaged your brain a little? You should try that more often.

All I have done is interrupted the stream of male tears.

And, you should really try debunk any of my arguments head on, because I am interested to see what you actually disagree with.



View attachment 710187

Riveting content right here, boyos.

I disagree with anything that attacks the family structure.The family structure is the foundation and environment that society is successfully built on.Confusing roles dont help the family structure.You want equality even if that means that the family structure is compromised as women can prove they can do anything men can do (and even better)and if men dont like it they must toughen up and understand it from a women's perspective.That is the what i have read you to have said

 

[Bewlen]

@Emjay, serious question: so what is your stance on this whole matter, as a short summary rather than an essay? So many posts that I'm struggling to see your view clearly. (Please don't troll this question)

 

[Emjay]

I disagree with anything that attacks the family structure.The family structure is the foundation and environment that society is successfully built on.Confusing roles dont help the family structure.You want equality even if that means that the family structure is compromised as women can prove they can do anything men can do (and even better)and if men dont like it they must toughen up and understand it from a women's perspective.That is the what i have read you to have said

Women have the right to choose if they should work, or not, with their husbands. If the women wants to stay at home, the father should earn enough to support the entire family, and be able to support both of them through retirement. It's pretty simple. That's the way it is, and that's the way it's going to stay.

And, thank you for clarifying that this is actually about women in the workplace. I thought feminists were stark raving mad when they said that men were trying to undermine their freedoms, and here you are proving what they said. The use of stereotypes does not help your cause either.

 

[rambo919]

nvm

 

[Emjay]

@Emjay, serious question: so what is your stance on this whole matter, as a short summary rather than an essay? So many posts that I'm struggling to see your view clearly. (Please don't troll this question)

Thanks for asking, instead of just assuming.

It's simple.

1. I reject all forms of identity politics. Feminists are shrills. MRAs are just like the feminists. I used to be pretty outspoken for MRAs, but that ship has sailed.
2. Men and women are equal in terms of the workplace and in society, but different. Those differences fall on a scale, however. My beliefs revolve around self-determination, and believe everyone should have the freedom to choose their own path. I believe in equal opportunity, but not equal outcomes, and abhor any sort of quotas (which is enforcement of identity politics).
3. Men do get treated unfairly in certain spheres of society. However, men don't have it worse than women. And vice versa. Each sex has different issues.
4. The nuclear family is important, but women shouldn't be forced to fulfill a role. The family unit can work together to raise well rounded children. Women cannot have it all as it is impossible. Sacrifices will always have to be made, but as I said, working as a family, children can be raised well.
5. Violence is perpetuated against men and women, and it is the minority of men (and some women) that ruin it for everyone else. Violence is a societal issue, and not just a men's issue.

 

[cerebus]

Women have the right to choose if they should work, or not, with their husbands. If the women wants to stay at home, the father should earn enough to support both families, and be able to support both of them through retirement. It's pretty simple. That's the way it is, and that's the way it's going to stay.

And, thank you for clarifying that this is actually about women in the workplace. I thought feminists were stark raving mad when they said that men were trying to undermine their freedoms, and here you are proving what they said. The use of stereotypes does not help your cause either.

That's why feminism is still needed - because despite the claims of people on this thread, those people are still ideologically opposed to the most basic kinds of gender equality: the right of women to work and achieve independent fulfilling lives without undermining the natural order of the 'family structure'. Never mind other, more advanced rights that feminists push for, such as eliminating gender data bias.

 

[Emjay]

That's why feminism is still needed - because despite the claims of people on this thread, those people are still ideologically opposed to the most basic kinds of gender equality: the right of women to work and achieve independent fulfilling lives without undermining the natural order of the 'family structure'. Never mind other, more advanced rights that feminists push for, such as eliminating gender data bias.

I wonder if there is a term for being reverse red pilled?

 

[Gingerbeardman]

I wonder if there is a term for being reverse red pilled?

It's called endorsing equality of outcome.

 

[Swa]

That's why feminism is still needed - because despite the claims of people on this thread, those people are still ideologically opposed to the most basic kinds of gender equality: the right of women to work and achieve independent fulfilling lives without undermining the natural order of the 'family structure'. Never mind other, more advanced rights that feminists push for, such as eliminating gender data bias.

The only thing that can undermine gender equality and has done so in our modern world is feminism.

 

[rambo919]

Thanks for asking, instead of just assuming.

It's simple.

1. I reject all forms of identity politics. Feminists are harpies. MRAs are just like the feminists. I used to be pretty outspoken for MRAs, but that ship has sailed.
2. Men and women are equal in terms of the workplace and in society, but different. Those differences fall on a scale, however. My beliefs revolve around self-determination, and believe everyone should have the freedom to choose their own path. I believe in equal opportunity, but not equal outcomes, and abhor any sort of quotas (which is enforcement of identity politics).
3. Men do get treated unfairly in certain spheres of society. However, men don't have it worse than women. And vice versa. Each sex has different issues.
4. The nuclear family is important, but women shouldn't be forced to fulfill a role. The family unit can work together to raise well rounded children. Women cannot have it all as it is impossible. Sacrifices will always have to be made, but as I said, working as a family, children can be raised well.
5. Violence is perpetuated against men and women, and it is the minority of men (and some women) that ruin it for everyone else. Violence is a societal issue, and not just a men's issue.

1. That's stereotyping, deserved to a degree but SOMEONE needs to counter the feminazis running rampant.
2. Can and should are two different things. Some paths have inherent costs and sacrifices involved especially if it falls outside of natural roles. The current problem is the drive to mitigate those costs and sacrifices in favour of woman at the expense of men.... which is inherently unequal in nature.
3. Getting treated unfairly = having it worse in some cases. The only real question is to what degree.
4. Either it's sacred or it is not, it either works or it does not. Yes woman can choose to have a different role.... but it is unrealistic to think that such a choice wont destabilize the unit leading to inferior results. Everyone has had the right to make stupid decisions since the dawn of time.... even God gave the first couple the right to idiocy if they insisted.... though He also did not refrain from granting them the costs they deserved.
5. no disagreements

A LOT of the reactions here to you have nothing to do with what you say but how you say it, other have to do with what you say because you yourself make ludacrous assumptions sometimes and go seemingly nuts when confronted about them. Even when you ask a question sometime it contains malicious intent.

 

[Emjay]

you yourself make ludicrous (fixed for you, btw) assumptions

Remember when you said **some** men cannot control themselves when they don't have sex, hey, rambo919?



I find it odd that no one else called you out on it. But, I guess the guys will not call out crazy because it's on the same side? Only explanation.

Yes - that's malicious mockery.

 

[rambo919]

That's why feminism is still needed - because despite the claims of people on this thread, those people are still ideologically opposed to the most basic kinds of gender equality: the right of women to work and achieve independent fulfilling lives without undermining the natural order of the 'family structure'. Never mind other, more advanced rights that feminists push for, such as eliminating gender data bias.

Nope that's the heretics and infidels that don't worship at the altar of equity. Feminism is in many ways a religious crusade which is why it's adherents become so kneejerkelly frothy at the mouth sometimes when their still unproven beliefs are questioned.

 

[Tokolotshe]

Thanks for asking, instead of just assuming.

It's simple.

1. I reject all forms of identity politics. Feminists are harpies. MRAs are just like the feminists. I used to be pretty outspoken for MRAs, but that ship has sailed.
2. Men and women are equal in terms of the workplace and in society, but different. Those differences fall on a scale, however. My beliefs revolve around self-determination, and believe everyone should have the freedom to choose their own path. I believe in equal opportunity, but not equal outcomes, and abhor any sort of quotas (which is enforcement of identity politics).
3. Men do get treated unfairly in certain spheres of society. However, men don't have it worse than women. And vice versa. Each sex has different issues.
4. The nuclear family is important, but women shouldn't be forced to fulfill a role. The family unit can work together to raise well rounded children. Women cannot have it all as it is impossible. Sacrifices will always have to be made, but as I said, working as a family, children can be raised well.
5. Violence is perpetuated against men and women, and it is the minority of men (and some women) that ruin it for everyone else. Violence is a societal issue, and not just a men's issue.

Thank you. Excellent summary. I would say a lot more than that one ship has sailed. The traditional roles of men and women have changed. But equally, those change shave been for better and for worse. Unfortunately it opened doors for other problems, problems which the extremes on both sides of the coin just help worsen. It's these extremes that undermines traditional values (as opposed to roles).

On topic:
I have an (ex) dog in this fight. Some lawyers are simply aholes and do more harm than good. But then again I'm on record as saying a prosecutor and his staff are worse than "bobbejaane" to them. Also said in in correspondence to his bosses. In the meantime the one lady at the family court in my area had her hand in her hair because the arrogant prosecutor was not involving her. In my fights some of the most fair have been females, some of the worst males. I even nearly had a lawyer locked up for claiming to have destroyed stolen evidence. My own lawyer had elft me to my own devices as long I I wa son the right track, just confirming I'm doing the right things (no accounts - he was a great guy). I've seen a female abuse the courts simply because she can.

Yes, it gets messy. But record, record, record. When the time comes prove it. If things get stupid, volunteer to pay the maintenance in at the court. That way there is a record.

Equally, I've seen some guys not stepping up for their children, mom not knowing where the next plate of food for her children will come from while the dad is jolling around etc.

It works both ways.

 

[Tokolotshe]

I wonder if there is a term for being reverse red pilled?

Los die pille it. Hul en drank veroorsaak net k@k!

 

[rambo919]

Remember when you said **some** men that cannot control themselves when they don't have sex, hey, rambo919?



I find it odd that no one else called you out on it. But, I guess the guys will embrace crazy because it's on the same side? Only explanation.

Nothing crazy about it, some men have that little control..... with the loosening of sexual norms there are a lot more of them now than there were before because of an excess of stimulation everywhere. The rise in prominence of promiscuity has masked this.

A man is what he gets exposed to, the more stimulation (ads, porn, teasing woman, woman dressed immodestly, etc) the less resistance he can give against his natural urges. Nothing crazy about that unless one suffers from the delusion than men and woman are put together the same sexually.

That does not in any way mean I endorse that kind of behavior and tbh I was slightly insulted that you took the opposite away from what I said even though I repeatedly said I don't.

EDIT:Also I DID NOT MEAN MEN ARE FORCED TO RAPE.... if you took that away.... best not to finish that thought.