Men are Screwed (rule 43)

[Ancalagon]

So, you do and don't agree that men cannot control themselves due to hormones?

No, I don't think that is why they are violent. I think the cause is a lot more complicated than that. Actually I'd argue they probably have low T. Low T would be correlated with the fact they are losers. If a man's position in the hierarchy changes, his level of T secreted will change too. Being at the bottom of the hierarchy means they have low T, pretty much by definition.

The current scourge of violent incels is a huge problem - but nobody wants to address the real cause. The real cause I believe is a combination of a few things.

1. Abusive mothers, or mothers who have mental illness. I had one, ask me what it was like. I'm still messed up years later, although luckily I'm not violent. If I'd had fantasies about violence as a kid, I'd probably be a serial killer by now.

Every single serial killer that I'm aware of has issues with their mother. A lot of them have absent fathers. This is not to say that we can blame the mother for the actions of the child, but, we have to recognise that if we want to stop violent men, we have to give their mothers the support they need to raise their children properly.

2. They get conflicting messages. Society tells them to be nice boys and respect girls, but they see the girls going for the confident guys. Sometimes the girls mistake bad boys for confident guys, but the point is, the incels can't understand this. The problem is, the incels themselves likely have bad backgrounds that make confidence difficult to come by. And you can't really fake it that well. This makes them resentful.

All they want is acceptance from a woman - the acceptance that they probably never got from their mother - but they feel that they are being denied this acceptance from women who only go for bad boys or something. So, they project that hate and resentment that they are feeling onto society, onto the women that rejected them.

3. I've posted earlier in the thread about how the decline in monogamy has meant that its now more common for women to just share an alpha male, having a piece of him when they can, rather than pair up for life with a mate on the same attractiveness level as them. A woman who is a 6 (socially) would have ended up with a man who is a 6 or a 7 in the past. Now, the women who is a 6 (socially) goes from bad boy to bad boy because she doesn't have to settle down, she doesn't have to settle for the guy who is a 6. Why should she?

This means that our man who is a 6, who came from a bad home with an abusive mother, finds himself in a dating scene in which he has no hope at all. Who is going to look at the needy 6 who wants validation from women when they can have the 8 with that dangerous stare and the leather jacket?

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Yes, big guy. You are the target of my delusions. That's why you are responding so fiercely to my posts mocking you.

You admitted to fighting fire with fire. You ARE the equivalent of a female feminist. You hate them so much, that you want to adopt their strategies. Such a hypocrite.

I asked a rhetorical question, designed to get you to examine what sort of fire you were bringing to the fight. I didn't actually admit to anything of the sort.

There is such a thing as finding fault in people for something that happened to them without justification though, and it's a crappy thing to do to someone. It's not even that you made a general sweeping statement, it's that you specifically told an individual with a real problem that they were at fault when you knew fsck all about the situation.

I've told you several times that you should apologise, but you can't even admit the error. Shame on you.

And how you get from there to me trying to use feminist strategies to get laid, lord alone knows.

 

[rambo919]

What a clusterf*** of a thread.

Either feelings got hurt or actual trolling is in progress..... either way life is too short to waste energy of clowns only out for self-validation who think words are actions. Certain people are assaulting facts with feelings and no one is going to get anywhere other than irritated.... how is that for a quick summary?

 

[technofool]

This thread is going nowhere and is now pointless. Nobodies minds will change.



Not true, not from studies that I've seen. Sex doesn't lower testosterone - instead it causes secretion of hormones like oxytocin, which blunt the effect of testosterone a little. Men get less aggressive after sex not because of a dip in testosterone but because of an increase in oxytocin. I think other hormones will be affected as well, just not sure exactly what.

Just bear in mind that testosterone is also negatively correlated with body fat. The more body fat you have, the more estrogen you secrete, and the less testosterone.

One thing that you will however find interesting is that there is a theory - backed by some evidence - that men with low testosterone tend to be male feminists. The argument goes, men with low testosterone have no hope competing against a high testosterone male. So, they become male feminists, thinking this will get them closer to women and give them an opportunity to mate. High T men don't have to pretend to be male feminists, since they will normally be leaner and larger than low T men, and more physically attractive. Plus, testosterone is associated with social dominance.

Low T men then need a new strategy to get chicks, and the strategy is, become a male feminist cuck.

As I said, there is some evidence for this, but, evidence is admittedly difficult to come by since absolutely no liberal scientist would ever study this.

EDIT: For a hilarious read, read this.

Liberal cuck examines this theory, attempts to disprove it, finds out he has low T!

I have to put up my hand and say I resonate with this theory. I'm a useless leader and for many years thought I was a feminist because I was brainwashed but it never sat comfortably. It took a long time till I could throw off the shackles and escape the feminist slave plantation.

 

[technofool]

Do you need a safe space again?

Yes Please and a little respect too. Is that too much to ask?

 

[Emjay]

I asked a rhetorical question, designed to get you to examine what sort of fire you were bringing to the fight. I didn't actually admit to anything of the sort.

There is such a thing as finding fault in people for something that happened to them without justification though, and it's a crappy thing to do to someone. It's not even that you made a general sweeping statement, it's that you specifically told an individual with a real problem that they were at fault when you knew fsck all about the situation.

I've told you several times that you should apologise, but you can't even admit the error. Shame on you.

And how you get from there to me trying to use feminist strategies to get laid, lord alone knows.

The all seeing and knowing GBM. He has the exact same information as I do, but he magically knows more.

And, you preach about how the left using shaming tactics to get people to bend to their will. And there you are using it. You are bigger hypocrit than the people you mock every day.

I owe Zarnicate nothing. His story is anecdotal, and only one side. I wasn't even referring to him, but more to the idea that men have it worse than women when posting those memes.

Isn't it ironic that you are about go back onto my ignore list. I actually agree with most of what you say, but you double down on the nonsense in this thread. A discussion without the stereotyping would have been great. But the incels always ruin it for everyone.

 

[Emjay]

Thats way too stupid to actually respond to....

You believe men cannot control themselves when they don't have sex. So, please tell us more about that.

 

[Emjay]

No, I don't think that is why they are violent. I think the cause is a lot more complicated than that. Actually I'd argue they probably have low T. Low T would be correlated with the fact they are losers. If a man's position in the hierarchy changes, his level of T secreted will change too. Being at the bottom of the hierarchy means they have low T, pretty much by definition.

The current scourge of violent incels is a huge problem - but nobody wants to address the real cause. The real cause I believe is a combination of a few things.

1. Abusive mothers, or mothers who have mental illness. I had one, ask me what it was like. I'm still messed up years later, although luckily I'm not violent. If I'd had fantasies about violence as a kid, I'd probably be a serial killer by now.

Every single serial killer that I'm aware of has issues with their mother. A lot of them have absent fathers. This is not to say that we can blame the mother for the actions of the child, but, we have to recognise that if we want to stop violent men, we have to give their mothers the support they need to raise their children properly.

2. They get conflicting messages. Society tells them to be nice boys and respect girls, but they see the girls going for the confident guys. Sometimes the girls mistake bad boys for confident guys, but the point is, the incels can't understand this. The problem is, the incels themselves likely have bad backgrounds that make confidence difficult to come by. And you can't really fake it that well. This makes them resentful.

All they want is acceptance from a woman - the acceptance that they probably never got from their mother - but they feel that they are being denied this acceptance from women who only go for bad boys or something. So, they project that hate and resentment that they are feeling onto society, onto the women that rejected them.

3. I've posted earlier in the thread about how the decline in monogamy has meant that its now more common for women to just share an alpha male, having a piece of him when they can, rather than pair up for life with a mate on the same attractiveness level as them. A woman who is a 6 (socially) would have ended up with a man who is a 6 or a 7 in the past. Now, the women who is a 6 (socially) goes from bad boy to bad boy because she doesn't have to settle down, she doesn't have to settle for the guy who is a 6. Why should she?

This means that our man who is a 6, who came from a bad home with an abusive mother, finds himself in a dating scene in which he has no hope at all. Who is going to look at the needy 6 who wants validation from women when they can have the 8 with that dangerous stare and the leather jacket?

You left out:

Dead beat fathers.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

The all seeing and knowing GBM. He has the exact same information as I do, but he magically knows more.

Aye, I know what I don't know. It's always good to know what you don't know.

And, you preach about how the left using shaming tactics to get people to bend to their will. And there you are using it. You are bigger hypocrit than the people you mock every day.

Please show me where any of my statements with respect to "shaming" that could be in any way construed to be activism for social or political changes.

When you actually wrong someone, the decent thing to do is to apologise. Failing to do so is indecent.

I owe Zarnicate nothing. His story is anecdotal, and only one side. I wasn't even referring to him, but more to the idea that men have it worse than women.

Bald faced lies.

If he is being treated unfairly, he should approach the courts for relief. Replacement of his bad attorney should be first order of business.

You never did explain why it is inconceivable for the court system itself to be working against him...

Isn't it ironic that you are about go back onto my ignore list. I actually agree with most of what you say, but you double down on the nonsense in this thread. A discussion without the stereotyping would have been great. But the incels always ruin it for everyone.

 

[technofool]

The all seeing and knowing GBM. He has the exact same information as I do, but he magically knows more.

As usual some truly horrible ideas but that first one is one of the rare true ones. Even a broken clock is right 2x a day. Now keep adding everybody who disagrees with you to your ignore list and soon you wont see any posts.

 

[Ancalagon]

You left out:

Dead beat fathers.

I never had a dead beat father, although I did have a father who died early. Sure, that plays a role. Fathers exert a positive role in the upbringing of a child, when they are around. Something our society doesn't value anymore, basically seeing mothers as imperative but fathers as optional. Who needs a family unit? Just have single moms raise everyone, it will turn out fine!

 

[FapCop]

I have also learned to stay away from "Proud" single mommies

Yeah, spare me that "a real man would" bullschyte. No fecking way.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Yeah, spare me that "a real man would" bullschyte. No fecking way.

Vaguely related but I've started noticing a good number of people posting a whole lot of bollocks on the boob about #aminext and all that and it's starting to get a bit more than annoying...

 

[Emjay]

Yeah, spare me that "a real man would" bullschyte. No fecking way.

I agree. We should all stay away with people with baggage. Single moms. Single dads. They are all the same.

 

[FapCop]

"During a divorce, one of the spouses is often ordered by a court to pay maintenance while the divorce proceedings are being finalised. This is called an interim order.

Sometimes spouses appeal these interim orders, causing delays and leaving their former partner and children without money to support themselves.

The Constitutional Court has put an end to this practice. It has upheld the prohibition against appealing an order for interim maintenance pending divorce proceedings."

ConCourt makes significant interim maintenance ruling on divorce proceedings

The Constitutional Court has upheld the prohibition against appealing interim maintenance orders, pending divorce proceedings.

www.parent24.com

I went through a divorce. The courts are always in the woman's favor.
Her lawyer immediately applied for rule 43. No letter asking for an amount or anything just rule 43 needs to apply.
During the divorce my lawyer also advised not to even bother fighting the custody battle as all that is going to happen is, it is going to cost an arm and a leg and the court always rules in favor of the woman. Only grant the man custody if the woman is a danger to the child, drug abuser or unable to provide for the child. (friend did the custody battle and lost..arm and a leg)

Years later I was jobless and applied to have the maintenance reduced as I had no income and was living off family etc.
Go to court on the day. Ex doesn't pitch. Under normal circumstances they should then grant in my favor but no what does the court do they phone the ex and wait until she arrives. If it was the reverse would that happen...no.

Now some crazy b*tch thinks she is entitled to R60k per month and you can't appeal the ruling.
She is living in luxury when the man is eating scraps and can hardly get by in a month. (not referring to this particular article but friend's situation)

So bottom line gents just don't get married. Your screwed.

Happily Married = She is happy and you are married.

Saw this exact wall of text posted on reddit a few times

 

[My_King]

Yeah, spare me that "a real man would" bullschyte. No fecking way.

It's more the "Your not my dad" and "My kid comes first".
You will never be really part of the family.

At least the women can't scream "You destroyed my body" when you get in a fight.

Guess pros and cons need to be done.

 

[rambo919]

You believe men cannot control themselves when they don't have sex. So, please tell us more about that.

No actually you said that not me, I said there was a loss of control..... I never said the loss was total, I even qualified by showing how there are degrees of loss. You are stramanning heavily here, possibly attacking me for things that other people have said.... ironincally you are are doing a much better job of "us-vs-them" atm than the MRA's you seem to hate so much.

 

[rambo919]

It's more the "Your not my dad" and "My kid comes first".
You will never be really part of the family.

At least the women can't scream "You destroyed my body" when you get in a fight.

Guess pros and cons need to be done.

It did not use to be that way, before single mothers were a rare thing and mostly when you married one the children legally became yours.... there was no third wheel father or mother except as a ghost. I have yet to actually see the great new world promiscuity and dating instead of courtship and socially enforced monogamy promised us.....

 

[Emjay]

No actually you said that not me, I said there was a loss of control..... I never said the loss was total, I even qualified by showing how there are degrees of loss. You are stramanning heavily here, possibly attacking me for things that other people have said.... ironincally you are are doing a much better job of "us-vs-them" atm than the MRA's you seem to hate so much.

It depends on the environment actually, men need sex to correctly function, their response to the loss of control that comes from this appatite not being fed is the issue. Some react so badly they get violent others simply loose a degree of motor control (i.e. they get twitchy).... this IS a real thing. No it's not an excuse that's not what I am saying.

It's more the "Your not my dad" and "My kid comes first".
You will never be really part of the family.

At least the women can't scream "You destroyed my body" when you get in a fight.

Guess pros and cons need to be done.

I have the perfect solution for you. Get a vasectomy. You will never have baggage or have a woman "rape divorce" you.

 

[rambo919]

I have the perfect solution for you. Get a vasectomy. You will never have baggage or have a woman "rape divorce" you.

Read it again a few times and you might see the "some" qualifyer which is completely different to "all", I even said specifically that I'm not excusing bad behaviour..... ur definitely either trolling now or WAY too emotionally vested in.... something.