Men are great
i just want humans to start treating animals equally. im tired of all the humans hating them and wanting to hunt and kill them
we should all be living on earth equally and we should respect animals and protect them
Comment has been collapsed.
Keyword being if here because most of them simply can't.
Comment has been collapsed.
It does because your argument doesn't make any sense.
Comment has been collapsed.
We may not be able to treat them like equals, but we definitely can treat them with more respect. That alone would go a looong way.
Comment has been collapsed.
I understood it as "treat all animals equally" meaning treating a pig no different than a dog.
Isn't that exactly what "having respect" means though? Not being an asshole to someone?
Comment has been collapsed.
So what? They still all feel pain and want to live. In fact, pigs are as intelligent as a toddler. But I see that with those beliefs of yours, this discussion is going nowhere.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right, except a predetor is part of the natural cycle you mention and a really butcher isn't. While predetors definitely need to kill their prey in order to survive, humans simply do not and that's a proven fact. Humans just expect everything to be theirs which simply isn't the case.
Comment has been collapsed.
So how do you figure animals get their proteins, huh? Guess what, plants produce proteins, did you know that?
Basically, you don't care about animals but are trying to tell me you suddenly care about plants' lives? Get a grip on yourself.
Comment has been collapsed.
Uh, yeah it does work for us? You literally say it yourself, they are pests in some places. Cows, pigs, foxes, hell, even bugs simply aren't, so no need to kill them at all. Contrary to animals, plants don't have a central nervous system, so none of them feel pain but "OHMYGOD what about plans tho??". It's just always super amusing how people eating flesh care more about plants' wellbeing than animals'. Always makes me chuckle because you guys never seem to realise how absurd that is.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fucking hell, you really don't get it, do you? It's about killing as little as humanly possible meaning choosing your food for which as few animals as possible had to die. There will always be a bug squished or an insect killed one way or another but it's about reducing it to a bare minimum, not about which animal is worth saving.
Comment has been collapsed.
A simple search via google would have given you enough proof, sorry for assuming you'd be clever enough to do this yourself if you really wanted to - which I get, you don't. There really is no use to post proof if you're that stubborn to begin with. And since you now clearly stated that you "don't care", there's nothing more to say for me here anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
true that futile mistreatment could (and should) be avoided in what is the meat production process, but tbh to "humanize" animals sounds just as bad :/
Comment has been collapsed.
In my country:
-Women have a less salary in global (is this because of part-time or discrimination or both or other reason?)
-But they can go on retreat globaly before men cause they have 2 years bonus per children. This cause a man who have a wife 2 years young (that's globaly in that sense) who begin to work at the same age with 2 children. Wife will go in retreat 2 years before the man and she will die after (in global). So men retreat is shorter thnan women in global cause they die older cause of natural capacities and this increase the fact. So this is part change since 3 years cause we can split the "bonus" in 2 part but this is optional and not known.
-For the homeless, this can be explain by lot of structure that take care of women homeless. Men can only go to standard structure for all. So places are more difficult to have.
-For some people, in the future you will have a lot more girls who continue studies than men cause o lot of reasons (influence of the other, studies not calibrate for boys who more give up, blind test done with same exam with different name and different grade in advantage of girls, ...) So only future will show us if it's right.
I'm for integral equities. So I hate when you use your gender, ethnie, sexual orientation, nationality or money to have more right than another group.
The good fact is to have all the same right effectively and no discrimination at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
could you possibly explain what you mean by "global" / "globally" - im a little confused by reading your post.
I presume you mean "broadly" or something similar, but as you have used the term frequently... im just not sure.
(if English isnt your first language, dont be embarrassed / say sorry - no need - just trying to understand more clearly).
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing stops us other than the judgement of other people. This happens to anyone outside of the norm when it comes to fashion. Trendsetters (and those who challenge standards) have to endure a lot of crap to get to a point where people leave them be.
If you want to wear fashions outside of the norm for guys without being ridiculed, you were born a little too early. Right now we have all kinds of people pushing those boundaries but there's a ton of resistance. If you were born a few extra generations later, you might have had more options. \:3/
Nobody has put in enough groundwork for our culture to accept too much deviation on that front.
Comment has been collapsed.
In that way of clothes.
Men can't have short at work as Women can have mini dress when the weather is warm.
Why? Cause we can't cause it's not the way we have to be at work like it's codified.
So men have have more to endure hot weather.
We can only try with kilt but you need to have guts ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
The only person stopping you from wearing a skirt, is you.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can try if you live in France. I think it's not a good idea....
Comment has been collapsed.
The same thing had been thinking women in EU and USA when some of them started to fight for voting rights. Or ability to wear trousers. And so on.
Change always seems impossible at first.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm curious what happen on my carrier, which I don't care ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
You do you. Wear whatever the fuck you want! I do agree from buying clothes for my partner there isn't much range. I do love beards though, its very attractive so grooming is great for men :D
Ps is this you? I actually don't wear makeup. I'm very tomboyish really haha
Comment has been collapsed.
I think the phrase we're all looking for is "It's there, you just have to OWN IT"? Haha.
I suppose there are kilts, or failing all else, taking up clothing design. What starts as a hobby might turn into something awesome~
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem with gender equality issues for all demographics, is that this desire for change is usually projected outwards along with all the criticism and blame. Yet quite often we find that even the most passionate activists frequently fall into the trap of behavior and thought patterns that they hate in their enemy tribe.
In particular, its a source of a lot of sour grumping for me, that so many people who claim to be about mens rights and lash out angry at how culture judges and dehumanises us, but then when they feel even slightly frustrated with some random gentleman, they are all too eager to call them virgins, neckbeards, autistic, 'forever alones', white knights and any other regurgitative meme they have on hand. The most vocal activists in all subjects tend to just want to lash out to feel good, but don't actually care about the cause or the effects their constant warmongering has. Feminism has a particularly baffling variant of this within activists who are effectively 'sex negative' and talk down at grown women who aren't ashamed of just living their own lives.
The internet is a particularly toxic playground given the prevalence of social media, where it's easy to build convenient tribe-appeasing strawmen out of cherrypicked snapshot croppings blended with memelets, and any tired but wellmeaning user can one-click share a passively destructive message without realising. The number of times I've seen cathartic posts circulating in the various equality enthusiastic circles turn out to be deliberately twisted or dishonest hot takes done just to boost themselves within the tribe? It's pretty fucking depressing. So often the people who claim to be about progress are overly eager to cannibalise their allies for the slightest misstep. Echo chambers make the most ferocious piranha tanks I suppose.
In an ideal world, the people interested in equality (be it from a man, woman or others perspective) would band together and find a way to tow our disparate states of being into one vaguely cohesive culture. Sadly, that ideal world is kept from happening by the fact it would take work, and we would each have to burn a lot of bridges while cleaning our respective houses of the passively toxic mentalities we have left set in. The world demands a lot from us, with constant work, home maintenance, family care and so on. To then engage our little free time in pursuits that are inherently filled with needless hostility and prejudice is a big undertaking, and even in the internet communities with the best intentions it can be really like walking through a minefield when daring to dissent or even open adult discussion. I recently got completely dragged in a Discord chat for daring to suggest that misandry exists (on the basis that nobody is immune to prejudice, completely disregarding discussions of institutionalised misandry, etc). It immediately resulted in people dropping their disguises and spamming their favourite memes in a lovely witchburning ritual. It stung like hell, but people like this really shouldn't be considered friends or allies by any means. Red flags suck, but we need to remember to always pay attention to them, even if the people flying those red flags are "good people, maybe they're just venting".
All cultures and societies are change resistant until a critical mass of dissatisfied (and open) members are reached. Even then there is always suppression. Even MLK Junior was framed as a troublemaker all the way up to and even after his historical success. It is only in retrospect that we consider his efforts an obvious good thing. Yes, sometimes progress requires a conflict, but we should always favor the civil approach first, especially where our peers are concerned. Before we have any hope of converting or disarming any supposed enemy, we have to attend to the knife we hold at our own throats.
Comment has been collapsed.
This compliment means so much more given your avatar. For all the grim stuff the internet reminds us of, we can always count on purring creatures to lift our spirits. Even if in this case it's a purring pink horse I suppose, heh.
Comment has been collapsed.
Glad you appreciate it. It has become something of a poster child for all things cute and fluffy on the internet. As for me, I sense irony. Incidentally, it does not purr, it dances.
Comment has been collapsed.
Seconded.
Terrific post.
But, you know, it's just how it is. The normal craziness of life, and everything. But you seem like someone who has already figured that one out. There isn't much that we can do, you, me, or anyone else for that matter. I know, it sucks, but it is what it is. Just live and let live, that's what I always say..
Comment has been collapsed.
You're a female? Then that's none of your business, like feminism is none of our business as men, and if it fucks the society and fails hard it's not our problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
In a civilised society, issues of inequality for ANY demographic is everyone's business. Our culture is carried on the back of all participants, and the lawmakers and policy writers are lifted up through governance of our selection.
If you don't want to get involved or discuss matters, then that's entirely up to you, but consider this a friendly reminder that you do not speak on the behalf of all men and it would sure as hell be silly if you were just drawing lines in the sand, saying "boys on that side, girls on this side". We're way beyond the point of trying to separate out demographics and keep them in hermetically sealed social containers :P
Comment has been collapsed.
That's exactly what feminism has done, and it's too late. Now you can live in fantasyland, but feminism (like SJW activists in general) have started to create a sexual segregation that men can't criticise, it will and is making women go backward and there's nothing we can do against it by virtue of nature (or at least society, as influence by women and feminist).
However as men we have the responsibility to emancipate ourself from both the inequality feminism as further deepened but at least provoking an awareness, and women will not help men, quite the contrary that's why it is IMPORTANT to not consider women in the task of emancipation because that's exactly what makes men cowards or hypocrits going backwards too.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, there are outspoken branches of feminism that draw lines in the sand and socially discriminate.
However you chose of your own free will to tell the OP that this subject is none of her business. That was not an act of feminism. That's all on you. Also consider that feminism is not entirely made out of women, and not every woman supports the whole modern pop-feminism thing either. While the subject of certain (internet based) feminist branches creating insular social garbage based on gender (accidentally enabling and reinforcing passive sexism) is something worth discussing, it is an entirely different subject from your original remark on the OP, so be careful about the shifting goalposts.
You also need to make up your mind. A woman made this subject in the interest of men, and you told her it's none of her business, but then during this backpedaling from my reply, you then say that women will not help men. Why would you promote inaction like this, if you are dissatisfied with the state of things? Shutting down discourse out of kneejerk reflex based on sex, and then defaulting to the feminism bogeyman when it is only tangentally related just makes you look like you're running on autopilot and not really thinking things through :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Never said I was a feminism, I'm against the current feminism because it has pushed women backward. And the reason it happened is because women choose too, and there's nothing as men that we can do about it no matter whether it's because the vast majority/mainstream of current feminism which has shut-down men or because it's not up to men to emancipate women.
However on the topic of the OP, yes sure there are many things to talk about relating to the masculin or male conditions: for the same reason cited above it's none of women business, and it's up to men to think, deconstruct, criticise and emancipate themselves from the male condition.The first reason why? Because women are actually mainly the ones who enable and reinforce the masculin condition. Yup, the same way men have enabled and lots of time reinforce the feminine condition WHICH feminism and women in general try or pretend to try emancipating themselves from, men causes require men to stop listening to women.
But the deeper reason why, it's the deep hidden truth: while there are of course women enabling/reinforcing what feminist call "toxic masculinity", those women who pretend to address men issues have no fucking idea of the condition or what it means and will in fact push men towards emasculating themselves. Like nice guys, like "men" feminists, and this is exactly what men don't need to emancipate themselves in a true way.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're not wrong, but also, I think you two here are not really disagreeing with each other, you both just have not realized it yet :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Not saying we do, but I just want to avoid counter-productive and time-wasting approaches with these kinds of topic, I've been there...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah you have no idea what ad-hominem means. Me arguing against the context and stand-point from which OP speaks is actually the argument against this thread being made. For many reasons and arguments that I could also describe.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I ever have a son then it will be my business. I want to protect my children's future.
Comment has been collapsed.
The truth is whether you have a son or daughter, it's the same business. Don't think that men will be able to emancipate themselves if women don't, the reverse being true as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
Men create societies. You don't see women rulers turn a podunk country into a major power without the efforts of men. Other than that, are capable of being basically equal with some effort from both sides.
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't see women rulers turn a podunk country into a major power without the efforts of men.
But we see male rulers turn "podunk" countries into major powers without the efforts of women?
Where are these all-male societies? How on earth do they function?
Comment has been collapsed.
I am frankly amazed you brought up the idea of all-male societies.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am frankly amazed you ignored most of recorded history.
Comment has been collapsed.
The recorded history where there were always women leaders who created empires without men? You seem to not help yourself twisting things around.
Comment has been collapsed.
You were the one who claimed the existence of these single-sex empires, that male rulers somehow forged "major powers" without the efforts of women within their society.
Simply asking for clarification, as most of recorded history reads otherwise.
The recorded history where there were always women leaders
Never said "always," but there were plenty, yes. Libraries are free, check it out.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are funny. You keep avoiding coming up with an answer about women rulers.
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean, what, are you demanding that I list for you every single female ruler in history? Because again, that information is freely available and would have taken the same effort to confirm as the comment you just posted. You can deny history all you want, but that doesn’t make it any less true.
Therefore, you’re either being willfully ignorant or annoyingly argumentative. I’d argue that the onus is on you, as it was you who initially claimed that no such female historical presence existed. You are literally arguing with verified, recorded history and yet for some reason you’re the one demanding “proof”?
As I previously noted, this information is freely available via local libraries and online. I can’t even begin to source this for you, as the topic of “female rulers” is incredibly broad. You are welcome to educate yourself, you don’t have to rely on everyone else to explain your mistaken history to you. To willfullly do otherwise is pure ignorance.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
so he is right because? it black pigeon speaks, he is no different then any other ideologue, he look at a result and tailor the explanations to fit his world view.
For every stupid thing a woman done in history I can find you a man who did that also
https://youtu.be/epdF_4gqRj8
Comment has been collapsed.
When you have 99% of the world's rulers being men, that would be easy to do.
Quantity and equality.
Comment has been collapsed.
pretty sure he was talking politic there. what makes of a country a major world power is either the military power or the industry power, two category historically almost entirely runned by men, especially the former
Comment has been collapsed.
Efforts of reproduction, family and home/nest/whatever building, yes, absolutely.
You are correct on all counts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right. So if I painstakingly list every successful female ruler in history, you’ll somehow see the light?
Doubtful. Because again, you could have looked all of this up yourself. But instead, you’d rather watch close-minded echo chamber YouTube videos and demand “PROOF!!11one” from anyone who denies your claims.
You don’t care about history, you just love being controversial. Feel dumb for even trying, so I’m done with this bait.
Comment has been collapsed.
TBH, the guy deserving the credit for all this golden age shebang is Francis Drake :)
As well as the English shipbuilders, the English sailors and seamen, and the English guys who stole the metallurgy stuff for the cannons from the Austrians.
Oh, and of course, the weather. Never forget that storm. Thanks to the weather.
Comment has been collapsed.
True. But a good leader knows how to make the best use of what s(he)'s got to work with. Credit where it is due.
And yes, that was one lucky storm :)
Comment has been collapsed.
This was awesome. Thank you. I'd say something like "dude, that took balls, " but yeah... 😏
Seriously, as someone that considers themselves a Menimist and feminist, thanks. So many people are confused about what actual equality is. You're not. Keep fighting the good fight.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is some serious discussion, many people will agree or not. But I know you are right, whitelisted. But I think we are still not ready to accept equality in all countries, because accepting a revolutionair change is hard and takes time.
Comment has been collapsed.
People seem to think that people who want gender equality only concern themselves with females which is... not the case. Men suffer a lot from hyper masculine ideals. Men fear speaking out about sexual and physical abuse from women because there's social ideas that says that means they're 'weak' so they'd rather keep it to themselves than speak out about it. Men fear expressing anything considered 'feminine' because, again, its seen as weak. And the worst thing is its usually other men perpetuating this because they have it so ingrained in their minds that a man should be as masculine as possible. I've seen sexual abuse cases about boys being sexually abused by their female teachers and other men in the comments saying how 'lucky' they are, which is really sickening. On the other side of the coin its peripherally degrading to women because its portraying the idea that 'feminine' traits are 'weak'.
Comment has been collapsed.
What you are describing, "toxic masculinity" is the product of both feminism and women. I can't stand hypocritical men being feminists, hopefully they won't have children (because the result is always worse).
Gender equality is the opposite of feminism, period, everybody is starting to understand that. That's why men should be concerned with their own, not feminism, and being seen "weak" is the result of women judgement which a man has to emancipate from.
Comment has been collapsed.
Gender equality is the opposite of feminism
You mean extreme feminism? I agree, but then you should have added "extreme manism", too.
and being seen "weak" is the result of women judgement which a man has to emancipate from
If a man is treated badly by women (we don't even need the extreme of abuse), guys (especcially machos and wannabes) are making fun of him, because he's weak in their eyes. No women's judgement needed there.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's no such thing as "extreme feminism" like there's no such thing as "extreme communism or nazism": unlike one of feminist's favorite argument which is that somehow you can choose your movement's flavour like an ice cream, a movement is represent by it's major discourse and it's final impact on society. Today, mainstream feminist is already extreme feminism.
As for treatment and judgement, yes men who are prisoner of their condition will of course "make fun" or "provoke" but it doesn't matter, for both men it starts with women judgement and how they act or more importantly, choose these men according to their own conditions and criterias.
If tomorrow most women or feminism started to say that only men who are capable of crushing the head of a baby are manly and desirable, then men will start doing it. You do not believe me? That's actually the definition of extreme matriarch society, like say, Sparta...however the day most women start to say they want a normal man who is confident in both his strenght but also weaknesses/fragility, then men will follow suit...that's where it all starts.
And that's why I say that the first step to helping men emancipate themselves, is to be independent of the need for women company or their judgement.
Comment has been collapsed.
The whole word is gender biased to start with, so it can never be about true equalism. Or would someone believe a Chauvinist who fights for equality under that name?
http://www.rebellesociety.com/2015/12/04/why-feminism-cant-be-replaced-by-equalism-or-humanism/
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, "equalism" is not a word, it's egalitarian, but basically egalitarism is so complex (as in we're far from understanding enough to set concrete ground rule) that we have to start somewhere. Fem-inism succeeding once, in the 70s, and then went completely haywire, but still it gave us keys of understanding before fucking women situation. Men need the same, before we talk about equality.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's what I hate about English, people claiming something is not a word when it very clearly is. Stop sucking up to the french, people want to be equals, not egals. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
If you see feminism itself as already exaggerated, ok. All isms are bad. Reminds me of this nice song. In German we rather call it emancipation instead of feminism, so that's okay for me. In the end it's only terminology.
You already gave examples for chauvinist behaviour in the post below (beat-ups, rough/sexist jokes, drinking games etc.). This happens even more in social groups only consisting of boys/men. And young boys (6-10 years old) aren't that influenced by (female) society yet, they don't need to impress girls at that age. I was never asked by my mother or a girlfriend to do a test of courage or to beat somebody up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why do you think young boys are the least susceptible to chauvinist attitudes? Yup they're not that influenced by women and the image of men that they cater to yet. And of course a women don't ask you to be courageous, beat someone or even be yourself, they just mostly emasculate their boys when they say anything.
Comment has been collapsed.
So why should a young boy have a chauvinist attitude against other boys if it's caused by female expectations according to you? Doesn't make any sense. It's territorial behaviour. And this is continued when boys become men, but the focus changes and girls become one object of desire. So yes, men behave chauvinistic, but out of their own nature. Girls/women aren't needed to provoke it.
Comment has been collapsed.
This has nothing to do with nature. Well not totally. If we are reverting back to "nature" then let's stop talking about equality, women in the kitchen/cave guarding children and men chasing for food/money, period. OR by human nature we are to be independent, in fact emancipated from these arbitrary rules, but it require stopping the bullshit about men/women.
Comment has been collapsed.
Before we get influenced by family, society and law we're just animals driven by instincts based on our DNA. And territorial behaviour belongs to this. Now I'm still waiting for a reason why you can blame women/girls for things boys already do without them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure why you think women are the only ones perpetuating this when I already stated I see men putting down other men for "weak" and "feminine" traits. Its not that women don't do this to men as well, but men feel pressured by other men to be hyper masculine just as much. And its because its an early, learned behavior from both parents and society.
Comment has been collapsed.
See my reply above, I reply to that precisely.
I'm sorry but besides when I was a teenage in which case masculinity was limited to roast jokes, who can drink more, some beat-up and more importantly, who can get the girl, the whole of masculinity both for men who are prisoner of their condition/image and those who want to emancipate from it to be their true self, is in large majority conditioned by women attitude and judgement towards them.
Classic exemple: when you're a young boy, you are way more susceptible to be abuse, not necessarily physically but actually morally and psychologically by older women, for exemple telling you that girls are special snowflake, that you should respect more than other for no reasons, and be arbitrarily nice to or "offer" flower for them to like you. Until you realise that being nice is the precise reason you are alone and get crap, at which point you have to choice but to align with what works, which is being an asshole because that's actually the only way to get women, and then if you're smarter/more driven the real problem starts: you actually want to be yourself instead of pretending false conditioned masculin BS, except women won't encourage nor will they be attracted to that.
That's why the first step of emancipating from the masculine condition to become a true-self, is absolutely the opposite of listening to women or even caring about getting them. Because the only thing that affords you the freedom to be yourself and get the girl, is to accomplish yourself in something, which if you want to do it while being happy means you have to be emancipated and know who you are first.
Comment has been collapsed.
This just sounds like you're bitter over not getting a girlfriend. And it also makes you sounds like you're claiming men are mental slaves to what women want them to be, which in turn makes them sound very weak-minded. You fail to realize little boys are typically raised by two parents with a father who ingrains in their mind that they need to be a breadwinner and that boys are supposed to protect girls at a young age and shoulder all this responsibility on a child.
Women have no obligation to be with a man just because they are nice to them. And the same goes for women who are nice to men or women who make overly sexual advances on men. If that makes them uncomfortable or they are not feeling the same way, any human being has every right to say "no".
Comment has been collapsed.
You're missing the point, or rather probably the references. But you're getting there: yes, masculin and feminine conditions are a vicious circle that goes back and forth. You can go all around if you know enough about feminism and, well masculine condition, and you'll realise: it all indeed starts with women. Not by random magic or even choice or conspiracy from women, but by nature and interiorisation of women.
As for men being nice entitling them to anything: yes, that's why young boys being told they should be nice are being psychologically abused by older women or feminists into being alone and miserable. Then explain to me why being the opposite of nice always guarantees you to have a woman? Yup, as I said, if we were to listen to what women want we would repeat the same mistakes nazis did...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, as I said, if we were to listen to what women want we would repeat the same mistakes nazis did...
Comment has been collapsed.
I know, and yet...read history books on feminism during the period preceding the war and krash...
Comment has been collapsed.
Women don't date you because you said a nice thing and gave them flowers. It's about intellectual and emotional conversation that separates you from other men. You have to be nice AND interesting.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yup, that's why this thread is not your business. I was referring to obvious situation when you grow as a man, and you come spilling BS: "being nice" is what young boys are abused by older women into thinking, and then wonder why they're alone...until they realise that's exactly why. In fact even feminist now consider "nice guy" to be fucked-up pervert because of course they always attack and bully fragile men.
This has nothing to with being interesting, women do not care for interesting either...boy, I don't know what you would teach your son, but he'd be miserable.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm I'm guessing you are single. You seem very negative. The reason I'm going out with my boyfriend is because he is funny, interesting and nice... well that's a very generic simple list but anything else is too personal to share to a stranger.
Can you give me an example where a nice guy has been called a pervert? I don't understand. Being nice is just a good trait everyone should have lol
Comment has been collapsed.
One word: feminism. I'm surprised and not surprised that you don't know what I'm talking about since you made this thread, you might have been spared. Now just type "nice guys are" in Google and see the suggestions and results...
Most women or girls are disgusted by "nice" guys, that's one of the earliest moral/psychological abuse on boys when they're told to be. I'm sorry I don't believe you got with your BF because he's nice, interesting/funny maybe.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah and if you also type "can I eat" the first autocomplete is period. What are you trying to prove...
I'm literally a girl. I know what I'm attracted to. How others treat me can result in a relationship along with other traits like intelligence and interest. You'll forever be single the way you are if you think that way.
Comment has been collapsed.
But I'm not forever single, I hook-up like anybody because I understood how it works and also I'm starting to be popular in my field. You said you want to "protect your son" if you have one...well your answer about the results in Google is a ditto about how much BS you are pretending.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you are just "hooking up" you are still single. You'll have a sad life that way. One night stands don't equal relationships.
I said if I had one not that I did. Learn to read. If you are making an argument based on Google searches then you're an idiot. So I'm not wasting my time with you. Cya!
Comment has been collapsed.
in north america we have:
animals rights
LGBTQMENTALILLNESS rights
women's rights
plants rights
insects rights
cooking pans rights
then lastly men's rights (if it exist)
Comment has been collapsed.
I told my cooking pans get back in the kitchen where they belong.
Comment has been collapsed.
End sexist discrimination in the child and family law courts.
TL:DR: there isn't discrimination actually
other source
Work to reverse the loss of boys and young men in the educational system
Since you seems to like sources. Even if the title seems to go in your direction, reading the article will show you that it's a more complex issue than just a war sex, but also "Men continue to dominate subjects such as engineering and technology, etc..." and "boys work less hard at school".
Provide equal reproductive rights to both sexes.
My bad on this, I didn't understand what you meant, but i thought this would be a nice addition to your collection of sources. Men's pill exist, but they can tolerate side effects that women have to endure since years.
Repeal VAWA
"Although the title of the Act and the titles of its sections refer to victims of domestic violence as women, the operative text is gender-neutral, providing coverage for male victims as well". The document itself is not the problem, it's the application behind.
"The VAWA is a giant piece of codified legal sexism" you say ? You don't even know what you are talking about.
About your sources at the end:
Satistics: This doesn't include attempt, where women are twice as likely to actually try to suicide. It just that men use more radical method.
Source: bottom of the page. Yep, it US stats, I could not find for UK quickly, but I still found this from the same source than you which explain that it's toxic masculinity which actually make them commit suicide. Yes, men die because they feel pressure from OTHER MEN.
Also, it cool be cool to read your own articles: the third you post is about male privilege, which doesn't really fit through your post. The guy explains that he got shit on because he accidentally signed with his female coworker's name.
Videos: Gender Wage Gap do exists. Sorry, I'll prefer to trust the "Office for National Statistics" of GB than a video made by PragerU, an organization founded by a conservative US guy who endorse Trump and conservative values. same for the 3rd video, made by the same orga.
Finally, the last video is made by a MGTOW, men promoting total absence of female in their life. If you think that's an healthy mind set, you absolutely not for equality between sexes.
(Disclaimer : YEAH NOT ALL MEN I KNOW, it's to simplify the redaction, if you don't feel concerned by what I'm saying about men, move along then, congratz you are not an asshole).
I certainly don't say that men don't have bias against them. I just want to point that actually most of these issues lies in the fact that men are toxic between themselves. Men want to be viewed as powerful, but also want the part of the cake which come with being the victims.
Men are not allowed to show emotions, because emotions is supposedly a female feature, and being a female sucks.
By advocating "female power", the point is not to make "female > male", the point is to make men understand that being female is not a problem, and therefore you can sometimes act "like a woman" without it being a degrading thing. No need to deconstruct genders or something, just make them equal and it will benefit everyone.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't have time to properly reply but...
All I will say is not once did I say these were credible sources. I've experienced discrimination of males from a close outside view so I wanted to post. I'm not an expert so yes I don't know what I'm talking about. However...
Don't point out bad sources when you have used The Guardian yourself. Any educated person knows they have heavily biased.
That is all I will say on the matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
Jeez, I wrote a comment and it disappear... Let's go to write it again !
WTF ? Who post sources, and then goes "Don't look too much into it guys". Why put them in the first place them ??
Any educated person knows they have heavily biased.
Any educated person don't throw some sources like that. Sources are supposed to be there to support your claims, not BE your claims. You just did "Oh, men commit suicide, oh they get sad inside, I saw it with my eyes, I swear.". No ! If you want to talk about suicide, then go for it ! Explain how, explain WHY. No one care in research what is happening, we care why it's happening like that. Making observations is the easy part, drawing your conclusion is the main work. It's like when you do a presentation: if you put a graph but don't talk about it except "you can look and i'll go to the next slide" then it has nothing to do there.
Also, don't confused "being biased" and "having a political orientation which is slightly off center".
Also, I would have like to give you sources like the Daily Mail (most right wing newspaper) but they just don't care. All they do is give statistics, but explaining nothing. They don't even talk about male bias. 1. 2. But here have some BBC coming to the same conclusion as The Guardian. I guess they are biased too.
Listen, I understand that you tried to do something here. I agree that males are also victims of the "gender war". But what makes me mad with your post is that:
- at best, you bring people to the cause, but for bad reasons (really, MGTOW ??)
- at worse, they realize that what is presented here is poorly done, and deny the cause...
Comment has been collapsed.
All I will say is not once did I say these were credible sources. I've experienced discrimination of males from a close outside view so I wanted to post. I'm not an expert so yes I don't know what I'm talking about. However...
Don't point out bad sources when you have used The Guardian yourself. Any educated person knows they have heavily biased.
Wow... that's, uh, something else.
Just commenting to make sure you know that it wasn't the OP alone because I don't blacklist people for their opinions, no matter how ill-informed; however this post bleeds masterclass fucking stupidity of the glue-huffing kind, and I ABSOLUTELY blacklist for that.
I'd hate to be complicit wasting even a minute of your time on recreational gaming when that further delays you from ever perusing the education and reasoning development of which you're so clearly bereft. You've been so harmfully deprived--and even more cruelly deluded.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for this insightful post. I really appreciate someone advocating for improvements in our society when it comes to gender issues, particularly on these forums, and the giveaway of course! I do not understand how so many people can be ignorant to women's plight. Such is the privilege of some I suppose. Keep up the good work! <3
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, it's a giveaways website, so I thought it would be a nice touch to have one in the thread ^^.
It's really a tough issue, so I guess sometimes you have to jump in the mess and try to speak with people. I'm pretty confident that it will be sorted out one day, but if we can make it happen sooner, let's go !
Comment has been collapsed.
"End sexist discrimination in the child and family law courts."
"TL:DR: there isn't discrimination actually"
"other source"
Have you actually READ your source?
According to the report, in 96 per cent of cases, the parents who apply to court for “access” to their children are men, with the average case taking between six months and two years to complete. In just under half of these cases, dads will win the right to have their children stay with them overnight, with the most common arrangement being every other weekend. Just under a quarter will be restricted to seeing their children in the daytime and the remaining quarter will be given little or no opportunity to be the daddy.
According to the University of Warwick, the lead researcher on the project, Dr Maebh Harding, looked at this data and “concluded that contact applications by fathers were in fact overwhelmingly successful”.
The basis for this claim is that 88 per cent of dads who applied to court for contact with their kids were awarded some kind of access. For example, 10 per cent were restricted to “indirect contact” with their children via phone, post or Skype; a further five per cent were only allowed to see their children in the company of a supervisor and 23 per cent were permitted to spend a few daytime hours with their children.
I don’t know about you, but when I think of an “overwhelmingly successful” parent I don’t picture someone who is neither trusted to be alone with their children, nor allowed to wake up in the same house as them.
The fact is, we live in a society where it is the accepted norm that women should demand equality in the public sphere, while maintaining special privileges in the private sphere.
And probably the most sacred of those privileges is motherhood, where the reproductive slogan, “my body my rights”, gives birth to a deep sense of lifelong entitlement that can be summed up in the maternal mantra, “my baby my rights”.
This presumption that women own their children obviously has a biological basis, which has become hardwired in our collective psyche and written into our laws. In 2015 it is still the case that mothers and fathers do not have equal rights. As the former Equal Opportunities Commissioner, Duncan Fisher, explains:
“In UK law, a father can only be a father if the mother approves him. She can do this in two ways – marry him or invite him to sign the birth certificate. If neither of these happens, he is not the father until the family court approves him. A man has to be vetted by the mother or the state before he is allowed to be a father.”
The entire system of parenting in the UK is set up around the presumption that mother knows best and that when parents separate there should be a primary parent (nearly always the mother) and a secondary parent (nearly always the father).
The role which is reserved for the secondary parent is unfair, unequal and for many, a deeply unfulfilling way to experience parenthood.
The family courts may well apply their rules fairly, but this is not the point. The main issue for separated dads is that the rules that shape family life in the UK are unfair and unequal and any system of law based on those rules can only ever be biased against men.
TLDR: Author of the stury has the opinion that indirect access to your child is an "overwhelming success".
NO SANE PERSON IN THE WORLD WOULD CONSIDER TO ONLY SEE YOUR CHILD THROUGH A PHONE OR SKYPE A SUCCESS
Comment has been collapsed.
HAHA, OP insult me of being an uneducated person because I link The Guardian and I get answered with The Telegraph. OP, where are you ? Come tell him that his sources are biased !
Also, since I could link you The Times and it would just be a battle of who can find the most newspaper, let's go into the report itself.
You can see in section 2.2 that 56% of the men asking just want contact and 34% only want full residence. More detail in 2.8 also.
Fathers’ applications for residence were mainly to change, rather than protect, the status quo or to reflect a recent change in care.
While 51% of women wanted full residence.
The most common reasons given for applications for residence by mothers were fears that the father would abduct the children from their care or from the jurisdiction.
Most men then women simply don't want their children, hence the fact they don't get them. "Some contact is enough". Having children is surely a fun thing, when you can bring them to do some activities and see them happy. But having children also means taking care of them, when they need to go to school or when they are sick, and most men just don't want to take care about that, because of course it's the unfunny part.
“Uuuuh, they only get contact”. WELL THEY WANT CONTACT.
Section 3.
They explain that some case are just there to make a legal paper, and that the decision is already took. Some are made by family member (not parents) needing formal recognition. Some are about family abuse
The court did not always determine factual disputes. In some cases the court deemed the parties’ dispute over an incident of past behavior to be irrelevant to the issue of contact or residence and used undertakings to alleviate concerns about similar behavior in the future.
To sum up, not that many cases are actually just parents fighting, because lots of cases are solved by themselves, and court is just here as a middle man, of for legal papers.
It also states that children is asked his/her opinion with a 38% rate, lots of cases don’t needing their opinions since it was already solve by parents, or again abuses cases.
Section 4.1.
Of the 174 parent applications, resolution was reached by consent order in 106 cases (61%). In 13 cases it was not clear from the file if the final order had been reached by consent. In 55 cases it was clear that the parents did not agree the final order (32%) but not all of these cases went to a contested final hearing. In 16 of these 55 cases, the respondent parent simply didn’t attend the final directions appointment and the order was made in their absence.
61% reach consent ! And 9% don’t care enough to show up, while 22% only stay and fight. And I guess the refused demand were about the residence, because for the contact order, they were a 88% success rate. (more in section 5 about quality of contact)
And what about Shared residence Orders, while we are in residency topic (4.3.3) ? It was not even considered in 80% of the case. Both parents ask for all or nothing, because it’s not about the children, it’s about WHO WILL WIN. Don’t come tell me that father want to see their children so badly.
Section 4.3.1.1 Why did Fathers’ Applications Fail?
The children’s strong opposition to contact and litigant disengagement were common themes. Hum…
Section 4.6 Analysis:Does gender matter?
This indicated that in cases where residence was not in dispute, children were more likely to live with their mothers. Actually I should link all the paragraph, but it will take too much place. You have the link.
Section 5 – let dig a bit in the contacts. This might be the section you want to read, according to your TL,DR.
FIFTY% of contact are overnight contact (90% of these are regular). While you were scared about the Skype and phone stuff, only 15% are “no direct contact”. And why it has been decided that way for these poor father who can’t see them directly ? There were proven or investigated allegations of domestic violence in 4 of these cases, and concerns around child welfare in 3. In 5 of the 8 cases either or both of these issues were present (63%).55In all the cases with concerns, the fears were shared by professionals and there was clearly no simple solution.
Also, for the no contact at all: There was proven or investigated domestic violence in 11 of the 17 cases. In 13 cases resident parents and/or professionals raised serious child welfare-related oncerns.15 cases (94%) featured at least one of these complicating factors; 10 cases (59%) featured both. In many cases the children also had strong objections to contact.
I’m going to skip section 6, as it speak about non parents issues, which doesn’t concerns us here.
I’m starting to get hungry, and I have assignments to do, so I might have skipped some part, feel free to dig with me as well in this documents.
TL,DR: Yes, some father have issue to see theirs children. No, it’s not a conspiracy about lovely father. I truly believe that some real inspiring father might not get what they want, but so do mothers. It’s a matter of lawyers at this point. Gender bias in court doesn’t exist.
The bias in the society, where some father think that raising children is a female concern. And boooh, they don’t want to have anything to deal with female stuff. If we could make men understand that being female is not a stain, they would engage more with their children, and would get them more often in return.
Comment has been collapsed.
So, let me get this straight: Are you saying that since there is no gender bias, when both the mother and father seek custody, statistics would show that it's 50%? it's not only with a 174-people sample. Is that what you are saying?
Comment has been collapsed.
WTF, it's absolutely not what is written in this report, and not what I wanted to say.
when both the mother and father want the child to live with each it's actually not even considered in 80% of cases... why are you talking about this ? No, I'm taking about when a father ask for contact (which is what they mostly want, not full guard), in 50% of the cases they are granted regular WE. You were worrying about father having only Skype call or whatever, well no. Those granted Skype call only are judged abusive, and represent only 15% of the cases solved by contacts.
Comment has been collapsed.
End sexist discrimination in the child and family law courts.
TL:DR: there isn't discrimination actually
oh well tell that to all the men that went homeless or suicidal after caming out of a divorce trial stripped away even their own dignity as man and father, they will be glad to know that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Was hoping this thread would have more interesting discussions and less petty arguments. But then of course this is the place where people blacklist others because of differing opinions and politics ¯\ (ツ) /¯
One thing I'd like to contribute to the topic though is this documentary, The Red Pill. Despite the name, whether you're to the left of the political spectrum, to the right or somewhere in the middle like me- I'd definitely recommend giving it a watch. While I disagreed with quite a few of the things it showed and it's presentation, I thought overall it was very insightful and I learnt a lot on this issue; and the perspectives of those within it. I definitely don't have the same perception of the ""meninist"" crowd as I once did. Popular media seems to like painting the whole group/movement as a joke but there are definitely real motivations and real issues.
OP You remained very composed in an otherwise very controversial and heated thread. So have my thanks and some cute gifs:D
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is, as long as there is any difference between people, whether it be gender, or eye colour or the order you put your socks and shoes on, People will always fight over it. We as the human race have always been inclined to fight each other.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's kill all those bastards who put on shoes before socks, they hate everything we represent!
Comment has been collapsed.
i actually meant 'sock sock shoe shoe ' or 'sock shoe sock shoe'. and i mention it because i saw a post about it which caused a big argument in the comments :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Only silly people wear shoes inside houses to begin with so that's not a very big issue. Unless you go barefoot at home and only put on socks to wear shoes I guess.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's parley!
I really didn't know that this is a thing people actually do, tbh.
Comment has been collapsed.
Apparently someone forgot the "over other socks" part of https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/oversocks
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not female but I love females except my girl friend: (
I wanna kill her one day while she is sleeping with a pillow.
Anyway, Male = Female
Anyone who says different, I suggest it to live in 21th Century!
Comment has been collapsed.
Should i be alerting the authorities?
Please don't smother anyone to death, (or do , it's not like i can do anything)
Comment has been collapsed.
Why do you have gf if you don't want to have her? It's hard for me to comprehend.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I wanna be honest, Stupid traditional things, Cuz she is my cousin and if I broke up with her, My family will kill me:)
I know that Sleeping with ur cousin is just like sleeping with ur sister in some countries but here cousin marriage is sacred.
Comment has been collapsed.
The genetic defects of inbreeding aside (never thought i'd say that), you should just do what you want to do as oppose to marrying someone you don't love due to tradition. It is your life after all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Easy for us to say, but bint 'amm marriages (marying your father's brother's daughter) are a very important part of certain middle eastern societies, as I understand. Kind of like how NOT marrying cousins is an important part of many other societies. (Not sure if it's a completely apt comparison, but it's easy).
Comment has been collapsed.
you should just do what you want
Considering that he want's to kill his girlfriend with a pillow I wouldn't encourage it :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh bugger I never thought of that. Gotta make sure that I never apply to work at a suicide hotline
Comment has been collapsed.
You should print out articles about inbreeding and leave them around the house.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is that in traditional people's minds only marriage with sister, mother, and aunt count as inbreeding and worst is marriage between cousins is sacred and unbreakable! The hardest thing in the world is changing the superstitious beliefs of society.
Further more more important problem is morality of her, For example, Yesterday I wanted to play With my Xbox1 and I saw that my controller is broken, then she said I did that to see U love me more or ur games!!!
Comment has been collapsed.
I would just leave -- literally leave the country; call them in 5 years when you're married to someone you actually love. Real family cares how you feel, not some stupid traditions.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well shit... I don't even know what to say to that. It's obviously not a simple manner and I can't contribute anything to it.
Just wanted to say good luck and that I hope things get better.
Comment has been collapsed.
What a fucking shitty thread. Males are already equal.
Comment has been collapsed.
My grandfather committed suicide over 20 years ago. After researching male suicide I created a thread with information that got to me related to male issues. It was a shit thread. Now there is no thread. I'll just stop trying.
Comment has been collapsed.