Personality Cafe banner

61 - 80 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
Owow, :3 we have awaken the bringers of some of the most misogynistic ideologies in here, so predictable...
Logic is indifferent to public relations.

I even heard through some quotes that feminists were at the direction of schools. Well, I would like that, we need also to have more LGBTQIA+ representation and discussion about those subjects within schools, that would be great. And well, anti-racism and anti-validism also.
The education sector leans strongly to the left, and a strong ideological bias in schools is likely to affect what content is selected and the manner in which it is taught to pupils. You simply do not notice the many biases that are in your favour.

But sadly, it isn't coming soon... still gender expectations should be abolished, and yes men should learn to speak about their emotions more freely, we're seeing the exact consequences of gender binary, here, men and women supposed to be the opposite. It's like if in the head of those people, women were another species. When you have to come to this kind of thoughts, you just completely missed what a society is about.
But what gender expectations are you talking about? The only one you've mentioned is allowing men to cry without judgement by women. (This particular "expectation" is actually not traditional at all and only began c. 1850.) Beyond that, it's not clear what you want to abolish which makes it hard for me to form an opinion.

And I would add that a lot spoke like if hetero was the only way, try to think this through if you were homosexual. You will soon notice that those misogynistic ideologies, imagining men and women like in a war of attractiveness (but actually, it's just men forcing their desire in women throat at this point, like they never did that in the past, or leaving us alone... yeah... cool), representing a world were women are together on one side, and men are together on the other side. That sound really homosexual to me. Those ideologies are just boys club were they speak about sex, their sex and the irrepressible desire to have sex. And I can say that those homosexual spaces are actually very homophobic. And then we're asked to feel sorry for those people? They isolate themselves, then cry for they lack of desirability and attractiveness.
What do you mean by "forcing desire"? Do you mean to say that men who merely approach women with sexual interest are somehow forcing themselves upon the latter? This implies that women are passive objects who cannot refuse an unwanted advance or tell the difference between dirty talk and attempted rape. So much for "strong and independent".

Feminists and lesbians got this homophobic and misogynistic stigma that we're ugly, we're those because we can't get laid by men. Let's make things clear, this isn't the case, while in those adverse ideologies, they're always speaking and shaming themselves. Do you see the difference, LGBT+ pride, feminism, empowering? They don't empower themselves, they're weakening themselves, together as a group, and then you'll hear them about being responsible individuals, having to deal with your own problem, but the group is their problem, not them as individuals. While for feminists and LGBT+, the group is empowering us, we're getting stronger because the movement is about that.
Nobody here is calling you ugly or implying that all lesbians (or even feminists) are ugly. I should warn you that while subsuming your own identity into that of ideology may be comforting, it greatly restricts your ability to be a unique individual with your own story to tell.

So we don't have to feel sorry for those people, they just have to leave those groups, deradicalization have to happen, but sorry, I have enough social issues, including patriarchy, so men keeping power, before putting ressources to deradicalize them. This job is on you, men, you know better on those issues. When you see them popping out on a forum, take them apart, think how you can help them to stop the delusions they got into. But just don't make us responsible or sorry for them.
You are not obligated to feel sorry for anyone, but showing others grace and rejecting spite is vital if you wish to be happy. You should notice an irony in that many of the people you criticize are much like you: they are unhappy, feel unwanted by the majority and sublimate their identity into ideology as a coping mechanism. While they may have come to a different conclusion, their process is similar. I hope that this insight will make you more compassionate. If you genuinely want to help (as opposed to just virtue signalling), befriend someone who disagrees with you.
 

·
Registered
Stealth Warship
Joined
·
618 Posts
I've heard the exact same things over and over from similar guys. I'm not a shoulder to cry on.
Of course you're not, and shoulders to cry on only offer solace if they're actually connected to a person who can actually solve the problem - anything else is just a parental echo - and you're not some grown man's "mommy" are you?

However that's not what I'm prescribing...


The only feeling you've shared here is HATE. You've joined an echo chamber of hate.
Hate can be a maladaptive reaction, to something inevitable - PAIN - the cure for it is Meaning - because pain is inevitable, the suffering must be worth something - done for something - if it isn't, it becomes unbearable and finds a negative object for it to source itself...

And that inevitably means the hatred needs to source itself from the pain itself - it doesn't stop, it doesn't solve the problem anymore because to solve the problem suffocates the pain which has to fuel itself instead of being merely endured in side effect to sacrifices which yield Meaning.

If women and having a family isn't the base case scenario all men can reliably (with some effort) draw meaning from - you leave the field open for people (like me - but maybe not) to give other sources of meaning - and whilst blowing up financial services' server farms sounds like a good idea...


...it's probably not the best one out there if you fancy the status quo to stay relatively comfortable.

So don't ignore the civic role and opportunity you've been handed, women if they're going to take their place are actually going to have to do something unusual: Care about men. Men have cared about women and children for ages, I don't believe women have actually gotten used to the idea they'd have to care about men as a civic issue, for them it's just themselves and children - and men have always been there as the ones who get sacrificed, for the most part I think we're fine with it...

...without Meaning however, you leave the field open...


I've nurtured every sensation man has been inspired to have. I cared about what he wanted and I never judged him. Why? Because I never rejected him. In spite of all his imperfections: I'm A Fan Of Man...!

Same old person answers who always has... and his methods are as predictable as the results... don't leave the field open to that unless you're secretly into it... and to the guys who aren't...

\/


Sorry I got a bit preachy. x
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
How conductive to good relationships between the sexes would you say it is for there to be a widely parroted ideological cluster that 1) Essentially uses cherrypicked, obsolete or heavily distorted data to push a rigid, heavily reductionist, otherizing and inaccurate narrative about themselves and about the psychology of individuals of one sex? 2) Encourages scapegoating and objectification as a lens through which to view interactions between the sexes 3) Paints the validation of the one sex as contingent on their ability to con the opposite sex into NSA sexual commoditization?
What data is being misinterpreted and how? I notice you mention scapegoating, so I'd like to propose a hypothetical. Let's say you know of one man who jaywalks, shoplifts, or cheats on his girlfriend. Alone, he may be little more than an annoyance, but imagine if thousands, even millions of people did the same. Society would collapse into anarchy. Therefore, every choice he makes has an effect on other people's choices, and this is why it is important to imagine what it would be like to live in a world where everyone else around you made the same choices that you did. Would that be a world you'd prefer to live in? If not, your actions as an individual are likely immoral (this is a paraphrase of the categorical imperative).

You could give me the bullshit spiel about self-improvement, but isn't painting a whole group of people with the same wide, degrading (and weirdly self-victimizing?) brush in the interests of self improvement kind of...self-defeating? Many self-improvement frameworks don't need to scapegoat or parrot idiotic pseudo sci-fi narratives against a whole demographic.
What you really seem opposed to is the process of forming opinions about something/someone from incomplete or generalized information. My response to that would be: it is impossible to know anything absolutely (outside perhaps mathematics) so we need to assess probability. If a result occurs 95% of the time, it is extremely predictive and for practical purposes "true". The outliers are too few to call the claim into question. In fact, statistical significance only requires a result to occur 70% of the time.

So let's say that 70% of the women you've observed behave in X way, and you have observed more than, say, 1000 women. From this is reasonable to make a generalization that women as a whole do X, even if you yourself are a woman who does not behave in that way. This kind of logic is what underlies all stereotypes or "shorthands" to categorize with. Probabilistic reasoning is not perfect, I'll admit that, but it is all that we can infer the truth with in a hypothetical social situation.

It's exhausting to deal with, to the point many women I know just....don't.
So is PMS and shaving your legs. What's your point?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
In my last comment I've written something which could lead to confusion. And because there're have been comments which have been written since then, though I don't know if they're responding to me, so I'll not edit it.

I don't think at all, that men between men have some kind of homosexual inclinations, it's just masculine solidarity. I just spoke of homosexuality as a provocative way of looking at it, but I regret it. Being a gay man with other men is often scary, cause they better not know that you're gay. Because it sounded like there could have been some kind of inclusion of homosexuality within those groups (it rarely happens, don't count on it), I want to repeat that this is not very relaxed at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
What data is being misinterpreted and how?
Biology, psychology, anthropology, medicine, statistics.
You pick it. It's basically a reductionist lens that caters to those who can't go beyond a reptilian mindset or heroic predator/prey narratives.


I notice you mention scapegoating, so I'd like to propose a hypothetical. Let's say you know of one man who jaywalks, shoplifts, or cheats on his girlfriend. Alone, he may be little more than an annoyance, but imagine if thousands, even millions of people did the same. Society would collapse into anarchy.
And you're saying this is women right now? Kind of a melodramatic take.



Therefore, every choice he makes has an effect on other people's choices, and this is why it is important to imagine what it would be like to live in a world where everyone else around you made the same choices that you did. Would that be a world you'd prefer to live in? If not, your actions as an individual are likely immoral (this is a paraphrase of the categorical imperative).
Oh I Kant ignore the smell of manchildsplaining....

Let me propose another hypothetical: Suppose you have a generation of folks being raised to see the world through the lens of stringent gender roles. It's easy for them, it's low-effort. If you stick to your role, you get a cozy position of passive dominance and entitlement. The world practically revolves around them and their needs. There is no need to actually try to learn how healthy relationships work or to develop interpersonal skills, or to do anything to get out of that role comfort zone because whoever finds themselves sharing a household with them is trapped financially and socially, being little more than sentient commodities.

Suppose then change happens, humans resist this at every turn, especially when adaptation is required. We developed brains to stay as lazy as possible and let tools do our work. This sweeps the rug from under the feet of the folks from the above paragraph and leaves them at a loss for how to cope, since they never got useful tools to navigate romance and never needed to learn how healthy relationships work, sometimes before they could even get hands on experience. This effectively puts them at a *gasp* disadvantage. That's a no no!

So they rage, they otherize, and they resent and reduce the source of their discomfort to a nuisance. They need something to be angry at, because that's how the world has made sense for them thus far, so they rage at themselves and at the one target they've been used to seeing as a receptacle for any stupidity that afflicts them since childhood. And most importantly, they always vomit depressive rants that rationalize regression. Every. Single. Time.

Then in comes a banner for them to rally under, under a bullshit pretext of self improvement that helps them make sense of the world without having them abandon their faulty, obsolete worldviews.
Of course they're gonna flock. This is just their way of resisting adaptation to change and to learn interpersonal competence in a world that's increasingly digital.

What you really seem opposed to is the process of forming opinions about something/someone from incomplete or generalized information. My response to that would be: it is impossible to know anything absolutely (outside perhaps mathematics) so we need to assess probability. If a result occurs 95% of the time, it is extremely predictive and for practical purposes "true". The outliers are too few to call the claim into question. In fact, statistical significance only requires a result to occur 70% of the time.
What I'm opposed to is a reductionist narrative that encourages people to see interpersonal relationships as this reductionist, mutually degrading predator/prey roleplay and has them insisting that's how the world works.

So let's say that 70% of the women you've observed behave in X way, and you have observed more than, say, 1000 women. From this is reasonable to make a generalization that women as a whole do X, even if you yourself are a woman who does not behave in that way. This kind of logic is what underlies all stereotypes or "shorthands" to categorize with. Probabilistic reasoning is not perfect, I'll admit that, but it is all that we can infer the truth with in a hypothetical social situation.
You live in a world with Billions of people and thousands of cultures outside of dating sites, Generalizing from a single 1000 person sample experiment that likely was done using dating site data? This is it, this is why your ideology is fucking garbage. Stop wasting my time.

Honestly, bring in the impregnable sex bots, but have the users be legally mandated to raise the offspring, so they will have something useful to do so they stop misinforming and poisoning the well. Actually, no, they might wind up sexually molesting them if they're female given the ideology that got them using a high-tech body pillow to reproduce, so nevermind...
 

·
Registered
Stealth Warship
Joined
·
618 Posts
Oh I Kant ignore the smell of manchildsplaining....
Love the wordplay, hate the snide impulse to name-calling - it's very "rationalwiki"...

Let me propose another hypothetical:
Oh boy (girl / lovecraftianing horroring) surely please do.

Suppose you have a generation of folks being raised to see the world through the lens of stringent gender roles. It's easy for them, it's low-effort.
1. What's easy or low effort about it?

If you stick to your role, you get a cozy position of passive dominance and entitlement.
2. Do you? What gives you that impression?

The world practically revolves around them and their needs.
3.Does it?

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2375926

It sure seems as if the money's flowing from one gender to the other... I assume if it's built around benefiting men you don't mind if we all (men and women) just stop paying taxes and sort ourselves out...

There is no need to actually try to learn how healthy relationships work or to develop interpersonal skills
I know, she has a Fennoko avatar and thinks she's got a good idea what healthy social skills or relationships look like... it's looking less and less like satire...

, or to do anything to get out of that role comfort zone because whoever finds themselves sharing a household with them is trapped financially and socially, being little more than sentient commodities.
4. Is paying so that someone else can stay at home "trapping them financially" now?

Enjoy your freedom and career - Human Resources will be there to support you if you start to feel trapped or a "sentient commodity" slavedrone.

Suppose then change happens
I got chills - see the utter lack of specificity, moral teleology or anything approaching it - I can institute some "changes" too - hopefully you won't find it too hard to adapt.

, humans resist this at every turn, especially when adaptation is required. We developed brains to stay as lazy as possible and let tools do our work.
You'll learn don't worry - this is all just sickness coming out.

This sweeps the rug from under the feet of the folks from the above paragraph and leaves them at a loss for how to cope, since they never got useful tools to navigate romance and never needed to learn how healthy relationships work, sometimes before they could even get hands on experience. This effectively puts them at a *gasp* disadvantage. That's a no no!
I don't know how many people you've met who agree with your ideas, however the ones I've met are far, FAR, from what I'd call capable of sustaining healthy relationships - some of the things they're into just can't be shared with polite company.

So they rage, they otherize, and they resent and reduce the source of their discomfort to a nuisance. They need something to be angry at, because that's how the world has made sense for them thus far, so they rage at themselves and at the one target they've been used to seeing as a receptacle for any stupidity that afflicts them since childhood. And most importantly, they always vomit depressive rants that rationalize regression. Every. Single. Time.
I agree with this - rage may be an anaesthetic to pain however it also seeks to perpetuate the problem causing it. However I don't think they're any different than all the other "enlightened" radicals raging against the machine and charging at windmills instead of solving their own problems...

Then in comes a banner for them to rally under, under a bullshit pretext of self improvement that helps them make sense of the world without having them abandon their faulty, obsolete worldviews.
Of course they're gonna flock. This is just their way of resisting adaptation to change and learn interpersonal competence in a world that's increasingly digital.
And I assure you, you shall have all assistance possible in detaching yourself from your obsolete, unworkable worldview as you learn to push your sluggish, lazy human mind (you said it) through the process of change you're unable and powerless to stop... your Bright, Prosperous Future awaits...

PS: Also please don't give me creeped out shudders again by flattering yourself my replies indicate some hidden interest in you - I assume you don't hold yourself to that standard whilst disagreeing with others, plus it's highly reductive, borderline narcissistic and delusionally self-involved.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
I dunno man, I'm not buying the whole robot thing.

I think young people today are becoming increasingly vocal about their disgust at the interference of technology in every facet of life.

Sure there will be the vapid consooomers who partake in the robot craze, or whatever technology bullshit they come out with.

But a lot of people are realizing they want less technology, not more.

My brain has been rotted from Internet p*rn for almost 2 decades, and I have given up. I feel a consciousness opening up inside of me (no joke), that I wasn't able to access because of this fake shit.

Us humans are not built for such artificiality. We have gone too far. We cannot simply 'adapt' to technology like this. People's souls are screaming out for true connection.

The problem is that when you do become more conscious, and try to meet people, you realise how robot like and empty they are.

So isolation (socially and romantically) becomes an easier option.

That's why I agree that rather than the robot craze becoming big, men and women will just get less and less interested in each other, and less and less interested in sex in general.
sounds like technology would need to become more ergonomic then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
Owow, :3 we have awaken the bringers of some of the most misogynistic ideologies in here, so predictable...

I even heard through some quotes that feminists were at the direction of schools. Well, I would like that, we need also to have more LGBTQIA+ representation and discussion about those subjects within schools, that would be great. And well, anti-racism and anti-validism also.

But sadly, it isn't coming soon... still gender expectations should be abolished, and yes men should learn to speak about their emotions more freely, we're seeing the exact consequences of gender binary, here, men and women supposed to be the opposite. It's like if in the head of those people, women were another species. When you have to come to this kind of thoughts, you just completely missed what a society is about.

And I would add that a lot spoke like if hetero was the only way, try to think this through if you were homosexual. You will soon notice that those misogynistic ideologies, imagining men and women like in a war of attractiveness (but actually, it's just men forcing their desire in women throat at this point, like they never did that in the past, or leaving us alone... yeah... cool), representing a world were women are together on one side, and men are together on the other side. That sound really homosexual to me. Those ideologies are just boys club were they speak about sex, their sex and the irrepressible desire to have sex. And I can say that those homosexual spaces are actually very homophobic. And then we're asked to feel sorry for those people? They isolate themselves, then cry for their lack of desirability and attractiveness.

Feminists and lesbians got this homophobic and misogynistic stigma that we're ugly, we're those because we can't get laid by men. Let's make things clear, this isn't the case, while in those adverse ideologies, they're always speaking and shaming themselves. Do you see the difference, LGBT+ pride, feminism, empowering? They don't empower themselves, they're weakening themselves, together as a group, and then you'll hear them about being responsible individuals, having to deal with your own problem, but the group is their problem, not them as individuals. While for feminists and LGBT+, the group is empowering us, we're getting stronger because the movement is about that.

So we don't have to feel sorry for those people, they just have to leave those groups, deradicalization have to happen, but sorry, I have enough social issues, including patriarchy, so men keeping power, before putting ressources to deradicalize them. This job is on you, men, you know better on those issues. When you see them popping out on a forum, take them apart, think how you can help them to stop the delusions they got into. But just don't make us responsible or sorry for them.
I think the issue here isnt "trying to be binary and opposite" but that ALOT of behaviors form around men (being the pursuers) and women (the choosers?) and the attitudes/behaviors that each form around that process. (im reffering to your 3rd paragraph)

(4th) sounds like robot sex toys are the way to go here. give men the outlet to "force their sexuality on" and then the only remaining thing for a "woman to fill" in his life is all the other things right? at that point the only reason to go down this path with a woman would for the other things a relationship entails. making kids (for now) a connection with a "real person" this also acts as a filter for women right? the "men that just want sex? are off banging a piece of silicon, the men that want a "connection" are pursueing real women instead of a fantasy

(5th) i think i followed this correctly, and i agree. the only arguement i can say here is/ mgtowism "tries" to empower men by going their own way, not saying its the right way, or it works. but it is trying to "empower"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
Love the wordplay, hate the snide impulse to name-calling - it's very "rationalwiki"...
Ad hom noise.

Oh boy (girl / lovecraftianing horroring) surely please do.
More noise and sidestepping

1. What's easy or low effort about it?
Go work, return home to what's basically a second mommy you slide your dick into. All you need to know to succeed at life is in the box labeled "work".
Should any conflict arise, women are from Venus, men are from Mars, PMS, etc. Basically pick a handy stereotype to wave shit off. Maybe beat her up a little.

2. Do you? What gives you that impression?
The fact you're asking this question. You were for the longest time socially encouraged to live with your head up your own ass. Still are, to a degree.

3.Does it?

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2375926

It sure seems as if the money's flowing from one gender to the other... I assume if it's built around benefiting men you don't mind if we all (men and women) just stop paying taxes and sort ourselves out...
Oh no, a study from New Zealand that essentially showcases property and business ownership =Tax liability, being misinterpreted in bad faith to argue some sort of regressive bullshit. Whatever shall I do?

I know, she has a Fennoko avatar and thinks she's got a good idea what healthy social skills or relationships look like... it's looking less and less like satire...
More noise and sidestepping

4. Is paying so that someone else can stay at home "trapping them financially" now?

Enjoy your freedom and career - Human Resources will be there to support you if you start to feel trapped or a "sentient commodity" slavedrone.
Sure, I will.

I got chills - see the utter lack of specificity, moral teleology or anything approaching it - I can institute some "changes" too - hopefully you won't find it too hard to adapt.
More noise.

You'll learn don't worry - this is all just sickness coming out.
More noise.

I don't know how many people you've met who agree with your ideas, however the ones I've met are far, FAR, from what I'd call capable of sustaining healthy relationships - some of the things they're into just can't be shared with polite company.
Don't care about your life, and have no way to confirm truth or falsehood about your anecdotes.

I agree with this - rage may be an anaesthetic to pain however it also seeks to perpetuate the problem causing it. However I don't think they're any different than all the other "enlightened" radicals raging against the machine and charging at windmills instead of solving their own problems...
Women becoming independent economically and reproductively IS them solving their own problems. It's not radical, it's reality. Typically the demographics opposing this and pushing for regression have something to gain from it. Dependency makes it easier to be mediocre.

And I assure you, you shall have all assistance possible in detaching yourself from your obsolete, unworkable worldview as you learn to push your sluggish, lazy human mind (you said it) through the process of change you're unable and powerless to stop... your Bright, Prosperous Future awaits...
More noise.

PS: Also please don't give me creeped out shudders again by flattering yourself my replies indicate some hidden interest in you - I assume you don't hold yourself to that standard whilst disagreeing with others, plus it's highly reductive, borderline narcissistic and delusionally self-involved.
You mean "Please don't bring up that I've already been asked to stop engaging and choose to ignore said requests"? Oops, too late.
The "creepy stalker" narrative was your own invention, you ran with it. I don't care why you insist on engaging me and never gave it any thought. I simply find your posts intellectually deficient and self-fellating and would rather not have to deal with your bullshit. That's all.

Gonna go "PMS and Shave My Legs" or whatever. Go bother someone else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
ya know, (i finally finished reading all this) ive got to say, this has stayed suprisingly even keeled :D more "discussion" less "name calling" YAY!
 

·
Registered
Stealth Warship
Joined
·
618 Posts
Ad hom noise.


More noise and sidestepping


Go work, return home to what's basically a second mommy you slide your dick into. All you need to know to succeed at life is in the box labeled "work".
Should any conflict arise, women are from Venus, men are from Mars, PMS, etc. Basically pick a handy stereotype to wave shit off. Maybe beat her up a little.


The fact you're asking this question. You were for the longest time socially encouraged to live with your head up your own ass. Still are, to a degree.


Oh no, a study from New Zealand that essentially showcases property and business ownership =Tax liability, being misinterpreted in bad faith to argue some sort of regressive bullshit. Whatever shall I do?


More noise and sidestepping


Sure, I will.


More noise.


More noise.


Don't care about your life, and have no way to confirm truth or falsehood about your anecdotes.


Women becoming independent economically and reproductively IS them solving their own problems. It's not radical, it's reality. Typically the demographics opposing this and pushing for regression have something to gain from it. Dependency makes it easier to be mediocre.


More noise.



You mean "Please don't bring up that I've already been asked to stop engaging and choose to ignore said requests"? Oops, too late.
The "creepy stalker" narrative was your own invention, you ran with it. I don't care why you insist on engaging me and never gave it any thought. I simply find your posts intellectually deficient and self-fellating and would rather not have to deal with your bullshit. That's all.

Gonna go "PMS and Shave My Legs" or whatever. Go bother someone else.
Sounds all like noise to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meliodas

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter #73
Maybe I will start a follow up thread to this: as women become increasingly superior to men in society (More driven, higher test scores, graduating more from college, more willing to work hard), what does the future look like in terms of Male-Female relations?

Almost every female around me is more driven and prevalent in society than me.

I notice most men just lift weights, work a menial (supermarket etc) job or don't even work at all, and go home to their video games.

I lurk on the FemaleDatingStrategy reddit, and many women are confirming as much.

Women are so driven today for career and everything. Men are not as much.

The dynamics for the future (and even the present) are interesting to say the least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
408 Posts
@rohan89 you are poking at a really deep topic here with a lot of history behind it. I could write a thesis here, but I'll try to keep it short.

Families fell apart. Young children have several key developmental stages that are crucial for learning to connect with others. As it's become acceptable for parents to have a child and then part ways, they aren't around for various reasons (work, divorce, fighting, etc). Parents talk smack about each other. Leave the kid at daycare. The kid can't develop these proper familial connections, and instead gets put in front of a screen to watch Disney movies and play games.

So now we got a bunch of adults with all these gaps in their ability to connect with another person, and weird expectations literally built on fiction. Girls grow up feeling like it's all on them to get anything done since men aren't reliable 'cause mom was ranting about dad and men all the time. That also can lead to the sex thing. She feels expected to provide sex, regardless of what her opinion is. She's feeling the other pressures, but can't really say anything and they're all invisible, but she's supposed to be all sexy and crap even though she's exhausted with everything on her shoulders.

It started with the Baby Boomers and all the economy changes.

People do rise to the level that's expected of them, though. That applies to children AND adults. I have seen guys who were raised by a good dad, or who had a single mom that had high expectations of him. They still get out there and succeed.

There are ways as adults to go back and develop those gaps to properly connect with others, it's just a lot of work.
 

·
Infractionated
I drive a blue tricycle with a gold bell.
Joined
·
8,597 Posts
I do think the vast majority of people are about as interesting as potatoes and look like potatoes also.

I'm not into fucking potatoes.

I guess I'm pretty lucky I found a hot potato.

As a 57 y/o male I can speak from experience that your theory is false
I’ve been propositioned by 30 year olds
Most senior women do date men of similar age
While it’s true that many a senior finds the [10-20] age gap more attractive
Many will not date someone 20 years their junior
I try to get in your pants just 67,201 times and now it's "propositioned by 30 year olds" like that was an excessive amount of times. Psssh.


catwalk said:
a good trade-off for most women once their libidos have reduced
Is that a thing? Does that happen? Asking for a friend....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
17 Posts
Unless you are a women who likes girls, then there might be some hope. Maybe most women aren't attracted to 80 percent of men because we once lived in societies almost entirely comprised of ladies, where men just came to visit and drop off animal products and rape.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
602 Posts
I think the issue here isnt "trying to be binary and opposite" but that ALOT of behaviors form around men (being the pursuers) and women (the choosers?) and the attitudes/behaviors that each form around that process. (im reffering to your 3rd paragraph)
Well, those are expected gendered behaviours which are thought as "complementary" and thus opposite, this is the binary I'm talking about. And which also denies again the behaviours of non-hetero, and those behaviours are socially determined. Why heteros would need to act very differently than homos? Why their attraction is gendered while it isn't for homos? I'm not for the abolishments of non-abusive behaviours, and that one do the pursuing and the other would have the last word, even if it's always more complicated than that. If half of the hetero women are pursuers while the other half are hetero men, are people scared to not being able to distinguish a woman from a man? That's sound fanciful, thus why do we gender the behaviours if it's not to maintain power over the other group? There's a power interest in this, and we know the favored.

(4th) sounds like robot sex toys are the way to go here. give men the outlet to "force their sexuality on" and then the only remaining thing for a "woman to fill" in his life is all the other things right? at that point the only reason to go down this path with a woman would for the other things a relationship entails. making kids (for now) a connection with a "real person" this also acts as a filter for women right? the "men that just want sex? are off banging a piece of silicon, the men that want a "connection" are pursueing real women instead of a fantasy
I'm sorry I don't understand what you're trying to convey here.

(5th) i think i followed this correctly, and i agree. the only arguement i can say here is/ mgtowism "tries" to empower men by going their own way, not saying its the right way, or it works. but it is trying to "empower"
Well, if the society has to be seperated in two, those people didn't understand that empowering yourself in isolation is just dealing with depression and maintaining yourself in social isolation (I did that before, and yes, you can survive, but what are the gains, I just denied any social responsability and I was going to cut ties with the people I had loved, and that I love again, now I'm out of the depression). This leads nowhere, this is again a consequence of enforced binary. This is selfish empowerment, thus not a empowerment towards the society, cause they deny the consequence sof their actions on the society they're dependent of. Deradicalization should also concern this movement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
I do think the vast majority of people are about as interesting as potatoes and look like potatoes also.

I'm not into fucking potatoes.

I guess I'm pretty lucky I found a hot potato.



I try to get in your pants just 67,201 times and now it's "propositioned by 30 year olds" like that was an excessive amount of times. Psssh.




Is that a thing? Does that happen? Asking for a friend....
quick! what do you call a stoner that sits around and watches TV all day?....

A baked potato! :D

portal-2-glados-potato-chell-png-favpng-LaMFppHPBywMdRnykiFGYu0FT.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
It is not really genetic(s).
It's genetic, but at the limbic level.

Analogous to: human language is supported by genetically determined cognition, but you still have to learn to talk, and the culture you learn in determines what language you learn.

People are genetically predisposed to attract and be attracted sexually, but they still have to learn how to implement that predisposition, and the culture that they learn in affects the cognitive structure they acquire as a result of that innate, genetically-programmed drive.


Boomers fucked a lot. A lot more than the 'sexually liberated' bunch you are talking about today.
Oh. . . . there are sexually liberated young people now, but they aren't the posers you see on social media pretending to be sexually liberated. A person with a real life doesn't have to act out a pretend life on youTube. We're turning into a culture of the daft leading the blind, and that's a legitimate problem that warrants discussion.

It's been my experience that sex only appears significant to someone who isn't getting any. Meaningful relationships don't succeed or fail based on how good a couple is at having sex, they succeed or fail based on how well a couple is at creating meaning.

Sex is actually easy once you stop being an asshole about it. In successful relationships between intelligent adults, it's not a thing. Seriously, "Do you want to screw?" has the same emotional weight as "Do you want another helping of mashed potatos?". The answer will be either 'yes' or 'no', and whether you fixed your hair first doesn't really affect the outcome as much as some people would have you believe. It's just gonna get fucked up anyway, right?

Do people eat because food is attractive, or because they are hungry? Does how food looks really matter? Sometimes it seems to, but why is that, and at what point does considering that factor important stop reflecting a legitimate concern and become an indication of neuroticism? Is sex different?

Socially, yes -- personally . . . . . ummmmm.

No one is really complaining but a niche internet group of male(s) that NEET-out & maladaptive daydream about 'princess-charming' all day.
Right, but their problems aren't insoluble, so let's look at it.

Women are not, and have never been, princesses who need charming. A typical woman doesn't have sex because of who the guy is, she has sex because that's who she is. Most are going to pick guys more based on the absence of obnoxious traits with negative social implications than on simple physical 'attraction', most of the time. Yeah, generalizations are only generalizations, but still, even I can pick up college girls, and I'm OLD.

These guys don't have trouble getting women to agree to sex because that's difficult (it isn't), they have trouble accepting women's sexuality because it's her free choice so he can't pretend that it makes him 'special' anymore. They're complaining about hypergamy, but their real problem is just plain old existential angst. They're looking for validation for their existence, and women don't have that to give.

IF most men and women DO end up alone, it's only because they aren't willing to abandon childish prejudice and outmoded social paradigms and look at the challenge with an open mind.

That's got nothing due to genetics, it's a direct affect of identity politics promoting the value of the 'group' over the value of 'self' in order to get votes from the disenfranchised illiterati and to herd them into fenced in corrals where they'll be easier to control.


Sigh . . . . . How's that for a dead-hippie Boomer rant? :tongue:


Felt good to me.

YMMV.
 
61 - 80 of 90 Posts
Top