Men and women are not enemies!

[betamanlet]

I couldn't agree more with Kamille. I've been in relationships that haven't worked out, some tougher than others, but it hasn't made me bitter and twisted against men... it's rather the situation or compatibility that was the problem. It's rather destructive, thinking that there must be a problem with the other sex in general when the likelihood is, it's probably just one person (or, dare I say it, you!)

 

 

I think you need to view it from the perspective of "these men". They see that if they were on death row,t hey would have more female interest in them than they currently do. Scott Peterson, and many other criminals get love letters. Sure, these women are insane, but there are at least women that desire them, but zero women desire beta males. He'd have better luck being on death row than being a beta male. Once you can think from the perspective of a beta, you can understand better, but I don't think a female could ever comprehend what being a beta male is like, given the amounts of attention women get from men.

[Kamille]

I couldn't agree more with Kamille. I've been in relationships that haven't worked out, some tougher than others, but it hasn't made me bitter and twisted against men... it's rather the situation or compatibility that was the problem. It's rather destructive, thinking that there must be a problem with the other sex in general when the likelihood is, it's probably just one person (or, dare I say it, you!)

 

Yes I agree. Both men and women can decide to blame the other gender for a failing relationship. This leaves them off the hook from trying to understand what it was about that relationship that didn't work out and how to avoid a similar scenario in the future.

 

Or yet, thinking that an entire gender is problematic makes them accept poor behavior from the people they date. "He doesn't return my calls and treats me like crap? Well, all men are like that, all I can hope to do is change this one guy." (which only serves as a frustrating vicious circle that will confirm to this person that 'all men are jerks'). No, not all men are the same, so if someone treats me poorly, I move on.

 

Beta, you're funny. First of all... Who's decided -but yourself- that you are a Beta man?

 

Well. I gotta go now. You know, walk down the street to bathe in male attention .

Edited December 18, 2009 by Kamille

[betamanlet]

Yes I agree. Both men and women can decide to blame the other gender for a failing relationship. This leaves them off the hook from trying to understand what it was about that relationship that didn't work out and how to avoid a similar scenario in the future.

 

Or yet, thinking that an entire gender is problematic makes them accept poor behavior from the people they date. "He doesn't return my calls and treats me like crap? Well, all men are like that, all I can hope to do is change this one guy." (which only serves as a frustrating vicious circle that will confirm to this person that 'all men are jerks'). No, not all men are the same, so if someone treats me poorly, I move on.

 

Beta, you're funny. First of all... Who's decided -but yourself- that you are a Beta man?

 

Well. I gotta go now. You know, walk down the street to bathe in male attention .

 

Well, I haven't so much as kissed a female in 2 years, not by choice, making me think beta is a pretty good descriptor of me. My alpha friends are much more successful with women than I am, and they in fact wind up dumping their girlfriends all the time. My friend, an alpha, has been briefly dating this woman, we was all crazy about her at first, now he decides she hates her, and I believe he has dumped her by now. She will of course go nuts, call him contantly, want him back, etc, meanwhile, I will not have had a date in 2+ years because I wouldn't treat a woman that way.

[temple]

Hmm. That's probably what the problem is then beta. I'm sorry you think of people in terms of the Greek alphabet, but life is far more complicated than that. (Though I'm sure it's a much easier way of dealing with rejection than toughening up and thinking you need to improve on an aspect of yourself. No one is exempt from self-improvement.) Like Kamille said, you're the only one who classed yourself as a 'beta male'.

 

You asked me to see it from the perspective of 'these men': why don't you see it from the perspective of women too? It's not all just one way. I've been played too. That doesn't make me beta woman and I certainly don't consider him alpha man (actually he's more omega man ). I know it's easier, MUCH easier to think "This one didn't work out, ergo, nothing will work out" but where would anyone get in life if we all thought such horribly negative things?

 

Try to be positive!

[lino]

I see this section of the website is pretty much the same as when I last was reading it

[meerkat stew]

It's rather destructive, thinking that there must be a problem with the other sex in general when the likelihood is, it's probably just one person (or, dare I say it, you!)

 

Q.E.D. my general points in this thread. Rationalize thoroughly and accept NO accountability whatsoever while simultaneously shifting all blame back on men.

 

In the late 80s and early 90s, an immense and ugly witchhunt began in this country for sexual and satanic abuse generally, and in preschools specifically. If you like courtroom dramas, check out "Indictment: The McMartin Trial" which describes this part of the phenomenon. Let's call it the "fire."

 

Simultaneously, there was a "repressed memory movement" championed by radical feminists and lesbians seeking to prove that a -majority- of women had been sexually abused by close male relatives (often their fathers), as young children, they had just repressed their memories of the abuse. Let's call this the "gasoline." (Does the claim sound ludicrous on its face today? Sure it does, but it was taken completely seriously at the time. The women's movement actually managed to convince the country at large to believe that most women in the U.S. had been sexually abused by their fathers, grandfathers and uncles as children, and that repressed memories keep them from remembering it. This is a fact, not making one bit of it up).

 

The gasoline and fire together created an utterly absurd social situation with the goal of claiming that -millions- of otherwise law-abiding American men (and a small number of women) were in fact deranged sexual predators and practitioners of ritual satanic abuse. These were not isolated phenomena in a few hillbilly backwaters, but a thorough, nationwide campaign.

 

To say that millions and millions of Americans' lives, freedoms and civil rights were adversely affected by these two social phenomena is no exaggerration. These extremely damaging movements were started by women, encouraged primarily by women, and exacerbated by playing on women's fears for child safety, this was a radical demarcation of lines in a very real gender war the likes of which had never been seen. The cliche' "battle of the sexes," popularized in a humorous way in the 60s-70s, suddenly had large, sharp teeth capable of immense social damage.

 

Now of course men have had a lion's share of blame for many damaging social phenomena throughout history (war, segregation, etc.), and have been generally held accountable in various significant ways, throughout recent history.. often ad nauseum. The child abuse/repressed memory scam was every bit as damaging as many of those wars or other phenomena, even moreso than contemporaneous, more "male" caused disasters such as the savings and loan crisis.

 

Even though the junk science (mostly "social" science) behind the witchhunt was disproven soundly, and some of the wrongs were eventually righted, the "female" side won this gender battle resoundingly. The women responsible for the mass, propagandistic lies were never held accountable, and though most are somewhat familiar with these phenomena, you rarely hear them discussed today. That even (or rather only) one movie was made about this is quite amazing, in proportion to the level of qualifiable and quantifiable social damage caused. There is no way to quantify the damage exactly, but IMO, this phenomenon was at least as damaging to the country as the Viet Nam War.

 

I imagine 50% or more of the younger readers of this post have no idea what crazy meerkat is rambling on about. Which demonstrates just how complete the victory was in that the "women's movement" could cause such social mischief and escape completely unaccountable and unscathed.

 

The door was thus opened for the mass political manipulation of women based on emotional appeals to maternal and "victim" instincts by factional political interests, and such manipulation has continued increasing to the present day. Since this time, despite that the intervening years have been generally prosperous and fair, the politics of victimization of women have grown like a pernicious weed in our culture.

 

The quasi socialist U.S. bureaucracy seeks two things generally, 1. to grow both in size and power (Leviathan writ large), and 2. to solidify its position to prevent threat to its control. The government has learned that the easiest way to accomplish its goals is by manipulating female votes.

 

Want to regulate private behavior, alcohol, marijuana and other substances that reduce general productivity and cause people to question the state (while growing the government and simultaneously grabbing more control over citizens)? Tell women that their children are using marijuana in epic levels, are being sold pot at schools, and are all becoming heroin addicts as a result (this is your government on steroids, Nancy Reagan). Tell women that drunk drivers are mowing down their children on the roads.

 

Want to figure out a way to tax the internet and bring it entirely under government control? Tell female voters that the internet is crammed full of sexual predators, all seeking to molest their children. This one is going on as we speak, the jury is still out on whether government, via facile manipulation of women, will actually pull this one off. God I hope not. They are also working the "terrorist"/Patriot Act angle here disingenuously.

 

Want to increase government control over food production and basic infrastructure? Tell women that the food industry produces extremely dangerous products and that water is impure.

 

There are oh so many other examples. The basic formula is 1. take a social flaw that even tangentially touches on womens' rights or the safety of children, 2. Begin a propaganda campaign utilizing bogus statistics and studies claiming that an outlier social flaw is in actuality a threatening epidemic 3. Propose overreaching legislation ostensibly targetted at the "epidemic," but with the ulterior motive of growing the government and stealing personal freedom, and 4. Open the ballot box and watch the manipulated female (and of course some male) votes flow in. 5. Both state governments and the federal governments are "bad guys" in this formula.

 

If you think I'm being unfair to the left, corporate interests engage in the exact same campaigns to sell products and services to scared women and mothers. The difference is that corporate interests generally affect only their customers and certain bad acts, but don't involve the PERMANENT removal of civil liberties for everyone.

 

Agree or disagree with the above analysis, see how disingenuous it is to attribute "hatred of women" or "assuming women are the enemy," or a "bitter, bad attitude" to someone merely because they witness the above phenomena and believe that such phenomena are evil influences in our society? We are all, in a sense, the enemy in our complacent attitudes about protecting our freedoms. Women's issues, and women's susceptibility to this kind of manipulation ARE the primary, current fulcrum for the evil though. The government ain't gonna change, so ladies, unless you do by rising above "manipulation politics," we are all f-cked as citizens seeking to live as free from government control as possible because after all, you own 51% of the social common stock as it were.

 

Finally, I'm not some militia crackpot in a compound somewhere, but just an average concerned citizen who believes that we can effect change within the system in a nonviolent manner, but only if we change our POV drastically compared to what it is currently.

 

And finally finally (promise) if you think this is off-topic in a dating-gender relations thread, you are mistaken, as for many men, it is a cornerstone reason why we don't really treat women as equals, why we often give up on finding women of substance and just go for sex in dating. We see what happens at the polls when you are so easily manipulated, and it causes us to lose respect. Unfair and generalizing to individual women? Absolutely. Just as unfair as assuming the next guy you date will be a "player" because the last one was or that "all men are dogs." Just telling it like it is.

[IrishCarBomb]

post

 

 

[ordinary_girl]

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mrmxflunto

 

[ordinary_girl]

it's interesting meerkat how you are insulting men in your last post because you make it look like it's only women that care about social issues (while men appear to stand by in silence and sit on the fence rather than putting their view forward)

 

but more importantly: you are making pretty serious comments about 50% of the population: ie women. if we are this bad, don't you think men are just as responsible letting us get away with it? most of us have our fathers present when we are brought up. if we are so evil, how come those men don't step in? how come us women have been allowed to get out of hand so much by our parents?

[meerkat stew]

Carbomb, have seen your posts, and understand why you resort to Youtube clips as opposed to rational discussion. Were I mentally equipped as you are, I'd probably do likewise.

[meerkat stew]

it's interesting meerkat how you are insulting men in your last post because you make it look like it's only women that care about social issues (while men appear to stand by in silence and sit on the fence rather than putting their view forward)

 

In what way am I insulting men exactly? Try making a logically structured claim about my post, or any part thereof, and I will happily pay you the respect of responding in kind, fair enough?

 

but more importantly: you are making pretty serious comments about 50% of the population: ie women. if we are this bad, don't you think men are just as responsible letting us get away with it? most of us have our fathers present when we are brought up. if we are so evil, how come those men don't step in? how come us women have been allowed to get out of hand so much by our parents?

 

I assure you the "witchhunt" phenomena as I described them are real and happened. The women's movement waged literal war on men at large as child abusers, despite the supposed victims could not even remember the abuse. This led political interests to conclude that they could in fact get away with even the most egregious political manipulations of women, and the consequences of that realization are continually emergent in the U.S. today. And of course, men are to blame also, I acknowledge this in the post. But there's only so much we can do in a "one person-one vote" system where 51% of the population is women.

 

And is it really men's jobs to control women and rein them in? Isn't that anachronistic? Aren't you capable of doing that for yourselves?

 

Your analysis of my post is very simplistic. Step it up a notch if you disagree with me.

[Sam Spade]

 

 

 

There are oh so many other examples. The basic formula is 1. take a social flaw that even tangentially touches on womens' rights or the safety of children, 2. Begin a propaganda campaign utilizing bogus statistics and studies claiming that an outlier social flaw is in actuality a threatening epidemic 3. Propose overreaching legislation ostensibly targetted at the "epidemic," but with the ulterior motive of growing the government and stealing personal freedom, and 4. Open the ballot box and watch the manipulated female (and of course some male) votes flow in. 5. Both state governments and the federal governments are "bad guys" in this formula.

 

 

 

s.

 

 

I wouldn't go as far as to elevate this to the status of conspiracy theory, but the basic logic is true. You can get away with the most absurd, ridiculous things as long as you say its "for the children" or "for the women". It doesn't matter what you say - as long as it motivate it with kids or women's safety it gains instant credibility (Because what monster could disagree withsomething we do "for the kids" ). This is one of the oldest forms of manipulation.

When I hear "it's best for the kids" - in an individual or social context, I'm paying attention to what will follow...

[ordinary_girl]

 

And is it really men's jobs to control women and rein them in? Isn't that anachronistic? Aren't you capable of doing that for yourselves?

 

Your analysis of my post is very simplistic. Step it up a notch if you disagree with me.

 

no, I asked you a simple question and you have not answered.

 

parents are responsible for how their children turn out. right? therefore fathers are equally responsible as mothers for how their daugthers turn out.

 

if 51% of the population are crazy/evil/etc then whose fault is that? it's a very simple question.

[meerkat stew]

no, I asked you a simple question and you have not answered.

 

parents are responsible for how their children turn out. right? therefore fathers are equally responsible as mothers for how their daugthers turn out.

 

if 51% of the population are crazy/evil/etc then whose fault is that? it's a very simple question.

 

Individual adults are responsible for their own actions, attitudes, beliefs, etc. Parents are not. Even if, for the sake of argument, some level of parental abuse scarred a child permanently, that child would still be responsible for being able to think rationally and to act ethically, unless found criminally insane.

 

Fathers are indeed responsible, in the U.S. at least, for instilling a privileged princess mentality in their daughters, but thankfully, that child-raising practice is gradually fading out over time. This has nothing to do with voting behavior though... or maybe it does.

 

You didn't read my post carefully if you think there is any argument therein claiming that "women are bad." Women have been manipulated as part of a dishonest political process, and this has nothing at all to do with their parents, unless the claim is that women are incapable of growing into independently minded, rational adults free of parental control, a claim with which I disagree thoroughly.

Edited December 19, 2009 by meerkat stew

[meerkat stew]

I wouldn't go as far as to elevate this to the status of conspiracy theory

 

Have always been averse to conspiracy theories, shadowy government and corporate plots to rule the world, what have you, but one person's conspiracy theory is another's completely transparent political process.

 

Corporations seek to use government to their ends. The lobbying industry is very real and certainly no shadowy conspiracy. Government seeks to grow, government employees get paid more, have more perks, and have easier jobs to do (e.g. prosecutors) the bigger government grows. These are not exactly X Files stuff.

 

Let's look at the Reagan era War on Drugs for example. How many billions and billions of tax revenue dollars have been spent on this since 1980? Staggering. What benefit has the average citizen reaped? Are there less drugs, less addicts? etc. None. What benefit has government reaped? MASSIVE benefit.

 

Is it really a conspiracy? Or just a natural Hobbesian progression, or an Aristotelian natural movement from a natural form of government to a corrupt form?

 

If it's a conspiracy, it's one that takes place in broad daylight, right in front of our faces. It's amazing to me how many people do not realize to what extent government is a transparently zero sum game.

[Woggle]

There is evidence that Gloria Steniem worked for the CIA and worked to help destroy the American family. The battle of the sexes only serves the elite.

[meerkat stew]

The battle of the sexes only serves the elite.

 

There is lots of truth in this. People situated in stable family units tend to be happier, despite that gender roles are more restrictive. Happier people are harder to manipulate by advertising and overreaching government.

 

The message of propaganda or advertising either one, whether done by governments or deodorant companies is that "something is wrong with your life, and my snake oil will cure it." Such manipulation is not nearly as effective on happy people.

[mem11363]

OG,

You asked him a great question. He won't answer. Just like he wouldn't answer why he keeps giving his sexual partners expensive gifts when he knows they will almost certainly be giving him cheap gifts.

 

Bottom line - he does not know how to sustain a happy long term relationship with a woman and he almost always portrays himself as a victim.

 

As for me, I am grateful to Mothers against drunk driving as they have single handedly cut alcohol related deaths in half. Since drunks kill about half men and half women you would think that everyone would support MADD.

 

As for the whole repressed memory/false accusation thing I agree that was crazy and destructive. Like other brief periods of lunacy, it ended when rational people - both men and women - realized what was happening and changed the system.

 

 

no, I asked you a simple question and you have not answered.

 

parents are responsible for how their children turn out. right? therefore fathers are equally responsible as mothers for how their daugthers turn out.

 

if 51% of the population are crazy/evil/etc then whose fault is that? it's a very simple question.

[IrishCarBomb]

Carbomb, have seen your posts, and understand why you resort to Youtube clips as opposed to rational discussion. Were I mentally equipped as you are, I'd probably do likewise.

 

I guess it makes sense in a way. Youtube links would probably make your point more successfully than you do.

[meerkat stew]

no, I asked you a simple question and you have not answered.

 

parents are responsible for how their children turn out. right? therefore fathers are equally responsible as mothers for how their daugthers turn out.

 

if 51% of the population are crazy/evil/etc then whose fault is that? it's a very simple question.

 

Individual adults are responsible for their own actions, attitudes, beliefs, etc. Parents are not. Even if, for the sake of argument, some level of parental abuse scarred a child permanently, that child would still be responsible for being able to think rationally and to act ethically, unless found criminally insane.

 

Fathers are indeed responsible, in the U.S. at least, for instilling a privileged princess mentality in their daughters, but thankfully, that child-raising practice is gradually fading out over time. This has nothing to do with voting behavior though... or maybe it does.

 

OG,

You asked him a great question. He won't answer.

 

1. It wasn't a very good question because it presumes that parents are generally responsible for their adult children's reasoning capacity and ethics, which is ridiculous.

 

2. I answered it, as quoted above.

 

3. Do you even -read- the threads before posting?

 

4. To this day you misunderstand, and have twice now mischaracterized, my point about the relative value of gifts given and received, despite that I have explained it to you previously, and it was obvious in the thread where it was posted to a careful reader to begin with, and that's not even -this- thread.

 

 

Bottom line - he does not know how to sustain a happy long term relationship with a woman and he almost always portrays himself as a victim.

 

You need to hop back on that short bus, Corky. You are way outta your league.

 

As for me, I am grateful to Mothers against drunk driving as they have single handedly cut alcohol related deaths in half. Since drunks kill about half men and half women you would think that everyone would support MADD.

 

You have got to be kidding me. Cite please, as I can't wait to bolster my point made in this thread with whatever fabricated statistic you pull out of your hat to back this claim.

 

As for the whole repressed memory/false accusation thing I agree that was crazy and destructive. Like other brief periods of lunacy, it ended when rational people - both men and women - realized what was happening and changed the system.

 

No system was changed...none. Business continued as usual except the writing was on the wall that women (and men, but mainly women via appeals to "save the children") could be easily politically manipulated into the most preposterous positions with no societal backlash whatsoever. Were it not for a reasonably vigilant judiciary, that despite its ideological leanings, did not allow the myriad lawsuits that resulted from all the false accusations, and the backlash in countersuits against bogus psychotherapist/hypnotists/social workers which -did- threaten to make it to juries, both phenomena might well have continued unabated to this day.

[mem11363]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Since 1980 (the year Mothers Against Drunk Driving was founded), alcohol-related traffic fatalities have decreased nearly 50 percent, from over 30,000 to under 15,500 and MADD has helped save over 383,000 lives.

LEARN MORE

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

 

1. It wasn't a very good question because it presumes that parents are generally responsible for their adult children's reasoning capacity and ethics, which is ridiculous.

 

2. I answered it, as quoted above.

 

3. Do you even -read- the threads before posting?

 

4. To this day you misunderstand, and have twice now mischaracterized, my point about the relative value of gifts given and received, despite that I have explained it to you previously, and it was obvious in the thread where it was posted to a careful reader to begin with, and that's not even -this- thread.

 

 

 

 

You need to hop back on that short bus, Corky. You are way outta your league.

 

 

 

You have got to be kidding me. Cite please, as I can't wait to bolster my point made in this thread with whatever fabricated statistic you pull out of your hat to back this claim.

 

 

 

No system was changed...none. Business continued as usual except the writing was on the wall that women (and men, but mainly women via appeals to "save the children") could be easily politically manipulated into the most preposterous positions with no societal backlash whatsoever. Were it not for a reasonably vigilant judiciary, that despite its ideological leanings, did not allow the myriad lawsuits that resulted from all the false accusations, and the backlash in countersuits against bogus psychotherapist/hypnotists/social workers which -did- threaten to make it to juries, both phenomena might well have continued unabated to this day.

[Kamille]

Q.E.D. my general points in this thread. Rationalize thoroughly and accept NO accountability whatsoever while simultaneously shifting all blame back on men.

 

 

Where has anyone shifted blame on men on this thread?

[meerkat stew]

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Since 1980 (the year Mothers Against Drunk Driving was founded), alcohol-related traffic fatalities have decreased nearly 50 percent, from over 30,000 to under 15,500 and MADD has helped save over 383,000 lives.

LEARN MORE

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Since you didn't post a link, I imagine this came off the MADD site...

[temple]

Where has anyone shifted blame on men on this thread?

 

I'm sorry that your thread, which was intended to unite people in a positive way and realise gender is not the issue here, has fallen so horrendously flat on its face.

 

Bitter people will twist anything to suit them. What I was trying to hint at was that maybe we all need to look at ourselves and realise some of the problem is interior, rather than directing our attacks on the opposite gender.

 

It's far easier to sit back and think bad things of other people rather than working on self-improvement and happiness. It's far easier to mope, be miserable, whine and moan that there are no 'good' women or men rather than picking yourself up again. It's far easier to hide behind statistics and look at the world through demographics and charts rather than thinking that, in actuality, everyone is different and beautiful in their own way. Taking the easy route out is a rather boring lifestyle.

[Kamille]

Well it was to be expected that this thread would draw in a few people who do believe that men and women are enemies.

 

I was actually asking Meerkat Stew where he saw blame being shifted onto men. I believe assertions such as that one should be supported with some kind of proof.

 

In another thread (or was it this one) Meerkat put down social scientists. And yet, here is making social analysis. I would like to see how he grounds his grand theories is all.