udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 this whole thing makes me sad... women do it so freely to the men here, it's really disgusting. the men who pop up and say nasty things I think are angry and doing it to get a reaction. So women do it they're disgusting. Men do oh they're angry and just want a reaction. I guess women don't get angry and do things for reactions & men aren't disgusting. But there is a generalised sense of feminine superiority. I see dispensed to the men here ; it is both misplaced and self-defeating. I see a general sense of masculine superiority in real life & constantly on here. I have a beautiful wonderful strong son, and as God as my witness he will never get involved with one of these emasculating, unappreciative unhappy women. Not because he couldn't "handle" them, more a case of: why would he want to spend his time with someone who cannot handle herself? Who cannot be kind, polite, gentle, caring,well, just "nice". He'd run a mile. Yeah I fear my family members will get involved with one of those unappreciative, hateful, bitter men or a man who thinks being nice is the only quality that entitles him to get what he feels he deserves. There's no way of handling those men except being self-effacing because you were born a gender or accepting the nice guy solely because he's nice. My daughter will never be horrible to her husband I'm pretty confident. She is a very strong young woman, but understands compassion and respect works both ways. Somewhere along the line a lot of women here and in the US seem to have lost sight of that fact. I think it was when guys started posting I Hate American women sites. Who knows? Maybe hate cycles between the genders if men aren't dominant in society and get what they want. I don't see more men than women or more women than men keeping sight that compassion & respect works both ways. Plenty of men think oh I get respect because I'm a guy. Plenty of women think I' get compassion because I'm a girl. I have had great men in my life and not-so-great ones. Some weak, some strong, some admirable, some pathetic. Yet in my experience, their default response is to care for me and put me and other weaker people before themselves. I am extremely grateful for this. I fear for the younger generation. They have not seen good examples of working heterosexual relationships. the whole thing is heartbreaking... Yeah I pretty much have given most hope for hetero relationships. I see no depth in most & marriage/relationships I don't see the benefit for women. I don't fear for my generation. I fear the backlash men will orchestrate after not getting what they want. I am not anti-woman, I am anti-traditional feminist. Its roots lie in mistrust, disrespect, and yes, hatred of men... It is morally bankrupt. Yep I try to say that about most pro male groups & male rights groups and I get blasted for that. Somehow pro anything or rights groups for one gender is rooted in mistrust for the other gender. I guess your heart is to busy breaking for men to see that it cuts both ways and that women aren't just hurting each other and men for no reason but like men they are struggling, bitter, angry at their new roles and just want a reaction. Why is it that few people can look at both genders without posting one in a favorable light.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 Having a vagina: It's an eternal, perpetual "get-out-of-jail-free" card for some women. Humour is a good way to deal with stuff sometimes, I wasn't laughing at you or the situation. It's the recognition, the "strong woman" delusion, the self-righteousness, the total lack of accountability and the blame of men for everything bad, past present and future... It should be classified as a psychological condition... Strong women isn't a delusion. Sadly it recognizing faults, self righteousness, blaming others, and total lack of accountability isn't a psychological condition. If it was I know plenty of victims & nice guys who have it.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 YES EXACTLY! I recommend reading Adam Corolla's "In fifty years we'll all be chicks" Hillarious book. It's no literary work of genius but the ideas are real just like Mr. Savage said. Men have definitely lost what makes us men in the past few decades. I think that can be attributed in large part to being puppets. So many men act and pretend to think/feel like women tell us we are supposed to, in order to have sex. Western culture is so innundated with sex that we have been trained to believe there is nothing more important, not even our own self respect and worth Lost what makes them men so much they have to pretend to be something else in order to have sex? Could be the girls they want don't want the decades old man. Go foreign or adapt to the environment it's evolution. Or prostitutes/escorts for sex. So what has men lost to you that is so defining & what do they have to pretend to be that isn't masculine just for sex?
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 EXACTLY! It's like the end of WarGames.. When they realise the only way to win is not to play... This way of thinking is prevalent, rife on this forum. Grown women not accepting responsibility, blaming the guy for everything. It's ridiculous... People thing not a gender thing. As for the only way to win is not to play. That's only true if both genders don't play so one can't start the cycle. As you can see with Woggle familiarity to bitterness is hard to break. Or do you mean women should stop playing & allow men to continue? Would it be cool if me stopped & women continued?
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 It seems you are reading straight to the interpretation "women have no honor, respect, responsibility," but there is more of a middle ground. For example, do women play sports? Of course. Do women play sports as seriously and competitively as men do generally? Some do, most don't. So certain aspects of teamwork, sportsmanship, dignity are best learned from a man generally, doesn't mean women don't possess those characteristics. What else would she read from women have none. No middle ground was offered. If there's a middle ground the best wording would be women and men have different forms of honor, respect, and responsibility. It'd be like me saying men have no compassion,empathy, or emotions. Then say oh there's a middle ground.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 The biggest problem with such "hate" is that it's not really hate at all, just simple disagreement or a different POV. It's not just disagreements or a different POV. There is tons of hate spewed & heaped on women in real life & online for simply being women and not giving what a man wants just like there is hate heaped on men for simply being men. It seems you've taken the feminist attitude as well to think there's few hate and it's just disagreement or a different POV. Feminism has messed up with all the real hatred towards women it chooses to battle over porn & advertising. Of course feminism doesn't discuss male issues it was never intended for men. Just like most male rights groups are unwilling to discuss female issues and if they do it's glossed over quickly. I have a hunch that most ranters here keep posting the same things as a cry for help and to have their bad attitudes questioned in a logical, reasonable way. Odd female ranters don't get that benefit of a cry for help. It's usually oh another feminazi or biter man hater and that's if the rant is slightly negative towards men. Do you have the same hunch with female ranters? Because what guys post on here has no teeth, "Why are women so and so?" is not an invitation to holler "HAAAATE!!!!" "OPPRESSSION!!" Yeah I have yet to see that tame of a post from a guy on here. Most posts just state women on whole are psychologically damaged cold hearted greedy soul sucking whores. In actuality I've seen more male posters leap on the girls for such tame posts. One why are men so and so? becomes it's your fault, you're a woman you wouldn't know a good man because your gender is stupid dishonest plays games and loves to be abused, you guys cry victim all the time etc etc If by that italicized statement a woman thinking porn is oppressive to women is not an invitation to holler misandrist! hate!
Author Woggle Posted July 22, 2011 Author Posted July 22, 2011 I very much agree with those who say that misandrists want the gender discussion to go one way. I don't think gender relations will ever improve until both sides get honest with each other and try to see it from both points of view but with some feminists they want to shout at men and want men to just shut up. They simply want men to nod our heads in agreement if we don't we are woman hating misogynists Also misandrists have nothing to do with anti-woman sites. My mother turned against men way before the internet was a mainstream thing and my father was an Alan Alda types who supported her and wanted an equal marriage. He gave her no reason to heap the kinds of abuse on him that she did but it happened and from what I hear many men his age went through the same thing. The ironic thing is that men like him got it the worst while the openly macho men still seem to have happy marriages. The men who never even bothered trying to please feminists ended up pretty good. I think what women see as woman hating is simply men throwing our hands up and admitting we can't win. There is no pleasing some women today and we have realized that. There is a huge difference between what many women say and what they do and men being the results oriented creatures we are are simply doing what actually works.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 This is the exact kind of thing that pisses men off when trying to discuss gender issues, the complete unwillingness of certain women to discuss in a straightforward way without bullying, blameshifting, or out and out creating whatever reality suits them in the moment. That's misandry. That's exactly the kinds of tactics the KKK or Aryan Nation would use in any "discussions" with blacks or jews. #1 Unwillingness to discuss straightforward without bullying? UF stated that kids are being taught in a feminine way and need a masculine parent to teach them honor, respect, responsibility. He hadn't offered a middle ground at the time. You offered your yin/yang version of the guy way/girl way. Then it was expanded. Omitted info added So his statement was taken as is that at best women can't teach honor, respect, responsibility & at worst that they have none. Hence I was explaining how that statement could be taken in the literal way. I even gave the example of if I say something and omit something that is key I shouldn't be surprised if people misinterpret my intent. In what did I bully you by explaining how someone could get the wrong message? #2 I don't see me blameshifting on anyone. Where do you see that? I'm just explaining how omitting info like I meant there's two ways of doing it can give the wrong message. That's the only kind of blame I see on my side. And that's not a gender thing. Don't omit info that is key to your message. #3 Creating realities Whoa where did I do that? At the time UF did not make the distinction or even offer a middle ground. Hence it's perfectly reasonable for someone to take his literal words literally. Please explain where did I display any of those behaviors? Misandry is hate/degradation that's my definition. How is unwillingness, blameshifting, and reality creating misandry? That's bullying and evading responsibility. If anything I see men display the behavior you say they hate. Though on this site it's excused as they are venting & it's a cry for help. If anything you seem unwilling to see anything but that I was misinterpreting and not explaining how one could get the wrong message at the time. You seem to be blaming me for something I haven't done. (I did read the thread but where do you see my claim that I did previously?) You see to be creating realities where the women are the unwilling ones and miscommunication = misandry.
Queen Zenobia Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 I very much agree with those who say that misandrists want the gender discussion to go one way. I don't think gender relations will ever improve until both sides get honest with each other and try to see it from both points of view but with some feminists they want to shout at men and want men to just shut up. They simply want men to nod our heads in agreement if we don't we are woman hating misogynists Also misandrists have nothing to do with anti-woman sites. My mother turned against men way before the internet was a mainstream thing and my father was an Alan Alda types who supported her and wanted an equal marriage. He gave her no reason to heap the kinds of abuse on him that she did but it happened and from what I hear many men his age went through the same thing. The ironic thing is that men like him got it the worst while the openly macho men still seem to have happy marriages. The men who never even bothered trying to please feminists ended up pretty good. I think what women see as woman hating is simply men throwing our hands up and admitting we can't win. There is no pleasing some women today and we have realized that. There is a huge difference between what many women say and what they do and men being the results oriented creatures we are are simply doing what actually works. Eh...I think everyone these days is just too quick to get offended and angry, and too reluctant to love one another (and not just romantically). Feminism, at least in theory, is about obtaining equal rights for women. A noble goal to be sure, but too often is presented as a zero sum game, as if women have to take stuff away from men rather than allow both to stand up on their own two feet as equals. I don't want men knocked down a few pegs, I want both of us to rise a few pegs. That, in my opinion should be a default, not something people should have to be reminded of. Both of my parents grew up in the Middle East, basically never hearing about feminism except as an obscure "western" ideology (this in a culture where women are generally not equal). Nevertheless, their marriage can in every way be described as equal (and happy): encouragement, not contempt; cooperation instead of competition. Both have good, and fulfilling careers. They taught me the same values. Unfortunately too many people don't teach their kids those values, either by example or in words. I don't know if the majority of women are anti-man (because I've never done a survey and never will) but I know most of my friends aren't. And from what I've read of your previous posts your wife isn't either. So, I think you need to stop reading this material, enjoy your life, and let the haters hate. They're the ones who will be paying for it years from now.
serial muse Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 Then I tried to suggest a middle ground without attacking the poster for her probably purposeful misinterpretation of what UF said. Then she did the same thing to me, claiming I said things I didn't say, basically making up what she wanted me to say to fit her agenda, regardless of the truth of it. This is the exact kind of thing that pisses men off when trying to discuss gender issues, the complete unwillingness of certain women to discuss in a straightforward way without bullying, blameshifting, or out and out creating whatever reality suits them in the moment. That's misandry. That's exactly the kinds of tactics the KKK or Aryan Nation would use in any "discussions" with blacks or jews. All of this, after saying And the above is the massive overreaction and straw man repeated over and over through the post, as if repeating it makes it true. dasein, you are a massive hypocrite. It's enough.
Author Woggle Posted July 22, 2011 Author Posted July 22, 2011 I agree 100% with the dictionary definition of feminism but how often do those who call themselves feminists actually practice it?
serial muse Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 I agree 100% with the dictionary definition of feminism but how often do those who call themselves feminists actually practice it? You know what, Woggle, I am sorry for my part in derailing your thread. I disagree with the idea that most women think what this blogger thinks, but I think it sucks that you had a bad experience there when you tried to participate. I just think that maybe it would be better for you to ignore those kinds of threads, as it would be better for me not to respond or even read posts that say things that I find personally repugnant. Honestly, I think that maybe you should just guard against going to places that represent viewpoints that trigger you. I'll try to do the same, because honestly, I really do empathize. And it's hard, because there are a lot of a**holes in the world, of every gender, and the internet is rife with sites that tap into neuroses, frustrations and crusades of every type. LS, it seems, can sometimes be one of those sites. Anyway, I just want to say that I think you're a good person, at heart, I admire your honest attempts to battle your demons and I wish you well.
Author Woggle Posted July 22, 2011 Author Posted July 22, 2011 You know what, Woggle, I am sorry for my part in derailing your thread. I disagree with the idea that most women think what this blogger thinks, but I think it sucks that you had a bad experience there when you tried to participate. I just think that maybe it would be better for you to ignore those kinds of threads, as it would be better for me not to respond or even read posts that say things that I find personally repugnant. Honestly, I think that maybe you should just guard against going to places that represent viewpoints that trigger you. I'll try to do the same, because honestly, I really do empathize. And it's hard, because there are a lot of a**holes in the world, of every gender, and the internet is rife with sites that tap into neuroses, frustrations and crusades of every type. LS, it seems, can sometimes be one of those sites. Anyway, I just want to say that I think you're a good person, at heart, I admire your honest attempts to battle your demons and I wish you well. Thank you. I really don't hate women but I am willing to call out bs when I see it.
serial muse Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 Thank you. I really don't hate women but I am willing to call out bs when I see it. I believe you.
Crabbies Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 Just out of curiosity, with so many women posting in the beginning of this thread to criticise, belittle, attack and insult the OP, who has been honest and open about his struggles; he had an abusive feminist mum and is clearly still suffering... Where is the compassion from all the women who saw fit to insult him? A woman posting that her father regularly beat her, called for the death of women, and threatened to cut off her breasts would have been sympathized with, supported, praised for surviving etc... we all know it.. But because he's a man: silence.... Did he deserve that treatment from his mum, or are we just tolerant of the abuse of men and boys? Or is he simply not credible because he's a man? This is a plea for integrity, respect and honour... Ladies, please explain yourselves... My first paragraph explains to whom my last post was directed: and I await a response, but am not holding my breath;) I think she died of asphixiation...
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 I agree 100% with the dictionary definition of feminism but how often do those who call themselves feminists actually practice it? Quite often they're not publicized as often because misandristic feminism is the spotlight in the media. The media loves drama, hate, and radicals.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 He didn't say that, he said that "men need to be masculine parents, teach their children about respect, honor, responsibility." Only in a very twisted, contorted way could this be interpreted as "women have no respect, honor, responsibility." But his words were in fact twisted in an effort to create a false reality that you seem happy to perpetuate. You want to see something that simply and plainly is not there. Only in a twisted way. I got from his statement that men were being taught to be feminine parents and they need men to be masculine parents and teach them about respect, honor, and responsibility. "There is a Tsunami of women ruthlessly exploiting the male drive to be a provider and trying to force men to parent in a feminine way. Men need to be masculine parents... teach their children about respect, honor, responsibility..." So how is "UF stated that kids are being taught in a feminine way and need a masculine parent to teach them honor, respect, responsibility." Feminine way. Masculine parent teaches honor, respect, responsibility. What's wrong in what I said? I never said that bullying or blameshifting was the only way certain women shout men down, creating a false, unreasonable interpretation of what someone actually said is what you are doing. How am I creating a false unreasonable interpretation? In fact my first post was explaining how she could have gotten that interpretation that women have no honor, respect, responsibility. I was trying to show what he said forced to parent in a feminine way when a masculine parent is needed to teach honor, respect, responsibility can be taken as that at best women can't teach honor, respect, responsibility & at worst that they have none. Since at that time his literal words were taken literally. No middle ground or yin/yang was offered. What else would she read from women have none. No middle ground was offered. If there's a middle ground the best wording would be women and men have different forms of honor, respect, and responsibility. It'd be like me saying men have no compassion,empathy, or emotions. Then say oh there's a middle ground. My other post was telling you that I am explaining how she got that intrepretation and how omitting the middle ground and the wording can lead to that interpretation. If anything you're the one creating a false unreasonable interpretation. Censorship, or an attempt to shout someone down so they can't be heard using purposeful tactics, is much closer to real hatred than mere generalizations IMO. Here's an interesting generalization, "Women in the porn industry are victims of oppression." Does the person making that statement know all the women in the porn industry? Of course not. What about a woman who loved doing porn and wouldn't choose to do any other work, would she feel offended by that generalization? She might. Surely you feel that this type of generalization is as outrageous as any other generalization about women? No? Why not? Wanting to silence someone is much closer to hatred, and that's the exact attitude of several in this thread about woggle's OP, but don't take my word for it, read the thread from page 1. It's all there in black and white. I don't see baseless unfounded self arrogance without hate in them as hatred but just that arrogance or ignorance. If someone claimed all men have 3 balls & all women have 3 t*ts I see ignorance/arrogance. If some claimed all men are pigs & all women are whores I see hatred. Silencing someone is hatred as well? To me unless it's silencing to promote hate then yes but if it's just obnoxiousness then no. Silencing you to further gender relations, equal rights yes. Silencing you because of an opinion..unless it furthers relations/rights then not much. I haven't seen much silencing on this thread. I have seen off topic posts & asking him where he found it & that he should stop looking/searching as it's counter intuitive to his therapy. Apparently men on this board frequently use all these tactics that are much closer to hatred but of course they're venting & it's a cry for help. I see evidence of men behaving by your definition with hatred (tactics) & men behaving by my definition (hate/insults/superiority/degradation). So far I've only heard of women behaving by your definition with tactics. You've been shouting me down all this time when I've trying to explain how what he said can be misinterpretation incorrectly since he offered no middle ground and no dual masculine/feminine versions of honor/respect/responsibility.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 If someone said "men are trying to force women to be more masculine, women need to teach their children in a feminine way, teach them about compassion, generosity, and family values," and someone else replied, "That's so very very very sad that you think men can't teach compassion, generosity and family values!" wouldn't you think that second person was being ridiculous, purposefully obtuse, and twisting what the first person actually said to suit them? Any reasonable person would. No I wouldn't. Then again I don't assume everyone thinks like me. I also see how miscommunication can occur very easily and how what you say doesn't equal what you mean aka taking it in the literal sense. I guess I'm not reasonable since I don't think everyone interprets things like me and can see how others can get different messages. When put in other context, this stuff gets real clear real fast. It's only because we have had to listen to it so long, and have been afraid to say anything in response that it sounds like it makes sense. Most of the more outlandish feminist claims about continued oppression, etc., also make no sense when seen in the clear light of day. Or people could stop being on the defensive thinking and be willing to be straightforward and clear up miscommunication/misinterpretation instead of thinking the person is purposefully plotting away and twisting info and that any attempt to explain how they got to that conclusion is a hate tactic. Then again what do I know I'm not reasonable.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 If someone said "men are trying to force women to be more masculine, women need to teach their children in a feminine way, teach them about compassion, generosity, and family values," and someone else replied, "That's so very very very sad that you think men can't teach compassion, generosity and family values!" wouldn't you think that second person was being ridiculous, purposefully obtuse, and twisting what the first person actually said to suit them? Any reasonable person would. When put in other context, this stuff gets real clear real fast. It's only because we have had to listen to it so long, and have been afraid to say anything in response that it sounds like it makes sense. Most of the more outlandish feminist claims about continued oppression, etc., also make no sense when seen in the clear light of day. Why are you quoting my "I got this" ? The full quote is "I got from his statement that men were being taught to be feminine parents and they need men to be masculine parents and teach them about respect, honor, and responsibility." So you're clear that I wasn't interpreting his message as women have no honor, respect, responsibility but showing how a person could get that interpretation? Now can you clarify me on this? He didn't say that, he said that "men need to be masculine parents, teach their children about respect, honor, responsibility." Only in a very twisted, contorted way could this be interpreted as "women have no respect, honor, responsibility." But his words were in fact twisted in an effort to create a false reality that you seem happy to perpetuate. You want to see something that simply and plainly is not there. Now how did I seem happy to perpetuate that reality by explaining to you how not explaining the middle ground in his statement can leave it open to interpretation? Sorry just because you don't see it doesn't mean others will especially when it's worded a certain way and omitting key info. Which is why I explained to you how some may get that. So me seeing miscommunication means I want to see something that's not there? I thought it meant I could see mixed signals & bad interpretations. You still haven't told me how is "men need to be masculine parents, teach their children about respect, honor, responsibility." different from what I told you I got from his statement that men were being taught to be feminine parents and they need men to be masculine parents and teach them about respect, honor, and responsibility. Full quote: "There is a Tsunami of women ruthlessly exploiting the male drive to be a provider and trying to force men to parent in a feminine way. Men need to be masculine parents... teach their children about respect, honor, responsibility..." My quote: So how is "UF stated that kids are being taught in a feminine way and need a masculine parent to teach them honor, respect, responsibility." Feminine way. Masculine parent teaches honor, respect, responsibility. What's wrong in what I said?
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 No, disagreement or even claiming someone is making things up or reading things in an unreasonable way is not "shouting down," claiming someone's opinion should be dismissed automatically without consideration merely because it's a generalization, the product of imagined hatred, the desire to oppress as part of a patriarchy, that they are "just bitter," that they aren't good with women or deserving of female company, and as a result that their opinions shouldn't even be heard or tolerated is shouting down. What UF said, his words, are a simple matter of fact, anyone can read them. What a reasonable or unreasonable interpretation of them is is a matter of opinion, as is my claim that you and others twisted or are twisting his words. One disagrees with the words someone says, the other applies a "one size fits all" response to anything one doesn't like by attacking the person who said them as opposed to the words they said. Simple distinction. That claim is shutting me down by not using my stance and using one that you assumed and prefer. You're completely dismissing my stance. I'm not twisting his words. I'm explaining how one can misinterpret it. I was doing that in the first post. I told you I was explaining how one can incorrectly misinterpret his statement multiple times in the posts thereafter. So how am I twisting his words? How am I twisting his words by explaining how one can get the wrong interpretation based on the wording and no middle ground offered in the statement making things up or reading in it unreasonably (though it seems any interpretation that's not yours is unreasonable and purposefully obtuse)? Twisting his words would be saying that's what he meant or that's the interpretation. I haven't done that. You did apply a one size fits all response with- misinterpreting, misreading, unwillingness, bullying, etc post. Your claim isn't even based on something I have done.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 As shorthand to show what post I am replying to. Nope, I'm done. Am content with what the posts I've made already say, no need for more from me on this topic. Funny because all your posts just evaded my questions. Your claim is that I'm twisting words by explaining how one can get the wrong interpretation. Yep by explaining how it can be misinterpretated. Here I thought twisting words meant misinterpreting not explaining how it can be done. Ah this site. Good for you being content. I am too. As this is the third time I clearly see you make assumptions based onwhat you read into in the first post & continuously ignore when someone tells you are wrong about their intention. You then evade questions asking where did you get that assumption. Then close the case when the person repeats the request to where you could have gotten that assumption from the first post & why you stick to that assumption despite the person telling you that is not their intention multiple times. Quite odd since you're so defensive about twisting words & misinterpretation.
udolipixie Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 So since you stick to whatever you read into on a post despite being told several times that's not the intention and being asked where did you get that idea from and not answering that. I won't reply to any of your posts & hope you do the same. No point in talking with something when I say something and they see want they want to see and stick to it. As per the last two times happy editing your previous posts! At least I know the benefit of the doubt for guys on here is not 3 but 1.
Mme. Chaucer Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 Just out of curiosity, with so many women posting in the beginning of this thread to criticise, belittle, attack and insult the OP, who has been honest and open about his struggles; he had an abusive feminist mum and is clearly still suffering... Where is the compassion from all the women who saw fit to insult him? A woman posting that her father regularly beat her, called for the death of women, and threatened to cut off her breasts would have been sympathized with, supported, praised for surviving etc... we all know it.. But because he's a man: silence.... Did he deserve that treatment from his mum, or are we just tolerant of the abuse of men and boys? Or is he simply not credible because he's a man? This is a plea for integrity, respect and honour... Ladies, please explain yourselves... I just read this entire thread, and I see not a single example of what you bring up here. Where did ANY woman, or person, on this thread "belittle, attack and insult" Woggle? Woggle has received, and continues to receive a great outpouring of support from women as well as men here on LS. Most of us who have engaged with him in the past will agree that seeking and exploring sites such as the one he links here is just self destructive for Woggle. So is engaging in decrying women or feminism with him. He, and we know that there are bad women, there are people (like you, evidently) who skew feminism to be a negative thing towards men rather than an uplifting thing for women. And, that there are bad people everywhere, and people who use EVERY philosophy, religion, political stance, social movement, etc. for negative purposes. As someone else said, Woggle, you would be much better served to seek the love in the world rather than looking for justification for your defensive stance. We all realize that you came by that naturally, but we know that you need to leave it behind you sometime very very soon.
Mme. Chaucer Posted July 22, 2011 Posted July 22, 2011 Demeaning / negative generalizations about women on THIS THREAD: And for some of them to adopt the standard "I hate men" stance because of this shows how un-intelligent they really are. you look at the U.S. and Europe and the women do about 60% of the housework, but really can't make any claims outside the home. American women, the whiny and self-entitled group. You can give everything to a woman and she will still complain about how oppressed she is. Women expect everything to be handed to them not fought for. They dont understand that in this man's world, respect is earned not given. A man once said to me, all women are looking for is a guy who won't put up with their bull*****... In my experience, this is true... But after I moved to usa, I saw with my own eyes what would happen if you help women get greater rights. Instead of being appreciative and returning the favor, they would simply bite the hand that feeds them and demand more and more without giving any consideration toward the other gender. Most of them come from broken homes, which is, to a large extent, the responsibility of their mothers (who are either of poor moral character themselves or were exercising bad judgment by shacking up with the wrong kind of men) a reflection on the average female's lack of logical capacity. The truth is the more developed and prosperous a society gets, the lazier the women become. There is a underlying misandry in an overwhelming number of posts and threads by women. women are their own worst enemies But there is a generalised sense of feminine superiority Happiness is the one thing that tends to elude these women. They tend to be a selfish, bitter, miserable lot. Having a vagina: It's an eternal, perpetual "get-out-of-jail-free" card for some women. It's the recognition, the "strong woman" delusion, the self-righteousness, the total lack of accountability and the blame of men for everything bad, past present and future... It should be classified as a psychological condition... There is a Tsunami of women ruthlessly exploiting the male drive to be a provider and trying to force men to parent in a feminine way women tattle more than men Demeaning / negative generalizations about men in THIS THREAD: .
Author Woggle Posted July 22, 2011 Author Posted July 22, 2011 I agree that being hateful and destructive is not a positive thing but I feel very passionate that I don't want any man to go through what I have in the past. It hurts me to see that many boys are pretty much being raised to hate themselves. When I see men going through the same thing it fires me up. I also agree that for the most part women here have been very supportive. For some reason other men on here don't seem to receive the same support I have but I do admit that for the most part I have had good experiences with women on here.
Recommended Posts