Why the world hates us?

[hu lover]

hehehehehe you said moist! hehehehe

 

[suprisedcrankyface]

yes and that can be difficult to go through especially for women, men however do not need to worry about that

Yet (decent) men CHOOSE to raise that child without the same hormonal drive. Genders are different but you cannot make it so simple as that.

 

[hu lover]

Yet (decent) men CHOOSE to raise that child without the same hormonal drive. Genders are different but you cannot make it so simple as that.

true but after the woman having the baby who would have it more difficult afterward the man or the woman?

 

[hu lover]

It's actually an incredibly old political principal put forth by Emanual Kant. Humans are not ends, nor means to something else. Failing this elementary philosophical threshold puts you squarely in the realm of 'authoritarian.' If you can't respect human autonomy, you are some degree of authoritarian.


Go ahead and try to get two partisan groups at the table and get them to agree on anything.

Then come back and tell me how 'easy' that was.


MLK was actually the reasonable centrist relative to two radical sides, but OK. His positions were completely reasonable, and down the middle. He emphasized peaceful resistance. Absolutely wild to frame him as a radical in an environment where actual radicals were shacking up with the USSR and becoming terrorist organizations.

And self indulgent liberals who supported him up to the point it might cost themselves something were decidedly not 'centrists.' Once again, centrism as explained by someone who doesn't understand centrism. MLK's position didn't earn him friends. He wasn't radical enough for his own side of the fence, and he was too radical for the conservatives who want nothing to change.


Centrism understands that when either side of two radical factions get what they want, it's usually a net drag on society. It's either cultural stagnation or complete chaos. You are not obligated to carry water for one group of radicals just because the other side is repugnant. They can both be repugnant. Societal change performed from the barrel of a gun is usually not effective and it's usually guaranteeing that the problem will not go away for generations.

Which is why most radicals fail. They can't accept that what they fight for wont be realized in their life time and instead of playing the long game- which historically usually works- they demand immediate satisfaction. Which understandably makes people treat them with suspicion; you don't know if these people care about their cause or are just out to enrich themselves. Because radicals tend to treat loyalty as their chief capital and competence gets treated with suspicion.

you make some pretty good observations

 

[suprisedcrankyface]

true but after the woman having the baby who would have it more difficult afterward the man or the woman?

Depends on the human story that follows?

you make some pretty good observations

That compromise has to happen for something lasting to occur? Yes, but if that's an 'observation' we are all fucked.

 

[balitz Method]

Your comment tries to sound thoughtful, but it’s just dressed-up condescension. You’re dismissing everything as entitlement without actually engaging with the reasons behind it. Let’s start with your premise. Yes, men have historically held power in institutions. But you’re talking about the top 1%. The majority of men weren’t kings or lawmakers. They were coal miners, factory workers, soldiers sent to die in wars they didn’t start. This idea that "men dominated everything" flattens class, history, and reality into one lazy narrative.

You must be registered to see the links

Used up, discarded, and invisible. That’s sacrifice, not domination. And it wasn’t done for the benefit of women either. It was done to sustain the same elite structures that oppressed everyone.

A good bit of Marxist and post-Marxist communist literature tries to stress that class consciousness is the only important consciousness, but by and large that still centers male concerns and viewpoints as 'the natural ones' without further examining them. The idea that only a small percentage of men have benefited from the male perspective being centered when all the facts in any situation have been and continue to be in most situations bent to support this view so that any concerns by others are easily dismissed as irrational hysteria not worth considering simply doesn't hold up. Solidarity between the ruling class and the proletariat (largely against their own interests) is often achieved through promises to increase male control over women. We have several current examples of far-right pushes gaining ground this way. Disenfranchised poor men are less likely to gain class consciousness if the ruling class allows them to police birth control or enforce standards of femininity by allowing violence against anyone who doesn't look traditionally ladylike.

There are concerns that need to be addressed - I agree that education caters to the way girls are socialized to behave and this is affecting boys, for instance - but at the same time no one saw these things as problems when it was men being exclusively catered to. There's a lot of "I'm not being given the chance to succeed (subtext: and I deserve to succeed)" without the historical awareness that they've been putting other people in that position for literally ever and more often than not their proposed solution is to go back to the way things were - whichever particular model was their favorite. What I was saying is that you have to actually investigate your premises to see if this is a case where there's a demonstrable and consistent systemic problem or just an instance of men seeing a change that favors someone else and declaring it unfair without realizing that things are still very much stacked in their favor.

That's why it's useful to seek out other perspectives, especially if they can thoroughly break down many of the things you've simply taken for granted; seeing just how thoroughly the male perspective and men in general are valued is eye-opening to people who have been living in that bubble for their whole lives.

It's frustrating to talk to people who think that they've never been prioritized just because they don't see it. They've never had 100% of their value tied to their reproductive functions and allowed zero control over them; they don't have a foreign perspective living in their head that judges their appearance; they don't experience how little everyday places cater to their unique needs; they haven't been discouraged from speaking up about harassment because the old fart in question is someone very important; they've never seen that look of trepidation that sinks into people's faces when they realize that a woman is going to be handling their matter; they don't get spoken down to as a matter of course; doing the best job and seeing the reward go to a mediocre man is an exception rather than the rule.

Most of all they haven't experienced how even other women may not sympathize with any of these concerns because they have come from thousands of years of alienation that caused them to think of themselves as secondary, to more easily empathize with the nearest man than other women. The system has not been dismantled. It's barely been adjusted and even that change causes huge uproars.

Men don't deserve to be ignored any more than women do, but they also have to do the work and stop dramaticizing every instance of not being given special (which to them is just normal) treatment. That's why The Other Sex works so well even now; it's not a man-hating book; it's a 'let's go over this step by step and see where we end up' book.

 

[anne O'nymous]

I find it funny that you hand picked European countries calling them secular while almost all of em have a large christan population not to mention their cultural is largely influenced by Christianity.

Also what made you think i am from USA?

Who the fuck said that you are from the USA? Not me...

Arent you making a lot of assumptions now and from what i remember Usa is also secular.

You know that the USA have "in God we trust" wrote in their banknote, and make their president swear on the bible, right?

Well celebrate your secular western democracies while you can maybe not now but in a few decades hopefully we would have better choices like an all African Britain or an all Arab France. It would be an upgrade really. "reality isn't as black and white as you think" i am brown i dont care. Give away your nations as i said before its your choice. I dont care for USA, I saw the LA riots video that country should focus on fixing itself before lecturing others.

 

[hu lover]

based on how the daughters or sons are raised within a family, the way they act and react to the world around them can be how they were raised by their parents. this would apply to some families but probably not all though

 

[suprisedcrankyface]

That's why it's useful to seek out other perspectives, especially if they can thoroughly break down many of the things you've simply taken for granted

Ohhhh.... the irony.... gotta be trolling posting blocks of chat gpt here hey?

 

[Shiko200]

Who the fuck said that you are from the USA? Not me...




You know that the USA have "in God we trust" wrote in their banknote, and make their president swear on the bible, right?

That makes a country non secular? wtf Also i dont think the president ABSOLUTELY has to swear on the bible. In god we trust being on their banknote means nothing either.

 

[hu lover]

 

[Warspawnfury75]

and now my head is physically starting to hurt!

 

[Warspawnfury75]

and thus this thread has now died.... rest in pieces

 

[wat3rfall]

A good bit of Marxist and post-Marxist communist literature tries to stress that class consciousness is the only important consciousness, but by and large that still centers male concerns and viewpoints as 'the natural ones' without further examining them. The idea that only a small percentage of men have benefited from the male perspective being centered when all the facts in any situation have been and continue to be in most situations bent to support this view so that any concerns by others are easily dismissed as irrational hysteria not worth considering simply doesn't hold up. Solidarity between the ruling class and the proletariat (largely against their own interests) is often achieved through promises to increase male control over women. We have several current examples of far-right pushes gaining ground this way. Disenfranchised poor men are less likely to gain class consciousness if the ruling class allows them to police birth control or enforce standards of femininity by allowing violence against anyone who doesn't look traditionally ladylike.

There are concerns that need to be addressed - I agree that education caters to the way girls are socialized to behave and this is affecting boys, for instance - but at the same time no one saw these things as problems when it was men being exclusively catered to. There's a lot of "I'm not being given the chance to succeed (subtext: and I deserve to succeed)" without the historical awareness that they've been putting other people in that position for literally ever and more often than not their proposed solution is to go back to the way things were - whichever particular model was their favorite. What I was saying is that you have to actually investigate your premises to see if this is a case where there's a demonstrable and consistent systemic problem or just an instance of men seeing a change that favors someone else and declaring it unfair without realizing that things are still very much stacked in their favor.

That's why it's useful to seek out other perspectives, especially if they can thoroughly break down many of the things you've simply taken for granted; seeing just how thoroughly the male perspective and men in general are valued is eye-opening to people who have been living in that bubble for their whole lives.

It's frustrating to talk to people who think that they've never been prioritized just because they don't see it. They've never had 100% of their value tied to their reproductive functions and allowed zero control over them; they don't have a foreign perspective living in their head that judges their appearance; they don't experience how little everyday places cater to their unique needs; they haven't been discouraged from speaking up about harassment because the old fart in question is someone very important; they've never seen that look of trepidation that sinks into people's faces when they realize that a woman is going to be handling their matter; they don't get spoken down to as a matter of course; doing the best job and seeing the reward go to a mediocre man is an exception rather than the rule.

Most of all they haven't experienced how even other women may not sympathize with any of these concerns because they have come from thousands of years of alienation that caused them to think of themselves as secondary, to more easily empathize with the nearest man than other women. The system has not been dismantled. It's barely been adjusted and even that change causes huge uproars.

Men don't deserve to be ignored any more than women do, but they also have to do the work and stop dramaticizing every instance of not being given special (which to them is just normal) treatment. That's why The Other Sex works so well even now; it's not a man-hating book; it's a 'let's go over this step by step and see where we end up' book.

You're not offering perspective. You're rewriting pain into privilege because it makes the narrative more convenient for you. You said solidarity was bought by offering poor men control over women. What control? The average man wasn’t deciding laws or enforcing systems. He was working himself to death, getting sent to wars, dying in mines, and coming home in pieces. You talk like every man was a judge or senator. Most were tools, no different from the women you're defending. The difference is, when women suffered, the world eventually listened. When men suffered, it was called duty. You said “no one saw it as a problem when it was men being catered to.” What fantasy are you living in? Catered to by who? Society gave men expectations, not compassion. Provide or be worthless. Fail and you're forgotten. Break down and you're weak. Men were allowed to serve. Never to be served. You bring up girls falling behind in the past. Fair enough. Now boys are falling behind. Globally. In reading, graduation, college entry, emotional literacy. Do you think that’s some sort of balancing act? What kind of equality accepts one group’s collapse because of past resentment?

Then there's the classic bait that men today just can't handle change. No. They're speaking because for decades they were silent. Because saying "I feel empty" gets them laughed at or called dangerous. You expect them to carry guilt from a history they didn't write while denying them even basic sympathy in the present. And you really tried to make “control over birth control” an argument while completely ignoring the fact that men never had reproductive choice either. A man has no say after conception. He can be forced into 18 years of financial burden for a child he didn’t plan and can’t even access if the mother decides to cut him off. That’s literally liability without rights. You speak as if men live in a bubble where they’ve always been valued. Tell that to the 70% of homeless people who are men. Tell it to the veterans killing themselves in silence. Tell it to the fathers whose children were ripped away by a biased system. And tell it to the boys growing up right now with no role models, no guidance, and a culture that treats their pain like an inconvenience.

You said “they haven’t experienced this or that.” Maybe not. But neither have you. You haven’t experienced being told to shut up the second you open your mouth about your own suffering. You haven’t been told your depression is toxic. You haven’t watched media turn your identity into a joke. You haven’t seen songs like "Manchild" celebrated for mocking you while any criticism is labeled misogyny. You’re just rationalizing dismissal at this point. You accuse others of lacking historical awareness while clinging to a selective version of history where only one group’s pain matters. You can’t even look at men breaking down in public without rolling your eyes and calling it entitlement. You’ve built a framework where male suffering is always either invisible or deserved. And That’s called moral cowardice.

 

[Evizzy89]

This is what your post looks like:
View attachment 4917735

It's fully you, really...

I mean, the song is fuckingly obvious when it come to who she's talking about:

"Did you just say you're finished? Didn't know we started"
"Won't you let an innocent woman be?"
"Never heard of self-care"
"Half your brain just ain't there"
"And I swear they choose me, I'm not choosing them" /s

And you, you get offended by this?
No, what am I saying, you aren't offended, you're clearly triggered because you felt directly attacked by those words because you recognized yourself in them...

the irony of you trying to insult him by trying to compare him to a women, while quoting a women, its like you dont have an original thought in your head D=


its fully you really

 

[Evizzy89]

View attachment 4917335
View attachment 4917336
Your comment has no basis in reality. Men still overwhelming control nearly all, if not all, societies in this world by a wide margin. No matter the five social institutions: Family, Education, Religion, Government, and Economy - all prioritize and are mainly led by men. While the Family does have strong maternal leanings, it is the men who make the rules and have the say over the Family institution through their power in the other four institutions.

Edit: also anyone who dismissively types "Sure, women are getting r4ped and abused but..." about real life sexual and domestic violence (and can't even be adult enough to type the actual word: raped) should probably consider a bit longer than a moment of introspection.

Hi! been awhile how you doin? wanted to re-iterate you about how youre a disgusting human being (consensus polled via everyone in the world except you, we didnt want to include you fyi)

Dude was obviously feeling insecure and in distress and instead of being a decent person and defusing or relieving any of the anxiety you went straight for the insults and sarcasm, bravo mr tolerant

Edit: removed a corny joke that made me look slightly more retarded than I actually am
added bunny as apology D=

 

[That other person]

You haven’t been told your depression is toxic. You haven’t watched media turn your identity into a joke.

Now this much I can agree with. When it comes to mental health and media there's a lot of hypocrisy.

A man feeling like shit has to stand up on their own more often than not. Even seeking therapy and stuff is seen as a sign of weakness and not of self-improvement, but mostly when it comes to men. Actual issues are seen as non-important because you only need to "man up".

A woman watching porn is now "exploring her sexuality freely" while a man watching porn is and always has been "just a pervert that's also probably a loser virgin" or something worse.

There are complains about female characters being attractive, but no one mentions the absurd muscles and perfect jaws of men. Many would complain about, idk, Tifa from FF7 for sure and then leave out the fact that Sephiroth and Cloud are attractive as hell too. This happens in other things too. And by saying that and merely recognizing a male is attractive I'm absolutely homosexual by the established "manly" standards.

Both sides have horrible issues and complete idiots backing them, and just because there are plenty of assholes that happen to be male doesn't mean men in general are an issue, assholes are, but everyone is too worried defending their side because being in the middle and actually thinking means you get pummeled by both.

I get where the OP is coming from. A little too aggressive, too angry, yes, but frustration is understandable. Not everyone is like this, and the world is not quite against one side, it's just, like I said, people found others online to be idiots with and feel empowered by having a brainless crowd following them repeating the same thing, and some took that as a chance to make some profit because why the hell not.

So if you meet a cool ass girl or an awesome dude, just be fucking nice and appreciate the fact there are other normal human beings out there instead of assuming they are this or that because they do this or that or whatever the fuck. Also sorry for the huge reply.

 

[fyl3toys]

 

[Count Morado]

wanted to re-iterate you about how youre a disgusting human being

 

[Evizzy89]

View attachment 4926915