I am a sexist

Post Reply New Topic

I am a sexist. At least I think I am, or think along the lines of one. I don't know what it is with me but I find myself constantly getting incredibly irritated with women in general, on a regular basis. I have this unshakeable feeling that women have lives that are basically catered to (as long as you aren't hugely undesirable in some way) and that women just have no idea of this so they complain constantly. I, of course, use the exponentially rising rates of plastic surgery, scam supplement usage, insane feminists that think that women are "ignored" after 50 years old as proof and justification of my generalizing.
What's really happening is these old women are now finally, at 50, being forced to experience the world and society through the eyes of a person who doesn't have a vagina and 'reproduction-ready" pheromones constantly altering every social setting they enter. And since they have built no means of actually being pleasing as a person to be around, they do essentially become useless. It's not healthy thinking on my part I don't lol (though poetic justice to my heart is incredibly warming)
And then I become a member of these forums and see hundreds of posts from males struggling to support themselves and dealing with daily torment and anxiety and the threat of starvation even, and then I occasionally see a post by a female, always going on about how they're sitting around complaining all day as their husbands support them. I would love to see the amount of useless (financially) aspie males who are getting supported by some random NT wife, the number is probably so insanely low compared to females.... I'm not sure most aspie females even realize the debilitating nature of ASD.

And then I realized. Men are mostly worthless. [I]inherently[\I]. Women can be thought of as individuals, men can't. Men's role in mankind is basically "throw as many at women as you can and hope they stick" and you end up with the majority being useless and therefore undesirable. The quantity of men has little impact on the reproductive capabilities of any group, so long as there are enough (don't know the number, but it isn't 1:1). Basically, a vagina is worth a million bucks. a penis is worth maybe 1000. This is a conclusion I just arrived at. LOL.

About the complaint about women, I don't actually think that. But the thoughts enter my brain at random times and refuse to leave (I know it's bulls**t) until I talk myself out of them lol. Which is probably how I arrived at this conclusion..

edit: already embarrassed about this post. damn me and my brain

I think about useless BS too at times.
It's better kept in your head.

I agree, it does seem that you are a fully qualified misogynist.

OP Aut2know better.

Earlier this evening I watched a video that showed some of the most offensive vintage ads ever made. Most of them because they were very sexist towards women. For example one shows a man spanking his wife because she didn't make him the brand of coffee he likes, and another a wife is crying because she burned the food but the husband consoles her by saying "at least you didn't burn the beer". The replies to the video showed me that nothing has changed and most men think women should still be treated like they're weak and inferior whether they admit it or not. So many "go in the kitchen, w***e, and make me a samwich" jokes. How original and brilliant. (sarcasm) Notice how it's only the domestic kitchen they think a woman belongs in, but if she's a chef in a restaurant kitchen, oh heaven forbid.

This is a really sh***y thing to say to all the AS women who belong to this forum. Like, really sh***y. You need to learn how to empathise with women, because guess what--we are people, just like you. I suggest talking to a therapist about these thoughts and why they are intruding into your consciousness on a regular basis. It's not healthy, to think this way about 51% of the human population.

You're treading on dangerous territory here. Identity politics is one of those things that has a way of doing very terrible things to people. On one end of the spectrum you have folks like lostonearth35 talking about how terrible men as a whole are, asserting that they are morally inferior to Women and some extreme feminists talking about attempting to eradicate masculinity and men as a whole (though, how they think that would work out for the long term survival of the species, I'm not sure). On the opposite end of the spectrum, you have some extreme MGTOWs saying the same exact crap about women, saying that they're inherently selfish, incapable of basic human decency, etc. and they're blind to the fact that they're making the same exact mistakes.

The fact of the matter is that some men are complete as*holes. Some women are also complete as*holes. I believe that the vast majority of people (at least when met in the proper setting) are capable of being fairly rational. Unfortunately, we currently find ourselves in the midst of something quite terrible. The shrill, shrieking voices of a small minority of rather far from rational people can get a lot of attention on the internet, even go viral. While the overwhelming majority of people have absolutely no ill will towards people of other races or genders, rational and moderate people don't grab people's attention quite like those who not only have extreme views but are far from reserved about those views, some of which have absolutely no bearing in reality.

I was recently speaking with an older woman I know who works for the county mental health department and she told me that she thinks a large part of the radicalization that's going on right now is largely due to how young people are so used to instant gratification. With all the various devices and services at the disposal of the average citizen of most western nations, it could very well be the case that people don't realize that you can't just have rapid regime changes or cultural changes without horrific unintended consequences. Some things just don't give instant gratification.

Of course, I don't think that alone explains this phenomenon (though it may very well be a contributing factor). Lots of assertions made by such individuals make me think they're living in some sort of Twilight Zone type universe. For example, I've been accused of being a neo-nazi for quoting Martin Luther King jr. speeches on Facebook (I've since had to quit using Facebook because of exactly this sort of thing). I wasn't aware that Martin Luther King jr. is now considered by some to be a neo-nazi figure. In fact, I've always thought of him as a champion of civil rights. However, the political climate surrounding race and gender has reached an alarming state. Most people are reasonable enough to not call someone a nazi for being a fan of Martin Luther King, but there are some people in this world you just can't debate because no matter how absolutely insane their position is, they'll just never be open to anything else. These are exactly the sort of people that posts like these attract.

So, I'd urge you not to seek advice from strangers on the internet about this sort of thing. Instead, try to determine the reality of the situation based on observations that you can make on your own, free of manipulation by outside sources that may have hidden agendas.

Of course, if you're dead set on getting your world view given to you by some outside source, maybe you'd benefit from reading some of Ayn Rand's books. Her whole outlook on life really revolved around respecting people as individuals and not trying to lump them all together as nothing more than members of various groups. There are many who would disagree with me and you're certainly welcome to, but I strongly believe that she had exactly the sort of ideas about identity that could help alleviate some of these sort of problems, which I believe come from thinking of people in collectivist terms.

Well, at least you recognise it's BS. It's some stuff that you think is the case and that strikes you as unfair strung together with piss-poor rationalisations in an attempt to blame your difficulties on, what - women? Feminism? There's some interesting stuff there that would bear a considered, thoughtful analysis. But as it is, yeah - BS.

And hey, I have my own kneejerk BS stuff, but I know better, and am pretty quick to reason with myself.

I'd recommend keeping away from Rand, though. Eesh.

Yeah, Rand is not taken seriously by scholars of any political persuasion because her entire "philosophy" is a massive train wreck. There is nothing to be gained from reading her 1200 page doorstops. At best, it's a needlessly extreme and sophomoric rehash of ideas that others have stated far better. At worst, it's a series of stark-raving mad rants.

Trying to go "men bad, women good!" or "women bad, men good!" is a surefire way to end up bitter and miserable.

My advice? Talk and read writings by people of various views and listen uncritically to what they have to say. Don't get defensive or challenge anything, that comes later. Listen, then examine claims in your own time to find if they're true or if they make sense. Right now, it sounds like you need to establish your own identity. It's really important to do so and I'd urge you not to just find something that sounds nice and go wild with it.

So this...

... is really excellent advice. Just be sure to make sure what people tell you isn't total BS. People love trying to sell you BS.

It is a biological fact that sperm is cheap, while eggs and pregnancies are expensive. Therefore, in addition to their personal achievements, females will always have inherent value as breeders and sexual companions, whereas males won't.

It's a biological fact that kids are a ton of work, and more likely to survive to adulthood and succeed with more people helping to make that happen. Fathers have a vested interest in doing so.

Also, what makes you think females do not want sexual companionship?

But that help doesn't depend much on the sex of the person delivering it. It does depend on what they can actually bring to the table---so personal achievements, like I said.

If the father is going to be any help, he'd better bring something in addition to sperm. So both parents have to do their part of that "ton of work", which should be roughly equal, but, in addition to that, the mother invests the egg and the pregnancy, which are still much more expensive than the sperm---so the imbalance persists, like I said.



Not necessarily. Depending on circumstances, impregnating a lot of women and letting them care for the babies may be a better strategy as far as perpetuating and propagating their genes is concerned. It's what wealthy, polygynous men with lots of wives do. But, even if they do equal work, the aforementioned imbalance persists.



What makes you believe I think so? I didn't say that. Females want sexual companionship, but, since eggs and pregnancies are much more expensive than sperm, there's a strong selective pressure for them to be much more picky with what males they find attractive. As a result, female sexual interest is much scarcer than its male counterpart---reasonably fit females have an overabundance of males interested in them sexually, very few of whom they find attractive in return. Therefore, mere male sexual companionship is worthless; females are sexually interested only in males who can offer much more than just to reciprocate their sexual interest. The converse isn't true: males are usually quite willing to have sex with most females if they were to show interest back, and neither party had any commitment in the way.

To sum up, female sexual companionship has inherent value, while the male variety does not, like I said.

Last edited by Spiderpig on 30 Dec 2015, 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

OP: Women don't necessarily have it easier. They struggle with poverty and mental illness just as much as men do, and they have to deal with the threat of rape/harassment/discrimination a lot more than men do. I think you should talk to some actual women about how their lives are before you jump to conclusions.

And LocksAndLiqueur: I don't think lostonearth35 was saying that men are inferior.

And it would be a better strategy for mothers to give their babies up for adoption, or even have them stolen. Yet neither of these are likely to be considered welcome options for mothers.

I find that sort of theorising doesn't really bear out in the world at large.

No offence meant to them, but I can go out and about and see loads of plain and even ugly men and women with their bairns in tow (and there's not many people round here, as Phillip J Fry had it, 'pulling down delivery boy money'). They're getting along in their lives, trying to make a go of things, and succeeding much of the time.

Hell, I'm no looker, am very much non-wealthy, but even I've had a few women interested in jumping my bones with no indication of anything more. I've also managed to have some kids.

The sudden culture shift, post the introduction of the contraceptive pill, to one of women sleeping with men more freely and for the sheer pleasure of it doesn't really indicate an innate biological behavioural disinclination to do so, but rather one based on social pressures and the fear of an unwanted pregnancy.

Oh, snap!

Was going to respond to Spiderpig too, but Hopper appears to have beaten me to the punch. I don't really have anything to add to that. I could go into why a lot of that evo-psych stuff is effectively pseudoscience, but that sounds boring.

When I was an angry teen I felt the same way.

Eventually I realized how dumb I was so I adopted a healthier mindset.