Misogynists

Post Reply New Topic

>>"I think men should be allowed on here, but the ones that say idiotic things should be prohibited from commenting.<<

I was leaning toward this approach also, but then it comes down to who decides on what is idiotic and what is not. Meanings may get mixed up, people may be having a bad night and make one mistake, even the admins may dislike someone and act unfairly etc. This could cause alot of arguements/disagreements, protests of unfairness, bias and gender discrimination, which would ultimately make the whole thing much worse.

Hmmn you're right.


Another alternative could be men in mens only, and women in womens, but posts to each other could be shared in the adult section or something.

I can't in all honesty say that a woman has no right to think I'm some kind of creepy weirdo that's going to do scary and horrible things to them. Mind you I'm thinking they probably don't, because if that was true I'd probably attract more of them (it's so counter intutitive it makes sense).

But what does piss me off is this idea that sexually frustrated depressed and lonely men are proto rapists. Or that they're all jerks. Here's what you can safely assume about a guy that isn't getting any, and it's clear that he wants some.

He want's to have sex.


That's about it. He's not gay. He's not an as*hole. He's not going to kill and rape someone the first chance he gets.

Roughly the same applies to women in roughly similar situations. And if you think that somehow because their reproductive organs are on the inside, you need to either pay more attention to women, or pay more attention to more types of women.

They're not all alike you know.

you know that's the sanest thing anyone in here has said all week!

You may need to explain to her the differences in visual focus between males and females. Males have tight focused good long range/depth perception type vision, probably evolved for throwing rocks at stuff in order to kill and eat it. Females have good peripheral vision, probably evolved for more of a gathering style than a hunting style.

Thus if she wants to check out a guy's... um... whatever part of a guy is attractive?... she can see it perfectly well out of the side of her eye. Her male friends, on the other hand, need to look directly at things if they want to see them with any detail. I read somewhere on the internet, so it must be true, that women check out men as often as vice versa, the only difference being women are harder to catch doing so.

As they get older, they'll learn to use their peripheral vision a bit more, and being slapped a few times will speed up the process.

How can you possibly think that? If anything, women have it a lot worse.

If we work outside the home, we're guilted over "depriving our kids of a mom."
If we don't work outside the home, we're told we're just "lazy and backward."

If we want a husband, we're "out to trap a man."
If we don't want a husband, we're considered "unnatural."

A man gets racked "down there" how often? Maybe a few times a year? And even then, it only hurts for a few minutes.
A woman has 13 periods a year, and for many women each period involves cramping which lasts for one day or more.

If we dress and act sexy, we're called sluts.
If we don't dress and act sexy, we're considered "repressed" or "frigid".

If we have multiple partners, we're considered no better than whores.
If we only have one partner, we're considered "possessive" or "morally stick-up-ass."
If we have no partners, we're considered a future spinster (or crazy cat lady) in the making.

If we're smart but unattractive, we're still unwanted.
If we're rich but unattractive, we're still unwanted.
If we're talented but unattractive, we're still unwanted.

If we get raped, people assume we must have "caused" it somehow. (And rape happens FAR more frequently to women than to men.)

If we're into science or technology, we're automatically assumed to be extremely unattractive.
If we're not into science or technology, we're assumed to be shallow and with the IQ of a cinderblock.

When it comes to the perpetuation of the species, a man and a woman have fun, but who gets stuck with the check? Who has to go through the hell of pregnancy and childbirth? Not him.

A man and a woman get ready to go out somewhere on the weekend. Who puts their shoes on their feet and their wallet in their back pocket, and is good to go? Now, who is putting makeup on, stressing over whether or not their blouse matches, searching the house for a particular pair of earrings, and so on? Who is expected to do that (and automatically assumed to be a lesbian or psychologically maladjusted if she doesn't), and who has the freedom to come as he is?

Have you tried on high heels? The things could double for medieval torture devices.
Have you tried on men's shoes? Very comfortable, aren't they?

I mean really, what does a man have to do to be accepted? Get a job, be self-sufficient, have enough by the way of social skills that he can talk and not automatically bore or piss off everyone within earshot, and not be so insecure or so much of a crybaby that he turns everyone off. That's it, and he's fine.

For a woman, that doesn't even begin to start it.... to say nothing of the fact that a lot of the standards for women are mutually exclusive. We're damned if we do, and we're damned if we don't.

Yeah. I find it pretty ridicilous when anyone tries to say that women somehow have it 'easier'.

It's pretty hard to compare in general which gender has things 'harder' or 'easier'.


One thing I do know though, is that women definately do not have things easy. Maybe they don't have to put up with all of the same kinds of crap as men, but they have to put up with a LOT of other kinds.

Who's fault do people think this is?

All of ours.

I reread my question and it sounded kind of agressive and rhetorical, but it was genuine. Are females considered 'lesser' in so many ways because men run the world? Maybe because of Eve and the Christian idea that woman came from man (his 14th rib)? Same for Islamic countries, where woman have to cover up and have alot of rules restricting and forbidding them. Any ideas?

There are I think, two things going on that promote the idea of women as "inferior".

First off, is that there is a long history of women being kept down. I think this is a combination of a political thing (men felt threatened by their power), and that it's easier to have sex with them when they don't have the option of saying 'no'.


On the other hand, you have the women that embrace the idea that they're inferior. I think both my grandparents are like this, but it strikes me as fairly odd that the one is like that because she's a real firebrand. She really seems like someone you'd think would be a feminist.


So in summary, you have a couple bastards, and you have people believing them.

nicely stated Hazelwudi. i agree completely. i s'pose itsa catch-22.

all of those "proper" things for a lady to be expected of doing (AS or not) that men DON'T have to deal with.

i just LOVE bein a girl.

but, at the same time f**k being a man.

always driven by thier basic needs.

grrr.

what maslow didn't understand (cos he was a man) was that for women, his "hierarchy of needs" is different... for women, socializing is a "basic need", just as "sex" is a basic need for a man....

again, as someone else said before me, "for men, the equivalent of being celibate for a year, is like a woman prevented from talking or socializing with anyone for a year"

there's not much you can do against the HARD WIRING in your brain. you can try to cover it up, but then you get men who act like sissies and wussies, and so-called "perverts" and rapists and molesters

Haha. Stop generalizing. How much do you know about women anyway? I don't fit your mold.
Men always driven by their basic needs? This is news to me. What's a basic need, anyway? Shelter, food, and clothing?
Ugh.

the only way we can get anywhere in a discussion of populations is if we generalize... we're talking about populations of people, not individuals... sure there are exceptions, but we're not looking at those

anyways, yes all humans are driven by their basic needs... and sex is a basic need... look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_h ... y_of_needs

however based upon my own life experiences, IMHO the position of sex is different for men & women... for women it's higher up... so they don't NEED it as much as men do

I don't know about that. It is pretty easy to say that some women engage in "behaviour X" and some men engage in behaviour Y. Pigeonholing an entire gender to fit what you think drives them all is not going to work because as you say there are exceptions to the rule. Black and white, all or nothing thinking for the win, I guess. And I see a post like blackdove's above, and I think, hey... I have met plenty of men driven beyond their most basic needs. I can think of conditions labeled as personality disorders, sexual disorders, etc. that challenge this so called heirarchy of needs. They don't want it, they don't actively seek it - what's going on with them? But you're not talking about people who happen to be atypical; they just don't count?