He's right, you know.
archive.is
He's right, you know
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
eater.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
web.csulb.edu
theredpillmovie.com
youtu.be
zurinstitute.com
psychologytoday.com
en.wikipedia.org
everydayfeminism.com
twitter.com
God I wish my hobbies were niche again. Normalfags ruin everything.
>our latest product isn't successful enough
>NERDS ARE SMOTHERING CULTURE
>Taking the stage at Comic Con 2015, the then Editor-in-Chief at Marvel Comics, Axel Alonso, announced the triumph of the nerdgeosie:
> ‘It used to be that cool people looked down on nerds. Now I know a lot of cool people who pretend to be nerds.’
This. At least the Warhammer franchise will remain unsullied by normie pandering.
Oh sweet child. Never look up Age of Sigmar.
just wait
One day, we will get big tiddy T'au waifus to be canon
its the other way around
american culture shifted when they saw a market to be profited for niche IPs and turn them into a mass market.
Everything else came as a snowball effect. Like Hippyism and the Love Movement was all created by enterprises exploiting the ideals of the time for profit. Woodstock wasnt made on love, it was about bank rolling profit.
Nerd culture happened to be the next one, soon to be faded by a new one; memes.
I agree💯
>Nerds exist
>Mainstream villifies them as cast offs from society
>Actually start to like the stuff nerds like
>Start to turn the nerd stuff into mainstream entertainment
>nerds don't like it
>start to blame nerds
Which is exactly why Gillette did a 180 when nobody liked there commercial.
So what is the next niche?
What's today's nieche btw? Gym culture?
I didn't follow anything about Gillette, what happened there?
>america
>culture
Made a commercial about manhood with the intent of making autist sperg on the internet and spam it all around. It worked.
>In the visually stunning but philosophically stunted Mad Max: Fury Road
Aaaand, this guy's a retard.
Nerds are useless, user.
>American
>culture
get real. Its been this way from the get go, Hollywood takes a concept and runs it into the ground. When was the last time you saw a proper cowboy movie?
>Mad Max: Fury Road
>philosophical
A big retard.
unironically, imageboard culture basket weaving forums
They tried tackling #toxicmasculinity. Probably ended up costing them sales but who knows if anyone that actually buys disposable razors would give a shit.
Nerds are not neets user.
Nerds are neets who consider themselves better.
No no noooo STOOOOOP
I miss when cowboys and pioneer stuff was American culture.
>American culture
I mean, I imagine a few probably do smother themselves in cheese spray, but why are we picturing superheroes next to-
Ah. Yeah, no, Americans have no culture, and this essentially proves it. 'Nerds' aren't a thing; being smart isn't some kind of horrifying disability, and I think these snide comments come from someone whose high point in life was 8th grade, and they've been heading down ever since. Linking nerd culture to suicide and not several economic crashes, and the rise of apocalypse mongers is daft.
As for 'oh noez, they potraying the CIA so baaaad', the CIA did literally kill a President for not invading Cuba/looking into federal banking so it's not a fucking suprise when a fictional Holocaust survivor is pissed he's still discriminated against.
In short, blame your country and your pathetic education system and institutions that allow a syphillitic billionaire to underbite his way to Presidency, not some fictional engineer who keeps ducking into transhumanism territory. It's like blaming Philip K Dick for the fact your neighbour thinks the toaster is trying to kill her.
>Move over, marines! Let a real hero show you how it's done!
>Nerds
>smart
>Americans have no culture, he squealed, wearing American style clothes, listening to American music, on an American website, with an American restaurant right outside his window
but burgers amirite? that'll show em
That's literally what 'Nerds' means; Geeks are obsessive and deeply into something, Nerds are knowledgeable and smart.
>Nerds are knowledgeable and smart
So how many girls have you picked up so far?
It's your fault
>American style clothes
An injun costume?
WAHHHHHHHH IT'S T-T-THE NERDS FAULT THAT WE DON'T HOLD POLITICIANS ACCOUNTABLE AND NOT THE FACT THAT THE LAST LEADER WE HAD THAT WASN'T A NEOKEK FOR THE MIL-COMPLEX HAD HIS BRAINS BLOWN OUT IN DALLAS
The more the merrier. I like not having to hide the things I like.
Yeah, until normies get bored with them and you have to go back to the closet.
Truly, BKV was prophetic.
>american culture
>American style clothes
Do you also think you invented suits?
>American restaurant
because fast food join is a such hard concept to come up with, for your information my country had a few local once before the mega corporation took them over.
>American website
you mean a format stolen from a jap? you remind me of some fags I know who think any website that has English as a default is American, even when it was created and is hosted in china by a Chinese guy.
>American music
you can keep the nigger music. I will stick to powerwolf
Then nerds only have technical knowledge and the moniker is being used incorrectly.
...Is this dumb cunt trying to say that the alienation of people by the natural consequences of capitalism is actually the fault of nerds? Our culture isn't being smothered, our culture is broken because it has become interwoven with capital and therefore is now merely a consumable.
In fact, the hamburger isn't American at all. The way of cooking the meat was invented in Germany, ketchup was a Chinese invention etc.
>The more the merrier
if only that was true. more people there are the less value your voice has and the direction of your hobbies is dictated by the majority. in the end you might end up with your hobbies hijacked and even the niche stuff no longer being made while some abomination dressed in its skin will shit on you for not showing the same devotion or just tell you it no longer needs you
That is a separate subject. obviously all cooking in America goes back to Europe, because before there was America it was bunch of european powers carving up the land and some other rejects of Europe running to America
>all cooking in America goes back to Europe
Now I want to ask /ck/ about Native American food, pemmican and such.
don´t you mean liberals user?
eater.com
have not seen anything that was unique to the region (like sushi) or does not have some better version elsewhere. Even in Europe, lots of local shit never got big because it just meh.
conservatives are no better once they are in power. hell half my childhood it was conservatives that were keeping me from enjoying my hobbies
>In fact, the hamburger isn't American at all. The way of cooking the meat was invented in Germany
There is some contention over this without a lot of evidence to back up either claim.
>American conservatives try to get rid of my games because of muh violence
>American liberals try to get rid of my games because of muh violence
>Japan and now Poland are eager to give me what I want.
America is the problem.
Careful, user. Yea Forums is 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% conservative and wants to murder and exterminate all liberals.
there is contention over a lot of types of food. waffles, turkish delights, sour plum sauce
Because they are. Because almost every technological breakthrough was caused due to someone who was, in one way or another, a Nerd.
you can want to exterminate liberals without being a conservative. I see some bible fags around here but the levels of conservatism Im talking about would A) never bring them you Yea Forums and B)they would be mocked so often they would just leave.
Fucking this.
They have no use for your labels. neets also did some important shit back when working was considered to be a mark of a poorfag.
Counterfeit and homosexual
I don't think you know what culture is. If any of those things were it, then know that they're ours now.
Not having a culture isn't necessarily a bad thing. It just means you were never isolated enough to form one.
At some point there's going to be semantics involved such as, "well technically this SIMILAR food was made before THAT similar food" etc.
A&W claims to be the first restaurant to serve bacon cheeseburgers - but you could argue that any diner that had hamburgers, cheeseburgers, and served bacon was first because you could just order bacon with your cheeseburger on the side and poof, they just served you a bacon cheeseburger. Really it's hard to pin down with any certainty when defining food can be a game of semantic details.
We're crypto cyberfascists, at least the PCs that come here are
America had a culture?
t. wannabe murderer in denial
Is there a page 2?
Argument is kind of all over the place with no real conclusion
It was more or less
>Only nerds and not the average fat popcorn sucking consumer go to see superhero movies
>Lets also ignore worldwide markets
>The US is therefore a large amount of nerds and I hate nerds
>Marvel Movies are "Like something Alex Jones would write" because they portray the gubbermint in a negative light and that somehow makes them conservative propaganda?
>Iron-man and Batman are to blame for Trump
Looking at other things he wrote the level of dissonance is strange.
>implying isolation is bad
This. Relatable corporates are trending. Wendies twitter girl pioneered that.
So, what are they gonna do?
Jump out of the screen and get mad?
Write bad things on the internet?
If this place has any value, is because it's chaotic. If it becomes lil' alt-right echo chamber, then it's a good thing to tell all the retards to commit suicide.
its good when you are good but since all are shit it will likely lead to stagnation and make you unread to face the rest of the world. expansion is the human way.
TL;DR Eurotrash. Learn to condense your points down to the essentials without superfluous jibberjabber that only serves to create an illusion of intelligence
You don't seem to actually know what a NEET is.♨️
Whatever you say, user.
So, how's worshipping Satan going for ya?
>bringing politics into this
Kill yourself
Well, it does stifle growth.
t. plebian who can't read anything but #hashtags
>Being that guy
Your life literally has no value.
>expansion is the human way to extinction
ftfy
Isolation ensures that people don't go homicidal from being exposed to ideas they don't agree with.
Close all borders on all nations. Shut down all international travel and trade. Shut down all communications between nations. It's the only way to prevent WW3.
The way the meat is prepared isn't American in origin, but the way the hamburger sandwich itself is explicitly American and far more people eat the hamburger sandwich than they do hamburger meat on it's own.
>implying growth is good
SO, the Holocaust should've never stopped growing, huh, user?
Coin Flip: Heads
The what?
user, everything should be done in moderation. We can't just join everyone into same country because nationalism still exists and only the most zealous will survive, yet we can't isolate ourselves because eventually stagnation will occur.
I agree globalism shouldn't be a thing, but we should still strive for synthesis instead of replacement (which is what is happening now).
I don't think you actually know what culture is, but given that most of the world is drowning in American culture I can't really blame the fish for not knowing they're wet.
>sandwich
English.
>all nations
yeah that is as likely as "lets all get along" but even more tarded. shitposting has been stronger today, it has ruined what little enjoyment I got from the likes system
>powerwolf
The fuck is this shit?
>40k
>Unsullied
They've toned down the grimdark brutality of the Imperium a lot in recent fluff. Like, the whole point is that the galaxy is so shitty that humanity has to turn to its worst instincts to survive, but that in turn makes everything shittier and that humans are doomed to this self-reinforcing cycle of pain and torment.
The halo cost should have reached its apex. cheack m8
Why does it sound like incels took over in writing 40k?
I'm not referring to sandwiches themselves but the type of sandwich called a burger. Work on your reading comprehension.
Yea Forums isn't conservative, it's just shut-in. Don't confuse actual normalfag boards like /pol/ that got raided by Redditors and politically-obsessed people who want a safe space to say "nigger".
nah they actually made lots of profit from brand recognition cause screaming manbabies.
played like a fiddle.
The bread? Nah, surely it was invented in Europe.
>everything should be done in moderation
Humanity is incapable of doing anything in moderation. better to go with the extreme that ensures stuff like that stupid missionary that got killed by the Sentinelese.
>eventually stagnation will occur
And stagnation is bad because...?
Nah. They lost a lot of sales because of boycotts. Nice try though
>s-stop criticizing corporations th-that's what they want you to do!!
These boycotts never work, otherwise Keurig and Nike would still be trying to recover... But all that happened was that these crying imbeciles destroyed the stuff they already had, OR worse, bought things explicitly to destroy them.
No, all they got was backlash over a melodramatic but ultimately harmless ad, and mostly boosted by retards like Shapiro and Posobiec. No biggie in the end.
>bread
>invented in Europe
Christ, Europoors are stupid.
This entire post is wrong and smells of newfag.
Don't try to characterize the browsers of a site that prides itself on anonymity and irony.
Or you're just another shitposter.
Way to breed paranoia
Progress isn't made because existing ideas aren't challenged nor another point of view is present.
See communism, great depression, gook isolation period.
Aye. I agree that the retard got killed for a good reason. He just didn't listen. Then again, extremes only prove points of opposition that are pro replacement.
>And stagnation is bad because
because its boring and you can be stagnated in a bad situation where you don't get healthcare and the chief fucks you in your boypussy.
>Sentinelese
shits that should be forced into civilization
>americuck so butthurt that he lost track of the conversation
Oh well.
Personally I think it was people at GW getting up their own asses about what they wanted Warhammer to be. Instead of a 90's rock opera with big guns and man-eating aliens, they started to get really bent out of shape about how Space Marines are the last, best hope for humanity. Then they started writing about Marines being these sophisticated types invested in the longevity of the Imperium, and Guilliman came back, the Eldar have uneasy ties with the Impreium because they're both "good guys" sorta, and so on.
When originally the whole point of Chaos Marines was that Marines, having been bred for nothing but killing in the first place, have a really easy time turning to the devil for an opportunity to get even better at killing.
In a nutshell, I think it was just GW wanting heroes for their game, and it was probably around 5th edition when they starting writing in that direction.
Your hobbies are niche
The nerds these people refer to dont care about cartoons or comics they care about celebrities and sensationalism
>Don't try to characterize the browsers of a site that prides itself on virulent hatred and disdain for others that aren't exactly like them
ftfy
>shits that should be forced into civilization
You'd end up with same shit like we currently have with antivaxxers. They just don't have the herd immunity against common diseases like we do.
>Comments are disabled
Afraid of something?
send in robots to immunize them. leaving their children is savagery is inhumane, it is your moral duty to give them an informed option, if they chose to stay morons then its their choice but if they know no other way than you are just being cruel.
>Americans didn't make X because Y and Z were made elsewhere
>No, the assembly is what matters and not the individual components
>DUUUUUUUUH BUT OTHER COMPONENT MADE HERE
>But is wasn't even made there
Seems you were the one that not only couldn't refute my point but couldn't even consistently assert yours properly. Pathetic.
>Spectator articles in my Yea Forums
It may be from the American version (which I didn't even know existed) but that's a surprise.
>couldn't refute my point
What point? That the USA invented everything? lol
tell me how much money they lost, give me numbers.
>boycotts never work
indeed nike made more money after all the angry fellas burned their socks with the kopernicus ad or whatever his name.
i am not advocating for anything of the short of change your beliefs i am saying that internet outrage being left or right never amounts to nothing.
welp maybe left outrage does cause the people on charge share those beliefs. the end.
just
don't
look.
Never said that but keep strawmanning.
>powerwolf
nu-males need to be gassed
Don't forget those who cut the Nike logo out of their shorts, as a "fuck you" to the brand. Nigga you're still wearing Nikes lmao
>>No, the assembly is what matters and not the individual components
yeah Im sure thats what you tell yourself when you but hammers made in china and covered with a "made in the use" rubber handle.
>destroys own property
that will show them!
Enjoy the memes while you can, Muhammad.
>no argument
>USA autocorrected to "use"
Well okay then, have fun phone posting about nothing.
This site prices itself on virulent hatred and disdain for others.
Whether like them or not. Of course there's some irony in that since you're not shy on expressing any virulent hatred or disdain for the people here with sweeping generalizations.
>nerds
You mean Disney. It wouldn't be problem if it was a few movies the last 15 years but Disney (the most boring and safe company when it comes to movies) is behind Marvel. So 3-4 cape movies a year and 2-3 animated movies and almost nothing else.
At least beside their shitty DCEU and the never-ending Harry Potter franchise, Warner put out a lot of differents movies those last 10 years: Nolan's movies, Ben Affleck's movies, Pacific Rim, The Great Gatsby, Prisonners, Edge of Tomorrow and it goes on and on...
>no argument
>attacks anons who phonepost
Oh well.
80s anime
Because I'm not a hypocrite like all of you, who keep insisting that your hatred for blacks/Jews/women/LGBTQs/whatever else you hate is """""ironic""""" or "for de lulz."
No shit, they keep pumping them out because the consumer keeps spending the money. That's capitalism 101.
>HOW DARE YOU NERDS HATE THIS SHITTY THING, YOU SHOULD LIKE IT
Spotted the 40k newfags
You are absolutely a hypocrite.
You are asserting, baselessly, that people (including myself) you have no knowledge of are bigots who hate minorities. You are making a brash assertion of other people, not the least of which is myself. A very harsh, negative and incorrect assumption.
What reason, whatsoever, do you have to believe that's true of me?
They keep comments disabled to feed the Facebook actually.
Don't generalize. I hate people who do the shit you mention there, and it's not that common in here, beneath the surface level bullshit you may encounter.
I don't partake in ironic racism either.
>Don't generalize
It's probably bait anyway.
Excellent pearl clutching and concern trolling. Really the modern staple of the internet tough guy in 2019
>Guy makes a good point
>HAH PEARL CLUTCHING
Tranny spotted.
I don't think those words you used mean what you think they do.
>Excellent pearl clutching and concern trolling
But the one pearl-clutching was you claiming people on Yea Forums were 99.9% conservative, racist, misogynist etc, whichisn't true. And the one doing all the co--
Yeah okay, I get it, my bad, I shouldn't have.
>What reason, whatsoever, do you have to believe that's true of me?
You're posting here aren't you?
And before you say anything, I have a strong hatred for vegans, Argentinians, anti-vaxxers, and multi-level marketers.
>You're posting here aren't you?
So are you.
>I have a strong hatred
You need a life.
>Cynicism is bad
Oh yes, because it's so much better to be sheep for the slaughter.
>being obsessed over sex
Reproducing is understandable, but for the life of me, I don't get what these people have against the decrease of casual sex.
>No, all they got was backlash over a melodramatic but ultimately harmless ad, and mostly boosted by retards like Shapiro and Posobiec
>you can only be a cynic or naive
>being an incel is good
>when newfags start to believe in the ironic shitposts as unironic
It's the same.
>but for the life of me, I don't get what these people have against the decrease of casual sex.
Raised in a culture of it and can't handle the idea of people not being more conservative when if comes to sex.
>hurr incel
Do you even know what that word means, retard?
People have tried to make gym culture a niche market to co-opt and politicize in the past. It never took off because doing so would require actually going into a gym and working out. It's easier to talk shit when all you have to do is read some text and type out how it offends you.
That's literally what happened, and your dumbass picture doesn't prove otherwise.
>implies that a bad thing
nigga u gay
german power metal band. Nothing really remarkable. But for me its ghost.
Yes, it's your life in one word.
>depression on the rise and people are retreating into distractions post 9/11
Gee I wonder what could have happened around then than could have caused this trend.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA no
Ghost is terrible, though. Blood Ceremony, Jex Thoth and other bands of that ilk (let's not even forget Coven) did all that way before Ghost without the lame gimmick.
I'm sorry for doing this, but I've disliked that band for years.
>you can keep the nigger music. I will stick to powerwolf
holy fucking cringe
the whole world lost in 2016,not only comics
the orange is not only destroying a country,hes destroying mainstream news and entertainment
uhhh...
>hes destroying mainstream news and entertainment
They did that themselves.
pleb
Ghost is the most pleb bullshit ever, while every single band I mentioned is superior. Why do I keep falling for this?
>still can't define "incel"
If all leftists are as retarded as you are, no wonder they want communism.
Involuntarily Celibate.
Not him but you were the one who casted this pearl into the ocean
>but for the life of me, I don't get what these people have against the decrease of casual sex
You're literally advocating for the abolition of sex before marriage. You're not an incel, but you're definitely a socially stunted nerd who projects his lack of sex unto everyone else.
PICKLE RICK IS IN THE HOUSE TONIGHT
literally skinheads
This is bad because?
>trusting politicians
I bet this person is against congressional term limits.
>Powerwolf
>not Coppelius
You, sir, are not a man of culture.
Nerds are blameless. You fucking normies took our culture, commercialized it, and tried to sell it back to us.
What is going on???
i don't know what this person's alternative is. they seem to understand the nerd worldview came about after a series of institutional failures and economic events that put many people in a state of mind of distrust and hatred of institutions. therefore they understand that this shift to nerdiness on the part of american society is the fault of events that are beyond the average person's control. and when you are shown that life is out of your control and the state can't protect you or often doesn't have your interests in mind, then you should be paranoid and hateful. it's a healthy attitude to have compared to blind trust of the state and corporations, i feel.
THEN FUCKING STOP APROPERATING OUR SHIT JESUS H CHRIST ON A BIKE FUCKING A DYKE GOD DAMN IT.
School shooters got normies curious.
I've never ever heard of this site
crossfit and gym culture blew up. thers like at least roughly a 18-20 gym/crossfit places in my town. some of which are a couple of blocks away from each other.
they're a conservative magazine. it's not a surprise they write articles about lamenting the loss of bootlicking.
Yikes
Based
Holy shit? You’re over 200 years old?
>they're a conservative magazine
that explains why i've never heard of it and will continue to ignore it.
>you can keep the nigger music. I will stick to powerwolf
>all this bullshit and nobody is talking about how retarded the article actually is.
nigga he's talking about 50-early 70s. back when westerns were popular. The era of bonaza being the most popular show on TV, were we had genre's of music talking about cowboys. Were disney made a miniseries about Davy Crokett. You dumb shit.
Well, the term goes back to the Indonesian kecap, their particular variation of onions sauce.
The term and idea was imported to Europe through trade and there are various recipes for a mushroom ketchup for example as people tried to replicate the condiment or make their own.
Tomato ketchup, however, has barely any resemblance to the original product aside from containing salt.
Much like burgers, it is a product one has to attribute to the USA in its current form.
Germany does not have a native equivalent to the hamburger, let alone one native to Hamburg. There are things in buns, but that's where similarities end. Germany has snack formats with pickled or smoked fish, sausages or otherwise meat in a bun. But a burger? Not really. The preparation is much more simple with a crispy roll serving mostly as a vehicle for the meat snack.
The conceptually closest thing might actually be the döner kebab pockets sold from Turkish shops that dwarf corporate burger joints in number and revenue.
There you have a meat component with vegetables, condiments and optional cheese in a bread recepticle, served hot.
Which is still about as close to a burger as a Cubano sandwich.
Now, deli meats and sandwiches is where you can get closer to a claim of German heritage.
>They've toned down the grimdark brutality of the Imperium a lot in recent fluff
grimdark brutality or grimdark stupidity?
There's sandwiches to discuss, man!
I have no time for clickbait.
They released an ad that was the gender part of pic-related and couldn't understand why most men were offended
>most men
No, just a subgroup of extremely online men who saw "toxic" masculinity and assumed "masculinity is toxic" because they're fucking idiots.
the problem is that a lot of people here are part of these minority groups...and partake one the same bullshit, kek.
You can see gay anons being racist as fucks against black, antisemite niggas, people of color in general are pretty racist as well in /pol/, hell, majority of the blacks I know bash feminists and avoid LGBT like the plague. This is also a heavy international community, it's silly to think that all the "hating" is coming only from white trash.
I'm from South America and I have my share of guilty in playing pol memes around Yea Forums, kek
I'm glad Rockstar made RDR2. I'd go into further detail but I know some rando contrarians will say that I deserve to be raped by 50 Drukhari dicks at once because I like something that's popular.
The non-existence of a female version of the term is still a statement of intent.
That is to try and fix men rather than accept that women may cause their own problems in any way. Like exerting the exact same peer pressure mechanisms that can perpetuate toxic masculinity.
Well maybe if people knew how to debate we wouldn't be in this mess
>The non-existence of a female version of the term is still a statement of intent.
Because there's no institutional "femininity" or "matriarchy" that threatens men's very existence. It's them who still partake in the most violence against women and perpetuate the cycle of abuse towards them and even themselves, by repressing their own emotions and creating all sorts of complexes that turn against themselves (suicide rates, depression, manias). That's what toxic masculinity is about, and it's why pretending there's an equal footing in the subject is disingenuous.
You're being disingenous here. Not him. There's no other way to phrase this and the easiest, simplest way to put it is, "everything bad that happens to men OR women is because of men." That is the expressed and explicit statement feminism makes, and it's one of the biggest problems of feminism.
Men enact "more violence" towards other men than they do to women.
Of course, and cancer too should always grow.
Damn you sure got'em! How could someone forget that if something using a word is good, then all things using that word must be good.
You're very clever, good job!
steal our culture. rape cut and tear it till it's a bland homogenized shade of itself.
blame us for ruining culture.
FUCK YOU
STOP STEALING OUR STUFF.
Wow, this conversation about comics/cartoons is absolutely riveting!!!11!!111!
Oh that's right, this is just meta bullshit.
>"everything bad that happens to men OR women is because of men."
Did I say everything? The things I mentioned can certainly be attributed to men. Which of these can be attributed to women in the same proportion?
You're conflating homicide rates with violence in general and muddling the argument, when the "violence and abuse" I mentioned was directly related to domestic violence. Not that you care about either anyway, it's all about trying to disprove the argument posited.
Yes.
(pic related)
They actually did lose a lot of sales and their stock dropped. It was a fiasco.
I'm agreeing with you, moron.
Why stop at nations? You think those aren't divided internally? And cities? You don't actually think you and your neighbour are somehow immune to dispute.
All communication is a mistake. You need to be isolated. From everyone. Start now- lock yourself in your bathroom and flush down the key.
Trust me when I say I don't see how you were agreeing with me with that statement, but if you were, then sorry for assuming otherwise.
>Actually being proud of being stupid
>Which of these can be attributed to women in the same proportion?
Domestic abuse is roughly proportionately equal between men on women as vice versa.
Which again, is irrelevant when you frame every single issue, social or otherwise as being the result of either "the patriarchy" or "toxic masculinity." There's zero issues ever blamed on women and several blamed on men. It's hardly nuanced. It's literally a narrative where all women are oppressed, and all men are oppressors. Either implicitly or explicitly.
Hold up, there are black people in 40k?
>Isolation ensures that people don't go homicidal from being exposed to ideas they don't agree with.
say person where riots can happen because local sports team lost to rival sports team.
Your suicide would benefit the species.
>Domestic abuse is roughly proportionately equal between men on women as vice versa.
Why do you have to lie like this? There's no single statistic that agrees with you.
>Domestic abuse is roughly proportionately equal between men on women as vice versa.
I vaguely recall reading that domestic violence between lesbian couples is drastically greater than with heterosexual ones, but don't quote me on that.
>Why stop at nations? You think those aren't divided internally? And cities? You don't actually think you and your neighbour are somehow immune to dispute.
Absolutely great point. Isolation at the personal level. That's what the machines in The Matrix should've done; isolate every human in their own virtual reality that caters to their biases and preferences.
Finally, someone on Yea Forums that gets it.
the Salamanders have been around forever
Or, you know, superhero movies became popular because effects were finally able to keep up, which hadnt happened outside of a few well recieved pet projects like donner Superman.
So would yours.
It means you're so utterly repugnant, no one touch you.
I'm sure that's not true. You're just (statistically, might I add) an indoctrinated retard. Your opinion, your repeated bullet points, or your outrage are unnecessary.
>he said while wearing jeans
Not "drastically". Some statistics in particular cases (sexual violence) are higher, but domestic violence is as prevalent as heterosexual couples among same sex partners.
No, I just don't get high off my own farts
>inb4 BRAAAPPosters
All man who dislike Brie Larson, and her work, are toxic, user.
This still belies the central point, user. Ignoring completely the issue that issues outside this limited one of domestic abuse. I can concede that point, but it isn't the entirety of every issue or indeed most or many of them. And the issue can't be reduced to such a simple praxis "toxic masculinity." It's not something endemic to masculinity, to men. The reasons for abuse are far more complex than that, and there's no single cause.
I'm not American but you're one deluded idiot to think America's culture did not and does not permeate throughout the fucking globe.
American culture is so ubiquitous that some people don't even realize they are consuming American media, products and chasing American ideals.
I believe Larson's Academy award is unwarranted.
This, if you think America doesn't have a discernable culture you are sheltered as fuck.
Who the fuck is talking about Brie Larson here?
>I can concede that point, but it isn't the entirety of every issue or indeed most or many of them.
Again, who said "everything" here? Pretending every single issue is about men is precisely the sort of strawman argument people lob against feminism even though I find quite unlikely that they would say something like this; the notion of patriarchy has certain boundaries that cannot be extrapolated into everything that constitutes society.
And no, "toxic masculinity" isn't a concrete thing, it's a behavioral aspect that is bred and reinforced by society, and it's not an illness, it can be corrected or driven away in certain ways. The patterns of violence aren't explained away with it, but it has definite traits supported by statistics.
Do you have any actual sources on that? Because it seemed like /pol/ just shat its pants for a week about nothing.
A normal person could never afford that hobby.
>And no, "toxic masculinity" isn't a concrete thing, it's a behavioral aspect that is bred and reinforced by society
Not that user but namely?
Different social circles have different views on what a man is, same goes with "toxic femininity" which is actually also cited as a major problem in "society" and in their respective circles.
>Again, who said "everything" here?
It's implicit. Particularly when the only explanation ever proffered to any situation is "toxic masculinity" or "patriarchy." The only time feminism offers a cause, it's one of the two.
The statistics you've supplied do not support or suggest any cause. Rather, it's a nebulous concept created to assign blame to things with far more complex origins.
It's turtles all the way down, really. But it's a wasted conversation, as I am certain you've no interest in changing your mind, and you've given me no reason to change mine.
Hypothetically, what if the person in question chose to be a celibate monk? Full-stop, piety and sobriety, even if he for whatever reason posts on a Timbuktu tutu tailor's travelogue?
>It's implicit
No, you're assuming it is, but it's not. No one fucking blames measles outbreaks on "toxic masculinity", for fucks sake.
>The statistics you've supplied do not support or suggest any cause.
Nigga how else you interpret that women are four times more killed during domestic violence incidents than men? Or that 89% (that's almost 9 out of 10) of female victims of domestic violence experienced 4 or more incidents related to it? This is some wild, WILD case of denial you got there.
>same goes with "toxic femininity"
I've never seen this term used with any sincerity.
>the Eldar have uneasy ties with the Impreium because they're both "good guys" sorta
I'm actually OK with this. The humans and Eldar allying with each other against the *real* threats to the galaxy was almost inevitable when things hit the fan, and things have definitely hit the fan, finally.
People complained about Warhammer 40K being frozen in place for 20 years, and they're finally progressing the setting forward, so I don't see the problem with changing the status quo a bit.
>same goes with "toxic femininity"
This literally doesn't exist, and I was the one who brought it up precisely to point out there's no behavioral pattern to women that breed violence in the way men do.
>Different social circles have different views on what a man is
There are specific aspects that society ingrains in men particularly that creates this vicious cycle in particular. Men shouldn't show emotions, men are supposed to be strong, men are meant to be successful and should support their families. These three create specific expectations from men that, in case they aren't fulfilled, create anxiety, violence, depression in different ways.
should i watch antman/wasp or infinity first?
i just watched ragnarok
>No, you're assuming it is, but it's not.
reiterated:
whenever a cause is proffered in feminism, the cause is, patriarchy or toxic masculinity. Oh. Or sexism.
>Nigga how else you interpret that women are four times more killed during domestic violence incidents than men? Or that 89% (that's almost 9 out of 10) of female victims of domestic violence experienced 4 or more incidents related to it?
Anyone who would try to sell me a cause on these based on statistics is going to be disingenuous and I would call any answer given, yours or anyone else's a guess.
Statistical results do not suggest a cause of themselves, and using them as such is causation from correlation.
Sure is /r9k/ in here.
Well, I am.
I don't know a term that properly would define it.
As far as I can say anecdotally, they don't really do it alone and always do things in "cliques" although much action isn't done it is more "of mouth" than "of fist".
>This literally doesn't exist
That's because you're using violence in its limited definition of physical harm.
Women tend to fight other women more viciously than they do against men if you want to see it in a more physical sense.
Ant-Man & The Wasp takes place right after Civil War and before Infinity War, but its post-credits scene may confuse you if you don't watch Infinity War first.
If you already know what happens in IW, then watch Ant-Man & The Wasp.
>whenever a cause is proffered in feminism, the cause is, patriarchy or toxic masculinity. Oh. Or sexism.
Strawman. See, you're not even reading me.
>Anyone who would try to sell me a cause on these based on statistics is going to be disingenuous and I would call any answer given, yours or anyone else's a guess
You're refusing to see the numbers and the obvious pattern here, not me. It's quite obvious how the dynamics in place behave, but you refuse because it would be conceding that feminists are right about this.
This. Some clever chosen executives realized that nerds buy up any old shit they churn out if it belongs to a franchise they like, and had the apparently successful idea of marketing nerddom itself to the mass market to turn them into nerds who buy up any old shit they churn out as long as it belongs to a franchise they market.
It's pretty bad, but what replaces it will be worse, mark my words.
>>same goes with "toxic femininity"
>This literally doesn't exist
Top fucking kek. I'm really enjoying this april fools.
>That's because you're using violence in its limited definition of physical harm.
No, I'm using violence as verbal and physical abuse, the whole package. If you really think women verbally abuse men more than men abuse them physically AND verbally, then you're again arguing against statistics.
>Women tend to fight other women more viciously than they do against men if you want to see it in a more physical sense.
Oh right because that's REALLY what we're talking about here, not DOMESTIC violence.
Alright, let's humor you: let's see who uses the te-- WHOA WHAT A SURPRISE!
identarian militant gangs.
>Strawman. See, you're not even reading me.
Then offer an instance where feminism views problems faced by women as caused by women themselves, not a root cause in masculinity or men or male social structure. I'm all ears.
>You're refusing to see the numbers and the obvious pattern here
I'm refusing to draw conclusions from correlations. You are asserting that a correlation is a cause without any kind of proof other than your assertion.
You've proof of the statistical but no proof of their cause and now you're brow-beating the point.
Men abuse women more than the other way around. For what reason I'm not sure, and you've not provided a convincing reason or proof.
>source is a wikia
L M A O
insecure womenlets
More doesn't mean the lesser doesn't exist.
Yes, it's true men commit more violence but the emphasis is more, doesn't mean that women don't do their own share of aggravation and harm.
>"the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation."
It's binary, one is either more or less.
You're coming off as a radfem and I want you to bring your radfem shit outta this board.
The image you linked explicitly states that any harmful or toxic behaviors in women are actually the result of men/masculinity/the patriarchy.
>Then offer an instance where feminism views problems faced by women as caused by women themselves
This is a real head-scratcher right here. A woman gets raped, so instead of pointing fingers to the rapist who perpetrated the assault, a feminist would criticize the woman for dressing slutty or "letting it happen". Is this the real dumbshittery you're proposing?
That's what the first page of Google looks like, and beyond the wikia stuff, it's literally all MRA/MGTOW youtubers trying to "stick it to the feminazis".
>More doesn't mean the lesser doesn't exist.
Of course it exists, no one is denying those. But apparently you can't talk about how one of them is more prevalent without screaming "WHAT ABOUT US?"
Why does it bother you that fingers are pointed at more men than women simply because, as statistics clearly show, more men are engaged in it? No one's calling you an abuser, or a rapist. No one is claiming YOU particularly engage in this, so why are you bothered?
>You're coming off as a radfem and I want you to bring your radfem shit outta this board.
You're an idiot who can't read the evidence presented and are annoyed that someone is actually showing you why you're wrong. Fuck off.
Where does it say that? Explicitly:
>any harmful or toxic behavior
And furthermore: it's a false equivalence, not a real term rooted in reality.
What can replace it at this point though? It seems more to morph, mutate, or change genre and it's hard to believe any one thing can truly replace it. You can only spin something like cooking or sports or crafting so far. But nerd shit? You can spin that yarn forever. Even if it does get worn out just reboot it a decade later.
Lol
Captain Marvel is almost reaching a billion dollars (dubious figures aside), and Disney is still disappointed because it drastically under-performed to the predictions they sold to their investors.
Every dollar they don't make, they're having to justify why they didn't make, and it all falls down to pandering to progressiveness. This is not the end of Captain Marvel, but I would expect the next movie to be radically different in response. Trannies, have sex.
>ITS STILLA FLOP WE DID IT BROS
lmao
>Of course it exists, no one is denying those. But apparently you can't talk about how one of them is more prevalent without screaming "WHAT ABOUT US?"
Why does it bother you that fingers are pointed at more men than women simply because, as statistics clearly show, more men are engaged in it? No one's calling you an abuser, or a rapist. No one is claiming YOU particularly engage in this, so why are you bothered?
We are talking about it.
It has existed and will always exist due to the binary nature of being male or female, one will always dominate the other.
And in history it's been the male, there have been good and bad shit about that.
That's not what bothered me, what bothered me is that YOU think that it all boiled down to toxic masulinity and to an extension THE DREADED PATRIARCHY when there are several more factors that come in to play that just that.
YOU'RE THE ONE THAT OUTRIGHT STATED THAT TOXIC FEMININITY DOESN'T EXIST ,YOU MONG.
YOU FUCK OFF.
>You're an idiot who can't read the evidence presented and are annoyed that someone is actually showing you why you're wrong. Fuck off.
I never refuted your evidence you little shite and in fact I agreed with you that men do more violence against women.
That's objective fact.
What your little fucking brain can't wrap your head around are THE SOLUTIONS, you cannot just point see "Men hurt us alot more than we do!" "Society is patriarchal that's why!" as opposed to what?
I frankly live in this society and I happen to like it.
>Disney is still disappointed because it drastically under-performed to the predictions they sold to their investors.
It actually surpassed their conservative expectations of $100MM opening weekend. Why are you doing this to yourself, a full month later?
>you can keep the nigger music. I will stick to powerwolf
God I hope this is bait.
Seething xD
It is still a flop because it under-performed. That's what a flop is. AKA Mad Max Fury Road. You can make a profit and still be a disappointment in the eyes of your investors.
>A woman gets raped, so instead of pointing fingers to the rapist who perpetrated the assault, a feminist would criticize the woman for dressing slutty or "letting it happen". Is this the real dumbshittery you're proposing?
This is a strawman at best. It's a non-sequitur to what I asked and completely dodging what was asked. Can you offer an instance where feminism views problems face by women as caused by women themselves? Any issue that only women face that isn't the result of men, the patriarchy or masculinity?
That's all that was asked, and you didn't provide an answer.
>Why does it bother you that fingers are pointed at more men than women simply because, as statistics clearly show, more men are engaged in it?
Not him but:
You are saying the reasons for these behaviors is because of something endemic to men, masculinity, or who men are as a person raised to be. It's impossible to not feel accused when what is ultimately an inescapable part of who and what you are is what is being accused.
You know that literally no place on earth can be devoid of culture by definition, right? You breathe that shit near a sociologist and he'll feel the need to tell you how wrong you are.
>tfw almost every game and movie I enjoyed as a kid has slowly implemented political fucks who can’t keep their mouth shut or take over production of it and completely destroy it
Become a space fighter sim fan! no one is pushing their shit into our genre
Because I can count on one hand how many decent games have been released in the past two fucking decades
I think people are seeing America like that because for a relatively young country, it has way too many fingers in everyone's pie.
You're literally saying this
>It has existed and will always exist due to the binary nature of being male or female, one will always dominate the other.
>And in history it's been the male, there have been good and bad shit about that.
Which explicitly outlines what the Patriarchy is about... And then you go and say this... ?
>what bothered me is that YOU think that it all boiled down to toxic masulinity and to an extension THE DREADED PATRIARCHY when there are several more factors that come in to play that just that
Just... Dude holy shit, step back and realize what you're yourself typing. You're basically saying it's the dreaded patriarchy then doing a 180° and claiming there are more factors involved, lamo.
>YOU'RE THE ONE THAT OUTRIGHT STATED THAT TOXIC FEMININITY DOESN'T EXIST ,YOU MONG.
Because it fucking doesn't, what is wrong with you? That stance hasn't changed. IT'S NOT REAL YOU IDIOT. Is anyone else seeing this?
>you cannot just point see "Men hurt us alot more than we do!" "Society is patriarchal that's why!" as opposed to what?
That's not what's being said though? See, you're still NOT reading, let me paste it again for you:
>Pretending every single issue is about men is precisely the sort of strawman argument people lob against feminism even though I find quite unlikely that they would say something like this; the notion of patriarchy has certain boundaries that cannot be extrapolated into everything that constitutes society.
>And no, "toxic masculinity" isn't a concrete thing, it's a behavioral aspect that is bred and reinforced by society, and it's not an illness, it can be corrected or driven away in certain ways. The patterns of violence aren't explained away with it, but it has definite traits supported by statistics.
If you still can't understand this them I'm sorry for you.
>powerwolf
I feel it necessary to inform you more than one person is talking to you, and you're ascribing things that user said that he didn't. Two people have made two different positions here.
This person is 15 years old, stop talking to them.
>Hypothetically, what if the person in question chose to be a celibate monk?
They practice abstinence or their order or belief makes them celibate or ascetic. It's usually said in a way that is to inform someone asking. There's, to me, no sense of negativity when that's being described. Usually, it's more quizzical and surprising.
INCEL is the exact opposite. It's an insult that INCELS themselves had attached themselves too, with pride I might say. Also came from the web, an online community forum from a Canadian student. Even if it didn't words change and evolve (WOW!) to match their current political, cultural, and social status.
e
Glad to see Nerd culture being hated like it always was when msm and hollywood were pretending not to.👌
>claiming there are more factors involved
I'd say he's right.
There are more factors involved, and removing whatever you felt the patriarchy would hardly remove or alleviate the issue.
>This is a strawman at best
Dude you literally are proposing a ridiculous situation here:
>Can you offer an instance where feminism views problems face by women as caused by women themselves?
There are MANY issues women face, you have to be more specific because holy shit, it's impossible to decipher the intention here when we're talking about DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, an issue that primarily happens among heterosexual partners (as they're the majority of the population after all) and in which women are PRIMARILY the victims.
>Any issue that only women face that isn't the result of men, the patriarchy or masculinity?
Yeah, menstrual cramps. That's not patriarchal at all! The fuck you wanted me to say here? Be specific about what sort of issues.
>It's impossible to not feel accused
I am a man, and whenever someone talks about "rape culture" and shit, I don't feel offended or accused because I don't engage in that.
I know I'm talking to at least three people here, but that one in particular has the same writing pattern as
So I know it's the same person making that retarded argument.
>Hypothetically, what if the person in question chose to be a celibate monk?
a voluntary celebate.
Sometimes people call this, "volcel."
You're mixing me with multiple, anons
I'm saying that if you eliminate the patriarchy, all the problems men do the females will not disappear, in fact I think it will worsen.
I feel sorry for you if you think the patriarchy (which has literally built and progressed most of human civilization to where we are now).
Patriarchy cannot be completely driven away, LIKE I SAID, only lessened and even then to what extent.
That's what I've been trying to say, radfem.
Now get off my board.
It's because he IS right, but he can't express his opinions correctly so he basically defended the "patriarchy argument" before doing a 180°. I never said it was solely the patriarchy, if you read my own quotes you can see I said patriarchy cannot be extrapolated into everything.
But it cannot be extrapolated as a direct cause to domestic abuse as well.
>I am a man, and whenever someone talks about "rape culture" and shit, I don't feel offended or accused because I don't engage in that.
You do not speak for all men, just for yourself. That said, it would be reasonable for a man to feel attacked by such a position, and I explained why. Being personally unaffected does not mean that those who are do so in a completely unreasonable or irrational fashion. Those who say it is an attack are not without merit, even if you do not share the sentiment.
>I'm saying that if you eliminate the patriarchy, all the problems men do the females will not disappear, in fact I think it will worsen.
And this is stupid, but sure
>I feel sorry for you if you think the patriarchy (which has literally built and progressed most of human civilization to where we are now).
The patriarchy... What? lmao can't type
>Patriarchy cannot be completely driven away, LIKE I SAID, only lessened and even then to what extent
I mean your whole argument is the same teenager level tier of argument from the Ben Shapiro school. OH RIGHT THE MEN BUILT SOCIETY SO THEY CANNOT GO AWAY
My good bitch no one is talking about that shit, it was all about the concept of toxic masculinity and how it explains certain aspects (BUT NOT ALL) of domestic violence and negative behaviors. Your tangent about all the accomplishments of Occident through the might and sheer will of Manly Men has nothing to do with this discussion.
Exactly yes, a DIRECT cause for sure, again:
>the notion of patriarchy has certain boundaries that cannot be extrapolated into everything that constitutes society.
>INTO EVERYTHING
Right, so I only speak for myself, but YOU can generalize for all other men?
>I am a man, and whenever someone talks about "rape culture" and shit, I don't feel offended or accused because I don't engage in that.
I feel pretty attacked when the subject is then pointed to "all men" rather than actual rapists.
FUCKING NERDS WHY WON'T THEY JUST CONSUME PRODUCT AND GET EXCITED FOR NEXT PRODUCT?🐓
Well I'm sorry that you're so fragile that you cannot distinguish between all men WHO ENGAGE IN RAPE and not men in general in terms of a discussion that revolves around rape. You sound like the guy who needs to jump into a discussion unannounced to proclaim that he does NOT rape or abuse!
Are you one of the fags shitting up MK threads with MUSLIM KOMBAT?
>I mean your whole argument is the same teenager level tier of argument from the Ben Shapiro school.
Never watched that guy in youtube, but ok?
>My good bitch no one is talking about that shit, it was all about the concept of toxic masculinity and how it explains certain aspects (BUT NOT ALL) of domestic violence and negative behaviors.
Yes, it does it include but also toxic femininity.
That's my point, it's just that MEN are more prone to be more physical.
They are literally stronger and I don't why some people still refute this fact.
I mean you're meaning to say that men don't think about hitting their wives when they say or do something irrational?
Of course they do, DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD DO IT
This is literally the crux of my argument towards you.
>At least the Warhammer franchise will remain unsullied by normie pandering.
girliman is a leniceguy that had to be saved by womyn and the head priest has an electric dildo up hiss arse
fpbp as is tradition
t. beta rapist
And I'm sorry that you need to be toxic towards me about that topic.
I honestly don’t care about skarlet. She was boring to begin with. And mortal kombat hasn’t really been hit by any of that shit and if it has I honestly don’t care as long as the fatalities are in
I would argue that, since the problem isn't exclusive to just one sex or the other, then the cause can't be. While one happens MORE to the other, that would mean that factors that affect both would have to be largely at play.
Specifically. Domestic abuse isn't exclusively perpetrated by men. Therefore, the cause is unlikely to be something that is exclusively a social pressure on men. I.e. Toxic masculinity. If toxic masculinity was the DIRECT cause, then those not beholden to it (women) would be extremely more rare than what they are.
The cause of domestic abuse can therefore be safely assumed to something else that happens to both sexes, but to men more than women. And there are several of these things that are not inclusive to toxic masculinity. Being neglected or harmed through abuse or negligence is certainly not exclusive to toxic masculinity. Being in a single parent household without a father GREATLY increases the odds, statistically, of someone abusing their spouse.
Being specific here:
If you're abused or neglected or growing up in a fatherless home will GREATLY increase your odds of becoming abusive in your relationship: regardless of being a girl or a boy in those situations.
All of these things exist as exacerbating factors, statistically, to being abusive to your spouse, and exist as factors that are not exclusive to toxic masculinity.
>Yes, it does it include but also toxic femininity
Dude you were told by others, not just me, that this shit does NOT exist.
No one is trying to refute that men are stronger btw, you're arguing with yourself
>Of course they do, DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD DO IT
... And going from this, now you see why the statistics are so high regarding women who are abused by their male partners? Men who lack this filter in particular? It's not such a huge leap, it's fucking easy.
I'm not being "toxic" about it, because I used to be like this, until I realized they didn't mean me, and I didn't need to reassure anyone I wasn't an abuser unprompted. Because if you know in your heart you're not abusive, you don't have to feel insulted when women say men in general are shitty because out there, there's guys like this who openly say what a lot of us keep quiet regarding violence, and women could still feel threatened by the impending violence.
The only way this changes is when men themselves stop having these lurking thoughts about resorting to violence to solve arguments. Otherwise, this will keep happening.
>... And going from this, now you see why the statistics are so high regarding women who are abused by their male partners? Men who lack this filter in particular? It's not such a huge leap, it's fucking easy.
The cause of that is more than just "toxic masulinity".
It's several things outside that notion.
>No one is trying to refute that men are stronger btw, you're arguing with yourself
That was more of an aside than anything.
>Dude you were told by others, not just me, that this shit does NOT exist.
I think it does, both sides can be toxic.
I just don't know the proper term of it if there is one.
>If toxic masculinity was the DIRECT cause, then those not beholden to it (women) would be extremely more rare than what they are.
Not necessarily, because we're still talking about at least an 80% of violence skewed against women. Toxic masculinity is not a "thing" you can name, it encompasses a lot of behaviors I outlined above:
>There are specific aspects that society ingrains in men particularly that creates this vicious cycle in particular. Men shouldn't show emotions, men are supposed to be strong, men are meant to be successful and should support their families. These three create specific expectations from men that, in case they aren't fulfilled, create anxiety, violence, depression in different ways.
But this doesn't paint the whole picture. These are things you and I have experiences in different degrees (and you know it to be true), and depending on these factors, men are shaped in a way that makes them more prone to certain violence. Again, there are other factors at play, but this is what our societies (in plural) have in common.
>All of these things exist as exacerbating factors, statistically, to being abusive to your spouse, and exist as factors that are not exclusive to toxic masculinity.
And that is all true. Hell, you can come from a really bad family background and still turn out "fine". It happens all the time, and depends on the upbringing.
I'd be interested to hear what your beloved childhood games that were ruined by SJW politics are, then.
Mostly battlefield
Can you describe an example behavior of toxic masculinity?
I'd actually want to know this.
Easy: when friends aren't allowed to be sentimental or "overtly" friendly among themselves. That crying or hugging your friend "too much" or showing emotions are seen as weaknesses or "female reactions".
When I say "allowed" I don't mean they're forbidden to, but that they're discouraged because it's "for faggots and women".
Jesus Christ this article is dogshit. The author is fundamentally detached from both the world of comicbooks and the modern political machine but feels compelled to lump both into the same pile.
This isn't defending capeshit, but god this faggot is insufferable.
Battlefield sucked ass because of EA long before SJW shit, and if you only have one example your original whiny post comes across even sillier.
I don't really believe that to be the case since many guys do cry, they're human too y'know.
Hell, bromances are a thing and I think is one of the things women cannot really replicate with their peers.
Unless sisterhood counts?
That's more of a clique-y thing.
Here's an example of toxic femininity:
Public male bashing.
All this is anecdotal so take it with a grain of salt as I did with yours (I'm assuming it was as well?).
That guy did a lot of writing to say basically nothing at all.
>I don't really believe that to be the case since many guys do cry, they're human too y'know.
Not him but you're coming across as very young and sheltered.
>but this is what our societies (in plural) have in common.
The largest thing in common with people who abused their partner, were violent, rape or otherwise is family environment more than behaviors you explained as toxic masculinity.
More sexual, physical and verbal abuse comes from people who either had a broken home, were abused or neglected themselves, or both. Which isn't toxic masculinity at work. It's coming from a broken home and coincides with what's largely established:
How your parents and peers act around you as a child are the largest impacts on family life.
It's boys who grow up from a family where violence, abuse, neglect and fighting are normal.
A safer assumption is that without strong male role models, there's no positive behavior for them to emulate that they should behave like. As such, a boy is going to emulate what they see such as neglect or abuse.
This isn't coming from society's or their family's expectations. It's from the child internalizing violence and neglect in their home as normal. Not strictly a masculinity thing.
However, it does appear that this conflict at home is internalized different in girls than boys. Boys express this by lashing out. Girls tend to more self destructive tendencies after experiencing them. In the case of both, they're seeking attention and validation in how they're used to getting it. For girls, acting out doesn't get attention, but self destructive behaviors does. Likewise for boys, that kind of behavior doesn't get attention. Lashing out does.
How old do you think I am but I'll take that as a compliment?
Guys cry, they're not from Mars, user.
>I don't really believe that to be the case since many guys do cry, they're human too y'know.
Obviously we do, but if you tell me you haven't heard the phrase "boys don't cry", then you haven't lived enough.
I've had to say goodbye to friends who migrated to other countries and expected me to just shake hands. And the last time I was "dude just hug me, what the fuck, I'm not gonna see you in a long while". There's a difference between normal physical contact and outright avoiding it because you don't want to get "sentimental".
>A safer assumption is that without strong male role models...
I'd change that to a strong role model in general, a lot of men grow up without a father and are fine, because their mother was there for them. You can't say the same about those who grow without both.
>could Hollywood as a system be bad for American culture due to letting a relatively small handful of people only interested in making money be the curators of mainstream culture?
>No, its the audiences who are wrong.
Again, very sheltered and young. Look up John K's dad sometime, and what his shitty parenting helped spawn.
Why is hulk wearing clothes
Professor Hulk.
>normalfags overstate the importance of a cape movie
>Yea Forums overstates the importance of normalfags overstating the impotance of a cape movie
>Can't show Native Americans on TV anymore
Such a shame, I love their culture.
Both of those first replies are to me btw.
Yes, I have heard "boys don't cry" but I've also heard "Just let it all out" and "Stop crying or your mascara will bleed" and "Strong girls don't cry."
Your friends are just your friends and they just don't like hugging, not really a big deal about that.
I see my guy friends hug all the time when they part ways and say all kinds of sentimental stuffs and then laugh it off.
>I'd change that to a strong role model in general, a lot of men grow up without a father and are fine
According to the CDC:
90% of all runaway and homeless children are from fatherless homes.
85% of children with behavioral problems come from fatherless homes.
The US DHHS bureau of the census found 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes.
Growing up without a father is statistically harmful to a child's development.
I will, hold on.
I do know who John K is and his scandals.
Well to that I say NOT ALL MEN are cut from the same cloth. But there's definitely ingrained behaviors that stop many from expressing their feelings openly. And that is definitely something that young boomers and older millennials faced, not so much gen-z'ers though. You should be glad it's not so much the case anymore.
Good to have these statistics at hand too, just as much as the domestic violence stats. Hard to correlate both without further data that links them, but I'm willing to bet there's a relation somewhere. Specially the "youth suicides" part.
>Good to have these statistics at hand too, just as much as the domestic violence stats
Take with some salt, I had a hard time getting info on it and I had an even harder time confirming the source.
But it seems to follow logic. Violent destructive behavior seems to follow boys with unstable families.
>But there's definitely ingrained behaviors that stop many from expressing their feelings openly
Maybe because they have to be tougher?
I mean sports would be nothing if all the guys just complained everytime they got hurt or came into contact with another player.
Same thing goes for soldiers and policemen, men can get pretty tough and strong but they can still cry.
Okay I read up some.
His dad was pretty harsh but wasn't every parent back then like that due to growing up through the largest war in human history?
When did that happen? These aren't just fads, they are entire mediums. Like no one is going to give you shit for liking DC and Marvel shit and talking to them about the characters can be fun if you have the social Grace to not completely geek out about shit they have no interest in.
I've accepted that going into every fandom. Anyone who values their grip on the marketing demographic isn't going to have fun with anything for too long. Maybe being in my 30s is too young to truly appreciate the frustration of demographic shifts, but so far it's been fun.
Why do they HAVE to be tougher, though? That's what I mean in first place, about the expectations. Maybe I don't want to be tough, maybe I just want to be by myself and keep to the things I can deal with, with my mind or my skills. Not my physical strength.
You don't have to conform to what society expects from you, user. You can be and do anything you like, not try and fit into that mold that tells you you have to be strong and brute and rude or else you're not a man.
>talk beyond the films.
you're going to get called an elitist if you do
His dad was insulted by the assertation that he would cry if John was hurt, claiming that was sissy shit. Its like you're close to grasping that this mindset was a widespread problem but you're too dumb to get there.
>Why do they HAVE to be tougher, though?
They don't really have to be but most of the tough jobs are by guys though so if you're going into that then you should be strong enough.
Nobody will call you less of a man if you're not ripped as fuck unless you enter a field where THAT is the requirement or outlook for everybody there.
Like I said, he was raised during wartime so he most likely was guarded enough to the future generation of males.
That being said, it wasn't that healthy to do that to his son at all.
IT is a widespread problem but not without reason, still a problem nonetheless.
>>>>>> your original whiny post comes across even sillier
Motherfucker battlefield up to 1 was fun as fuck besides the dlc bullshit. But taking a known conflict with people still around from it like ww2 and erasing historical events to add women in is complete dogshit. The Norwegian resistance mission was not carried out by a teen girl but by Norwegian commandos. The shitflinging by dice and ea were they called their fans idiots and sexists for pointing out the fucking obvious. So don’t give me shit why that example doesn’t count. Even total war is doing that shit too
>Men abuse women more than women abuse men
Objectively false cunt
Now you're asking some more interesting questions.
In the most "gender equal" nation on earth, you would think that most positions have gender equality. If everyone is encouraged to do what they like or feel comfortable doing in a career they wanted, then you would have equal men and women, right?
Well, evidently, no.
youtube.com
Here's a good documentary on the subject. Norway was voted as being the most "gender equal" nation on earth. However. In norway, career decisions are far MORE traditional now than in 15 years or so.
In on particular company, they found only 10% of engineers and construction workers were women. Whereas men who are nurses at a hospital are equally as rare, if not more so.
For some reason, when men and women are encouraged to do what they feel like they want to or comfortable doing, there's a natural separation between the sexes that forms, and nobody seems to be able to answer why, no matter what kind of laws are passed to ensure equality of opportunity.
CONVERSELY.
In nations with STRICT, rigid separation and social expectations of women, you see much more parity careers pursued by men and women - such as in saudi arabia, pakistan, etc.
It seems that, the more you try to rigidly enforce gender roles, the less likely you are to get them. And of course the more you try to have parity between the sexes and let the genders do what they respectively like, you get more people electing to follow their gender roles.
it also became a huge pop-psych thing at the time that having any kind of prolonged contact with your children (i.e hugging, letting them ride on your shoulders, touching your head to theirs etc) would give them dependency problems. which in turn created a generation of emotionally stunted assholes with a massive complex about being able to do everything on their own, never opening up to anyone, and caring about how other people feel is the greatest weakness conceivable.
Also I would like to add that
>you don't have to conform to what society expects from you, user.
I never implied that.
In fact, most guys I know actually work out for their SO, so there's that.
Mine has a gut and I don't mind that, still he's going on a diet.
>culture are products of consumption
You are part of the problem.
The only good battlefields were Battlefield 1942, Battlefield 2, their respective expansions, battlefield 2142 and maybe battlefield vietnam despite how short lived it was.
>But taking a known conflict with people still around from it like ww2 and erasing historical events to add women in is complete dogshit.
Dude it's all made up, why do people care so much? It's like people complaining about Wolfenstein, it's an alt-history game with obvious political implications, and people get mad because it gets political?
Crossboarder or baiting?
Lol, you are a mad cunt.
>According to their responses, almost equal proportions of men and women (7% and 8% respectively) had been the victims of intimate partner physical and psychological abuse (18% and 19% respectively). These findings were consistent with several earlier studies which reported equal rates of abuse by women and men in intimate relationships.Footnotes 2-16
Your stupid link only counts specific events or police reports.
No, actually literally all men that don't hate themselves were offended by an ad portraying negative stereotypes of men.
if feminists knew how to debate they wouldn't be feminists. I challenge you to find a single person who is capable of logical thought that still thinks feminism is a good thing.
the vast majority of egalitarians are male. Most feminists (aka misandrists) are women. Women are the ones who control traditional gender roles, it isn't men who enforce gender roles on women. Why do you give women a pass when they're the ones keeping traditional gender roles alive? They're the ones opposing any discussion on men's issues while 90% of people who support gender equality for MEN AND WOMEN are male.
here we go. When a feminist realizes that she has lost, she resorts to lying while somehow accusing her opponent of lying.
>MUH COURT CASES
gee it's almost like there's a proven bias against male victims and female abusers in court
>no single statistic that agrees with you
Here's 286 sources you idiot:
web.csulb.edu
>This bibliography examines 286 scholarly investigations: 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses, which demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 371,600.
Of course if you ever actually researched any of this you wouldn't be a feminist in the first place, because the only people who support feminism are people who don't understand feminism. You should watch
theredpillmovie.com
it was directed by a feminist who realized feminism is wrong about a lot of things. Everybody who learns about feminism comes to the same conclusion.
you shouldn't concede that point, you were right. See above source, women commit DV at about the same rates as men.
>You should watch theredpillmovie.com
... And post discarded.
and while we're on the topic, men are as likely to be raped as women are, and 40% of rapists are women. Pic-related. But feminists are the ones who control rape research, and most feminists don't consider it rape when women force men to have sex. So feminist rape research conveniently leaves out all of the times women rape men, and then feminists use that as proof that women don't rape men. Pic-related is what the numbers look like if we use the anti-feminist definition of rape which includes F-on-M rape
They never fucking advertised it as that.
american culture literally dominates the world
>You should watch a documentary by a devout feminist who spent three years researching feminism and men's issues with an open mind
thanks for just admitting that feminists are afraid of learning anything. Most feminists prefer to pretend that they want to be informed about gender issues.
>it's an alt-history game
This has not always been the case with battlefield games.
1942 and battlefield 2 come to mind, though battlefield did add some questionable weapon unlocks that weren't exactly used commonly (or at all) by particular forces.
For example the jackhammer never was a thing. The only surviving example is a mockup. It never went into production and survives mainly as a prop in hollywood films. Similarly, I don't think the coalition ever fielded or used the DAO-12 in any military capacity. In maps where the coalition forces were represented by the American armed forces, the G36 is also an anachronistic choice; only having ever been used in the united states by police forces, not military. On that same token, I'm fairly sure the l86 was never adopted outside Britain. Hell the A1 was an absolute mess.
I could criticize the weapon choice in all the battlefield games except maybe 1942 where it was more rigid. Or 2142 where it was completely fictional. It was also my favorite.
>no bf3
Come on now
No women wants a weak men.
That's why most go to the blacks now.
that's not an argument. Is it because feminists have no argument?
LMAO the MRA signed in. You're late to the game, pal. I like how even the data you use has to be nitpicked in order to correlate with your argument; easy to see it when you have to redefine rape to fit with a definition that allows you to frame it around you, as well as the
>"REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS"
That neglects to bring up actual statistical data from police reports on violence. Not "COURT CASES", you imbecile.
I fucking know who she is and what The Red Pill is. It has been criticized to death for its lack of rigorosity and sourcing. Sad that it's all you got.
Anyway, it looks like the thread got surrounded by the 'tards, and here I thought it was level-headed until now.
I omitted BF3 intentionally. Mostly because I didn't play it, but also because, based on the changes I saw, I didn't want to.
You're pretending as if people didn't move around places constantly in history thus forming that country's culture.
Same thing with America but she's only been here for less than half of a millenium.
>Gets completely BTFO and exposed by somebody who actually knows what they're talking about
>"p-p-post discarded..."
Sounds like you're waving the🏳️
Nah BF3 sucked ass you tasteless fag, and that had nothing to do with SJW shit. EA is just a dump.
You came here with a confrontational attitude and you expect people to engage you just because you demand it? Fuck that. Besides, you really HAVE to dig hard to find statistics that support your flimsy statements, whereas I can just go to ANY documented report on domestic violence and find consistent % that say men commit more violence towards women than viceversa. This is all fact, and I know it bothers you so much because you've already internalized the idea that women are lying devils and you don't want to be pointed at, but it's true. And that doesn't mean you're an abuser, but I know you can't stop from victimizing yourself over it, so may as well take the initiative and lunge first.
>easy to see it when you have to redefine rape to fit with a definition that allows you to frame it around you
Yeah I just want to point out that you're specifically objecting to the idea that forcing somebody to have sex is rape. Thanks again for you're honesty, most feminists lie and claim that they think a woman forcing a man to have sex is rape, even though obviously feminists disagree with that view. But you at least admit you're a misandrist who thinks women can't rape men.
>That neglects to bring up actual statistical data from police reports
thank god there isn't a well-documented gender bias among police then, and of course we know there would never be any reason that male victims would be reluctant to report their abuse to police. No you're right, police reports are completely reliable. It's not like male victims of DV are actually thrown in jail when they call the police or anything.
>It has been criticized to death for its lack of rigorosity and sourcing
literally the only people who criticize it are misandrists. You have already admitted that you don't think women can rape men, and that only DV that's reported to police is real.
>Sad that it's all you got
it's not all we've got. It appears that you don't have anything at all though, because you've been exposed as a man-hater. What I especially love is that at first you tried to convince us that feminism cares about men, and now you just admit that you actually hate men and think we deserve to be raped and abused as revenge for our male privilege.
You came here claiming that feminism cares about men and then you turned 360 degrees and admitted that you hate men and think we can't be raped or abused. How are you still pretending to have anything to stand on?
You've been exposed. Everybody ITT knows you're a bigot.
So 60% is suffered by women
60 is bigger than 40
>>Nah BF3 sucked ass you tasteless fag
>people still play it
>one the best selling games in battlefield
Sales are the metric of quality you're using? Okay dude.
Bad Company 2 was miles fucking better than 3.
🐱
>But you at least admit you're a misandrist who thinks women can't rape men.
Yep okay, Ben Shapiro is posting right now.
>admitted that you hate men and think we can't be raped or abused.
Is this the only way you can argue? By projecting things onto people who have never been said or implied? I didn't even claim anyone here was misogynist but you're the one coming here, guns blazing, calling me a misandrist repeatedly? You expect me to take any of your bullshit seriously or you just want to "own the libs", user? be honest.
based♨️
Following the thread, you're having a problem many have when explaining toxic masculinity and the patriarchy, and that's that in the semantics of it it doesn't label all males or male interaction as bad. The first hurdle is helping those who think feminists are anti-male learn about what those terms mean.
>I'm saying that if you eliminate the patriarchy, all the problems men do the females will not disappear, in fact I think it will worsen.
What's this based on? Where's this coming from?
Did you ignore that people are still playing it dumbass
>whereas I can just go to ANY documented report on domestic violence and find consistent % that say men commit more violence towards women than viceversa
actually we already know you can't. Instead, you have to rely on "sources" that are subject to the sexist bias of courts and/or police departments, and the sexist bias that prevents men from making formal complaints. Whereas the sources in rely on surveys not subject to the misandrist bias that you want to protect. And 286 sources is not exactly scraping the bottom, it's more than you provided.
Whereas the sources in are the same sources feminists rely on, except they added in F-on-M rape, even though you don't believe it's possible for women to rape men.
COCA COLA
SOMETIMES WAR
>The first hurdle is helping those who think feminists are anti-male learn about what those terms mean.
But that wasn't my intention originally, as in, explaining what the "patriarchy" was based on. I was talking about toxic masculinity, which I did explain, in detail, and no one in this thread seemed to object to it (I quoted myself three times on that, by the way). The whole patriarchy rant I replied there was just a tangent.
Dude you seem to be under the impression that I read your posts in full, I only read the first lines of each and dismissed it, because you're a raging cunt. And it's clear you got mad because you started calling me a misandrist out of nowhere and putting words in my mouth.
It's not so much that I "can't", it's that I won't humor you. I don't have to debate you, I can simply ignore you, and in fact, it's what I'm going to do just now. Even with those I disagreed ITT I could find points in common, not with your Youtube-tier tantrum.
Simmer down.
>Thanks again for you're honesty, most feminists lie and claim that they think a woman forcing a man to have sex is rape, even though obviously feminists disagree with that view.
Source?
You're coming at this loaded with preconceived notions. Why?
>What's this based on? Where's this coming from?
My own personal opinion, thought that was pretty obvious.
You guys wanna know what's gonna be the next big thing?
furries
Okay, Jack.
Tell me why.
The whole board of directors is on speaker waiting...
They are? Good on EA for keeping the servers open as long as they are. Maybe one day I'll actually give it a shot myself.
at this point I'm about 99% sure you're a troll but
this post said that women forcing men to have sex should be considered rape
and you clearly disagreed with that view in this post: This post said that, even if a male victim was too ashamed to report his abuse to the police, he still existed. And again you disagreed and insisted that if he didn't report it to the police he didn't exist. When a feminist (Cassie Jaye) did actual research on men's issues and feminism, including interviews with leading feminists, you mocked her and falsely claimed she was discredited.
>calling me a misandrist repeatedly?
You believe that men can't be raped by women, you think male victims of DV don't matter, you mock people who support equality for men, you defend Gillette for making misandrist generalizations... what word would you use if not misandrist?
You hate men. That's irrefutable. /pol/ says the same things about black people that you say about men (just look at the other half of pic in ). You are just as much of a bigot as the Nazis on /pol/.
>or you just want to "own the libs"
I am a "lib". Not all liberals hate men, even though misandrist liberals like you wish we did.
They already are. Look out for Detective Pikachu and Sonic, it's gonna blow up.
>out of nowhere
No I'm pretty sure they started calling you a misandrist out of where you mocked the idea of women raping or abusing men. Seems misandrist to me user.
> I don't have to debate you
because you can't.
It's easier to say that the patriarchy in the west is based on Christian doctrine that demands that women be given little power and not hold office or lead a household. People will say that that's not the case anymore, but people who love to emphasize that America is built on Christian doctrine will have an easier understanding that to be more Christian conservative, to push for a more traditional America, is to push for "patriarchy". They'll still see it as a bad, feminist word, but they can understand what it means better.
>Will Lloyd
This guy's got a case of dumb brain. He's got bozo-brain.
See pics in and and obviously this post where this particularly feminist confirms that they personally believe a woman forcing a man to have sex is not rape, and even tries to make fun of the idea that women can rape men. If you think including F-on-M rape is "nitpicking" and resort to snarky LMAO STUPID MRA comments when somebody suggests that F-on-M rape is real, then you're a misandrist.
>LMAO dude I totally could BTFO of you because I'm definitely right even though I can't provide any sources to support me and I can't refute your sources but dude LMAO you're so stupid simmer down LMAO idiot! I'm not a misandrist, just because I think women can't rape men and that men's issues should never be taken seriously that doesn't mean I hate men LMAO
user you have issues
>People will say that that's not the case anymore
Eh, that's arguable. A lot of South America is built upon Christian values, and even though the religion seem to slowly fade with each passing decade, the values remain and it's hard to break away from these core ideas, unless there's a paradigm shift. Not many developed countries have a strong atheistic population, and the ones who do, seem to have a larger gender parity (which don't exactly correlate with the jobs according to but I digress, as it's not my post nor my research), while those who were based upon Christian values do have a clearly patriarchal base. Sometimes it's not even conservative, though it obviously leans that way.
I still get the point though.
>you defend Gillette for making misandrist generalizations.
Not that guy, but you're on a mission to misunderstand people if that's what you saw. Toxic masculinity isn't to say that all men are bad or all masculinity is bad, just elements of masculinity that are toxic. Basically nigger moments for men; what cultural factors cause men to murder people more than women. It's saying men aren't evil by nature, but there are can be problematic cultural practices.
thats good tho
I mean Asian countries have a strong patriarchal base, I'd wager even stronger than the ones on the West and they aren't really all that Christian.
Because what's more obnoxious than people with 100s of new genders?
1000s
Nerds have so little control over american culture that they are constantly demonized in American society.
Every day, somewhere on this site, we see feminists and egalitarians get into a debate. And every single time it's the same debate
>Feminists claim that feminism isn't anti-male
>Egalitarians provide evidence that feminism is anti-male
>Feminists begin falling apart and shilling anti-male views (it's different in each thread, but obviously here we have feminists rejecting male victims)
>Egalitarians provide more sources and evidence that feminists don't have
>Feminists realize they've lost and resort to meme insults instead
Every
Fucking
Time
When are feminists going to learn? You lost. Go back to your women's studies classes where the teacher will fail any student that supports actual gender equality. You can't make fun of somebody for saying that women can rape men and then keep pretending your movement isn't anti-male
Exactly, and that's just what the furries have.🌈
I'm sure it's been studied already, but it would be interesting to know why that's the case, in these cultures. They do seem way more rigid than the West, and in fact goes to explain why women's rights are more repressed in comparison.
End yourself
How much do you want for you not to disclose that information?♨️
"Toxic masculinity" is a dog whistle for misandrists. If you need proof look right here ITT where the feminist who brought it up is the same one attacking other anons for saying that men can be raped by women, and trying to dismiss a documentary by an ex-feminist about men's issues.
Ironically the term was created by MRAs, but obviously it's been co-opted by misandrists now
>which don't exactly correlate with the jobs
We could argue and assert that it's gender roles in general that seem to have little correlation (or reverse correlation) with gender parity. It's seguing greatly, but I think the point is that the trying to enforce gender roles causes people to go against strict cultural enforcement of those roles, whereas when people are more lax with gender roles, people seem to willingly move towards them.
Again, I'm WILDLY seguing here, but it's interesting. Sexually Dimorphic species (humans included) have this tendency to have very separate gender roles. Whereas species where both sexes have similar roles tend to have less physical differences in the sexes.
Which, from the standpoint of evolution makes sense. If, for example, male and females of a particular species have the same roles for foraging, hunting, and child rearing, then naturally it benefits that species to have both physically fit enough to fit those tasks. Whereas an animal where either the female or male does primarily one or the other, they're more likely to evolve traits that each respective sex is better suited to their own roles.
People still watch American Idol. BF3 was shit then and its shit now.
It's like the exchange Trump had when discussion the student that slept with his teacher:
Trump: “How would you like to be the husband of the wife who was playing around with a 14-year-old kid? Unbelievable. By the way, did you see what she looked like?”
Imus: “Not bad."
Trump: “Not bad? Yeah, I’d say so. I know a lot of guys who are trying to date her right now.”
Imus: “Well, I don’t know what teachers looked like when you were in school…”
Trump: “None of them looked like that, believe me. So do you think this 14-year-old kid is scarred forever? He might have put the moves on her! It might have given him confidence, actually."
He is seeing the difference between rape of a girl by a male teacher and the rape of a boy by a female teacher. Trump and this feminist seem to be on the same page and even the Daily Show treats this exchange as not a big fucking deal, but a little joke in a small segment.
Yes, rape is rape, but we note gender differences and react differently.
I'd wager it's been an ongoing battle since their negative portrayal in famous Hollywood movies such Revenge of The Nerds. It's all very documented, the amount of nerddom actually rose from 36% to about 67% and that uptick during the 80's only rose since then.
by the way there's only one guy talking about "egalitarian", "anti-male" and "misandrist" in this thread, check the IP count, it hasn't changed, and he's still trying to bait people to reply to him
You do know that on Yea Forums furries used to be viewed the exact same way bronies were/are, yeah? I mean, there's still a global rule that's still enforced that the only place furries are allowed are coincidentally the only boards that permit (and encourage) trolling.
Yeah dude you're totally a lib
>toxic masculinity
Yet notice the kind of violent assholes these feminazis swallow the loads of. Women are inconsistent stupid creatures that need to be banned from any controlling position in society. A man who thinks like a woman would be considered batshit insane.
It's not though, it's a word for men feeling the need to defend their honor in that idiotic Jersey Shore way and excusing the locker room talk where sexual conquest is a game you can't turn off.
Guys dont really care about nerds, women are the reason nerds are hated because nerd=anti Chad so ooga booga me hate nerd even if nerd has done nothing to me!
Blame sedentary agriculture from thousands of years ago.
>Dat finger length thumb
The fuck?
>you can't be a lib if you believe that men can be raped by women. A TRUE lib knows that only men can be rapists!
while it is true that President Obame (a feminist) believed that a woman could not rape a man, it is possible to be a liberal even if I disagree with that view.
It's amazing, even when men are at fault it's actually the women's doing.
I know but the user claims they are going to have a strong resurgence or "the next big thing".
It will be dubbed the Furryssance
When did Obama say that?
Before stupid women, guys just let nerds invent shit and be monks let them live their lives how they wanted, but then women were like OMG GUYS WHO DONT ACT LIKE CHAD SHOULD ALWAYS BE HATED AND TREATED LIKE SHIT EVEN IF THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG AT ALL!
This thread is all roleplay right? Good grief.
Man, it must be hard being a sad, lonely boomer that the world is leaving behind
literally right here ITT we have the feminist who talked about "toxic masculinity" then immediately denounce men's issues and claim that men can't be raped by women.
Look at the pic in and tell me the other half wouldn't be racist if you saw it posted on /pol/
Maybe?
Who knows. Why are people sayin that though?
The IP count is still at 52, you guys.
Also, Hypercrisis?
Nevermind, this guys ruined it.
Nope, that would be me.
both the NISVS and NCVS said that a woman can't rape a man. The NISVS is the study in pic-related of You won't learn any of this in your Women's Studies courses. Trust me, I know the cult of feminism told you otherwise but MRAs actually know what we're talking about, that's why ITT, MRAs/egalitarians are the only ones providing legitimate sources and arguments.
>people
It's just between user and I.
You want in, too?
That'll be a like.🐸
>Trump and this feminist seem to be on the same page
an old MRA quote is "feminism is patriarchy in lipstick"
Trump is the patriarchy, and he agrees with feminism about male rape victims.
Then a +1 for you it is, sir.
Your strawmanning and making the easy mistake that all feminism is is woman vs. man as if women's issues aren't also about the role other women think women should play and that it comes from a place of animosity and exclusion. It's a false equivalence. It's like how talking about urban gang violence isn't a racist conversation by nature and you'd be idiotic to think that anyone who wants to talk about that is automatically a racist.
>I know the cult of feminism told you otherwise but MRAs actually know what we're talking about
Right...
>MRAs/egalitarians
I don't know how to break this to you, but "egalitarism" is actually another label for feminism, not whatever you think it is.
Good.
Welcome to the secret club.
There's just three of us now so don't go spreading this insider info around.
We'll be fucking rich.
Here's a like.
Trump is Trump, but what he is seeing is the biological difference between two very different cases. A full grown woman raping a developing boy does less physical damage than a full grown man raping a developing boy. It's fun to see this as a feminist issue, but this has to do largely with biology and anatomy. A dick entering a vagina does more damage to the vagina and might even create a rape baby. Trump wouldn't be making this joke if a girl got raped by man.
I don't know how to break this too you but there's a 99% overlap between MRAs and egalitarians. You must be pretty young because feminists used to claim egalitarianism was misogynistic for thinking that men have issues too. It wasn't long ago that feminists hated egalitarians just as much as you hate MRAs, and for the same reason: You hate men, and therefore you hate anybody who says men deserve rights.
what strawmanning? Nothing I said is inaccurate.
>and you'd be idiotic to think that anyone who wants to talk about that is automatically a racist
But if the same people talking about it are also saying that black people are scum who don't deserve rights, then it's racist. Just like here, where the people ITT talking about "toxic masculinity" are mocking MRAs and saying that men can't be raped by women, they're obviously misandrists.
"Smart" doesn't translate to "Attractive to women" or "relates well to people".
So Obama didn't say that.
What you say cannot be true hashtags like YesAllMen exist and the only solution feminism and liberals offers to the problems they see is the total deconstruction of masculinity.
>and might even create a rape baby.
She can get an abortion or at worst give it up for adoption. But did you know male rape victims have to pay child support? That boy raped by a woman has to pay like $300,000 to her now. This is another issue MRAs think is wrong, and feminists call us misogynists over because they see nothing wrong with forcing (male) rape victims to pay child support to rapists.
I think some of you need a social life.
No he was just in charge of the executive agencies that said it and signed off on their official statements. Looks like you're the one nitpicking.
Physical damage is temporary. Developmental damage, especially at that age, is less so.
And unfortunately, it's no less damaging for men as it is for women.
A boy getting diddled by an adult, be it a priest, boy scout leader or even a hot teacher is going to be just as messed up as if a little girl got felt up by the phys ed teacher, uncle, or softball coach. It's not anymore harmless for men or little boys to be raped.
>You must be pretty young because feminists used to claim egalitarianism was misogynistic for thinking that men have issues too.
I'm 31. Egalitarianism was a label men used as to avoid misusing feminism during Second Wave. Whatever you're talking about is pure revisionism that sounds dangerously close to those who call themselves "race realists" or "race critics" in order to avoid being called what they really are.
Also notice how this guy keeps hammering the point across that anyone who opposes his viewpoints is a misandrist, and that him and his ilk are the ones who know what they're talking about. It would be funny if this wasn't the same guy who insists that feminists are "distorting statistics".
Oh and btw, for such an "egalitarian" you sure sound compelled to talk about how women are stupid.
>police reports
Don't mean anything since men are less likely to call the cops against a woman. Loling at you angry roasty.
>But if the same people talking about it are also saying that black people are scum who don't deserve rights, then it's racist.
That's not what's happening. The only way you can begin to argue that is if MRA is a gender and only one person seems to have mentioned them twice. I feel like you want to argue semantics and use the dynamics of MRA = misogynist and spin that around using that as a standard, but nothing really holds water as you'd always be making sweeping generalizations.
You know where the word "roastie" comes from, right?
>Whatever you're talking about is pure revisionism
ah yes the honored tradition of feminists lying to protect themselves. Egalitarianism was an anti-feminist view 5 years ago. Name an egalitarian feminist. I'll wait. Meanwhile the MRM was started by pic-related.
>Also notice how this guy keeps hammering the point across that anyone who thinks men can't be raped by women is a misandrist
>Also notice how this guy keeps hammering the point across that anyone who thinks male victims of abuse deserve help is a misandrist
>Also notice how this guy keeps hammering the point across that anyone who thinks men's issues are a joke is a misandrist
yes, your point? There's nothing egalitarian about claiming men can't be raped by women. You are a misandrist.
>Don't mean anything since men are less likely to call the cops against a woman.
Really now? Enlighten me how.
>Loling at you angry roasty.
On a second thought, don't.
are you pretending to be illiterate or are you actually illiterate? Read the thread.
>yes, your point?
My point is that you're a sad person who replied in anger to several of my posts and others ITT and you realized no one was engaging you until I decided to throw you a bone moments ago. I saw it, user... 52 IPs, unchanging since you arrived. That's pretty fucking pathetic.
Protip: You're not going to convince anyone with your childish tantrums about "muh misandry".
Oh and btw, don't waste time with your ready-made pics to "own the libs" (no one believes you're one, by the way), no one's clicking them.
>Enlighten me
It's been known for years that men are less likely to report rape and abuse. Data from non police reports show that men get abused just as much as women.
>Getting this triggered over getting called a Roasty
Loling @ you. Go back to tumblr if you are this easily triggered.
>Physical damage is temporary. Developmental damage, especially at that age, is less so.
Tell that to the people in wheelchairs dude.
Yes, but the application I hear is always different. Some guys insist if a girl is slutty, their beef curtains turn, well, from an innie to an outie.
I don't often hear about it from sexual abuse context. But using that exact example:
It might not look pretty but as I understand it, it's not going to hurt them or cause any discomfort in the future. Again, assuming that's what would happen.
More to the point:
Know what pink socking is?
If you don't, I'm not going to ruin your day and tell you.
>400+ posts into an anti-feminist thread on Yea Forums and nobody posted pic-related
I'm disappointed in you. As much as I'm enjoying the arguments between egalitarians vs feminists who pretend not to hate men even though they obviously hate men, this is a classic that must be posted in all anti-feminist threads on Yea Forums
No one's triggered here, dude. It's just that I try not to argue with children.
Why don't you post that data from "non-police reports", then? Let's have 'em. Meanwhile, while you dig hard for those, I'll top you off with this, which already disproves your pitiful claim.
Absolutely; but that's not limited to just girls and women, yeah?
I mean that was the assumption though - that rape wasn't as bad to little boys or to men, and that's really not proving the case here with male victims, adult or adolescent.
That was a shitty court ruling I don't know the details of and can't find any recent uses or controversies about in that one county. That's not to say that's what happens everywhere all the time since 1996 in ((((California)))). I don't know how many feminist opinions I've heard about this, but you seem to default on "fucks over a male = feminist".
>According to their responses, almost equal proportions of men and women (7% and 8% respectively) had been the victims of intimate partner physical and psychological abuse (18% and 19% respectively). These findings were consistent with several earlier studies which reported equal rates of abuse by women and men in intimate relationships.Footnotes 2-16
>I think men are scum who can't be raped by women, I never considered myself an egalitarian until I pretended to call myself one a couple of years ago, and I have literally NEVER tried to raise awareness of men's issues but please believe that I don't hate men
this is just getting sad user.
already posted a source. Actually no, already posted 286 sources: . But you ignored that because you're a feminist which means Feelz>Facts.
Of course you wouldn't need those 286 sources if you were actually an egalitarian, since actual egalitarians already knew this. Don't worry, nobody believed you in the first place. We all knew you were a feminist, not an egalitarian.
>shitty court ruling
there are dozens of other court rulings, and there has never (in America) been a court ruling the other way. Male rape victims have to pay child support in America.
>((((California))))
>(((())))
usually we have to say "feminists are almost the same as neo-nazis" but you saved us the trouble and outed yourself as a literal neo-nazi. Thanks for that.
Oh right, the same source from above. That's the only one you're going to quote?
It's more like it's skewed in principle and it doesn't correlate with actual statistical findings. It's LITERALLY "feels b4 realz".
And "actual egalitarians" are feminists, my dude. It's funny you keep using that word, but clearly you don't know what it means.
A penis raped by a woman is unchanged and the boy isn't going to get pregnant. A vagina raped by a man is changed and there's a chance the girl will get pregnant. With that clear difference in mind, the handling of rape cases should be different.
More to the point: I didn't know women insert their vaginas into the buttholes of boys.
According to zurin:
Women are more likely to use a weapon in domestic abuse situations whereas men are more likely to use physical force (bare hands.)
Yeah but there's a chance the woman will get pregnant and then the boy will be made responsible for that.
>"actual egalitarians" are feminists
>these feminists that hate men aren't real feminists!
Every time
>BF3 was shit then and its shit now.
>the Salamanders
have white features with pitch black skin
>usually we have to say "feminists are almost the same as neo-nazis" but you saved us the trouble and outed yourself as a literal neo-nazi. Thanks for that.
Not even that guy, but this is the prime example of what we call here "reaching hard".
No, I'm saying "egalitarianism" MEANS "feminism" and you keep using it as if it was something else altogether when it isn't. Who the fuck started calling it that? Was it Peterson or one of these other hacks? Because it's fucking funny if you ask me.
Men have greater physical capabilities for abuse but women have greater emotional or social capabilities for abuse, it's being made even more evident with the callout culture social media has birthed.
>And "actual egalitarians" are feminists, my dude
funny how feminists disagree with that though. Funny how I've been an "egalitarian" for 15 years and it's only been within the last 2-3 that feminists started claiming they were egalitarians. Why didn't you ever call yourself an egalitarian before user? Why was it that until a couple of years ago you said that egalitarians were misogynists? Did you change your mind because you realized you were losing?
You aren't fooling anybody. Did you ever speak out against anti-egalitarian feminism like pic-related? I'd bet no, that's why you're ITT defending misandrists and opposing actual egalitarians. Go show me examples of feminists who are egalitarians. You can't.
Just because a word MEANS something, doesn't mean a group named after that word means the same thing.
Or do you think the DPRK is an actual democracy?
>Why didn't you ever call yourself an egalitarian before user?
Because it felt like an euphemism for feminism, because, after all, it was THE SAME THING.
>A penis raped by a woman is unchanged and the boy isn't going to get pregnant. A vagina raped by a man is changed and there's a chance the girl will get pregnant. With that clear difference in mind, the handling of rape cases should be different.
The absence of the risk of pregnancy for a man or boy should not and does not diminish the harm or severity of the crime of rape against them.
>More to the point: I didn't know women insert their vaginas into the buttholes of boys.
Don't be obtuse, please. Female abusers can and do sodomize boys with all sorts of objects including hands, fingers, etc with all the same risks of sustaining injury when they are ultimately are not careful (and, an abuser is not likely to take care when abusing their victim. That's why it's called abuse.)
Ignoring that entirely, are the adult men who abuse young boys who rape them or violent rapes against inmates in prison or other situations where the rape is and should be considered just as severe as it is with women.
There's no reason why male rape victims should be treated unfairly when it can and often is extremely harmful to the boy or man. There's no reason to treat male rape victims with the amount of levity you are suggesting.
Obviously, hence my comparison with the whole "race realism" shit. Clearly for this guy, egalitarianism actually means just owning the feminazis and seethe whenever men are called out for rape. Not gender equality.
I just want to know who started it, because this is honestly new to me, and this guy is clearly much younger than me because it seems pretty natural to him.
Financially, as in courts aren't going to punish the child for being the result of male rape. That's the rationale as far as I'm reading.
>Not even that guy, but this is the prime example of what we call here "reaching hard".
((((echoes)))) are a well-known neo-nazi symbol
>No, I'm saying "egalitarianism" MEANS "feminism"
and us (ACTUAL egalitarians who ACTUALLY support gender equality) are telling you that you're wrong. You never called yourself egalitarians before, you explicitly rejected that term and said it was misogynistic to think men have problems too. Now suddenly you think we're going to just forget about the last 50 years when feminists were anti-egalitarian? See pic in if you're still confused about the difference. See pic in for an ex-feminist/egalitarian who was forced to stop being a feminist (but is still an egalitarian/MRA)
user if you aren't lying then it's pretty clear you're either very young or very inexperienced. Maybe step back and take it from people who have actually been in these discussions for a while. Do your research. Talk to other people who have 10+ years experience advocating for men's issues. Notice how none of them are feminists.
Stay salty forever you miserable retard. Hashtags are for brainlets who couldn't understand nuance if it came up and fucked their wives in front of them. I want a concise summation of the arguments put forth without any puffery or self-aggrandizement.
How so? People have been catching on to the game, politicians don't do anything of value for the majority of people. They're corrupt, sleazy, garbage people who used other people's money that they owe favors to. What point does he have? That everyone is moving into fantasy land because they've finally realized the only way forward is bloody? Hes the type of piece of shit to point out garbage that's not anyone's and suggest other people sacrifice time picking it up while he goes about his business.
I'm so fucking tired of superhero bullshit. If these losers are so pro feminist, why don't they promote paper girls? That comic is pretty good at representing females and it's not played out capeshit. At least promote some decent shit instead of ruining other franchises.
You kinda just revealed how you dehumanize men if you think physical damage is the main offense from rape. Hell a lot of women who are victims of rape say that they had orgasms from the rape, but that must mean they really did want it after all right?
50 posts have been added since this and nothing's changed. Egalitarians still have facts and sources, feminists are still getting increasingly desparate and making absurd lies that anybody can tell are bullshit.
...
>((((echoes)))) are a well-known neo-nazi symbol
LOL no, it was started by Jews and it's used in mockery after that. Are you new here or some shit? I'm pretty far from being right wing but that stuff is pretty common use here, even if it's rejected. You sound awfully flustered by its usage.
>user if you aren't lying then it's pretty clear you're either very young or very inexperienced.
Like I said I'm 31, by your rhetoric you can't be older than 21 though. Only someone this concerned and frustrated over women has some unresolved puberty issues still going.
>You kinda just revealed how you dehumanize men
LMAO
>Egalitarians still have facts and sources
YEP confirmed for LARPer
>LMAO
Care to prove otherwise or will you continue to grow more hysterical?
Sorry, let me clarify why I'm laughing: You keep referring to yourself, a SINGLE DUDE WHO HAS BEEN POSTING ALL THIS DRIVEL, as "us egalitarians" in plural, you and the bro squad, y'know? Ready to own the roasties.
But it's YOU! Only you my dude, you alone itt.
>user posts source
>Discredit it for no reason
>The absence of the risk of pregnancy for a man or boy should not and does not diminish the harm or severity of the crime of rape against them.
It doesn't, but it marks an extreme difference: having the female rape victim either give birth to the child that her rapist gave her and further harming her body with it or getting an abortion and living with the guilt. This isn't an event at the victim olympics, this is biology. Male rape is not diminished here.
>Female abusers can and do sodomize boys with all sorts of objects including hands, fingers, etc with all the same risks of sustaining injury when they are ultimately are not careful (and, an abuser is not likely to take care when abusing their victim. That's why it's called abuse.)
And they should be held accountable for physical abuse on top of rape.
>Ignoring that entirely, are the adult men who abuse young boys who rape them or violent rapes against inmates in prison or other situations where the rape is and should be considered just as severe as it is with women.
Male on male rape is treated more severely because of the damage sodomy does.
>There's no reason why male rape victims should be treated unfairly when it can and often is extremely harmful to the boy or man. There's no reason to treat male rape victims with the amount of levity you are suggesting.
I'm not suggesting levity, I'm suggesting recognizing that the damage is different.
I'm a different guy.
I Kill Giants was fucking awesome too but I guess that was more about a child coping about death than anything that promotes feminism.
>LMAO
Not him user. But.
This isn't helping your case when you react to male rape victims as though it's somehow less wrong when it happens to them as it does to women.
This belies a more important central point user. If you believe women and men should be treated equally, perhaps men and women who are rape victims should be treated equally. Instead of deciding that because they aren't the same, they should be treated without full parity of the law. Which is, by the definition of the word, unfair and unequal treatment.
I think user supports the idea of Fair And Equal But Only When Convenient To Me.
What I said still stands:
>This court case set a precedent for male rape victims to make child-support payments. The financial needs of the children outweigh the court’s interest in deterring sexual crimes against male minors, even if statutory rape is the cause of conception.
Well I personally think a good comic without baked in cringey shit that represents females well is good enough. I don't understand why people need to go over the top to promote STRONG WYMYN. X-files is a good show that feminist should promote too, but they don't. They just find other nerd franchises to go to ruin. I don't fucking get it. Terrible tastes these feminists have.
>IP count doesn't rise
>user employs youtube-tier tactics to try and dogpile the other guy who clearly doesn't care about engaging
Yes dude you WON, congratulations, you owned the roasties another day. How does it feel? Damn good I bet. But hey didn't you win here already?
>This isn't helping your case when you react to male rape victims...
Let me stop you right there. At no point I'm actually engaging in this one-sided debate, I'm just making fun at the tantrum. Arguing in bad faith, as this guy did, was never going to work with me. So no, I DON'T care about the topic he keeps pushing regarding male rape and I never tried to argue it because I didn't bring it up and it was never my focus in this thread, I said my piece an hour or so ago. Everything after that has been trying to get this through his thick skull, but it hasn't worked, so he resorts to calling me misandrist and anti-male and other bullshit because I won't engage him, even though at NO point I disagreed with the assertions about male rape.
Then you'll forgive me for my confusion.
As it seems you felt it would be wrong for Trump to joke about rape if it was a woman or girl who was raped, but it's not as wrong when he joked about the boy being raped.
Stop me if I'm misunderstanding you here, user. But it seemed like you were ok with one but not the other. Personally, I don't think the office of the president should be making rape jokes. I'm fine with rape jokes as a matter of fact, but not from an office to which we hold a high degree of scrutiny.
>but that stuff is pretty common use here
it is, by literal Nazis from /pol/
>Like I said I'm 31, by your rhetoric you can't be older than 21 though
If you are 31 then you are a 31 year old who didn't start following men's issues until he was 27. What you CAN'T be, and what I am 100% certain you are NOT, is a 31 year old who called yourself an egalitarian when you were 21 while actively discussing men's issues. I on the other hand am a 30-year-old who has been following men's issues since high school. And I am 100% confident you never talked about men's issues nor called yourself an egalitarian back then. Stop lying.
>LMAO
we already heard that argument, see when a feminist (either you or another one) had "LMAO" as their primary argument for why women can't rape men. But they were totally an egalitarian right, because egalitarians love to mock male rape victims.
I've read some Ursula K. Le Guin's works and it was pretty good too, although heavy on the sci-fi jargon
What a terrible ruling.
Financial support from a young child (the victim) IS the financial needs of children. In this case, it's one child's financial needs for another's.
Such a ruling is hardly fair to anyone, particularly awarding money to the perpetrator of a rape. Though, a court ruling does not make something right or morally just. Remember that the court has on occasion ruled (and later overturned) bad decisions before.
I think I'm agreeing with you? I think it's unfair that males are not treated as victims of rape. I'm not sure what you're greentexting though.
>we already heard that argument, see (You) when a feminist (either you or another one) had "LMAO" as their primary argument for why women can't rape men.
Let's see if you understand it in clearer words...
It's not that I don't believe women can rape men (they most certainly can). It's that it's quite fucking obvious it was brought up in order to silence the topic at hand, because you wanted to push a subject you were most comfortable with (as in, one where YOU were the focus and not women) and I wasn't having it. I'm well aware of the amount of male rape that exists, and how prevalent it is. You don't need to tell me that, it was simply a weird tangent to take.
Is that clear now? That's why I laugh. It's fucking nutter is what it is. I never denied any of that but you wanted to make an enemy out of me so you started throwing insults and insisting WHOA US "EGALITARIANS" ARE ALWAYS IN THE RIGHT AND FEMITARDS ARE SEETHING while I'm sitting here thinking how the fuck did one topic move onto the other and why you were so ardent on me discussing it.
They took down the ad.
Just looked her up. Never heard of her and I love scifi. Gonna buy some of her books and see how it is. Thanks for the recommendation.
Ursula K. Leguin is quite important to the genre, user. Also look up Anne Leckie, more modern but still good.
Well I don't know if she fits your taste, it took me a while to get used to her writing but I can see how she won the awards.
Try reading her short stories first and see where that takes you.
It's hardly a weird tangent. Your post implies that you dehumanize men because you think they can't experience pain the way women do.
>And "actual egalitarians" are feminists, my dude
>I don't know how to break this to you, but "egalitarism" is actually another label for feminism
WTF? When did this happen? No seriously when the fuck did feminists go from "we don't need egalitarianism because only women have problems" to "feminists are egalitarians"? And do feminists really expect us to just ignore the fact that they used to oppose egalitarianism?
>Your post implies that you dehumanize men because you think they can't experience pain the way women do.
No, I don't imply shit because I never said any of this. Who or what is this shit? What post are you attributing me?
>"we don't need egalitarianism because only women have problems"
This never happened, unless you only read Valerie Solanas or some shit.
>10. Be aware that men can be victims of sexual assault. If you are, seek help immediately.
>10a. But don't bother calling a rape hotline or anything, those are only for women.
>10b. And you probably shouldn't go to Campus Security or anything about it, either, because they're legally obligated to investigate you as the perpetrator.
>10c. You know what, don't bother going to the Police for that matter. Even if they could do anything about it -which they really can't- the person who assaulted you is never going to be served justice so you'd just be wasting your time and money, and destroying your reputation.
>10d. I guess if you get raped or something just become an alcoholic.
College is fun.
>It's not that I don't believe women can rape men, it's that 2 hours later I will pretend that I supported male rape victims all along, even though I previously accused you of "redefining rape to fit with a definition that allows you to frame it around you" when you defined rape as "a person forcing another person to have sex"
user, go to sleep. You lost this one. And FYI, most feminists believe that a woman forcing a man to have sex is not rape. Including President Obama as we already covered.
You lost.
>This never happened, unless you only read Valerie Solanas or some shit.
>they weren't real feminists
Not that guy but no, men can't experience the pain of having someone turn you into a roastie against your will and then have a small human grow inside you and what you do to deal with that.
There's no dehumanization involved here accept for maybe in the larger, unfortunate discourse of abortion.
Yes.
Like they want you to overlook how lesbians grooming and raping 13 year old girls is considered a positive thing and a text with that very thing is required reading in every college and girls only school in america.
Wait, doesn't #10 for men run counter to the motives outlined in the filename? It says men can be the victim of sexual assault and to seek help.
>this never happened
t. never tried to talk about men's issues until a few years ago. It happened, like all the time. Every time somebody tried to say they were an egalitarian that's the response they got. If you actually cared about men's issues you would know that. Remember the #HeForShe campaign? That was only 5 years ago, and guess how many feminists cared about "egalitarianism" when the UN came out with that? Did you say anything about egalitarianism then? Or only now when actual egalitarians point out that feminism supported HeForShe?
>burn our bras
>I previously accused you of "redefining rape to fit with a definition that allows you to frame it around you"
I did accuse you of this, because you went on a tangent about this topic because you weren't comfortable with the fact we were discussing domestic violence on women
>when you defined rape as "a person forcing another person to have sex"
I actually didn't do this, because I didn't read your post, I only read the beginning of it. I guess this is your confusion, you keep thinking I was breaking down your posts when I was basically telling you to shut the fuck up since it wasn't the subject.
Oh Valerie Solanas was indeed a feminist, just a very radical one. SCUM is still a fun read.
But anyway, tell me something: Did you have fun? Are you going to tell Shapiro all about the roasties you defeated tonight? Just wanna know how an... """""egalitarian""""" (sorry, can't get used to that word used in this context) feels after such a rush of a night.
>never tried to talk about men's issues until a few years ago
Well no I don't talk about "men's issues" because I'm not a shut-in MRA. I do believe in gender equality though, which is achieved through feminism since the gender disparity is skewed against women. Sorry if that bothers you!
Oh btw: en.wikipedia.org
Look where it redirects!!!!!!!
see it's a throwaway at the end. It was written by the same type of feminist ITT, they desperately want to convince people that they care about men even though they obviously don't. The rest of those cards basically say "women are victims men are rapists" then they tack that on at the end just so they can say "we totally care about men! We're eGaLiTaRiAnS!" Even though the rest of the men's card is about how men are rapists.
Reminder that in 6 states, men legally cannot be raped, just "sexually assaulted" which carries a much less severe punishment with a much shorter statute of limitations.
For the purpose of FBI reporting statistics, before 2012 men could not be reported as rape victims by the FBI.
Trump shouldn't have made the joke either way, but the reason why the public didn't care too much and instead elected him president is because the public recognizes a difference in a boy being raped by a woman and a girl being raped by a man. I'm not okay with either, but the president and largely the American public seem to on board that it's okay when the teacher is a hot woman.
keep on trying to build that downline, Amway shill
Reminder that KEEP CRYING BECAUSE TOXIC MASCULINITY IS INDEED REAL AND "TOXIC FEMININITY" ISN'T
Good night.
It says to seek help. If that's what how you read into it, seek help.
>ell no I don't talk about "men's issues" because I'm not a shut-in MRA
With all respect, it really sounds like right here you're saying that men's issues that they face are unimportant or less important.
As insufferable as MRAs can be, that doesn't make everything they say wrong by association. Truth stands on its own.
No. All normals need to die, regardless of political alignment
Because if you draw lines where "rape = potential to make a baby inside a victim". It's arguing legal semantics, unfortunately.
This does not sound like you are sympathetic or interested in the issue of equality.
>well no I don't talk about men's issues because I don't actually care about men's issues.
I already knew that.
>since the gender disparity is skewed against women
[citation needed]
>Look where my feminist website redirects!!!!!!!
Wow that is definitely because your movement has historically advocated for men's equality and not because of pic-related propaganda!
Curious that you ignored the rest of my post... do you not have examples of egalitarian feminists in 2014? Surely there must have been feminist outrage at the HeForShe campaign from the UN.
>the rest of your post
kek, maybe next time you shouldn't mock people who think that men can be raped by women, then you wouldn't have to jump through absurd hoops to defend your previous statements where you clearly mocked somebody for saying that men can be raped by women. But, you wouldn't be a feminist if you weren't trying to rewrite history
10% of it says to seek help, 90% of it says "stop being a rapist." You must really care about male rape victims if that's the message you want to tell male rape victims.
With that, you can technically rape without penile penetration
>it really sounds like right here you're saying that men's issues that they face are unimportant or less important
They are important, very much so. The problem here is that I don't talk about "men issues" to shut down real concerns about women issues like this guy did ITT, and notice that he hasn't stopped victimizing himself and looking for enemies everywhere, still posting pictures like these and calling everyone who doesn't comply with his ideology a misandrist.
And I most definitely am interested in gender equality by the way, but there's that, and there's false equivalences. Only dumbass centrists actually try and see "both sides" on issues that are clearly skewed in a way or another. Only a moron does that. And fact of the matter is, it's hard to empathize with a moron who talks about roasties and shit but turns around and says "Look at me! I am a victim too!" while discrediting everyone around him.
Look, he's still at it! More pics I won't click!
>Female tab talks about how to prevent sexual assault
>Men one basically talks about how men should avoid sexual assault/rape as if they were going to commit it, but not how to prevent it for themselves.
>Men one ends with literal "Lol, call help faggot."
What the fuck? Isn't that sexist.
Legal semantics are unfortunately important in this case. Especially when it comes to sentencing and how long you have to report a rape. Which are incredibly important issues.
In this exact instance, it's literally saying one is more criminal, legally, than the other. Which is codified and explicitly unfair treatment of victims based on sex.
>It says to seek help
The issue is that it's basically impossible for men who are the victims of sexual assault to actually GET any help. There are no numbers men can call or support groups they can go to.
>Skewed against women
Lol, no it's not tumblr. Woman get all the same legal rights as men and get the ability to cry and complain when things don't go their way.
But it can't be helped when only one can grow a baby inside them against their will.
>isn't that sexist
No user don't you get it? It's egalitarian because the feminists ITT told us that TRUE egalitarians think that men can't be raped by women, and that TRUE egalitarians realize that only women matter.
>Only dumbass centrists actually try and see "both sides" on issues that are clearly skewed in a way or another.
Sorry, can't really agree with you on this.
Equality in my smelly opinion is about equality of service, treatment and opportunity. Not equality of outcome. We don't treat one issue with less severity because it is a small issue.
For example with transgender issues, they are but a small minority of the population. Nevertheless, they deserve the same protections against discrimination as if their issues were more prevalent. Likewise, if a man suffers abuse, regardless of how prevalent it is, it should be offered the same consideration as anyone else.
>TFW my college gave me extra credit to go to a healthy at every size meeting
>Doesn't respond to the source that was posted
So just like every feminist you are going to ignore evidence yet still claim you are right aren't you?
MRAs have some support groups, but they aren't widespread because MRAs don't have a lot of resources. And of course the feminists ITT believe it's misogynistic to have those support groups.
>"ROASTIES REEEEEEE"
Okay now it's been fun, but the thread already hit bump limit, and I have series to watch. Keep those /pol/ tier infographics primed up until next time.
For the last time... LMAO
The definition of rape, legal or otherwise, is not contingent on pregnancy. Nor should it be. A man's inability to be impregnated should not exclude their perpetrator from being arraigned or convicted of rape.
Just so everyone's clear, nobody is defending rape ITT right?
Not an argument. Are you going to respond to the study that BTFO your shit argument or not?
This thread is past the bump limit and none of the misandrists ITT have convinced me why pic-related is fighting against sexist stereotypes.
Yet another thread of Feminism vs. Egalitarians, and yet another thread that Egalitarians win.
>that macro
False Dichotomy.
I am.
Jesus Christ, is that real?
Objective standpoint:
There is one men's only abuse shelter in the united states.
>LMAO you think men can be raped by women!
>LMAO
>LMAO
>LMAO you think male rape victims should have support groups LMAO you pussy, real men wouldn't care if they were raped LMAO
>btw I'm totally an egalitarian who supports gender equality and doesn't hate men at all
I wonder if this is a troll or not. Not once did this user even try to make an argument the sources or arguments other anons have made. Just spouting bullshit like "W-Women face so much oppression" with no evidence at all.
Rape victims aren't MRAs. They don't need MRA support, they aren't trained therapists or counselors. They aren't a male rape help group
He reminds me of hbomberguy with the way how his argumentation works.
It depends on how you define "rape." If you define "rape" as "a MAN forcing a WOMAN to have sex" then nobody is defending it.
But if you define it as "a man or woman forcing a man or woman to have sex" than there is as least one and probably more than one feminists ITT defending F-on-M rape. But not because they're misandrists, because it's definitely egalitarian to mock people for thinking that women can rape men or that male rape victims need support groups.
it's literally what feminists believe. Of course it's false, just like most of what feminists believe.
no, it's paraphrasing a Trump quote to mock Gillette's anti-male ad, which basically said that but not in those exact words.
>Be a nerd
>Take refuge in nerdy things, including the internet
>Normies come in screaming and knocking shit over. Change the rules of the internet from 'never share personal info' to 'why isn't your personal info on google?'
>Normies are now in nerd-space, running the show. Tell nerds to shut up if nerd opinions hurt normie feelings
>If something doesn't work though, it's the nerd's fault
Goddamn it
Daily reminder that science proves that feminists are all weakling beta's while the men women actually want to fuck are also the men who put women in their place.
>Rape victims aren't MRAs
for the last time, we get it. You don't think men who are raped by women are "rape victims."
But the rest of us, who AREN'T misandrists, think that men who are raped by women are rape victims. And many of those men are MRAs, and the only people offering them support are MRAs/Egalitarians.
>They don't need MRA support
They need a lot more than MRA support, but thanks to misandrists like yourself, MRA support is all they have.
They way feminists talk about it, abortion is a simple issue.
I'm saying they need counciling and therapy. I'm saying they need help but you keep reading what you want.
And I'm saying they need a society that recognizes that men can be raped by women in order to get any help. They need a government that recognizes men raped by women, which the feminist Obama administration refused to do. They need academics who support them, which feminist scholars won't do. And you keep saying that it's "egalitarian" to tell men that they can't be raped by women.
Male rape victims need a lot more help than MRAs can provide but unfortunately MRAs are the only ones who actually want them to get that help. You are saying this in an anonymous internet forum, after you (or another feminist) previously mocked male rape victims. Have you ever, outside of this, said the same thing? When Obama was in charge, did you ever criticize him for his administrations anti-male position on rape? Or did you just say "LMAO" and insult the people who did take a stand for male rape victims?
Guys I don't think he was implying that's bad
>”Superhero began with Batman in 1989”
80’s Superman? They had Richard Prior in one, bruh! Christopher Reeves?
>”Nerds are unhappy people”
The fuck, man? Did this guy never stayed up all night playing vidya, tabletop games or MtG? I’ve been friends with the same nerds since highschool and they’re successful, well adjusted and nerdy fucking people.
>Wrap it up by blamin’ ‘em for Trump
Where the fuck did that even come from?
Who the fuck is this hate filled motherfucker?
Are you on the square?
Are you on the level?
Are you ready to swear right here, right now before the devil?
>And I'm saying they need a society that recognizes that men can be raped by women in order to get any help.
That pamphlet said that men can be the victims of sexual assault and men's sexual abuse lines exist as well as billboard ads. Society gives more attention to females because it happens more often to them and often sexual abuse hotlines aren't gender specific. 911 isn't gender specific and neither is therapy. To frame this as something only MRAs can help with is to be willfully ignorant.
>And you keep saying that it's "egalitarian" to tell men that they can't be raped by women.
I've never said this, you're confusing me with someone else.
>When Obama was in charge, did you ever criticize him for his administrations anti-male position on rape?
You're caught up in the legal semantics of rape which, in some states only use the language to define an action that sees it as forced vaginal sex that may result in pregnancy. Rape is sexual assault. A female forcing herself on an unwilling male is sexual assault. The legal distinction is in semantics only as male rape of a female can lead to pregnancy and so is treated differently.
everydayfeminism.com
Here's a feminist perspective on MRAs. Thru don't cover all the topics you're looking for in this one little opinion piece, but it isn't antagonistic towards MRAs.
Why are you still here then?
It's highlighting the irony of saying Trump didn't call all Mexicans rapists in a joke Trump people are probably going to say calls all men rapists.
>You're caught up in the semantics of thinking that men can be raped by women
k
>Everyday feminism
pic-related is not a site that cares about men. It's a site for misandrists.
>Can't tell if everyone in this thread are fucking retarded or if just really dedicated april fool's day prank
From the article:
>Feminists acknowledge that most violence against women is committed by men, but we don’t view this as inherent or natural to men. We view it as a result of a patriarchal society that oppresses everyone – as an issue of socialization.
>Men are conditioned to be aggressive and domineering toward gender minorities like women through violent depictions of masculinity in the media, pressure to act masculine in front of their peers, and expectations from caregivers starting at a young age. This doesn’t absolve them of responsibility for hurtful behaviors, though.
>We don’t hate men. We hate toxic masculinity. We believe men can be better than they’re made out to be. Instead of getting defensive, men should be on board with that.
This would imply, following your pic, that blacks aren't violent by nature, just black culture fucking sucks. Which is fine to say and is largely agreed upon.
>co-opt our hobby
>change everything and run it into the ground
who's smothering whom?
>Rape is sexual assault.
They're two separate charges and are sentenced differently with different statutes of limitations. They are different under the law. A rape can also lead to sexual assault charge on top of the rape charge.
>A female forcing herself on an unwilling male is sexual assault. The legal distinction is in semantics only as male rape of a female can lead to pregnancy and so is treated differently.
The distinction between rape and sexual assault, legally, is far more than just semantics user. It literally results in different sentencing and has different statutes of limitations.
There is a difference between sexual assault and rape. Period. It's not just semantics. Even in states where there can only be rape if it defines involves, "intimate knowledge of a female vaginally." in states where men cannot be raped, rape and sexual assault are not the same charge and do not carry the same punishment nor do its victims have the same statute of limitation to bring charges.
>minority gender
they're.. like.. 52%
And they should be charged differently as a man raping a woman can lead to pregnancy and becoming a roastie.
>And they should be charged differently
Vehemently disagree.
Rape has nothing to do with the risk of pregnancy in its definition, legal or otherwise.
Does it matter who gets it worse?
Is there are reason both problems can not be solved?
I mean if we're going to play the appeal to bigger problems fallacy then I guess any problem faced by anyone in the first world can not be addressed until every single problem in the third world is resolved first since those are more severe, someone shooting at you? sorry but there is this starving kid in africa we have to attend to first.
That's where the semantics comes in. You're right, but it should be a separate class if vaginal rape because of the difference. Like a car crash is a car crash, but one that results in death should be charged and defined differently.
That's the "all lives matter" problem. There are bigger, more pressing local issues, but to frame it like you're going to address all issues like they're all racial issues like they're all the same size is silly.
In the 6 states where men cannot be victims of rape, legally none of them include the risk of pregnancy. they explicitly use the (now outdated an no longer used) FBI's definition of - The carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will.
NO states, as far as I'm aware, use "pregnancy."
>but it should be a separate class if vaginal rape because of the difference
Strongly disagree. If you want men and women to be treated the same, you should treat them the same. Treating female rape differently is not equal and fair. The law must remain blind to be impartial.
The feminists are retarded. The egalitarians are unironically well-informed.
Feminism is a hate movement and no sane person can dispute that
>There are no numbers men can call or support groups they can go to.
I mean there are but they are rare and tend to get shut down by feminists as soon as they learn about them.
Even if it isn't about pregnancy specifically, recognizing the "roastie" problem is enough of a difference.
>Rape victims aren't MRAs. They don't need MRA support, they aren't trained therapists or counselors.
That will be difficult since any therapist or counselor that speaks to them will be branded an MRA by default.
That doesn't happen. How does that happen? What's that based on?
I love how feminists use "all lives matter" but when 96% of the people killed by police are male you say it's misogynistic to say Male Lives Matter.
Thread confirmed for April fool's prank.
The fallacy you're referring to here is called relative privation.
Don't go down that road.
I'm not saying that everyone has to address all issues I'm saying there should be no reason to try and stop somebody from addressing an issue that is important to them.
Feminists seem to have feminist issues well in hand so what is the problem with letting MRAs address the societal problems that they care about?
That just follows the pattern of toxic masculinity, which doesn't say men are naturally bad, just that males are more cultural inclined to be homicidal.
Idk about therapists or counselors but any organization that tries to speak up for men's issues is labeled MRA and feminists oppose them. CAFE in Canada is a good example of this. They tried to avoid the MRA label because misandrist propaganda had tainted it, but it didn't matter.
Anybody who supports equality for men gets called a misogynistic MRA because feminists think supporting equality for men is misogynostic
Probably the Warren Farrel Toronto protest. Including one such individual who went to the college to get answers about why his brother killed himself and was told he was, "scum."
The protest included feminists and professors from the campus who identified as "moderate."
>Feminism, a mostly female movement, says that nobody should be allowed to talk about men's issues
>This is somehow the result of toxic masculinity
You are really grasping at straws here.
Sex abuse and rape lines aren't going to turn you away for being male, though they may not walk you through the process of getting an abortion. There are musicians who stand by 1in6 through a blue string on their guitars and they don't get any shit for that. People can address male rape just fine.
Well off the top of my head there is Erin Pizzy the woman who started the first women's shelters in the UK who after trying to start men's shelters for men that were the victims of sexual and domestic abuse had her home vandalized and her family assaulted by feminist groups forcing her to leave the country.
There was another one I cannot recall the name of in Canada where a shelter was routinely threatened by local government red tape in an attempt to stop it.
Even approaching the subject of male sexual abuse victims tends to elicit accusations of one being an MRA or sexist or both.
The protest was even organized by the women's studies department IIRC. 100 feminists try to shut down a discussion on men's issues and now they try to pretend that "toxic masculinity" is the reason men's issues aren't taken seriously
The issue with this attitude is it is very myopic. It asserts that if women's problem's are solved first, then all the men's issues will be solved as a result.
"high male suicide rates and homelessness will be addressed if we resolve female domestic abuse rates first," effectively.
>President Obama praised the trend:
>‘I think America’s a nerdier country than it used to be when I was a kid – and that’s a good thing!’
for FUCK's sake.
>nerdgeoisie
I'm using this word from now on, it's perfect. Also, 'real' nerds exist, they're just now called "manchildren", "incels", "basement dwellers", etc.
That has nothing to do what I was talking about but I'll look into it.
Also will gave to look into that. Still doesn't involve councillors or therapists.
Euro media. Not even joking. Anime to a lesser extent but it's fairly mainstream
What the hell are you talking about?
Are you speaking in code?
>There are musicians who stand by 1in6 through a blue string on their guitars and they don't get any shit for that.
Why would anyone 1: color their guitar strings and 2: why would anyone have a problem with them doing that?
Seriously what did any of that mean?
Idk about rape lines but there have been examples of DV lines treating male victims as the abuser. They've started to change, but that's only because MRAs kept criticizing them. All while feminists called MRAs misogynists for supporting male victims
Male rape victims fall under men's issues. Feminists label anybody who wants to address men's issues as misogynists, and that would include male rape
>I'll look into it.
For your reference, the man who started the first men's shelter in Canada he's talking about was Earl Silverman.
>Still doesn't involve councillors or therapists.
Fair enough. Warren Farrel was not a counselor or a therapist to my knowledge.
>People can address male rape just fine.
Sometimes, but just look at this conversation, your response to people discussing it involves you going on the offensive.
Also while certainly a serious issue rape is not the only issue that MRA's seem to care about, there are other issues such as custody rights, circumcision, prison sentence disparity, domestic violence laws, the draft, and others I'm probably not aware of, and since they appear to be the only people talking about these issues why not just allow them to continue to do so?
>recognizing the "roastie" problem is enough of a difference.
The only roastie problem I have is I don't want to think about vaginas when I get Arby's.
Offensive against who? One shit head who started trolling because someone turned the conversation into one they'd rather be having?
>Feminists label anybody who wants to address men's issues as misogynists, and that would include male rape
That's not true. The article about feminists and MRAs disproves that.