/r/MGTOW banned

submitted by Vulptex from reddit.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Chipit 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (27 children)

There were even laws as to how much you could beat your wife like a stick a thumb wide was considered adaquate.

That's a myth. Ashamed to see it here.

Naturally, no mention of all the men who were conscripted to die in wars they would never benefit from, that women were exempted from. Not a single whisper. Why would feminists look out for men? They as a group look out for the best interest and equal rights/opportunity for women. World War I cost France 1,357,800 dead, 4,266,000 wounded (of whom 1.5 million were permanently maimed) and 537,000 in prison or missing - exactly 73% of the 8,410,000 men mobilized, according to William Shirer in The Collapse of the Third Republic. Some context: France had 40 million citizens at the start of the war; six in ten men between the ages of eighteen and twenty-eight died or were permanently maimed.

"If you're a woman and I'm explaining something to you in a rude and patronising manner it won't ever be because you're a woman. It will most likely be because you're a fucking cretin."

-- Johnathan Pie, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9pESjtw6GA

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (23 children)

Cut me some slack because I'm at the end of a semester and struggling with coming up with terminology at this point. If something doesn't make sense, I'll clarify the best that I can.

These were wars that were put into play by men with power, land and wealth in mind. Men are better physiologically equipped for physical combat, physical activities in general. It's a blessing, but a massive curse because you'll be dragged into whatever is necessary for the leaders of whichever society you occupy to have what they desire. Should it be dismissed? No. Does blaming the opposite sex for not being physiologically desirable as a soldier to fight within these wars created by those of your own sex group make sense? Also no. So you can separate from women, and that's honestly up to you.

[–]Chipit 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (20 children)

Should it be dismissed? No.

But it is, though.

You people created the oppression olympics, don't be surprised when competitors arrive.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

I'm not a "you people". I'm just an individual, much like you are, that is required to live under the allowed circumstances that are granted. I did not create anything. We don't have to appreciate the cards we're dealt, we just find ways to work around the inconvenience or shitty aspects until the power to change things arises. Why not desire a more balanced system though? We can acknowledge that men are more physiologically equipped for combat, and that women are able to give birth without confining them to roles based around that.

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

But we still confine men to certain roles no problem.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Did you miss the other part of that sentence?

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Combat is not the only thing the military does. And yet we still don't put women in those roles that they're perfectly capable of. The real reason is we're not as willing to risk the life of a precious woman as we are the life of just another man.

You also said that women should not be confined to roles based on their physiology (giving birth), but that men should be confined to them (conscription). That is the hypocrisy I'm talking about.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

We can acknowledge that men are more physiologically equipped for combat, and that women are able to give birth without confining them to roles based around that.

That looks grammatically passing to me to indicate that neither group should have to be held toward those roles.

[–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It looks to me like "men should be conscripted because they're more capable of it, women should not be forced into childbearing even though they're capable of it".

I definitely don't think women should be forced to have babies, that's disgustingly authoritarian. However forcing men to fulfill certain roles isn't any better, we just don't care about it because of male expendability.

[–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Wha...? Individualism? That's the system that created misogyny in the first place. It's dishonest arguments to argue in favor of it.

women are able to give birth

Men can give birth too. Jesus Christ you people are dishonest. Either you are pretending not to know your own arguments...or I can't think of any other reason.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I know you're fucking around, but misogyny was and just sort of has been the status quo for as far back as we've got written accounts of interactions between the sexes. We're physically weaker, and our bodily everythings have confounded the shit out of men since probably the dawning of higher thought, and unfamiliarity=alien=bad. I don't think we're capable of fully even understanding one another, and instead of appreciating the differences we just hyperfocus on them and create more problems.

[–]Dragonerne 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

You people created the oppression olympics, don't be surprised when competitors arrive.

We both know that men will win this competition. We've been bred to win competitions - the few men that don't win will be sent to die in war or slave in the fields for the "Ladies first and wealthy men" - society. It is simple evolution. Men are simply better at everything, be it victimhood or superiority.

[–]Vulptex[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

No, women are better at everything barring a few functions that males are specialized for (slaving for the tribe). We are specialized, meaning we become worse at everything else. All females are equipped for really is bearing children, so they keep their default settings for the most part. The only reason men appear to outperform women is because both society and hormones/neurology massively pressure us to compete instead of relaxing and doing something purely for fun.

[–]Dragonerne 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

No, because of evolution, men have evolved to become better than women who have had no evolutionary pressure to "improve".
Women are weak because they have always been so privileged by society and men are vastly superior because society has oppressed us, which has forced only the "best" men to breed.

[–][deleted]  (6 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    Now try to figure out where the biggest sexual dimorphism exists in the human species

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

      Bingo, nordics. The societies with the most feminism has the most sexual dimorphism. Its called evolution

      [–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      It's retarded too.

      [–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      Yes, we are better at the things society has always oppressed us into doing. Like fighting and providing. Not so much at our own fun little hobbies. Or deep thinking. Or living well.

      [–]Dragonerne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Men are better at close to everything

      [–]Vulptex[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Not everything in the military is combat. Women can do other things as well as or better than men yet we still don't put them there, the real reason is that we aren't nearly as willing to risk their lives as we are mens'. Also women usually won't take other responsibilities that they're perfectly capable of either, like paying the bills. Not because they're women, but because all humans will avoid what they don't have to do. Meaning the issue is that men are expected to do a whole lot more than women are.

      Calling out injustices men have is not "blaming women" for them.

      [–]NeedMoreCoffee 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

      That's a myth. Ashamed to see it here.

      https://historyofwomen.org/wifebeatingthumb.html

      Yea we know men died in wars, it's the only argument you losers have and keep hammering on about.

      "If you're a woman and I'm explaining something to you in a rude and patronising manner it won't ever be because you're a woman. It will most likely be because you're a fucking cretin."

      uhu

      [–]Chipit 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

      Personal insults are against Saidit Terms of Service. This comment is a TOS violation and has been reported, everyone please also click report.

      [–]NeedMoreCoffee 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

      What? Upset i can back my stuff up ? lolol