/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 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

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

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

        I actually learned about it on wikipedia on their article about sexual dimorphism or it might have been brain sizes, one of those related pages. Skimmed through some just an hour ago, didn't see it there now, could've been removed since then, but definitely interesting.

        I remember I was big on Jordan Peterson (so yes this is like wikipedia 2014/2015) and he was always talking about the equality paradox or something like that. Basically his argument was that we see a wider spread between the sexes, the "freer" society is, ie. more female engineers in Pakistan than in Sweden, which is the opposite of what the feminists back then were postulating; that society was causing women to go into "female sectors" etc.
        His argument was then that if that was the case, we would expect to see more female engineers in Sweden than in Pakistan, because Sweden has more "equality of sexes" (feminism), but we don't see that.

        But he was completely ignoring genetic differences between the populations, and so, learning that sexual dimorphism fact made me realize how Peterson was "wrong" in his analysis, so I wont forget that fact easily.
        The feminists could be right in their analysis if you correct for genetics, which neither group did at the time. (still don't).

        Evolution works over millions of years so how is that possible?

        Evolution works from 1 generation to the next. We can rapidly change a population in just 100 years

        [–]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