Unpopular opinion: parts of third-wave feminism directly led to the rise of trans ideology

submitted by Aureus from self.politics

Flaming-hot take, fully open to debate this. I'm not here to point fingers or assign blame per se, but to shed light on a massive strategic error on the part of feminists that has led to terrible consequences.

Third-wave feminism has two important beliefs:

  1. Rejection of essentialism (the idea that women and men are fundamentally biologically different)

  2. Masculinity is toxic/problematic/immoral/otherwise stigmatized

These two premises, taken together, lead inevitably to trans ideology.

Once essentialism is rejected, there are no moral grounds to differentiate between males and females. Without a fundamental biological basis to sex, how can you say that male wearing a dress is not a "woman"?

Where rejecting essentialism provides the opportunity, stigmatizing masculinity provides the reason. Take a batch of awkward males, tell them their masculinity is problematic and men are toxic, set up women as the admirable opposite of that, and remove all barriers to males being seen as "women". The effect is as inevitable as entropy - particles will freely move from a high-pressure environment to a lower-pressure one. The effect is even more pronounced when many actual women, in the name of progressivism, encourage them to do so.

The strongest evidence of this comes from the political beliefs of trans-identified-males themselves. They are almost universally left-wing progressive activists, to the point that it seeps into their daily lives. This is exactly what you'd expect to see if radical progressivism leads to becoming trans, or if the two movements are connected in some way. TiMs and third-wave feminists agree on almost 100% of issues.

This relationship is reciprocal as well. While many TiMs support third-wave feminism, many third-wave feminists also support trans ideology. I'm sure many here have encountered actual women who are outspoken feminists, but later reveal themselves to be vehemently pro-trans as well. And it's well-known that progressive circles promote trans ideology: consider this post shared on anarchy and lgbt subreddits, or this article equating biological sex with "white supremacy".

What are the solutions to this? One would be to double-down on biological essentialism. Here is one great example of that, while here is another. Another solution would be to de-stigmatize masculinity, and tell young men that it's okay to be a man. I'm surprised more gender-critical feminists haven't gravitated towards figures like Camille Paglia or Jordan Peterson, both of whom are critical of trans ideology and recognize the need of young men to attain a sense of masculine self-worth and confidence (lest they be taken in by far more subversive ideologies).

TL;DR: As long as biological essentialism is rejected and masculinity is stigmatized, the transgender movement will continue to grow.

top 100 commentsshow all 207
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Radfeminist 29 insightful - 4 fun29 insightful - 3 fun30 insightful - 4 fun -  (9 children)

this is the opposite of the case. Trans ideology is rooted in essentialism. The entire concept of transitioning to a woman is based on the idea that there are innate traits associated with being a woman and if a man shows any of these traits, it's because he is actually a woman.

In fact, "queer theory" is the origin of the TRA movement. Queer theory borrows from feminism, but it borrows more from "critical race theory" which is an essentialist theory itself. The reason it feels like the opposite of essentialism is because its postmodern, which means that theorists believe in social deconstruction. They believe that gender is a social construct, and social constructions are meant to be de constructed. This is generally positive, because men and women should be allowed to behave and act however they want. But when you then blur the lines between gender and sex, it morphed into a belief that you have to deconstruct sex itself.

This is obviously a problem because sex is not a social construct. Sex is just your biological function. So how do you deconstruct sex? You have to attribute everything that was written about gender to sex. They basically walked themselves into a circle.

[–]Aureus[S] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not sure if I 100% agree but that's an interesting take.

The entire concept of transitioning to a woman is based on the idea that there are innate traits associated with being a woman and if a man shows any of these traits, it's because he is actually a woman.

I know what you mean and it's a ridiculous phenomenon. "This boy is playing with dolls and likes pink? Must actually be a girl! Quick, get the plastic surgeon!" You're totally right about the various movements you describe as essentialist.

This is obviously a problem because sex is not a social construct. Sex is just your biological function.

I'd describe this as "essentialist" thought too though, at least for the purposes of my OP. Let me know if there's a better word to describe it.

[–]Radfeminist 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

oh no, I meant that to be essentialist. They attempt to be deconstructive but ended up being essentialist is what I mean to say.

[–]mangosplums 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Feminism created the term "gender", when what they really meant was "sex roles". Why was the term gender created at all? Because feminists were trying to divorce the roles that men and women play, who we are, from our biology. Feminists argued those roles weren't based on biology at all, they are only based on socialization. That was the entire aim of Judith Butler and what radical feminists argue. That it's all socialization. This is false though. Sex roles are based on the assumption that women will grow to be mothers and men, fathers. Because women are the ones who give birth to children, qualities such as being nurturing have historically been highly valued and encouraged in women, and qualities such as being a provider have been highly valued and encouraged in men. Women didn't go out and work because they couldn't, because they were too busy making babies. All of this is based on biology. Of course, people shouldn't be forced to do things they don't want to do just because they were born a certain sex. Not everyone wants to have their life focused around popping out babies, and with technology, birth control and so many thing, we can make babies in different ways today than we used to be able to, and it just changes so much about our lives and who we can be. So people need not live lives based on sex roles if they don't want to.

With that said, the essentialism in sex dysphoric transexuals makes sense. If you were born having qualities that fit really well with the things that the opposite sex body is made to do, and fit really poorly with the things that your body is made to do, having feelings that you're in the wrong body makes sense. If you're a boy who is extremely nurturing and gentle, you probably know instinctively from a very early age that you have all the qualities to make a great mother, and to do the things that people who have soft, nurturing bodies do. Therefore being a man with a hard strong body feels wrong and being a woman with a soft gentle body feels right. That's why extremely feminine gay male transexuals and extremely masculine butch lesbians who transition make sense. The contrast is just too strong between their personality and the things their bodies are made to do. That is not to say that any woman or man who has qualities that don't go well with their body's sex role, should switch sexes, of course not. Just that it makes sense how acute body dysphoria can develops for individuals in which this is extreme, and that switching sexes actually makes sense for them. These types of trans people I have zero problem with and I support fully.

What does not make sense is men who aren't extremely feminine wanting to become women, or women who aren't extremely masculine wanting to become men. Also people transitioning who haven't been longing to be the opposite sex since childhood. A butch trans woman just makes no fucking sense. There's no need for them to transition in the first place, their personality fits well with their original biology. Where is the motivation to transition coming from for them? Where is the body dysphoria coming from? Do they even have body dysphoria?

[–]FediNetizen 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Where is the motivation to transition coming from for them? Where is the body dysphoria coming from? Do they even have body dysphoria?

Not sure if you were just being rhetorical here, but for the men the motivation to transition is largely fetishistic in nature, and it's called autogynephilia.

[–]mangosplums 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Sorry, yeah I was being rhetorical. That’s the motivation sometimes. I think there’s other motivations as well though.

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

Yeah I agree fetishism is just the most common one IMO. Second most common is probably the desire to be a "gender special" so you can feel oppressed.

[–]SeasideLimbs 24 insightful - 9 fun24 insightful - 8 fun25 insightful - 9 fun -  (22 children)

100% agreed. Masculinity is being demonized and the attack on biological essentialism provides men with an easy way out of their predicament by simply identifying as women (or anything other than men, really.)

There are also other reasons for them to identify as women, of course, such as...

  • not only masculinity being portrayed as negative, but also rarely ever portrayed as a positive anymore, meaning men lack ways to see their masculinity in positive terms

  • feminism's toxic effect on dating culture and relationship expectations in which men are supposed to be perfect beings who never make a single mistake while women can abuse them however they like - something easily avoided by identifying as a woman and thereby not only shirking these new responsibilities, but also the responsibilities that used to come with being a man that made sense, like being the provider. instead, "trans women" can act like the spoiled narcissists feminism wants women to be

[–]Aureus[S] 23 insightful - 4 fun23 insightful - 3 fun24 insightful - 4 fun -  (15 children)

One massive issue is young men being neglected - never being taught how to be confident, functional, self-sufficient men. Worse, modern culture isn't just letting them fend for themselves, but feeding them the wrong advice, on top of the demonization they already see.

The comments from this thread are really illuminating. Several commenters seem aware of the root cause:

Why is anime such a mainstay among these people? Not just trans people, or non-binary people, but so many people who otherwise have anxiety, depression, poor social skills, etc.? I can't say I've ever met anyone in my daily life who has a strong fondness for anime like these people. Or really anyone who has a moderately well-paying job, confidence, and good social skills.

Before transitioning to become a cute anime girl they could oh idk lose weight or build muscle, research how to dress smart, practice good hygiene, and be physically active with hobbies outside the internet and see if that helps their crippling self esteem and depression? It’s never a functional person fantasizing about this shit it’s always someone who doesn’t take care of themselves.

Compare this sound and practical advice versus the advice you might hear from the woke crowd, or even from mainstream culture:

  • "Men should get a moderately well-paying job" vs "Don't feel pressured to get a well-paying job, follow your passions over your career, do what you love" "Men focusing on a high-paying career is a sign of toxic masculinity"

  • "Men should lose weight and build muscle" vs "Looks don't matter" "Big is beautiful" "Men having to be muscular is a sign of toxic masculinity"

  • "Men should be physically active with hobbies outside the internet" vs "Just be yourself" "Men being into sports is a sign of toxic masculinity"

Mainstream advice pushes acceptance when it should be pushing challenge. Hearing things like "men should build muscle, men should go for that high-paying job, men should go out even if they'd rather sit inside all day" makes a lot of people uncomfortable, but it's what young men desperately need to hear.

We can have a society that treats young men with kid gloves, never tells them to do anything specific beyond "just be yourself" and "be nice", and never builds or challenges them because we're afraid of "offending" someone. Then we can watch as they drift aimlessly, never develop any skills or source of confidence, and eventually become depressed socially anxious wrecks. The trans cult offers them a way out - a way to be valued when no one else values them, not even themselves. Who can watch this happen, and then wonder why trans ideology is booming?

This Jordan Peterson video, while a bit graphic, is a good summary of what I'm getting at. But it's the opposite of what young men are hearing nowadays.

[–]mangosplums 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Why is anime such a mainstay among these people? Not just trans people, or non-binary people, but so many people who otherwise have anxiety, depression, poor social skills, etc.? I can't say I've ever met anyone in my daily life who has a strong fondness for anime like these people. Or really anyone who has a moderately well-paying job, confidence, and good social skills.

Before transitioning to become a cute anime girl they could oh idk lose weight or build muscle, research how to dress smart, practice good hygiene, and be physically active with hobbies outside the internet and see if that helps their crippling self esteem and depression? It’s never a functional person fantasizing about this shit it’s always someone who doesn’t take care of themselves.

Because, porn. They get caught up in porn and the fantasy surrounding it and that's what causes this bizarre lack of relation to material reality.

[–]SeasideLimbs 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Great post!

[–]Zestyclose_Marketing 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

"Goyim Men focusing on a high-paying career is a sign of toxic masculinity" "Goyim Men having to be muscular is a sign of toxic masculinity" "Goyim Men being into sports is a sign of toxic masculinity"

ftfy

load more comments (3 replies)

    load more comments (6 replies)

      [–]just_lesbian_things 21 insightful - 8 fun21 insightful - 7 fun22 insightful - 8 fun -  (62 children)

      Hot response: this isn't an unpopular opinion. This is one of the few things both third wave feminists and their critics (including second wave/radfems) agree on: that third wave feminism paved the road for trans activism.

      the need of young men to attain a sense of masculine self-worth

      Nah, I think the problem is that young men have too high a sense of self worth. There are young (and old) men out there who think their feelings = reality. If that's not a symptom of ego overinflation, I don't know what is. Men need to get the fuck over themselves.

      [–]latuspod 13 insightful - 7 fun13 insightful - 6 fun14 insightful - 7 fun -  (46 children)

      As a former young man this is definitely not the case for all men. Men dont kill themselves 3 times as often because of their high sense of self worth.

      There undoubtedly are men out there exactly as you describe, but they arent the majority.

      [–]just_lesbian_things 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (45 children)

      Women are more likely to attempt suicide than men, but men are more likely to succeed. Men succeed more because they choose more violent methods. Male violence is a problem for both men and women, as both sexes end up victims to it. I'd say maybe masculinity and its ties to violence and the "boys will be boys" attitude regarding violent behavior is the source of the problem, but if you've got a better explanation, I'm all ears.

      [–]latuspod 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (31 children)

      Men undoubtedly are more violent there is no denying that. The solution to that is something that Peterson talks about quite a bit, socializing boys properly. They need proper outlets to vent and learn how to deal with their aggression, they need rough and tumble play. Young boys crave it, that is why they are pushing, and wrestling with their friends, or playing sports with the full omtemt of winning. But these are things that generally fall into the toxic masculinity and the "boys will be boys" trope. I have two young boys and have had some of their teachers praise their passivity and gentleness in gym class and others bemoan their competitive nature. I have gotten the feeling talking to all my kids teachers that the ideal little boy in elementary school would basically be a sterotypical girl. Of course it doesnt help that their are virtually no male elementary school teachers. It also doesnt help that kids are less active nowadays, both at home and at school.

      As for the suicide, yes women attempt more, with less lethal means, and sometimes those are cries for help rather than a suicide attempt. My sister has done so twice, swallow a bunch of pills and then immediately call 911. There are also numerous accidents that men get into that look suspiciously like suicide. I for years tried to think of a way I could do so, make it look like am accident, so my wife could collect on my life insurance so she wouldn't have to worry about finances while raising our kids. But I really dont want to get into whataboutism about depression and suicide because it is shitty all the time and is something a lot of people struggle with regardless of gender.

      I more so wanted to point out that a few men's behaviour is not indicative of all men. And I also dont think the solution to men or societies problem is to have men behave more like women. We as a society have work to do to liberate both genders, and I think in general society is choosing to focus on the wrong things.

      [–]just_lesbian_things 14 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 3 fun -  (24 children)

      The solution to that is something that Peterson talks about quite a bit, socializing boys properly. They need proper outlets to vent and learn how to deal with their aggression, they need rough and tumble play.

      Boys have had rough and tumble play for almost all of human history. Violent crime is at an all time low since we turned that down. I think evidence is against rough and tumble play.

      I have gotten the feeling talking to all my kids teachers that the ideal little boy in elementary school would basically be a sterotypical girl

      I'm personally of the opinion that most girls were beaten into silence and passivity from a young age. I was just as bored as the boys in class, but I didn't act out because my parents taught me better; with words, rulers, and the back of their hands when they needed a little more oomph. But maybe that's what modern society needs: people who can sit quietly and solve problems. Keep up or get left behind, right?

      There are also numerous accidents that men get into that look suspiciously like suicide

      And plenty of women "disappear". Back when I was planning to kill myself, I wanted to disappear so as to spare my family the funeral expenses and the trauma of finding me. There will always be an element of error in statistics.

      I more so wanted to point out that a few men's behavior is not indicative of all men

      I'm more specifically talking about trans-identified men according to the context of this thread. But sure, #notallmen.

      And I also don't think the solution to men or societies problem is to have men behave more like women

      Hey, if you got a better solution, like I said, I'm all ears. I don't even like dealing with men, but if they're going to negatively affect me, I'm going to have to do something about it. And if you don't like my methods, then you should come up with your own. I'm not going to sit around and put up with crazy, entitled male behavior while you brainstorm. Let's be proactive, right?

      liberate both genders

      I don't support gender. There are two sexes. Gender is a bullshit, outdated social construct.

      [–]america_first_1776 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

      Boys have had rough and tumble play for almost all of human history. Violent crime is at an all time low since we turned that down. I think evidence is against rough and tumble play.

      You're confusing a possible cause with an actual cause. The reason violent crime has come down for the past ~1000 years (dating back to Europe) is through eugenics. Men who were considered "higher-status" in Europe became more likely to have kids, all while Europe cleansed itself of the people who were most likely to commit violent crime. You add onto the fact that now a days, it is much harder to get away with a crime due to advances in forensic science and modern monitoring technology..

      I'm personally of the opinion that most girls were beaten into silence and passivity from a young age. I was just as bored as the boys in class, but I didn't act out because my parents taught me better; with words, rulers, and the back of their hands when they needed a little more oomph.

      Except, once again, your personal experience does not match with reality. Boys are more likely to get paddled than girls by a wide margin.

      But maybe that's what modern society needs: people who can sit quietly and solve problems. Keep up or get left behind, right?

      Who are you to tell us that's what modern society needs? There is such a thing as being active and solving problems at the same time. Modern society was built by men because men are more active and innovative than women. Pretty much every piece of modern technology you use was built by a white man.

      Hey, if you got a better solution, like I said, I'm all ears. I don't even like dealing with men, but if they're going to negatively affect me, I'm going to have to do something about it. And if you don't like my methods, then you should come up with your own. I'm not going to sit around and put up with crazy, entitled male behavior while you brainstorm. Let's be proactive, right?

      A balkanization of the United States based on both race and political affiliation. It's become clear that the differences between our sides is irreconcilable. Let's see what race/philosophy comes out on top

      [–]FediNetizen 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

      A balkanization of the United States based on both race and political affiliation. It's become clear that the differences between our sides is irreconcilable.

      It's only a small minority of people that finds being around people of different races and political ideologies so stressful that they feel the need to do something about it. America has been a cultural melting pot for 100 years now, and at the same time one of the most successful countries. Don't assume the rest of the country shares your fragility.

      [–]Aureus[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Don't assume the rest of the country shares your fragility.

      This already seems to be happening on both sides. Progressives will eagerly tell you that the "cultural melting pot" is a "racist" concept. We're beginning to see a sort of neo-apartheid where black businesses are distinctly marked and offered discounts from firms such as Uber, and in universities black people are offered separate dorms and graduations by their own choice.

      I agree with you that a balkanization likely will not happen - there's too much money in staying united. But that's doesn't mean that groups like The New Black Panthers won't call for it.

      load more comments (11 replies)

        [–]sudd3nclar1ty 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

        So happy to read your opinions: thoughtful, coherent and clear. Thank you for sharing your POV.

        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

        No, they're dumb. You are either a dumb feminist or a simp. I can see that you people are trying to boost your views in these threats. You make no coherent arguments and you are just as ignorant of human psychology as the wokest SJW. It doesn't matter, though, because you people always need censorship in the end because, even when you cannot muster the numbers, it becomes apparent to the majority over time how wrong you are.

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

        You sure told them.

        A shitpost is a shitpost.

        Stop ruining this place.

        load more comments (1 reply)

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

          Boys have had rough and tumble play for almost all of human history. Violent crime is at an all time low since we turned that down. I think evidence is against rough and tumble play.

          Are you sure about that? Maybe it was video games or D&D.

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

          Violent crime is at an all time low since we turned that down.

          Not down to socialisation.

          The reason crime rates have fallen is because men commit less crime as they get older. Our average population age in the west is in the forties, back in 1970 it was 34. Offending in the youth category at least in the UK is higher in the youth group than it was was a few decades ago.

          Over the space of a few thousand years: cultures with cities have been selecting out genes associated with violent behaviour by incarceration or execution of criminals.

          Yes violence has a genetic component.

          [–]latuspod 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          First thing by gender meant sex, there are two genders, two sexes. I feel gender is a better word for describing the relationship to society.

          But back to the Trans identified Men, as the OP pointed out it makes sense if you consider the way society treats masculinity and men, and add that to the fact that we have this stupid idea that biological sex doesnt matter in the public discourse and you create a solution for some of these men. It is a flawed and shitty solution, that is damaging all around. And then on top of that you have men with type B personality disorders look at all this and see it as a way to control others.

          The only thing I was trying to say is that being a man sucks sometimes. And I dont think the low key or overt man hating that accompanies some schools of feminism does anything positive, and is likely making the situation worse.

          load more comments (1 reply)

            [–]Trajan 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

            Agreed. We can actually see the results playing out in this social experiment to treat boys and girls as if the genders are interchangeable. The single biggest thing we could do to reduce violence would be for parents to raise children. Boys are particularly affected growing up in a household without a father. The idea that mothers and fathers are interchangeable, and that boys can be socialised to be more feminine, simply doesn't stand up to the evidence. Being raised in a single-parent household correlates with higher rates of obesity, increased risk of mental health issues, reduced upwards social mobility, increased risk of substance abuse, and increased risk of criminal convictions. One interesting hint comes from Harper and McLanahan (2004) who found that boys raised by lone-fathers have the same rate of criminality as those raised in a two-parent household.

            If males are becoming violent and disordered it's because society and law is favouring systems that disadvantage them. Feminists have played no small role in pushing for such systems under the guise of fighting 'patriarchy' and wamen power.

            [–]just_lesbian_things 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

            If males are becoming violent and disordered it's because society and law is favouring systems that disadvantage them. Feminists have played no small role in pushing for such systems under the guise of fighting 'patriarchy' and wamen power.

            How are feminists responsible for deadbeat fathers who won't take care of their own children? I'm not quite following the leap of logic.

            [–]Trajan 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

            You have just one piece of the problem there. Feminist thinkers (e.g. Dworkin, Greer, de Beauvoir) have long seen marriage as an instrument of patriarchal oppression. They attack marriage, seeing it a woman becoming the property of a man, and champion the idea of women as single-parents while also blaming the men involved. I certainly say that the men are equally to blame in these situations where children are born outside of committed relationships. We need to address the deadbeats, address the reckless mothers, and end this ideological view of it being perfectly fine or even somehow admirable to have children outside of marriage.

            load more comments (1 reply)

              [–]america_first_1776 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

              The stats that show women are more likely to attempt are based on self-report data, which itself is unreliable due to the fact women are more likely to be attention seeking

              [–]flugegeheimen 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

              Women are more likely to attempt suicide than men, but men are more likely to succeed. Men succeed more because they choose more violent methods.

              In other words men attempt suicide because their life is so shit they actually want to kill themselves, women attempt suicides because they feel entitled to better life and try to get attention this way.

              Male violence is a problem for both men and women, as both sexes end up victims to it

              That's like saying poor's violence is a problem both for poor and rich. Did you ever see a billionaire robbing people at gunpoint in ghetto? Me neither, what a fucked up scum these poor people must be!

              A privileged class of people is less violent, what a novel discovery.

              [–]just_lesbian_things 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

              Did you ever see a billionaire robbing people at gunpoint in ghetto?

              A privileged class of people is less violent, what a novel discovery.

              False equivalence.

              You never see children beating an adult to death, nor do you hear about gay men murdering straight men in a moment of straight panic. Doesn't mean children and gay men are privileged. You can't make those comparisons any more than you can compare male-on-female violence to billionaires robbing people at gunpoint.

              That's like saying poor's violence is a problem both for poor and rich.

              Your analogy consistently fall apart. I say male violence is a problem for everyone because men are the main perpetrator of violence against both men and women. If we can make men as a class be less violent, everyone benefits. This is mainly for the MRAs who like to cry about the lack of attention being given to male victims of violence whenever male-on-female violence is brought up or "men get raped too!" whenever male-on-female rape is brought up. Statistically speaking, men are doing the majority of the beating and raping.

              In other words men attempt suicide because their life is so shit they actually want to kill themselves, women attempt suicide because they feel entitled to better life and try to get attention this way

              I'm gonna have to ask for receipts on this one.

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

              Doesn't mean children and gay men are privileged.

              Children are privileged in comparison to adults, I'm not sure how is this even something that needs to be spelled out.

              You don't hear gay vs straight because mass media don't report these details and you can't tell the sexual orientation from a mugshot or anything that is reported. I'm not sure anyone even bothers to have crime stats on that.

              Your analogy consistently fall apart. I say male violence is a problem for everyone because men are the main perpetrator of violence against both men and women. If we can make men as a class be less violent, everyone benefits.

              "I say poors violence is a problem for everyone because poors are the main perpetrator of violence against both poor and rich. If we can make poor as a class be less violent, everyone benefits. "

              When you say "Your analogy consistently fall apart." I was expecting to see where it actually "falls apart" rather than plain repeat of your original claim again. Did you get distracted and forgot what you wanted to say or something?

              I'm gonna have to ask for receipts on this one.

              As soon as I see receipts on men choosing more effective suicide methods because of male violence or whatever misandric shit you came up with.

              [–]just_lesbian_things 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

              Children are privileged in comparison to adults, I'm not sure how is this even something that needs to be spelled out.

              OK, now I can't take you seriously.

              What privileges do children have? In most developed countries, children can't drink, can't drive, can't marry, can't open bank account, can't obtain gainful employment, can't own a house, can't vote, can't live without an adult, can't exist without constant supervision. I don't think they're necessarily oppressed, because there's a good reason why they these rules exist, but what privileges do they have? I don't think you know what privilege means in the context of social and systemic injustice. Why don't you give me your definition of privilege?

              You don't hear gay vs straight because mass media don't report these details and you can't tell the sexual orientation from a mugshot or anything that is reported.

              Sure they report on it. I read about gay bashing regularly. Just because you're ignorant doesn't mean the information doesn't exist.

              When you say "Your analogy consistently fall apart." I was expecting to see where it actually "falls apart" rather than plain repeat of your original claim again.

              Rich people aren't a victim of violence that exists within poor circles. Billionaires aren't out there mugging people at gunpoint; but they're also not getting mugged by people at gunpoint. They live in the own bubble. Women don't; women make up a significant percentage of victims of male violence.

              As soon as I see receipts on men choosing more effective suicide methods because of male violence or whatever misandric shit you came up with

              Uh oh, somebody sounds hurt. Men are more violent; both against others and against themselves. What sort of receipts do you need?

              load more comments (1 reply)

                load more comments (1 reply)

                  [–]jet199 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                  Clearly testosterone causes people to become violent.

                  This isn't just a difference between men and women. Men with higher testosterone are more violent on average even though they have the same socialisation and upbringing as normal men. Testosterone also causes the same difference between male and female mammals. The evidence is pretty clear cut whether people like it or not.

                  [–]just_lesbian_things 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                  Yeah people like to say that, but they don't understand the implications.

                  See, I think, to participate in society you need to meet a certain standard of behavior. Kind of like how if someone wants to drive, they need to get a license. If they can't pass their driving test, they don't get a license and they can't drive. I don't care if it's because they are near sighted and can't see the road, or so fucking old that they can't react to traffic, they're not getting behind the wheel.

                  I say things like "maybe it's socialization" or "why don't you retake your test with glasses on" because I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. But if what you say is true, and men are innately violent as a result of their hormones, then we'll have to look into more drastic measures. As we've already established, I don't give a fuck if men get castrated. Beyond that, we might have to look into barring men from owning weapons that may exacerbate their violent nature. We may have to ban men from certain occupations that wouldn't be suited to a violent prone demographic. After all, traffic laws don't change to accommodate people who fail their driving test. Here's to hoping it's socialization.

                  [–]bald-janitor 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                  Ok shill

                  load more comments (1 reply)

                    [–]Aureus[S] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

                    There are young (and old) men out there who think their feelings = reality.

                    That's not "self-worth", just delusion. Woke progressivism is what's giving them that delusion.

                    A perfect comparison would be to religious zealots. Religious zealots have been known to whip themselves, starve themselves, even kill themselves for their belief. Zealots remove all trace of their individual personality and subjugate themselves to an ideology. How can such an individual have "self-worth"? Who are they assigning worth to? Not their self - their body is harmed and their personality is subjugated to the religion they follow. Their ideology gets the worth, not their self.

                    Telling a zealot he has "too much ego" will not shake his belief in God. He may even agree with you, go home to whip himself some more, with his faith only strengthened because of it. His delusion is not due to too much ego, but too little. He has turned himself into an empty vessel, a blank slate, a zombie to be controlled by another. He has no personality of his own, just an ideology where one is supposed to be.

                    Doesn't this behavior remind you of TiMs? TiMs are complete zealots about trans ideology. TiMs destroy their bodies and brainwash themselves for this ideology. Can you really look at such a person and say, "This is a person with a lot of self-respect"?

                    What kind of person joins a cult? Is it usually a headstrong person who refuses to be bossed around by anyone? Or is it usually a lonely desperate person, with no self-esteem, looking for some sense of meaning in their lives and for someone to tell them what to do?

                    TL;DR: A male who hates himself and wants to chop off his dick does not have "too much masculine self-worth". Going after his self-worth even more will just reinforce his delusion that much harder.

                    [–]just_lesbian_things 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

                    That's not "self-worth", just delusion.

                    It's both. Plenty of delusional young women with low self-worth starve themselves to death as a side effect of their eating disorder without bothering the rest of us.

                    Doesn't this behavior remind you of TiMs? TiMs are complete zealots about trans ideology.

                    No. Trans ideology is a vehicle for male trans people and their egos, not the other way around. You would know if you actually speak to some of these people. They'll support "girl brain in a male body" until you ask them to get a brain scan. They're against gatekeeping until they get past the gatekeepers. They turn on each other constantly. The ideology doesn't have a shred of internal consistency; whether that's self-id/gatekeeping, non-binary identities, or transition itself. Trans ideology is whatever the trans person needs it to be. Trans ideology is constantly demanding support from everyone else and constantly trying to attach itself to other movements (gay rights, feminism, civil rights) because they're parasitic. They have no principles or goals, just a bunch of selfish people in it for personal gains.

                    You say this because you don't deal with their bullshit. You're watching the shitshow unfold from a safe distance. They stopped being victims when they started forcing their way into women's spaces and demanding that lesbians suck their girl penises. There's nothing low self-worth about demanding that somebody else suck your dick. That's entitlement.

                    Edited to add: I will say handmaidens and trans supporters are probably closer to your religious zealot example. Now those people (usually women) probably have low self-worth.

                    "too much masculine self-worth"

                    I didn't say masculine. Take that out of your quotes.

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

                    The ideology doesn't have a shred of internal consistency

                    Yeah, unlike feminism. Right. Would you like some patriarchy theory with your bullshit?

                    Question: once your done with your college lesbianism, are you going to marry a rich guy?

                    load more comments (2 replies)

                      load more comments (1 reply)

                        [–]america_first_1776 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                        There are young (and old) men out there who think their feelings = reality.

                        You're almost self-aware, it's adorable. You really really think men are the ones who are more likely to think with their feelings, despite ample evidence suggesting otherwise.

                        [–]whistlepig 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

                        There are young (and old) men out there who think their feelings = reality.

                        It doesn't appear you're making this massive assumption based on any real experience. If you're basing it on the fact that you often see men over compensating for weaknesses or sense thereof, then I don't think you're really paying attention.

                        [–]just_lesbian_things 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

                        Ah, yes, whistlepig. Let me be as clear and unambiguous as possible so it won't go over your head this time.

                        We are talking about a subset of mostly "young" men who are swayed by "trans ideology". Traditionalists like Jordan Peterson and OP think they're lacking in self worth and that masculine mentorship would be a great cure-all to all their problems. I'm of the opinion that it's an over-inflated sense of self worth that causes these men to impose their personal, emotional problems on the rest of us. I think it takes a special level of egoism to demand that everyone pretend you're a woman because you "feel like one".

                        [–]jet199 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

                        But people can also be highly confident in one area of their lives and have very low self esteem in another. We recognise that in women all the time, I'm sure men are the same.

                        Personally I've seen a lot of male detransitioners say that their dislike of their male sensuality was part of the reason for their gender dysphoria. They viewed castration as the key to removing all their problems and to make them a better person. They didn't want to objectify or lear over women so started objectifying themselves as women instead which then lead to AGP.

                        Male sensuality isn't nice and cuddly, you can see that everyday from how they describe it themselves and act. And it isn't all down to social power structures or women's weakness either, in gay male culture they are even more about objectification, promiscuity, fetish and dominance than the average straight man would want.

                        So what to do. Do you tell all men they are faulty and evil, but pretend you are not doing that by throwing in the odd "but it's socialisation not biology" as though that helps, or find ways that everyone can express their different sexualities in a healthy way so people don't see castration and putting on an act their whole lives as a great plan.

                        [–]just_lesbian_things 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                        You're operating under a lot of wrong assumptions about me. I will clear them up.

                        We recognise that in women all the time

                        There is no we, because I don't recognise that in women all the time. If you want to make this point, you will need to elaborate.

                        They didn't want to objectify or lear over women so started objectifying themselves as women instead which then lead to AGP

                        No, AGPs have no qualms about inserting themselves into lesbian spaces and leering at lesbians. I wish they kept it to themselves, but they very much do not. They have shut down any and all non-inclusive lesbian spaces as well as ostracizing and banning lesbians who won't play along.

                        Male sensuality isn't nice and cuddly, you can see that everyday from how they describe it themselves and act

                        I don't give a fuck about male sensuality. I generally do not give a fuck about men. Which leads to my next point

                        So what to do. Do you tell all men they are faulty and evil, but pretend you are not doing that by throwing in the odd "but it's socialisation not biology" as though that helps, or find ways that everyone can express their different sexualities in a healthy way so people don't see castration and putting on an act their whole lives as a great plan.

                        I will call out bad behavior regardless of who is doing it. I hope it is socialisation and not the innate nature of men because I like to pretend that people are inherently not bad and, despite my indifference towards them, I like to believe men are capable of redemption. I'm willing to go with your solution, if you have a better one on how to address the bad behavior, but I will not be helping men "find ways to express their sexualities". I think this is a pretty fair deal, more than generous honestly, considering how extremely predatory and disrespectful men have acted towards me regarding my sexuality. Also, it seems that you have a vested interest in making sure dudes don't cut their balls or dicks off, but please understand that not all of us share your passion. I, for one, don't give a fuck. I just don't agree that castrated/dickless men are women and I don't intend to pretend otherwise to help delusional men through their emotional issues.

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

                        We two should fight to end the Selective Service Act and get women into the draft. Those men and their silly feelings have monopolized that section of society for long enough. It's time we listen to women with Twitter PTSD that their experiences are just as traumatic.

                        Sure, it's men who put feels over reals, though. And if she feels it's rape the next day, it's rape. If a person feels slighted, it's a micro-aggression. It's some unconscious bias shit and this is driven by men. Must be the same reason men outperform women in STEM, because those subjects are so subjective and feelings based.

                        You lesbo psychos and you feminists are so full of shit, it's unbelievable. You are liars, pathetic hypocrites, but the one satisfying thing to see here is that you are so unbelievably stupid that you can keep stepping on the same hoe that slams you in the face. Out of all the Reddit bannings, your groups' bannings were some of the most hilarious. You will not learn, you will employ censorship, mobbing, ideological compliance, rewriting of history, class-based victomology, misandry, and all the usual feminist bullshit.

                        We can all see it: This is your own playbook at work. The joke is on you. You people are ridiculous and pathetic. It's been a pure joy for me to be able to talk to some of your ilk directly on this site because your kind works tirelessly in every community to have yourself shielded from argument and not have your feelings hurt. Let's hope this site isn't run by some simp who can be manipulated after one of you inevitably sucks his dick, lesbo or not. Poor womonz being harassed on the Internet! Someone ban these women-haters!

                        Fuck all feminists. And talking about mental issues with sexuality, go see a therapist about your lesbian shit. It's pretty embarrassing what you write. Seems that the only reason you choose to munch on vaginas is because a guy won't have you or you are too psychologically fucked in the head to relate to one. What neon color is your hair, BTW?

                        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

                        I'm a feminist ally. I want to see them working in sewer pipes and rubbish dumps. I'm tired of the sexist patriarchy oppressing them out of these jobs.

                        [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                        You are doing god's work, my friend. This is a form of oppression that must end soon.

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

                        that third wave feminism paved the road for trans activism.

                        Yes, maybe, but I think we still disagree on which ideological pillars the rest of feminism shares with what is really at the core of what makes these ideologies bad. From what I see, I don't think we have learned our lesson. If we had, this wouldn't keep repeating itself in myriads of forms of wokeness that keep infecting our circles.

                        People accuse me of sounding like a broken record but society is the broken record to me. If we really had such a good handle on where we went wrong, I think we wouldn't keep repeating the same mistakes.

                        There are young (and old) men out there who think their feelings = reality. If that's not a symptom of ego overinflation, I don't know what is. Men need to get the fuck over themselves.

                        Ah, yes, it's men's feelings that are over-valued in society. Sure. The majority of activism and recent legislation that has come out of feminist circles is based on feelings. It's based on perceived threats, perceived this or that, taking offense, not feeling safe. It's women that get safe-spaces, not men. They are told to "man up", you retarded feminist.

                        The only men who have ever gotten this much coddling, predictably, are trans-women, men who emulate women. Why do you think there is this huge reporting gap, this virtual absence of stories about trans-men? Society cares about girls, women -- and now a little about men who try to be like women.

                        "Women and children first!" you stupid cunt. It's why we use men and boys as cannon fodder, not women or girls.

                        That has been humanity's motto, predictably and consistent with everything we expect from a social, sexually dimorphic species as ourselves. You are clueless about biology, you are clueless about psychology, and you are clueless about history.

                        Just like the migrant crisis, women decided the program. The sisterhood decided trannies were the hot new issue and the sisterhood will need to decide when it's time to move on, as we see they are in the process of moving on.

                        It's so apparent that you people are basic feminists. "this isn't an unpopular opinion" Yes, because you're too dense to learn the actual lesson, you are too stupid to see the actual dynamics. What is going on completely sails over your head. That's maybe at least one point you feminists are correct about: if you are privileged, you tend to not see your privilege. Jesus fucking Christ, you cunts are so unbelievably stupid it's maddening. And are you people mobbing these discussions like you were on Reddit? I keep seeing upvotes for the dumbest, thinnest arguments in these threads, without any of the arguments to back them up. If you had as many arguments as you have people mindlessly parroting your asinine feminist ideology, you could actually be taken seriously. Everything about your behaviors and your arguments screams that you did not learn jack shit, so stop pretending it's all old news, you dumb piece of shit. How is this for the pyramid of debate?

                        [–]sudd3nclar1ty 16 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 3 fun -  (25 children)

                        Sorry mate, this is complete horseshit and smells alot like a men's rights advertisement. IMO, here's why.

                        Men and women are biologically different, but that doesn't manifest in a noticeable performance differences across many domains. For example, I love women's MMA. Women fight differently than men, but the fights are just as exciting. Same with women's football or math or playing the violin or sexual appetites.

                        However, particular male attributes, such as violence against women and what I call the privilege of certainty, really stand out. These characteristics of masculinity manifest in toxic, anti-social ways that feminism will eradicate with selective genetic pruning.

                        Men who blame women for their problems don't need to become women, they need to embrace social behaviors, empathy and communication. None of which fit the classical masculine profile promoted by popular cultures. Therefore do not blame feminists for men's problems with masculinity, blame the men who choose not to evolve.

                        TLDR; The problem is with socialization of gender roles, not with masculinity per se.

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

                        'Men and women are biologically different, but that doesn't manifest in a noticeable performance differences across many domains. For example, I love women's MMA. Women fight differently than men, but the fights are just as exciting. '

                        What an absolute crock. I teach MMA and the level of womens MMA is much lower than mens. Something that is said during nearly every single womens MMA fight.

                        There is a reason why outrageous finishes like flying armbar's are much more likely to work in women's MMA than men's. And that is the massive disparity in technique.

                        You are talking nonsense. Women's MMA is far far behind men's technique wise. This is not even up for debate in circles which are actually educated and experienced on the topic.

                        [–]whistlepig 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

                        the privilege of certainty,

                        You might as well be talking about modern femists or SJW's... That is hardly a masculine trait.

                        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

                        Men and women are biologically different, but that doesn't manifest in a noticeable performance differences across many domains. For example, I love women's MMA. Women fight differently than men, but the fights are just as exciting. Same with women's football or math or playing the violin or sexual appetites.

                        Do you people have upvote parties for this mind-numbingly stupid nonsense?

                        [–]sudd3nclar1ty 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                        Lawdy how many misogynists reply with 'you people' blah blah nonsense. If you have an argument, bring it clown. This incoherent whining is fucking boring you twit.

                        Debate me. Let's see that big brain do some work.

                        EDIT: foul language. My apologies this comment was super obnoxious of me.

                        load more comments (2 replies)

                          load more comments (8 replies)

                            [–][deleted] 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                            I think porn addiction and targeted online/social media propaganda played into this.

                            Porn obsessed youths who think everyone is having crazy sex but them eventually developed an obsession for “becoming” the women they’re obsessed with.

                            People will like hate on me, but porn obsession has made a lot of men un-dateable. They’re fixated on types of sexual behavior that causes pain and suffering to women. Our grandparents, even the worst “dirty old man” grandfathers, would not have approved.

                            These men are baffled that no one wants hard anal, deep throating to the point of vomiting, punching/slapping, and then they create long winded blame filled conspiracy theories about how “feminism” is to blame for their singleness. Some “troon out” and decide to become the women they wish they could have.

                            People say masculinity has been “demonized”, but the whole red pill thing has been going strong for years now.

                            Internet sites, social media, etc, are extremely adept at pushing propaganda at young people. Younger men have 24/7 access to social media that is developed by trans extremists who want to push their kinks into children. I notice a lot of them use gaming subs, cartoons, etc, to reach out to boys.

                            This is on mobile... I apologize for errors or awkward phrasing.

                            [–]Locke 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

                            It's so odd how masculinity is said to be bad by these people, but when you really think about it, they're saying femininity is bad too. They preach about "liberating" women from traditionally "feminine" things like caretaking, and insist these women will be liberated by being more assertive, more aggressive, more traditionally "masculine."

                            This brand of "feminism" isn't liberating to either women or men, it wants to eradicate the concept of "woman" and "man" altogether. Androgyny is increasingly celebrated, and people who choose to take pride in being a man or being a woman are shamed. It's definitely related to the "trans rights" movement. I don't know if it's somehow intentional and what they mean to accomplish or if it's some kind of natural trend, but either way I can't be the only one seeing it and I don't like it.

                            I have no problem with someone presenting themselves however they want, but someone shouldn't be shamed for not fitting the ideal, and androgyny seems to be becoming the "trend." I want men and women to have equal rights, but I don't want to pretend "male" and "female" don't exist as concepts to get there. That's what we're heading towards and it's some next level dystopian shit. It's scary and we need to speak up about it.

                            [–]Mobymaybe 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                            And when we speak up, we get banned from reddit for saying so. As a lesbian, I was banned for saying I prefer biological women. I don’t know what the solution is. It’s exhausting when you debate it with the woke generation.

                            [–]Ossidiana 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

                            Nope. It's men. It's always been men, and it's men again. Men brought the rise of trans ideology, men are those who benefit from trans ideology, and men are those who got so pissed that now women can live with the same rights as men that they're trying to say women don't exist (because men are women too).

                            I know it hurts, but it's just the facts.

                            Do you still have doubts?

                            Then ask yourself the old phylosophical question: CUI PRODEST? Who benefits from it?

                            And who benefits from the trans movement is men.

                            [–]DustinM 8 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

                            But ... but the feminists! Everything is always the fault of women especially the uppity feminists! /s

                            Seriously though this post fails the pyramid of debate right from the start. Kate Beaton created a comic about similar.

                            http://www.harkavagrant.com/?id=341

                            [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                            But ... but the feminists! Everything is always the fault of women especially the uppity feminists! /s

                            What a dumb straw man.

                            Also, that comic is as idiotic as some of those "assigned male" comics.

                            Seriously though this post fails the pyramid of debate right from the start.

                            You're a moron. Does that fail the pyramid of debate?

                            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

                            Men brought about the tranny wave just as much as they brought about the migrant crisis. Just because it's men who end up being perpetrators, a minority of them, does not mean they are the driving force behind it. People voting against their own interests is not unheard of. It's dumb, but not unheard of. Take the state of black America, for example. If you are an emotional reasoner, you tend to vote on an emotional basis. Look at the voting patterns and tell me it's men driving wokeness, which is not just expressed in terms of tranny ideology but with a host of other social trends whose commonalities some people still seem too dense to absorb.

                            https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/FT_17.11.06_transgender_accepting.png

                            These trends are very clear and they are always along the same lines: women support wokeness more than men.

                            I think this qualifies as "survivor bias": Risk takers are more willing to play the lottery. Therefor, most lottery winners will probably be people with personality factors that predispose them to taking risks, maybe gamble. Therefor, most lottery winners will seem like risk takers. However, to conclude the inverse is a fallacy. Most risk takers eliminate themselves early. Most companies, for example, go under. A group that is, on average, more represented in group A can still make up the majority of group B. That is part of why men seem to be in leadership positions. Their risk taking behaviors and their drive make it more likely for them to be the select few at the upper percentiles, but they face poorer outcomes on many metrics in general. If 99% of men who tried to jump across a cliff died, the 1% who make it across still appear like winners. But that doesn't mean that jumping across the cliff is a good idea. That is also why we sacrifice men in wars, why they are more likely to participate in competitive sports.

                            https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Survivorship_bias

                            You people need to stop reasoning backwards. For example, just because white people earn more does not mean you can reason backwards and blame white people for it. Black people voting for causes that hurt them does not make it white people's fault. Trannies being men does not mean that it's driven by men in general.

                            [–]Ossidiana 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

                            I'll tell you again. Ask yourself who will benefit from it, and you will find out who is the cause. You'll find out who benefits from white people earning more is.... white people. And who benefits from the trans wave is men.

                            [–]Rune 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

                            Thank you for saying this. You said it better than I could. I've been wanting to bring this up on LGBDroptheT, but I'm not sure they could own up to how much feminism created this mess in the first place.

                            A couple generations of demonizing men and turning gender into make-believe created the perfect conditions for the trans ideology. Straight guys have been joking about being lesbians in a man's body for a long time. And now they can say it seriously, and get whole swathes of society to agree with them.

                            [–]florasis 7 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 3 fun8 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

                            Yeah, feminism is the reason of entitled incel perverts males who get off dressing as a female and harass women for not sleeping with them. We got the usual misogynistic bs on blaming women for men behaving like cancer

                            load more comments (1 reply)

                              [–]Trajan 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (23 children)

                              The real unpopular opinion, at least amongst traditional supremacist feminists, is that they themselves laid the groundwork for the current situation in which they find themselves in the pit in to which they cheerfully tossed males.

                              Social constructionism and post modernism. These are the ideological underpinnings of feminism since at least the second wave. The progressive stack also went along with the neo-Marxist transformation of oppressed/oppressor, previously based on class, in to genders. The problem with the progressive stack is that it's not so much fun when you find yourself significantly outranked, is it, cat ladies?

                              Of course there's plenty of denial. Go hit-up the gender critical subs to find these damaged people doing mental backflips so they can hold on to their faith post schism. They will not acknowledge feminism's ideological underpinnings and lineage, they will deny feminism's complicity in the creation of a clown world in which a man can claim to be a woman or sausage. They prefer to blame it all on a patriarchal conspiracy – as if conservatives or right-wingers would be overjoyed to see mentally troubled men getting their dicks out around young girls. As if the right figures prominently in the development of the left-wing philosophies and ideologies that drive this movement. Feminists have made their bed, and they're bigots if they won't share it with the lady penis of a man named Miranda. Good job!

                              [–]DustinM 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                              You're literally making shit up.

                              2nd wave is firmly rooted in the material. It's why radical feminism has been at the forefront in opposition to gender ideology going back to at least the 1970s (see The Transsexual Empire by Janice Raymond, available free here: https://janiceraymond.com/the-transsexual-empire/ )

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

                              You are all wrong. Read Bax to see how far back this goes. All forms of feminism have been cancer. Women have not been oppressed, the tendencies of authority vs. responsibilities has always been different. It's always been a selective framing. Feminism has always been cancer.

                              https://archive.org/details/fraudoffeminism00baxerich

                              https://ernestbelfortbax.com/category/the-legal-subjugation-of-men/

                              load more comments (1 reply)

                                [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (19 children)

                                The real unpopular opinion, at least amongst traditional supremacist feminists, is that they themselves laid the groundwork for the current situation in which they find themselves in the pit in to which they cheerfully tossed males.

                                That is exactly right.

                                And the nonsense about which wave of feminist was good, which one was actually about equality can be easily answered with "none". Stop listening to feminists about their version of history and actually read up on the laws on the books, when men got the vote, what their responsibilities were, which privileges women had. It's actually not that unjust. It was unequal, but that does not automatically mean it was unjust.

                                [–]florasis 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

                                It fucking means it was unjust. Discrimination on the basis on sex is extremely unjust and that what women have always suffered, living in a male dominated society, where their rights, freedom and opportunities have always being restricted on the basis on being female and submitted to the other half of the population. Misogyny which you perfectly represent is cancer, sexism and female oppression is cancer.

                                [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

                                Actually, it's white people's fault.

                                It fucking means it was unjust.

                                Men went to war and were blown up in wars. Women could not vote. That is unequal. But if you ask me if I'd rather take a bullet in my head or not be able to vote, the choice is not entirely obvious to me.

                                If you do not have equal responsibility for unequal authority, it does NOT mean it's unjust. According to your logic, all inequality is injustice. If I picked out people by year of birth and gave everybody who is born on an even year an apple and every born on an uneven year an orange, it would be unequal but it would not be clear that it's unjust. That's why we call it apples to oranges.

                                And let's say it was inherently unjust when it's unequal: what does that mean? Whom is it unjust towards? Both? Then it's not unjust anymore. And if it was unjust towards one gender, which one? You are back to the same question. You can say all unequal treatment is unjust, but you are treating BOTH sides unequally, so you argued exactly nothing, you absolute mong.

                                One had more responsibility in some sense, the other had more authority in some areas. If being unequal is inherently unjust, then unjust towards which of them? Men were being discriminated AND women were discriminated, each on their gender.

                                freedom and opportunities have always being restricted on the basis on being female

                                You fucking idiot! Your choices are also restricted if you pay family support or you are sent to war or get arrested for draft dodging, you inbred mongoloid. Men's authority came with responsibility. Responsibility, in the male world, had consequences, different from the type of authority we give people now where they can seemingly fuck up whatever way they want and we shrug our shoulders. Captains were expected to go down with their ship, men were expected to lay down their lives for their country.

                                Go and read a history book before you reply next time, you dipshit.

                                Misogyny which you perfectly represent

                                Cry me a river. I am as nasty to one idiot as I am to the next. My contempt is intersectional. Boo hoo hoo. So mean to women. Go fuck yourself, you soy-infused dick sucker. Donate your McDonald's wages to some e-girl, wank off to some kiddy porn or do whatever it is you simps do on a weekend.

                                [–]florasis 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (15 children)

                                The wars were made by men. It's so pathetic and hilarous how you want to play victims for the shit you do. Sexism were always unjust toward women, since it were the women who were put in an inferior marginalized position submitted to men power. And the fact that you had disadvantage doesn't change your social superior position , freedom, rights, and powers you had more and over women on the sole fact of having a dick. Not even respond to that delusional insults.

                                [–]Trajan 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

                                The wars were made by men.

                                What have men done for you apart from founding the country in which you live, created political institutions, devised laws, formulated political philosophies that lead to unprecedented prosperity and personal freedom, created the technologies you enjoy, and risk their lives protecting you from accidents/crime/war? I get that you hate men. Maybe you're one of the feminists turned that way by some abuse you suffered, and for that I hope you get the support you need. Or maybe you're one of the middle-class feminists who, in the absence of serious challenges in life, and being a bit high on neuroticism, felt the need to convince yourself that you're vicariously suffering through an imagined persecution of an aspect of your identity that, quite frankly, doesn't correlate particularly well with the wretchedness that most humans historically endured.

                                [–]florasis 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

                                No, you idiot, I don't hate men, I hate misogynistic sexist idiot. You cannot use the card of men being victim of wars of crime and ignoring who is the cause of wars and crimes putting women to danger in the first place.

                                [–]ISaidWhatISaid 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

                                Wow girl, you really triggered them by pointing out that most wars are by men for men. There is literally nothing they can bring up against that simple fact. The industrial war-machine is overwhelmingly a male-run enterprise for the benefit of rich men. These men that pretend to care for the fate of men will happily send their own sons to die in some rich oil baron's oil war. If men are supposedly so much smarter and better than women, why do they agree to fight and to die in other men's wars? "risk their lives protecting you from accidents/crime/war" XD XD XD they write this crap down and pretend to believe it to guilt-trip their critics for bringing up industrial global war-mongering. Hey, it's OK to admit that you're all mercenaries doing it for the money, not because you want to protect anyone or anything. Those oil barons you're sending off your sons to die to protect could use that money to just dig another well you know. But I guess you would rather not know.

                                [–]florasis 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                                Misogynistics don't have logic, they just hate for women and victim mentality. Also it the usual way of committing shit and then play the victim or blaming women for what they do

                                load more comments (1 reply)

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

                                  The wars were made by men.

                                  This is an incredibly moronic argument on two levels. First of all, it's an incorrect generalization unless we to believe that English queens were poor marginalized things oppressed by evil peasant menz they ... forcefully sent to die in their wars for example.

                                  Second, even if the previous claim was correct, the only way it could make sense to use it as an argument here is because your moronic misandry completely eroded your already malfunctioning brain. In what way you could see "men dying in wars is fine because men started wars" as a valid argument? Do you realize that "men" is not a single entity but a group of mostly unrelated to each other people? If, for example, a law making the death penalty applicable to female criminals only, was proposed by a woman it wouldn't be sexism against women because a woman proposed it?

                                  [–]florasis 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

                                  Very few english queens. Women had not right to the throne. The sons always had the right to take power over the daughter. Henry VIII had multiple wifes and killed women just because they didn't give him a son. Ironically his daughter is known as one of the best english royal and under her power England experienced a golden age.

                                  And nothing comparable to the destruction of wars, almost all made by men.

                                  There is no misandry here. Of course men are separated identity. The point is that you cannot portrait men as victim and gloss over the reason wars and vast majority of crimes happen in the first place.

                                  Men were the ones sent in wars because of physical strenght and women having the roles of child makers. But not because of having a social inferior status as men, because society was always dominated by men and women had inferior submitted status to them.

                                  [–]flugegeheimen 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

                                  Very few english queens.

                                  Even one would be enough to disprove you.

                                  The point is that you cannot portrait men as victim

                                  You absolutely can exactly because 'men' is not a hivemind. Wars didn't happen because of the men that were conscripted against their will to die in these wars. They were victims. You still can't get out of your misandric dehumanizing view of men as a united homogenous blob. Some person doing something in no way justifies the oppression against another person just because they both happened to have similar genitalia.

                                  But not because of having a social inferior status as men, because society was always dominated by men and women had inferior submitted status to them.

                                  What men Queen Victoria (for example) was socially inferior to and dominated by all her reign?

                                  [–]florasis 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

                                  Not, it wouldn't disprove. Virtually almost all wars have been made by men, because they were and still the ones in power and women were marginalized, oppressed and didn't even have power, over their own life, since they were under father or husband authority, let alone a country.

                                  Again, men being sent to wars by others men because of physical superiority or women being weaker and having the role of child makers, isn't about men being victims of social inferior status. You cannot being sexually oppressed, when your sex is literally the ones in power.

                                  And Victoria became queen because the males before her died. A woman could become queens only in the lack of males. A brothers always come before a sister in succession. The law was changed only recently to give daughters same right of son to take the throne, but now the royals powerful like in the past, so means nothing.

                                  And even if the queen was in power, the entire society was male dominated and women were submitted and discriminated on sex base. Even the queen herself come after the male counterparts and only was queen cause they weren't available.

                                  [–]flugegeheimen 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

                                  Virtually almost all wars have been made by men, because they were and still the ones in power and women were marginalized, oppressed and didn't even have power, over their own life

                                  What men Queen Victoria (for example) was socially inferior to and dominated by all her reign?

                                  You cannot being sexually oppressed, when your sex is literally the ones in power.

                                  You absolutely can exactly because 'men' is not a hivemind. ... You still can't get out of your misandric dehumanizing view of men as a united homogenous blob.

                                  It's kind of telling I can answer literally by quoting my own comment you are allegedly replying to. Let me try it that way:

                                  SEX CAN NOT BE IN POWER, SPECIFIC PEOPLE ARE. ALSO ALL SOCIAL STRATA INCLUDE MEN AND WOMEN.

                                  I have little hope all caps will get through your thick skull though. You also predictably ignored the analogy addressing this thing:

                                  If, for example, a law making the death penalty applicable to female criminals only, was proposed by a woman it wouldn't be sexism against women because a woman proposed it?

                                  What, your misandric blinders didn't let you to read it?

                                  Again, men being sent to wars by others men because of physical superiority or women being weaker

                                  The main reason they were sent to wars is because they were disposable. There is no lower social status than cannon fodder. When you are forced to die for something it's a social level of cattle in the butchery.

                                  And Victoria became queen because blablablah

                                  Yeah, I was sure you won't answer the question and you didn't:

                                  What men Queen Victoria (for example) was socially inferior to and dominated by all her reign?

                                  And final thing:

                                  And even if the queen was in power, the entire society was male dominated and women were submitted and discriminated on sex base.

                                  Here you realize how moronic was your argument and how inconvenient female rulers to it, so you give up a little: "Well, IF we throw out that cursed royal hag out of a picture THEN it will be the full blown dystopia with oppressed womyn I'm crying about". Yeah, no. Even in this case we would just have to make an additional step and take some princess or duchess or whatever, so 99.9999% of male population will still have incomparably lower social status which returns us back to the square one.

                                  [–]Trajan 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                                  What legal rights do men have that women do not have in the West?

                                  [–]florasis 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

                                  We got the usual idiot who blames women for men behaviour. All this trans ideology is about men perversion. The incels, the men who got an autogynephile porn perversion and get off by wearing female clothes. The same men who also extremely aggressive and entitled like of the usual of toxic masculinity, attacking women for not wanting to sleep with them and invading their space. It's all about men, and it is gender queer ideology (which is the opposite of feminism, which is based on discrimination based on biological sex), that is supporting them.

                                  [–]Solarcore 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

                                  And growing crowds of transmen are just misguided lesbians? You’ve drank too much of the trending propaganda cool aid. Fetisist transitioning is one thing, sure, and that’s fucked up, but it ain’t the whole at all.

                                  [–]florasis 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

                                  Yeah. Absolutely. Transmen with dysphoria are actually very masculine homosexual women. And today there is a great pressure on butch lesbians convincing them they're actually transmen, just because they're naturally masculine. But today there are even a growing amount of transmen who are actually hetero girls with gay fetish. The point is that there is to make a difference between people with dysporia who are usually homosexuals or autistics. And people who are convinced to being trans for being gender non comforming or the ones got a fetish. Today, thanks to gender ideology , there is a lot of perversion going on. Mostly hetero males calling themselves lesbians and bragging about girldick and lesbians spaces have been infested by it.These problems have been going on for years. Most people don't have idea that today trans ideology is mostly centered around perverted hetero males, not femme gay males like in the past.

                                  [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                                  You really thinks transoids become trans because of ideological beliefs? For most men it's a fetish. s/itsafetish

                                  [–]Equilibrio 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

                                  I basically agree with your overall statement, but there is a problem with belief number two in that it is restricted to MtF transexuals. One of the surprising facts I have learned is that:

                                  "In a recent survey of 250 families whose children developed symptoms of gender dysphoria during or right after puberty, Lisa Littman, a physician and professor of behavioral science at Brown University, found that over 80 percent of the youth in her sample were female at birth."

                                  Source: Psychology Today

                                  So if masculinity is as stigmatized as you suggest, it is apparently still no match for the masochistic, self-victimizing nature of the female id. Either that or penis envy really is more than just an 80s punchline.

                                  [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                                  [deleted]

                                    [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                                    Holy shit, do you actually believe this mental diarrhea? The oppressor? You guys really are full on feminist morons.

                                    https://hooktube.com/watch?v=Ip7kP_dd6LU

                                    In general, women get preferential treatment, consistent with how a sexually dimorphic species would act. We can also discuss Islam in that context.

                                    “Is the Husband Obliged to Spend on His Wife If She Is Working? Does He Have the Right to Take Anything of Her Salary? - Islam Question & Answer.” Accessed January 17, 2020. https://islamqa.info/en/answers/126316/is-the-husband-obliged-to-spend-on-his-wife-if-she-is-working-does-he-have-the-right-to-take-anything-of-her-salary.

                                    I general, men are human doings, women are human beings. Men are appreciated in terms of what they can do for people, women are appreciated for being women. That is why, pretty much universally, we expect men to provide.

                                    In the rare cases, as in the social experiment above, people who have been on both sides of the fence universally report that people's average demeanor towards women is friendlier, towards men it's more threatening. Men do not hold open doors for other men, for example, on average. Women have men who will defend them in public from violence of the other gender.

                                    Hugenberg, Kurt, and Sabine Sczesny. “On Wonderful Women and Seeing Smiles: Social Categorization Moderates the Happy Face Response Latency Advantage.” Social Cognition 24, no. 5 (2006): 516–539.

                                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GccCWo_eZdw

                                    Rudman, Laurie A., and Stephanie A. Goodwin. “Gender Differences in Automatic In-Group Bias: Why Do Women like Women More than Men like Men?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87, no. 4 (2004): 494.

                                    Starr, Sonja B. “Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases.” American Law and Economics Review 17, no. 1 (2014): 127–159.

                                    Vugt, Mark van, David De Cremer, and Dirk P. Janssen. “Gender Differences in Cooperation and Competition: The Male-Warrior Hypothesis.” Psychological Science 18, no. 1 (2007): 19–23.

                                    There are so many examples of this gender split, even among other species: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3963620/Nagged-battle-Female-monkeys-manipulate-males-fighting-shunning-don-t-involved.html

                                    [–]Zednix 4 insightful - 6 fun4 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

                                    Feminism has no place in Western society anymore. It has become a gender supremacist movement. Feminists need to turn their energies to places where women need help not superiority.

                                    [–]flugegeheimen 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

                                    What are the solutions to this? One would be to double-down on biological essentialism. Here is one great example of that, while here is another. Another solution would be to de-stigmatize masculinity, and tell young men that it's okay to be a man.

                                    Well, the latter isn't going to happen without dismantling the feminism completely because the whole foundation of it is misandry. It's like removing the Devil and Hell from Christianity.

                                    However, I think it's also the closest to real solution. The root reason the MtF transition even exists outside of minuscule amount of mentally ill people with real gender dysphoria is inequality: women are privileged, men are underprivileged. So moving (or pretending to move) in MtF direction is a social lift. You can't force someone to break their delusions (to double-down on biological essentialism) when they want to have these delusions and they want it to have a better life.

                                    So, yeah, the absolute majority of TiMs will become just Ms when rabid societal misandry will stop reminding them that they are the most pathetic scum for being born with a penis and that women are wonderful. This also won't happen without getting rid of main perpetrators of the misandry: feminists and their brainwashed male allies. (With a main focus on allies because they are the sole reason feminism even exists today).

                                    [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                                    It's misandry, yes, but most of it is just women's stronger drive towards victimhood and hypo-agency. Women are just as capable as men, but they constantly seem to need them for their causes. Marriage is one of the most terrible things for women - just awful - but be a MGTOW and walk away from marriage? Woman hater! What the fuck are men supposed to do? They are supposed to be there when a woman needs a plumber but get out of the way when things are neat and comfortable. That is the story of modern society. Productive people enter a space, make it clean, build it and then it's invaded by women and weak men. Then those idiots rant and rave how the men that built the space make it unsafe and drive them out. Those men then go to the next space, build it, make it safe and well-functioning. The places they are driven from, in the meantime, fall apart. But, for that they are blamed, too! How does that logic work? It doesn't. Evil patriarchy if you marry her, evil misogynist when you walk away. Evil white colonialist when you build a neighborhood and make it nice, then you gentrify, and white flight when you leave. Apartheid remnants when you provide food for your country, weak cowards abandoning their country when you leave.

                                    https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Derek_J._de_Solla_Price

                                    What the fuck are we supposed to do? Nothing! Point and laugh at the crazy and stop kowtowing to it. Point and laugh at those idiot feminists already. Productive people do not need to learn how to say "Yes" they need to learn how to say "No".

                                    [–]mangosplums 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                                    I'm probably the rare woman who agrees with this. I've been trying to explain for a while how using the term "gender" is harmful. Radical feminists and trans theorists use it, and I think it's harmful in both cases. It was Judith Butler, a second wave feminist, who coined the term. There's a reason that her writing is dense, overly academic and hard to parse. Because she made up unnecessary convoluted terms that do more harm than good. What she really meant was "sex roles" and she could have stuck with using that phrase. It's had a real damaging effect to create this imaginary category called "gender", especially when the word gender is often used interchangeably with the word sex. The average lay person doesn't understand there's a difference in meaning between the phrase "gender is a social construct" and "sex is a social construct" because the terms sex and gender have historically been used to mean the same thing. Second wave feminists constantly preaching that "gender is a social construct" or "let's do away with gender" have inadvertently paved the way for people to start believing that sex is a social construct and that we should do away with sex since most people don't understand the difference between gender and sex. I've tried explaining this in gender critical before and most people didn't get what I was saying. Creating the idea that there's this thing called "gender" at all is what has kicked off the whole trans movement and self ID and all that. I think it's a really stupid term and people should say what they actually mean which is that they disagree with sex roles.

                                    Masculinity is toxic/problematic/immoral/otherwise stigmatized

                                    The thing is that "toxic masculinity" is supposed to be mean a certain subtype of masculinity, a subtype where violence is valued over working things out, and where any type of empathy or affection is devalued or seen as bad etc. We should be recognizing this type of masculinity as a bad thing and trying to move away from it as a society. It's not helpful for men or women. The problem is that people haven't differentiated or understood that it's not all masculinity that's bad, it's just one type of masculinity. And I completely see how this has morphed into people viewing masculinity in general as bad, and how this negatively affects men. I also tried to explain this in gender critical awhile ago, but they didn't get it. I tried to explain to them that the words "masculinity" and "femininity" were just defined by "the qualities associated with males" and the "qualities associated with females". As long as men exist, you can't do away with masculinity, because men, by definition, will always be masculine. Just like women will always be, by definition, feminine. Different qualities across time have been associated with different sexes depending on the culture (of course there are always going to be qualities that are tied to one's physical body and those are cross cultural). If you create a culture that socializes men better, provides better examples of what masculinity can be, the toxic type of masculinity can go away or at least lessen, and better qualities can be associated with masculinity. But you can't ever try to eliminate masculinity, the only way to do that is to have no males, hence so many males wanting to become female.

                                    As for Jordan Peterson, of course gender critical women are not going to embrace him, he's said so many things that are extremely misogynistic.

                                    Lastly, many people here are blaming feminism for the bad state of sex relations today and are not looking at the role that porn plays in this. It has drastically negatively affected the way boys develop and the way that men and women relate to each other. And many TIM become that way because they watch too much porn and start focusing on the fantasy of becoming a woman. Of course most men don't want to admit the negative effect porn has had on society, it would be like giving up a drug for you all to give up porn. But it's way way way more to blame than feminism is.

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

                                    Actually the LGBT is responsible. If you look at the history of the gay rights movement...there has always been room for men dressed as women. 3rd wave feminism is essentially hijacked feminism filled with "male feminists"

                                    What is really demonizing men and masculinity is all the porn online filled with anime characters and the video games where guys will choose to play female characters. We're doing it to ourselves. The shit we're watching isn't good for us. Instead of scapegoating women, we should take a long hard look at ourselves and the men that want us to become more effeminate using mostly male circles online to do it. They want to kick out the women so they can better groom us. You can read this (scoffed at just satire)...it was written in the 80's. Tell me some of this shit hasn't already passed!

                                    https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/pwh/swift1.asp

                                    Just some quotes very first paragraph:

                                    We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.

                                    Then go look up "The Overhauling of Straight America" written in a time when NAMBLA was allowed to be apart of Pride.

                                    There are many gay men in MRA circles too they are the vultures wanting men to hate women so much that we'll run into their arms instead after we've become so obsessed with all forms of circle jerking porn that we will eventually try it on a man that ID's as a woman because women aren't kinky enough to want the abuse.

                                    The main goal is to erode the family unit creating more single moms and grooming us into hating children and marriage so there is easier access to children from predators. Why else would there be this trickling mindset of bashing men that protect women calling us simps and whiteknights? We're only allowed to defend each other as men?? That's some straight up effeminizing brainwashing. Men behaving this way to get us into turning our backs on women and children in favor of earning gratification points in male circles shows it's not feminists behind this. It's men that want to roleplay as seemingly straight online.

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

                                    the video games where guys will choose to play female characters

                                    Or maybe they don't want to stare at a guy's ass for hours when playing a video game. All the tiddy jiggle physics and the revealing clothing must be because those guys can better fantasize about being women. Sure.

                                    Instead of scapegoating women, we should take a long hard look at ourselves and the men that want us to become

                                    Are you some sort of simp? Who here is scapegoating women? We are talking about an ideology and there are male feminists. Men are already sacrificing themselves left and right. The national cemeteries are full with such men. They are the majority of suicides and they keep bending over backwards for women. Being a "good man" is nowadays equivalent with being a doormat. It's not more "yes" that guys need, it's a strong "no".

                                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4akMaeZ0-k

                                    Scapegoating women my ass. You couldn't be more coddled as a woman in a westernized country nowadays.

                                    Most of what is going on in modern society is not because of some ideological subversion. Most of what is going on in modern society is a product of our evolutionary psychology. We are not fat because of brain washing. We are victims of our success. Modern society provides many hyper-stimuli that result in maladaptive behavior. Social media also amplify issues that are controversial far beyond their relevance, so we now make changes to all of society for ever smaller minorities.

                                    What could be blamed on gender differences, though, is that women tend to have higher in-group preference and they are more emotional. As such, they make for a good voting bloc through which many of the regressive policies and destructive changes can be pushed through, just like the migrant crisis in Europe. It doesn't matter that women are the majority of those negatively affected, in terms of rape. As contradictory as it is in some ways, they are also the ones more likely to vote for this nonsense. And they are also more likely to vote for other regressive nonsense.

                                    What these gender ideologues are doing, though, here on saidit, in Gender Critical, or most other places, is that they look at the outcome and then reason backwards (if they are even still reasoning at that point, as opposed to just validating their prior conclusions). It's not different from the wage gap. Outcome unequal, therefor discrimination, therefor group on top is oppressor. That is one of the basic patterns of reasoning of those people.

                                    However, they now seem to have found a place in some circles, these radferms or whatever they call themselves, because they also do not like trannies. But, for the most part, they do not dislike trannies because their ideology is batshit and contradicts biology in a myriad of ways, they are coming at it with the usual patriarchy and victimhood nonsense. They are not making fun of tranny ideology, for the most part, they are just upset women are outranked by trannies on the victimhood pyramid. Apart from that, they are still morons. Maybe they are even bigger morons because of that extra serving of hypocrisy. As a rule of thumb, all feminists are idiots. Most people who understand gender differences don't call themselves feminists anyway.

                                    In short: radfems explanation = "men did it". Why? Because they look at the outcome, as usual. It's tranny men who enter women's spaces, therefor men are at fault. Wrong. Women, the sisterhood, drove this far more than men. Just like with the migrant crisis, women hurting themselves in their confusion is not men's fault, nor the scheming of men. The sisterhood decided trannies were good and now the sisterhood needs to decide they aren't. Men usually aren't asked about those things. They need to talk to the sisterhood, as with the other feminist bullshit. Just because they now got the shitty end of the stick and they are women does not mean they have the shitty end of the stick BECAUSE they are women. Minorities of women, or individual women, are sometimes ostracized from the sisterhood for lack of ideological compliance, just as they are enforcing now. Take examples like that of Erin Pizzey. The founder of the first women's shelter, she was virtually driven from her home, threatened, and had her dog killed. Was that the doing of men? No, it was the punishment for non-compliance to the sisterhood. When those people came to saidit from Reddit after being censored, their first priority was not to set up free speech subs and learn their lesson, their first priority was setting up another group of ideological compliance ("It's not a debate sub, bro!").

                                    Are we this dumb? I keep hearing how I am a broken record, how I have nothing new to add to the conversation, yet, these people seem to need constant reminders, constant explaining why their latest iteration of wokeness, of feminism, of Marxist, is still the same old bullshit in a new disguise, how women are not oppressed, how men are not oppressors and there is no problem with manhood in society. We are a bunch of fat, lazy apes and we are as fat and lazy as we can be, on average, with the resources given. We are lazy thinkers, we are lazy eaters, we eat, sleep, and fuck. As sad as that sounds, that's the majority of what is really behind most of cultural decline.

                                    load more comments (1 reply)

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

                                      Amen. Read my rants on this. Already typed enough for today, though, so keeping this comment short.

                                      They already jumped ship and are now implementing speech codes on saidit. Don't believe me? Look at GenderCritical. But only look, don't speak because it's "not a debate sub".

                                      All feminists are trash. Victomology, class based or not, is idiotic, in the shape of feminism or in the shape of BLM or communism or patriarchy or whatever else. Trannies took their playbook and they ran with it. Now those idiots cannot even figure out how the boomerang returned to hit them in the back of their heads. Truly idiotic.

                                      Also, men have served throughout history to protect women, families, countries. Their domain are wars, not because they are the ones who brought violence into this world. Violence is a state of nature. Men are the ones who, by division of labor, were elected by evolution to deal with it. Men have overwhelmingly protected women, not been the perpetrators of abuse. Men and women did not evolve as enemies but as collaborators. A species fighting against itself is nonsensical in the end. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

                                      I keep hearing that I am unoriginal for regurgitating these points time and time again. As long as there are people through whose thick skulls this doesn't penetrate (is that pun rapey?) there is little choice but to keep restating this in the hopes it will one day stick.

                                      [–]america_first_1776 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                                      (((Feminism))) itself led to transhomo ideology

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

                                      it's due to life being hard for men and life is easy for women so men want to be women, simple.

                                      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                                      [deleted]

                                        [–]america_first_1776 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

                                        You've never been to California then haha.

                                        load more comments (16 replies)