'Young men in Ireland need feminism'

Sn@kebite

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I've read some of this "red pill" stuff before and in all honesty, it's (bar some of the more the autistic terminology), just common sense stuff that everyone knows or should know, siphoned through some snake oil bull****.

Men like young beautiful women.

Women like tall men.

Don't be a pushover etc.

Not exactly mind blowing hidden knowledge like.

Speaking of "red pill"; have you seen the reddit for supporting male victims of sexual abuse? Alarming how many perpetrators appear to be female. (Even though, of course, most are male). Truly eye-opening stuff.

PucaMama

pumpkin4life wrote: »

I've read some of this "red pill" stuff before and in all honesty, it's (bar some of the more the autistic terminology), just common sense stuff that everyone knows or should know, siphoned through some snake oil bull****.

Men like young beautiful women.

Women like tall men.

Don't be a pushover etc.

Not exactly mind blowing hidden knowledge like.

What do you mean by autistic terminology?

Skommando

Sand wrote: »

Id say its just generalisations. Like all the best lies, there is a ring of truth to it. But then it fails. That's when rankings, rules and pecking orders at the feeding trough, complicated charts, ladders and all sorts of nonsense get trotted out by morons.

Because people like to identify patterns and to focus on certain things to the exclusion of the wider whole. It is how our brains work, it is how optical illusions and even pickpockets trick us, and its extremely comforting to believe there is a pattern, there are rules, it is predictable. Believers in that nonsense need to believe everyone is predictable. Figure out what star sign, or gender or personality 'type' they are and you can understand them. That is safe. The idea that people are individuals with their own preferences and beliefs that do not feed into easy categories terrifies them.

You see that trait whatever the subject. Some people love to categorise and pigeon hole other people into neat little categories.

_Jamie_

ligerdub wrote: »

I'll give you Steinem but I'm not having Greer, in any sense, she is ugly both inside and out.

She really wasn't. I'm not making out she was a beauty but she was a perfectly normal looking young woman, certainly not ugly. Even now, she's not objectively ugly.

Skommando

_Jamie_ wrote: »

She really wasn't. I'm not making out she was a beauty but she was a perfectly normal looking young woman, certainly not ugly. Even now, she's not objectively ugly.

I suppose it depends on your standards, if Greer floats your boat work away, no man here will stand in your way.

_Jamie_

Skommando wrote: »

I suppose it depends on your standards, if Greer floats your boat work away, no man here will stand in your way.

Well, the quoted is obviously a daft post.

She's objectively not ugly, she's objectively just a pretty normal looking person. Not a beauty but so few of us are. And certainly doesn't fit the stereotype espoused earlier in the thread.

Oh and before anyone says looks are subjective, they're not, they're objective, for the beautiful people and for the normies. That's why some people are undisputedly considered beautiful. And how you can confidently say someone is average looking.

Skommando

_Jamie_ wrote: »

Well, the quoted is obviously a daft post.

She's objectively not ugly, she's objectively just a pretty normal looking person. Not a beauty but so few of us are. And certainly doesn't fit the stereotype espoused earlier in the thread.

don't be embarrassed, if that's what your into, we won't judge you, and you've no competition here.

_Jamie_

Skommando wrote: »

don't be embarrassed, if that's what your into, we won't judge you, and you've no competition here.

Sooo, the number of people here interested in Germaine is zero?

Anyhoo, ignore the point I've made, fine. Other people can read it too and that'll do me.

mzungu

Rereg wrote: »

Snipped

Not only is it not in line with ethological theory, it's not even close to it

Rereg wrote: »

Snipped

What mindsets would these be?

Rereg wrote: »

Snipped

You should be telling this to the "Red Pill" gurus.

mzungu

_Jamie_ wrote: »

Sooo, the number of people here interested in Germaine is zero?

Anyhoo, ignore the point I've made, fine. Other people can read it too and that'll do me.

I think back in her day she was quite attractive. So, take that zero, and throw it up to one!!

_Jamie_

mzungu wrote: »

I think back in her day she was quite attractive. So, take that zero, and throw it up to one!!

Thank you! Like I said, I'm not saying she was a beauty of the ages but she was perfectly presentable with a trim figure. And now she looks like your average older woman. Actually, she looks a lot better than many 70 somethings. So she doesn't come close to filling the butch angry lesbian stereotype.

Jimmy Garlic

A very fair and non-biased assessment..

DEFTLEFTHAND

brickmauser wrote: »

Man IS just another animal

The only animal who tries to deny its nature.

Not seen across any of the other mammals.

There's a general rule of nature. Defy it and you get fcked.

ligerdub

_Jamie_ wrote:

Thank you! Like I said, I'm not saying she was a beauty of the ages but she was perfectly presentable with a trim figure. And now she looks like your average older woman. Actually, she looks a lot better than many 70 somethings. So she doesn't come close to filling the butch angry lesbian stereotype.

She does in my opinion.

ceadaoin.

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

A very fair and non-biased assessment..

The current transgender movement is based on the premise that gender isn't a social construct. So how is a video from a transgender person supposed to be non biased?

Zulu

Can a woman not give an unbiased comment on sexism?
Can a black not give an unbiased comment on racism?

FortySeven

Zulu wrote: »

Can a woman not give an unbiased comment on sexism?
Can a black not give an unbiased comment on racism?

It would be unusual to be fair.

py2006

Flimpson wrote: »

Feminists I know are good people and they certainly don't hate men - they identify as feminist for well meaning reasons. I used to be the same. Then it dawned on me how divisive today's feminism is, how it does demonise men, how it is not about equality - just women's rights, how hypocritical it is, and how it infantilises and makes victims of women... That's not to say that there isn't misogyny/sexism towards women, or that feminism wasn't once a great thing (it was of course, and I'm hugely thankful for it) but today's feminism addresses women's issues from a fanatical angle, which is harmful.

In the name of the father, the son and the holy ghost....AMEN!

Wibbs

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The only animal who tries to deny its nature.

Not seen across any of the other mammals.

There's a general rule of nature. Defy it and you get fcked.

Actually you couldn't be more wrong and another example of how very different humans are. We as a species have been "defying nature" for the guts of a million years. We externalised our own evolution and because of that we achieved what we achieved. Next time you fly away on holidays, eat a steak, put on a warm jacket, take an aspirin, that's you defying nature. If we had gone along with nature, we'd still be a rare sub tropical herbivorous ape.

PucaMama wrote: »

What do you mean by autistic terminology?

I have noticed that a fair number of the "gurus' and a lot of the acolytes of red pill/pickup/MGTOW come across as very much within the range of Asperger type behaviour. They missed out at some stage with social development(nature or nurture?), tend to be a bit OTT and intense, tend to be literalists, tend to be highly focussed on that one subject and tend to rigidly follow repetitive plans and behaviours. The PUA business is very much targeted at that kind of young male mind.

silverharp

ceadaoin. wrote: »

The current transgender movement is based on the premise that gender isn't a social construct. So how is a video from a transgender person supposed to be non biased?

I didnt watch the video but if they are trying to mimic the hormone levels of the opposite sex they might be well placed to observe their own changes in behaviour

Outlaw Pete

ceadaoin. wrote: »

So how is a video from a transgender person supposed to be non biased?

I just seen it as an informed opinion and one which isn't singing from the usual illogical hymn sheet.

_Jamie_

ligerdub wrote: »

She does in my opinion.

That's fine but looks are objective, not subjective and objectively, she doesn't. You might not be into how someone looks but it can absolutely said with confidence where someone fits on the looks scale. Or else some people wouldn't universally be considered good-looking and many people are.

_Jamie_

Zulu wrote: »

Can a woman not give an unbiased comment on sexism?
Can a black not give an unbiased comment on racism?

I think generally both men and women have a slight natural bias towards their own gender. It's not really a problem, IMO, as long as one can intellectually rise about that natural bias. And I think that bias is sometimes a good thing. The fact that men and women come at gender issues from slightly different perspectives should be harnassed, I think, as it can be useful to have someone else view something slightly differently to how you yourself might. It gives a fuller picture.

The whole equality arena needs a rethink. Feminism is clearly lost at the moment and the opposing movement is too concerned with whataboutery and with rivalling the most ardent feminists in terms of whininess.

osmiumartist

Zulu wrote: »

Can a woman not give an unbiased comment on sexism?
Can a black not give an unbiased comment on racism?

Apparently men can't give an unbiased view on sexism, otherwise there'd be no mandatory quotas. It is of course assumed women are never sexist.

Skommando

osmiumartist wrote: »

Apparently men can't give an unbiased view on sexism, otherwise there'd be no mandatory quotas. It is of course assumed women are never sexist.

Wondering when femistss are going to seek gender quotas in things like bin collection and sewerage works ? Or gender quotas in the professions dominated by females such as nursing, social work and teaching ?

Jimmy Garlic

Skommando wrote: »

Wondering when femistss are going to seek gender quotas in things like bin collection and sewerage works ? Or gender quotas in the professions dominated by females such as nursing, social work and teaching ?

There will only be gender quotas for the cushy numbers and areas where women outnumber men won't be touched at all.

ligerdub

_Jamie_ wrote: »

That's fine but looks are objective, not subjective and objectively, she doesn't. You might not be into how someone looks but it can absolutely said with confidence where someone fits on the looks scale. Or else some people wouldn't universally be considered good-looking and many people are.

she's objectively rotten :-)
Let's just drop this one perhaps, shake hands and move on.

_Jamie_

ligerdub wrote: »

she's objectively rotten :-)
Let's just drop this one perhaps, shake hands and move on.

She isn't. Subjectively, that's your view.

FortySeven

_Jamie_ wrote: »

She isn't. Subjectively, that's your view.

Can we just say she's fluid and draw a line under this? I think that's how they partially settled a gender issue previously. Seemed to work.

ligerdub

_Jamie_ wrote: »

She isn't. Subjectively, that's your view.

Like I say, let's just forget about this one.

Fumbs up.