Jump to content
The Corroboree
Halcyon Daze

Top 5 reasons why I Hate women

Recommended Posts

LOL -Just kidding! :)

Edited by Halcyon Daze
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skynews_771462.jpg Edited by Halcyon Daze
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuckdamn. I'm drunk, frustrated and was well ready to give you a fucking serve.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was about to start a thread about sexism as a spin-off from the Ben Lee thread (http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=33699) to avoid going further off topic there, but this seems like a reasonable place to take the discussion :)

He made precisely symmetrical comments about both sexes. i.e. a male organ looking more like a female organ or a female organ looking more like a male organ. You could just as easily see misandry in this statement. I think it's a problem in today's society that is so influenced by feminist ideology that people see misogyny everywhere and misandry nowhere. You say a man is acting like a woman, and it's misogynistic because you are saying it's worse to be a woman than a man, but you say a woman is acting like a man, and it's misogynistic because you are confining the woman to a gender stereotype defined by the patriarchy.

Sorry for continuing the OT stuff, but calling everything misogyny really bugs me when we live in a society that is so misandric.

Bundy's post was really an attack on men (who listen to Ben Lee), since it implies that a male who listens to Ben Lee must have either a dimished penis, or none at all. The broader implication, though, is that a clitoris approximates not-quite-male genitals. In Bundy's view then, females are not-quite-males. Whereas males are males, but have less worth if they are less masculine (symbolised by the small penis). So the insult is aimed at men, and has women as the index of male worthlessness. I think women come off worse in that one.

That's the conclusion that is reached starting from the prior assumption that all gender insults are misogynistic and then read it in a way to make it fit the prior assumption. If you actually read the words, his comment was symmetrical, and without adding any personal bias, is neither misogynistic nor misandric.

It's ridiculous how much more prevalent it is than misogyny (which spellcheck informs me is a word) in society at large simply because it hasn't been made politically incorrect and stigmatized in the same way that misogyny has through the feminist movement. The pendulum seems to have swung a little too far the other way since feminism came along.

To me, this is a crazy statement. Are you talking about misandry being more prevalent than misogyny in Australia? Globally? Personally? Have you thought about the way institutions of power are still heavily male-dominated? We only just got a first female prime minister, the breakdown of men to women in parliament speaks for itself, as does it in pretty much any powerful/influential institution.

I think it's safe to say that we're talking about the West.

There are differences between the genders, and there's good evidence to show that the differences in the number of women in powerful positions, as well as the supposed gender pay gap, are due to the different choices made by men and women, not due to institutionalised sexism.

Just look at the different way that violence is portrayed in the media when it is perpetrated against men as opposed to women. It's been demonstrated here with the threads about a woman raping a man that result in comments that view the issue in a funny or positive way, e.g. "lucky guy, lol".

I don't agree with a lot of what this guy says, but he's compiled a lot of advertisements to show how gender is portrayed in the media, and I think it's very telling:

Men account for over 90% of workplace deaths. 80% of the victims of violence globally are men. Somewhere between 30 and 50 percent of domestic violence victims are men, yet there are almost no resources to help these victim simply because of their gender. Most domestic violence laws are specifically targeted to help female victims. Suicide is more common amongst men than women. Men die, on average, about 7 years earlier than women, even though biological factors only account for a couple of years difference.

Look at the way female genital mutilation is perceived by most people in our society, yet male genital mutilation is common practice. Men in our society are seen as expendable. The "women and childred first" paradigm still holds true for most people. Though the system whereby men are considered providers and protectors, call it patriarchy if you like, has been attacked by feminism for the aspects that benefit men, the aspects that benefit women have remained.

Mothers are given custody much more often than fathers are. Women have much more reproductive freedom than men. When a woman is pregnant, she has multiple options if she does not feel ready for the responsibility of being a parent. In many places she can have an abortion. Even where abortion is illegal, it is often tolerated. If she bring the baby to term, she can adopt the child out, and in many places there are safe places for a woman to dump a baby if she doesn't want it. But for a man, once he's donated his sperm, if the woman chooses to keep the baby, he is automatically responsible. And if he doesn't want to pay child support, he is told he is a deadbeat dad and that he should've kept it in his pants if he didn't want the responsibility of being a father.

Girlwriteswhat is pretty eye-opening:

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More Girlwriteswhat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christina Hoff Sommers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to take it a little less lowbrow, but this guy always cracks me up:

He could be said to be misogynistic, but I think he's just taking the piss to illustrate a point.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow she is extraordinary. This is the first woman who I have ever seen (or heard) explaining this situation as I see it; I have had many arguments with my partner who will eventually concede the point intellectually, but emotionally she doesn't accept that it is true. She is unaware that she is frequently verbally abusive, and I try to explain this by using the same tone back - at which point I am accused of being aggressive and unreasonable - perhaps true, but how come it only works in one direction? It is because it is assumed consistently that only men are capable of violence (including rape),are always the aggressor (even when the victim) and will somehow inevitably progress to the point of violence unless controlled, whereas women are completely incapable of violence and are always the victims.

I had to stop playing the first video as my two year old daughter was taking interest in the violent slapping of men, and I didn't think she would understand the subtleties of the discussion. Interestingly, I spent the first ten minutes completely role-reversing the actors in the ads - watching men slap women - to see if my reaction was stronger at the thought of men slapping women, but quite honestly the overt violence of the act was enough to disturb me either way.

I keep losing track of what I'm writing as I'm also teaching my daughter drawing (or facilitating scribbles, anyway) so I might leave it at that, but there is a clear and obvious sexism against men in society, which for some reason is almost invisible to society as a whole. It's just accepted as "normal". To me, it's sad that our species is so culture-bound and unable to think clearly and logically, it's enough to send a reasonably intelligent person insane.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S.C.U.M. Manifesto

(Society for Cutting Up Men)

http://www.womynkind.org/scum.htm

girlwriteswhat discusses this briefly in the NAFALT video I posted above, but in case anyone hasn't watched that, and otherwise isn't aware of the history of the SCUM manifesto, Valerie Solanas did actually put her vile ideas into practice by attempting to kill three men.

Edited by ballzac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on guys lets face it, girls are awesome, Women are awesome. They can be just as nutty as men sometimes but they are the fairer sex with fluctuating hormones and they just love being treated well.

From my experience women hate being ruled, and love being treated gently. It they ever get bitchy or violent or even psychopathic then that's not because they're female, that's because they are human. There's always going to be a few crazy ones around, -just like men.

A female's outward demeanor is a bit like her clothing, once she lets you underneath it's all sunshine and sparkles :)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Fairer Sex"

How unfair! Next you will be reciting the rhyme

Slugs and snails and puppy dogs tails, that's what little boys are made of

Sugar and spice and all things nice, that's what little girls are made of

You are just perpetuating violence and abuse of men by use of such language. Shame on you!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just gotta treat 'em right. After all, you get out what you put in.

Edited by Halcyon Daze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are just perpetuating violence and abuse of men by use of such language. Shame on you!

You just gotta treat 'em right. After all, you get out what you put in.

Are you saying it's my fault my ex was abusive towards me? I obviously deserved it, and I obviously didn't treat her right. Do you say the same thing about female victims of abuse? You know, if she just had've treated her man right she wouldn't have gotten the black eye? Yes, shame on you!

Come on guys lets face it, girls are awesome, Women are awesome. They can be just as nutty as men sometimes but they are the fairer sex

Do you know how many feminists would love to chop your balls off for saying such a thing? Look at the backlash after Christopher Hitchens said that women are the fairer sex and that no woman of his is ever going to have to work.

My gripe isn't with women. Most women I know are wonderful human beings. My gripe is with feminism and the misandry that is perpetuated through our society because of feminist inspired dogma. I think the gender stereotypes of old are terrible, and I think it's a valid human rights issue for those stereotypes to be broken. The thing is that feminism has had great success in breaking those stereotypes, but only where such a change benefits women. Men have always suffered from these stereotypes too, and feminism not only fails to address men's issues, but actively fights to prevent these issues being addressed by others. While the circumstances for women have improved significantly over the past few decades, the gender roles expected of men have pretty much remained the same, and anyone who questions the acceptability of this is labelled a misogynist. The only time men's rights as a group are ever improved are when it's an incidental consequence of improving rights for women.

I should qualify this by noting that there are a couple of exceptions. There are people who label themselves as feminists who are interested in true equality. Interestingly, they seem to almost exclusively be sex-worker or former sex-workers who are fed up with how mainstream feminism negatively impacts on their rights. But this is not the form of feminism that inspires public policy or societal norms. Most people who call themselves feminists will say they are for equality of the sexes, but when quizzed about specifics, they seem all too eager to ignore any men's issues and even deny that such issues exist. Again, I think girlwriteswhat, in her NAFALT video, is very convincing in her argument that until feminists start looking at, or at least acknowledging, men's issues, and publicly denounce feminists who refuse to do so, it is fair to paint feminist with a broad brush and not be persuaded by arguments that "not all feminists are like that".

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate them because of how much extra toilet paper they use

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know how many feminists would love to chop your balls off for saying such a thing?

I love all women.

Even the feminists, even the abusive ones who deserve to go to jail but somehow get away with it.

Edited by Halcyon Daze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, this escalated quickly, and I don't have enough time to address everything I'd like to, but some good points have been made. Thanks for moving the discussion here, ballzac.

First of all, the videos that have been posted are very provocative. Christina Hoff Summers is hardly a respected feminist. Her book Who Stole Feminism had some interesting points, but was basically a polemic rhetoric trap. Valerie Sollers is feminism's fundamentalist poster girl - mostly liked by anti-feminists as an example case for why feminists are crazy bitches, or teenagers who think her approach was inspiring. She was certainly not representative of the state of feminism in the 60s 70s (civil rights and critique of political structures were), and is likewise an outlier today. Citing her an example is a bit of a cheap argument, like saying that terrorists are representative of Islam. People reading her work should also remember that she was sexually abused as a child and raped as an adult (by men).

There are differences between the genders, and there's good evidence to show that the differences in the number of women in powerful positions, as well as the supposed gender pay gap, are due to the different choices made by men and women, not due to institutionalised sexism.

I agree that there are biological differences between the sexes, and can see how one of those (the ability to give birth) could affect women's choices in the workplace... I'm interested in what other types of choices women are making that perpetuate the glass ceiling. Institutionalised sexism is a fact, though, and its effects can't be ignored. For a subtle example, Wessler and Ryan (2012) have shown that in male dominated institutions women are limited in terms of opportunities for promotion and job satisfaction, and this is modulated by institutional rules that allow for greater or lesser opportunities for women in the workforce.

violence is portrayed in the media when it is perpetrated against men as opposed to women.

For sure there is a different treatment of the sexes in media-portrayed violence. All I have to say about that is that mass media wants to sell itself first, and do politics next. The politics found in most mass media outlets follow (and reify) the market for what people are interested in seeing. On thread comments that find rape of men funny, most of the posts I've seen of that persuasion are actually by men.

Men account for over 90% of workplace deaths. 80% of the victims of violence globally are men. Somewhere between 30 and 50 percent of domestic violence victims are men

In a Western context the workplace death thing could be true - I have no idea - but I know that in countries like India (cf. Vandana Shiva) and China the numbers are nowhere NEAR the same as your percentage (where did you get that, by the way? official, accurate numbers are difficult to find). The ABS doesn't seem to support those statistics, either (http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features20Jun+2011). And there is another question of decision-making: men are known to display higher rates of risk-taking behaviour, which could lead to strife at work (rather than male-workplace death being something caused by women/feminism, which seems to be the implication here).

It would also be useful to look at who is perpetrating the violence in these cases. Hint: it is usually men. This report uses UN statistics and so on, to show a breakdown of violence against women.

Most domestic violence laws are specifically targeted to help female victims. Suicide is more common amongst men than women.

Most domestic violence (think historically as well as contemporarily) has been perpetrated by men, law works by precedent, so it makes sense (within the legal framework) that domestic violence laws are designed to help female victims. If suicide is more common among men, that still doesn't say anything about the cause of suicide (I'm guessing it is not the fault of women oppressing men, that most men commit suicide). In fact, in my opinion, this is a likely outgrowth of patriarchal society. The culture of masculinity that patriarchy promotes is severe to most men, as well as women.

female genital mutilation...male genital mutilation

Totally different forms of mutilation. Men lose some sensitivity in their glans. For women, depending on the "Type" of mutilation, the procedure is extremely painful (in most cases), leads to urinary and other infections (not only initially, but ongoing), can cause keloid scarring (so fucking uncomfortable, and you don't see it on foreskin removals), neo-natal death, reduced sensitivity/pain during sex etc etc. They are barely comparable in my book, FGM is way more dangerous, painful, and damaging.

Plus, this practice in Western culture stems from male-male circumcism (how often do you see a woman perform a brit?)

Though the system whereby men are considered providers and protectors, call it patriarchy if you like, has been attacked by feminism for the aspects that benefit men, the aspects that benefit women have remained.

I would say that for sure protecting women and children is part and parcel of patriarchy, and a part that has been attacked by feminism. I often hear arguments about women wanting equal rights but not wanting to pay their half of the cost of a dinner, or movie. Just as often I hear women insulted because they refused someone who wanted to buy them a beer, or do something for them. But feminism has definitely attacked what is colloquially called "white knighting", and putting women and children first would be part of that.

Do you know how many feminists would love to chop your balls off for saying such a thing?

phew. last point: probably many would be pissed about that kind of condescension, and many not. I fairly regularly hang out with feminists of various stripes, and have never been taken to task for holding a door, giving a compliment, etc. My personal opinion is that postfeminism and its often crazy claims about sex and gender have confused a lot of people and generally given what is a really noble struggle (to get the sexes on equal footing and foster mutual repsect) a really bad name. I mean, people now claim that they identify as another being (say, an elf), and that identification should be respected in the same sense that ethnic identification should be.

For me, feminism is a set of movements that can, and often do, incorporate questions around men as well as women. But we live in a male dominated world, and patriarchy is bad for everyone. The fact that men have rights too should not be (and isn't) forgotten, but it should definitely not eclipse and work to destroy movements where people facing more oppression are trying to work for political and social recognition.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should qualify this by noting that there are a couple of exceptions. There are people who label themselves as feminists who are interested in true equality. Interestingly, they seem to almost exclusively be sex-worker or former sex-workers who are fed up with how mainstream feminism negatively impacts on their rights. But this is not the form of feminism that inspires public policy or societal norms. Most people who call themselves feminists will say they are for equality of the sexes, but when quizzed about specifics, they seem all too eager to ignore any men's issues and even deny that such issues exist. Again, I think girlwriteswhat, in her NAFALT video, is very convincing in her argument that until feminists start looking at, or at least acknowledging, men's issues, and publicly denounce feminists who refuse to do so, it is fair to paint feminist with a broad brush and not be persuaded by arguments that "not all feminists are like that".

Sorry, couldn't help myself. I also know a number of sex workers who are feminists and are interested in equal rights and actively take up issues in the way they affect men and women. But I also know academic feminists that do this, anarcho-feminists, and queer feminists (to a different extent, in a different way that usually deals with trans questions). There are also a number of male feminists that have taken up questions of mens rights within a feminist framework. Digby's Men Doing Feminism has some interesting personal meditations on these kinds of questions. Connell's Masculinities is also arguably working within feminism to some extent and talks specifically to constructions of masculinity (i.e. how men are expected to be men).

Again, I don't think feminism is creating misandry, I think the problems are rooted in capitalism and patriarchy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice rebuttals, racketmensch. However, it's interesting you think we live in a male-dominated world. Ballzac made some very clear popints about where men are disadvantaged over women, let us tackle the workplace, and I'm going to try and be brief because I've got very little time. The workplace, capitalism defined. Money earned = power to purchase and control, male dominated. Correct.

However, women frequently prefer to be at home looking after the children. Why?

Less stress. Prefer to be in a less competetive environment. Looking after children. More social networking (mothers groups etc.).

Seriously. The problem is capitalism - which doesn't see this as working. However, having been a stay-at-home dad, I actually much prefer that lifestyle and the lack of mental and emotional stress of being the primary breadwinner and the lack of competition is, quite honestly, probably the main reason why women live longer, healthier lives. Of course, more stress is likely to lead to greater "violence" as an outlet, stress is the biggest creator of violence, all wars are caused by stress, etc. and it is mens job to sort it out because they are stronger and considered less important. We are cannon fodder, taking all the flak to protect the children and the women who will care for the children. It is our noble duty; but it's not exactly fair. If this point were ever conceded, I am sure that still the vast majority of people who would go to war to defend the nation would be men. This is our biological inheritance; it doesn't make it fair, or equal, from a purely intellectual level. We risk death to defend our families - this would drive us insane if we didn't develop ways to deal with the emotional trauma. Many men do not - they end up homeless, or unable to control the violence which they bring home. Many violent men are emotionally traumatised, having been abused as a child, or having (not) dealt with extreme stress. Feminists frequently ignore this; they don't understand it as they have never undergone it. Most feminists would refuse to put themselves under the pressures that men frequently have no choice but to accept; most women do too, but they "suffer" the consequences of their man having to take the primary stress.

Emotionally traumatised women can be just as violent. Most women don't use physical violence because they believe they are not as strong as men, therefore it is counter productive. They also believe they are non-violent. How strong is the power of belief? Have you ever fought a trained female kick-boxer? The quickest and most deadly man I know is a Chinese martial artist. One day I caught him by surprise; his actual strength was minimal, he was smaller than the average female. His strength was illusory but still real. The difference between men and women in this area is smaller than you think.

But I want to hear from Ballzac. His answers are much clearer and better referenced than mine. Food for thought until then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the reply ww.

i'm much in agreement with you about capitalism being a root cause of the kinds of problems we're talking about. yet i'm reluctant to blame it entirely, since capitalist institutions arose out of natural human behaviour in an unnatural context (competition in a mass society that we didn't evolve as part of). they're complex problems that are well displayed within capitalism, for sure.

violence and aggression have been linked to testosterone, so it isn't just a matter of having a more cruisy occupation (child rearing, which to unexperienced me sounds extremely stressful), but actually pertains to neurological indicators that apply differently to each sex (Mehta and Beer 2010 co-authored an article on the correlation and causation [neurologically] between aggression and testosterone). Think this through as you will.

Personally I would not go to any war unless it was something like WWII, and in that case most of the feminists I know would also enlist. War PTSD is a massive problem, admitted, but lets remember who have initiated 99% of wars across human history, and whom they've been fought on behalf of. Furthermore, you can't blame feminism for the "women and children first" concept, since it is a patriarchal adage that existed long before poltiically organised feminism did. Also, there are social factors outside just sex. I can't remember the title, but there's a great Australian history book about what women did during WWII; the way they took over getting that society to function, and how pissed they were when men returned and sent them back to the kitchen. Women were every bit as important in war as men (soldiers) were (although I definitively do not glorify war or think of soldiers as noble).

Women are categorically not as strong as men. This factor of visible strength has a lot of soft power in terms of intimidation and so on. A highly skilled and dedicated martial artist might win many fights against people twice his/her size, but the sad truth is that brutal neanderthal strength often trumps skill, and most women don't dedicate their lives to martial arts in case of being attacked by men (nor should they have to). I have indeed fought trained female kickboxers. shit was brutal and i lost several fights technically, but have no doubt that i would've easily won if it was an actual fight, and not training. In fact, I've never felt violently threatened by a woman, but have often been threatened by men when i'm having a quiet beer or whatever. Feeling like you can't go out to certain places because of threat of violence is not a fun thing to live with, and females live with this all the time. IMO far more than males do.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×