|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On February 18 2013 08:49 Shelke14 wrote:
haha! you are right! It was the wrong person.. fuck, sorry. My bad!
Dumping on birthday..... thats is fucked up. My buddy just dumped his gf of 5 years on V-day.
Some years ago I dumped a guy a week or something before Valentine's Day. He was head over heels for me, but although he was the loveliest person ever, he was just too "nice", he'd always agree with me when I was wrong. I got the sense that he would do something big for Valentine's Day, and I felt bad because I knew it would be big, so it made me end the relationship (it was hard, because he was so nice). I found out pretty soon after from his best friend that he'd been planning to buy tickets to Paris + hotel and shit. So thankfully I did the right thing, and saved him a shitload of money.
Not a terrible story at all, just this comment reminded me of it.
|
On February 20 2013 01:56 docvoc wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:26 Shady Sands wrote:On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 16:12 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 16:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 15:56 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 15:47 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 19 2013 15:09 Shiragaku wrote:On February 19 2013 13:57 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 11:57 Shady Sands wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 19 2013 11:52 kwizach wrote:
SamsungStar, no offense but your prejudices towards the opposite sex permeate almost all of your posts.
No, what you call "female sexual empowerment" is not about women having a "free license to act without morals or conscience", it's about women being free to do what they want with their bodies without society condemning them for it on the basis of them being women and not men. It's about getting rid of slut-shaming. There is nothing morally wrong about having frequently different sexual partners as long as you're engaging in consensual sex and not taking advantage of the other person, and there should be no difference made between men and women on this matter. Nobody is saying that what is considered to be morally wrong for men (lying/deceiving for sex, abusing a position of power for sex, etc.) shouldn't be morally wrong for women. The point is that what isn't considered morally wrong for men shouldn't be considered morally wrong for women just because they're women.
You wrote "all I ever hear women say about decent men is "yeah... he's nice, but he's kind of boring :\." Then they go right back out to find a bad boy". This is such a ridiculous, caricatural statement that I genuinely wonder if you believe it yourself. If you do, my advice to you is to meet more women, or at least meet women from outside the little bubble you live in. No, women won't say about nice men that they're boring... unless they're boring - people of both sexes can be boring, and even then, it is an eminently subjective judgment. There's nothing about being nice that implies being boring. You can, however, be boring by never challenging/surprising/entertaining the person you're with. And even then, again, some people won't necessarily find you boring. If you actually think that women will "go [...] find a bad boy" because "nice guys are boring", you don't know women, and you probably don't know men either. Women go for guys that they don't find boring, just like men go for women that they don't find boring.
When you write, "this is no more than a feeble counterpunch to the massive amounts of man-hating women engage in at every level of discourse in society", my reply to you is that the only reason you think women are engaged in "massive amounts of man-hating" is that your sexist beliefs are making you both falsely interpret the denunciation of the patriarchal components of our society as "man-hating", and erroneously project over the entirety of the female population the actual sexism that can be found in a small portion of the said population - and their sexism is only a reflection of your own sexist beliefs, which are certainly not held by a smaller portion of the male population.
Finally, you write "What I will say, as a caveat, is that I have only ever had relationships with attractive, fit women. I'm sorry, but I've just never been able to get myself to date a less attractive woman. [...] So, I am probably just bitching about a specific subset of the female population when there are other, more decent, women out there. But they're probably not as hot". I'll repeat that yes, you're bitching about a specific subset of the female population (and even then, I'm not sure you actually understand that subset of the female population, and you're certainly lumping together different subsets of the female population that have nothing to do with each other), but you're just flat-out wrong when you declare that somehow the rest of the female population (which is, let us be clear, not a smaller part than the equivalent rest of the male population) - "decent women" - are "probably not as hot". That comment, however light-hearted it may be, very clearly denotes how ignorant you are of women - and, basically, of society (apparently beyond your circle of acquaintances). No, decent and intelligent women are not "less hot".
TL;DR: a sexist user is unhappy about the denunciation of patriarchal structures and lets his biases completely distort his view of women, men, and the relations between women and men. Did someone just post a feminist deconstruction of a Teamliquid user? Lol.. I stopped reading after the first line. Is it actually worth going through for the lols or is it the typical histrionic ranting? Please, the least you can do is at least make a half-hearted response rather than constantly engaging in this circle jerk with your other depressed male friends. You are only cultivating yourself if you ignore opposing opinions such as these and talking to those who are on a similar wavelength as you. While I agree with the premise that ignoring differing opinions and positions is generally wrong and narrow-minded... I have to say that nothing of value can be gained by listening to internet whiteknights do their best impersonation of a doormat as they worship the shit out of women and defend them no matter the context in hopes that their efforts will one day pay off. Some of the stuff SamsungStar says can be pretty childish sometimes, some of the stories he posts can be pretty far-fetched sometimes... but disregarding all that, I'd say his view on how the world works is far more realistic and accurate than that of these feminist men. I'd say his view on the world is pretty much a mirror of the bullshit we call out man hating feminists on. All he's doing is claiming that the other gender is untrustworthy, motivated by shallow desires and ultimately inferior based upon anecdotal evidence and broad generalisations. It's bullshit when women do it about men and it's bullshit when men do it about women because the only real pattern that can be drawn is that some people are assholes. In this case SamsungStar with his "lol I didn't read your long post cause I'm too cool" is an asshole but let's avoid his mistake and not extrapolate that to all men. Don't call me an asshole for having opposing views. I've responded to dozens of other arguments in this thread already. I'm not going to waste time on a long post of canned arguments. And at what point did I ever say women were inferior? I've been saying the exact opposite, namely that they are superior and are outmaneuvering men in modern day relationships. In this case, you have no idea what you're talking about, and your last line just makes you seem spiteful. Then again, it's Kwark, so pettiness is to be expected. Shira: You referenced Schopenhauer and said you're currently in a MM relationship because you don't think it's possible to form an emotional relationship with women and you're criticizing my views on women? .... I'm calling you an asshole for being an asshole. If you don't want to respond to a big post someone put a lot of effort into then just don't respond to it. Saying you didn't read it then dismissing it as a histrionic rant is an asshole move. Stop being an asshole. And claiming that women exploit and abuse men is part of your "women are bad" theory which I summed up as inferior. Your refutation of "technically I think they're superior because they exploit and abuse men" is meaningless semantics given the wider bitching about women that you do. It'd be like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil because of domestic violence and then when called out as sexist claiming "technically I wasn't sexist because I claimed men are stronger which is a good thing". Okay, so to you asking a question is making a statement? And saying something is exploitative and abusive means it's inferior? Like how America is inferior to Kuwait. Right? And it's meaningless semantics to say men should engage in counter-strategies to deal with the female offensive because I go on to detail how they are offensive. Wait, no it's not. It makes total sense. You're just too busy trying to fit me into the misogynist box to actually read anything that's been said. It's absolutely NOT like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil. What it is, is a man stating there are major social trends at work in Western society that are pushing gender biases in favor of women. Now I know you're a hardcore white knight, but that doesn't give you the privilege of forcing your agenda on me and drawing ridiculous comparisons. Which is all you've been doing so far. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in a less prejudiced way, and you'd see that I never once claimed all women were evil. I \also already openly stated that my experiences are only with a certain subset of women, that I am personally drawn to fucked up women because of my own idiosyncrasies, and that I don't hate women as a gender, but rather the horribly distorted views on relationships and monogamy that Western culture has produced, the blame for which lies on society as a whole, not one gender. And just as a tip, you and that other guy should both learn that starting your posts with insults rarely generates a respectful response. And it's really not the respondent who's being an asshole when he does. Quark gets passionate at times, but it's usually better to just cut him some slack. In this case, though, I do think he's gone a bit too far. His whole argument is essentially an extended ad hominem (SamsungStar is misogynist, ergo his points are invalid) built on a strawman (SamsungStar's points imply misogyny even if they don't explictly state it). It would be much better if he actually addressed things in a rational fashion. I'm not usually one to get into it like this, but, Kwark is right to call some of this out. Some of these opinions are getting past the point of being healthy. A lot of what Samsung has said is purely empirical rationalizations that turn into blatant generalizations. To be honest, he and and some of the other guys in here have completely ridiculous views of women; the views of men that crazy cat ladies have except in a gender 180. Some of the people in here are being incosistent, referencing Romanticist philosophy to justify actions that have little to do with that thought, and while Romanticists are important to how people view the moden world, their faults seem to be disregarded because they conviently support some people's views in here. They blindly follow while saying everyone else is merely blindly following. Yes, Kwark's argument is fallacious, but even if his logic is bad, his intuition into seeing B.S. is definitely there. Yes, this thread has a purpose, and I've enjoyed reading a lot of these stories and being thankful they didn't happen to me; however, this thread is going to devolve into bitter people spewing hate if we don't check how much bitterness we allow to permeate this thread outside of the stories.
That's a fair point. I'll agree the discussion has gotten off track a bit, partially due to me. My bad.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
Eh, the silly thing is I do kinda have a story to tell, although it's not directly related to the breakup.
Was at university, met some guy, super cute, out clubbing, he was from a university maybe 100-150 miles away, so not too far. Anyway, we ended up dating, we visited each other at university, visited each other at our hometowns, etc. Seems we both fell head over heels for each other (from what I could tell). We were only together for ~6 months, but then one day he completely stopped returning my calls and texts. Obviously I was cut up, kept trying like a dick, but he never replied.
Anyway, that's all fine and normal, so gradually I forgot about him. About a year later, I got a call from his mobile number. I answered with great trepidation. It was one of his girlie friends... who told me that he had died in a car crash. And that she'd be there to talk if I needed her or something. About a week later, I got another call, saying that I should send flowers for his funeral. There was one other call I can't remember, similar shit to that.
In any case, given I knew where he lived, what uni he went to etc., I researched it - no car crash, no death mentioned anywhere in local papers, the uni site. It was all bollocks. To this day I have no idea what the intention of it was.
|
On February 20 2013 01:47 SamsungStar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:33 levelping wrote:Well Samsung, I'm not quite sure to make of your rather aggrieved sounding response. I certainly wasn't implying you wanted a domestic servant, nor literally wanted a woman that only stays in the kitchen. I have looked at your posts in here, and below is what I am responding to: This is my problem with feminism. It has nothing to do with equality anymore, and everything to do with just outright favoritism. In 21st century America, in the Millenial generation, women have a ridiculous advantage. I, for one, am moving to another country where the culture isn't quite as poisonous towards me.
What I will say, as a caveat, is that I have only ever had relationships with attractive, fit women. I'm sorry, but I've just never been able to get myself to date a less attractive woman. Now, that being said, I think I am doing the male equivalent of girls who only date bad-boys. Because the majority of good looking girls tend to have bad habits. Why? Because they are allowed to get away with it. Therefore, they learn by experience or from their mothers that they can walk all over men. So, I am probably just bitching about a specific subset of the female population when there are other, more decent, women out there. But they're probably not as hot .
I guess this is just the way the game is played. My plan, as I said earlier, is to take my high social and material currency, take it to a less competitive market (Asia), and hook up with a more traditional girl who is mega hot but comes without the baggage of American women. The majority of my guy friends who have done this exact thing seem WAY happier than my friends who have stuck with American girls. And ALL of these guys were great at getting dates/hooking up with women in the states. They're not pasty-faced neckbeards who go to Asia to become English teachers. They're corporate execs, white-collar professionals, lawyers, businessmen, etc. Only two of them married American girls. One of them is an alcoholic now. The other abuses pharmaceuticals. The ones who married foreign girls have children, got a little fatter, and always have a smile on their face and a joke to tell. I am humoured by your idea that (a) the Asian market is less competitive (seeing as China and India, the two most populous Asian countries have a shortage of women and arranged marriages respectively), (b) Asian women are more traditional (which as a very very broad brush might be true, if you don't mind dating people from villages. In most of the economically advanced cities, I assure you that the women you find probably don't fit your conception of "traditional), and (c) that your "high social and material currency" will assuredly net you these "mega-hot" "traditional" Asian women that do not have baggage of American girls. I hope you can see that in these short paragraphs I have quoted, you have made very wide generalisations about women in general and Asian women in particular. I did make generalizations. How exactly would I be able to talk in specifics when speaking about cultures and gender norms of behavior? Also, do a quick comparison of divorce laws and rulings in China and America, and I think you'll quickly see why I am not interested in tying the knot in America. Look at child custody rulings. There is a clear argument for why I'd find American culture poisonous to married men. I do think the Asian market is less competitive. Even in the first-tier cities of China, the vast majority are working with an income level that doesn't even begin to come close. I'm not sure why you'd try to argue this. But I'm not saying I'm going there to buy a wife. Rather, it's just an environment which I'd have a higher statistical chance of finding what I want, which is a hot atheist Chinese wife who if she leaves won't be taking half my shit and my kids with her.
Well the thing is your generalisations aren't particularly accurate. The notion of the "Traditional Chinese Bride" for example, is likely to go out of the window once you hang around the new educated generation for a significant amount of time (which I assume is your demographic). I assure you that in the event of a divorce the average Chinese woman will fight tooth and claw for what she feels she deserves (granted whether or not the law is in her favour is a separate question).
You mention that the Asian market is less competitive, and appear to draw this conclusion by the lower income level. But that seems to be premised on a shaky argument that having more income makes your chances in the dating argument better. If you are indeed planning on waving around your presumably US-level income as your main draw, then I fear that you are highly likely to end up attracting the materialistic and money hungry women that you despise.
But since you mention that you aren't buying a wife, then I am confused why you raised the issue of income level at all. So what makes you more competitive (and your higher statistical chance) in the Asian market then? Surely it's not the well documented gender imbalance in China, which will be making you compete with millions of other single Chinese men.
And finally as to the law. I would caution you on accepting what you see on the internet as authoritative of a legal system that is codified in a foreign language. You're going into an unfamiliar country and the lady you marry there will have far better connections as well as an understanding of the law and realities of the country. If anything you'll be disadvantaged, being the foreigner. As for the substantive law, a quick google suggest that a draw for you is probably the new (ish) ruling on the splitting of matrimonial assets. Which (merits aside) does seem to be in your interests. But seeing as this law is already generating a healthy amount of controversy, are you sure that it is going to be in force for the entire length of your marriage? Laws change, and I think that as Chinese women get more and more educated, it is inevitable that they begin to ask for more rights, and you can bet they will be taking the west as a role model.
|
On February 20 2013 01:57 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2013 08:49 Shelke14 wrote:
haha! you are right! It was the wrong person.. fuck, sorry. My bad!
Dumping on birthday..... thats is fucked up. My buddy just dumped his gf of 5 years on V-day. Some years ago I dumped a guy a week or something before Valentine's Day. He was head over heels for me, but although he was the loveliest person ever, he was just too "nice", he'd always agree with me when I was wrong. I got the sense that he would do something big for Valentine's Day, and I felt bad because I knew it would be big, so it made me end the relationship (it was hard, because he was so nice). I found out pretty soon after from his best friend that he'd been planning to buy tickets to Paris + hotel and shit. So thankfully I did the right thing, and saved him a shitload of money. Not a terrible story at all, just this comment reminded me of it.
You saved him considerable grief, so cheers to that haha.
I suppose a breakup can never really be "happy," but it definitely can be a lot less miserable.
|
On February 20 2013 02:15 levelping wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:47 SamsungStar wrote:On February 20 2013 01:33 levelping wrote:Well Samsung, I'm not quite sure to make of your rather aggrieved sounding response. I certainly wasn't implying you wanted a domestic servant, nor literally wanted a woman that only stays in the kitchen. I have looked at your posts in here, and below is what I am responding to: This is my problem with feminism. It has nothing to do with equality anymore, and everything to do with just outright favoritism. In 21st century America, in the Millenial generation, women have a ridiculous advantage. I, for one, am moving to another country where the culture isn't quite as poisonous towards me.
What I will say, as a caveat, is that I have only ever had relationships with attractive, fit women. I'm sorry, but I've just never been able to get myself to date a less attractive woman. Now, that being said, I think I am doing the male equivalent of girls who only date bad-boys. Because the majority of good looking girls tend to have bad habits. Why? Because they are allowed to get away with it. Therefore, they learn by experience or from their mothers that they can walk all over men. So, I am probably just bitching about a specific subset of the female population when there are other, more decent, women out there. But they're probably not as hot .
I guess this is just the way the game is played. My plan, as I said earlier, is to take my high social and material currency, take it to a less competitive market (Asia), and hook up with a more traditional girl who is mega hot but comes without the baggage of American women. The majority of my guy friends who have done this exact thing seem WAY happier than my friends who have stuck with American girls. And ALL of these guys were great at getting dates/hooking up with women in the states. They're not pasty-faced neckbeards who go to Asia to become English teachers. They're corporate execs, white-collar professionals, lawyers, businessmen, etc. Only two of them married American girls. One of them is an alcoholic now. The other abuses pharmaceuticals. The ones who married foreign girls have children, got a little fatter, and always have a smile on their face and a joke to tell. I am humoured by your idea that (a) the Asian market is less competitive (seeing as China and India, the two most populous Asian countries have a shortage of women and arranged marriages respectively), (b) Asian women are more traditional (which as a very very broad brush might be true, if you don't mind dating people from villages. In most of the economically advanced cities, I assure you that the women you find probably don't fit your conception of "traditional), and (c) that your "high social and material currency" will assuredly net you these "mega-hot" "traditional" Asian women that do not have baggage of American girls. I hope you can see that in these short paragraphs I have quoted, you have made very wide generalisations about women in general and Asian women in particular. I did make generalizations. How exactly would I be able to talk in specifics when speaking about cultures and gender norms of behavior? Also, do a quick comparison of divorce laws and rulings in China and America, and I think you'll quickly see why I am not interested in tying the knot in America. Look at child custody rulings. There is a clear argument for why I'd find American culture poisonous to married men. I do think the Asian market is less competitive. Even in the first-tier cities of China, the vast majority are working with an income level that doesn't even begin to come close. I'm not sure why you'd try to argue this. But I'm not saying I'm going there to buy a wife. Rather, it's just an environment which I'd have a higher statistical chance of finding what I want, which is a hot atheist Chinese wife who if she leaves won't be taking half my shit and my kids with her. Well the thing is your generalisations aren't particularly accurate. The notion of the "Traditional Chinese Bride" for example, is likely to go out of the window once you hang around the new educated generation for a significant amount of time (which I assume is your demographic). I assure you that in the event of a divorce the average Chinese woman will fight tooth and claw for what she feels she deserves (granted whether or not the law is in her favour is a separate question). You mention that the Asian market is less competitive, and appear to draw this conclusion by the lower income level. But that seems to be premised on a shaky argument that having more income makes your chances in the dating argument better. If you are indeed planning on waving around your presumably US-level income as your main draw, then I fear that you are highly likely to end up attracting the materialistic and money hungry women that you despise. But since you mention that you aren't buying a wife, then I am confused why you raised the issue of income level at all. So what makes you more competitive (and your higher statistical chance) in the Asian market then? Surely it's not the well documented gender imbalance in China, which will be making you compete with millions of other single Chinese men. And finally as to the law. I would caution you on accepting what you see on the internet as authoritative of a legal system that is codified in a foreign language. You're going into an unfamiliar country and the lady you marry there will have far better connections as well as an understanding of the law and realities of the country. If anything you'll be disadvantaged, being the foreigner. As for the substantive law, a quick google suggest that a draw for you is probably the new (ish) ruling on the splitting of matrimonial assets. Which (merits aside) does seem to be in your interests. But seeing as this law is already generating a healthy amount of controversy, are you sure that it is going to be in force for the entire length of your marriage? Laws change, and I think that as Chinese women get more and more educated, it is inevitable that they begin to ask for more rights, and you can bet they will be taking the west as a role model.
These are some great points. Thank you for sharing. Although, I would argue that Taiwan's court system still vastly favors men and that is a developed nation with strong ties to the USA, so I have doubts about how quickly the legal environment in China would change.
And as ugly as it is to say, there is still a significant cultural, economic, and social advantage to being born in America, as perceived by mainland women.
Lastly, I think Shady might be the one who finds gold-diggers distasteful. I don't have a problem with them at all. Their way of thinking makes sense to me. I would much rather have a woman leave me for a man with a bigger bank account than a man who made them "feel something." Money is quantifiable. Feelings are not. Therefore, to me the woman who operates based on feelings is vastly more unstable than a woman who operates on money. And what I prefer is stability.
|
On February 20 2013 02:08 marvellosity wrote:
Eh, the silly thing is I do kinda have a story to tell, although it's not directly related to the breakup.
Was at university, met some guy, super cute, out clubbing, he was from a university maybe 100-150 miles away, so not too far. Anyway, we ended up dating, we visited each other at university, visited each other at our hometowns, etc. Seems we both fell head over heels for each other (from what I could tell). We were only together for ~6 months, but then one day he completely stopped returning my calls and texts. Obviously I was cut up, kept trying like a dick, but he never replied.
Anyway, that's all fine and normal, so gradually I forgot about him. About a year later, I got a call from his mobile number. I answered with great trepidation. It was one of his girlie friends... who told me that he had died in a car crash. And that she'd be there to talk if I needed her or something. About a week later, I got another call, saying that I should send flowers for his funeral. There was one other call I can't remember, similar shit to that.
In any case, given I knew where he lived, what uni he went to etc., I researched it - no car crash, no death mentioned anywhere in local papers, the uni site. It was all bollocks. To this day I have no idea what the intention of it was.
LOL this story is hilarious. Thanks for sharing. It sounds like he might have had abandonment issues and ran away because he thought you were going to slip away first. Then later he kept thinking about you so he tried to stage some dramatic scenario to see if it would evoke any feelings in you and the plan went horribly wrong. LOL. This guy sounds like a total riot tbh, just not much good as a partner. Sorry that he left you in the lurch like that.
|
On February 20 2013 01:57 marvellosity wrote:
Some years ago I dumped a guy a week or something before Valentine's Day. He was head over heels for me, but although he was the loveliest person ever, he was just too "nice", he'd always agree with me when I was wrong. I got the sense that he would do something big for Valentine's Day, and I felt bad because I knew it would be big, so it made me end the relationship (it was hard, because he was so nice). I found out pretty soon after from his best friend that he'd been planning to buy tickets to Paris + hotel and shit. So thankfully I did the right thing, and saved him a shitload of money.
Not a terrible story at all, just this comment reminded me of it.
"He agreed with you when you knew you were wrong.." what?
If you know you're wrong, why not change your stance on your own? It just sounds insane to me.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On February 20 2013 02:38 SamsungStar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 02:08 marvellosity wrote:
Eh, the silly thing is I do kinda have a story to tell, although it's not directly related to the breakup.
Was at university, met some guy, super cute, out clubbing, he was from a university maybe 100-150 miles away, so not too far. Anyway, we ended up dating, we visited each other at university, visited each other at our hometowns, etc. Seems we both fell head over heels for each other (from what I could tell). We were only together for ~6 months, but then one day he completely stopped returning my calls and texts. Obviously I was cut up, kept trying like a dick, but he never replied.
Anyway, that's all fine and normal, so gradually I forgot about him. About a year later, I got a call from his mobile number. I answered with great trepidation. It was one of his girlie friends... who told me that he had died in a car crash. And that she'd be there to talk if I needed her or something. About a week later, I got another call, saying that I should send flowers for his funeral. There was one other call I can't remember, similar shit to that.
In any case, given I knew where he lived, what uni he went to etc., I researched it - no car crash, no death mentioned anywhere in local papers, the uni site. It was all bollocks. To this day I have no idea what the intention of it was. LOL this story is hilarious. Thanks for sharing. It sounds like he might have had abandonment issues and ran away because he thought you were going to slip away first. Then later he kept thinking about you so he tried to stage some dramatic scenario to see if it would evoke any feelings in you and the plan went horribly wrong. LOL. This guy sounds like a total riot tbh, just not much good as a partner. Sorry that he left you in the lurch like that.
eh. I'd never thought about it like that. Thanks for the (possible) insight 
It was 6-7 years ago, so it's all water under the bridge. It was all just so bizarro.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On February 20 2013 02:41 SkytoM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:57 marvellosity wrote:
Some years ago I dumped a guy a week or something before Valentine's Day. He was head over heels for me, but although he was the loveliest person ever, he was just too "nice", he'd always agree with me when I was wrong. I got the sense that he would do something big for Valentine's Day, and I felt bad because I knew it would be big, so it made me end the relationship (it was hard, because he was so nice). I found out pretty soon after from his best friend that he'd been planning to buy tickets to Paris + hotel and shit. So thankfully I did the right thing, and saved him a shitload of money.
Not a terrible story at all, just this comment reminded me of it. "He agreed with you when you knew you were wrong.." what? If you know you're wrong, why not change your stance on your own? It just sounds insane to me.
Oh. Didn't realise this would cause confusion. Like, I like my partners to be feisty to an extent. And as lovely as he was, he'd just always agree with me. So sometimes I'd just say things that I didn't believe or were evidently incorrect to see if he'd pull me up on it, and he never did. It was basically at that stage I knew I had to end it.
|
On February 20 2013 01:26 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 16:12 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 16:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 15:56 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 15:47 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 19 2013 15:09 Shiragaku wrote:On February 19 2013 13:57 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 11:57 Shady Sands wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 19 2013 11:52 kwizach wrote:
SamsungStar, no offense but your prejudices towards the opposite sex permeate almost all of your posts.
No, what you call "female sexual empowerment" is not about women having a "free license to act without morals or conscience", it's about women being free to do what they want with their bodies without society condemning them for it on the basis of them being women and not men. It's about getting rid of slut-shaming. There is nothing morally wrong about having frequently different sexual partners as long as you're engaging in consensual sex and not taking advantage of the other person, and there should be no difference made between men and women on this matter. Nobody is saying that what is considered to be morally wrong for men (lying/deceiving for sex, abusing a position of power for sex, etc.) shouldn't be morally wrong for women. The point is that what isn't considered morally wrong for men shouldn't be considered morally wrong for women just because they're women.
You wrote "all I ever hear women say about decent men is "yeah... he's nice, but he's kind of boring :\." Then they go right back out to find a bad boy". This is such a ridiculous, caricatural statement that I genuinely wonder if you believe it yourself. If you do, my advice to you is to meet more women, or at least meet women from outside the little bubble you live in. No, women won't say about nice men that they're boring... unless they're boring - people of both sexes can be boring, and even then, it is an eminently subjective judgment. There's nothing about being nice that implies being boring. You can, however, be boring by never challenging/surprising/entertaining the person you're with. And even then, again, some people won't necessarily find you boring. If you actually think that women will "go [...] find a bad boy" because "nice guys are boring", you don't know women, and you probably don't know men either. Women go for guys that they don't find boring, just like men go for women that they don't find boring.
When you write, "this is no more than a feeble counterpunch to the massive amounts of man-hating women engage in at every level of discourse in society", my reply to you is that the only reason you think women are engaged in "massive amounts of man-hating" is that your sexist beliefs are making you both falsely interpret the denunciation of the patriarchal components of our society as "man-hating", and erroneously project over the entirety of the female population the actual sexism that can be found in a small portion of the said population - and their sexism is only a reflection of your own sexist beliefs, which are certainly not held by a smaller portion of the male population.
Finally, you write "What I will say, as a caveat, is that I have only ever had relationships with attractive, fit women. I'm sorry, but I've just never been able to get myself to date a less attractive woman. [...] So, I am probably just bitching about a specific subset of the female population when there are other, more decent, women out there. But they're probably not as hot". I'll repeat that yes, you're bitching about a specific subset of the female population (and even then, I'm not sure you actually understand that subset of the female population, and you're certainly lumping together different subsets of the female population that have nothing to do with each other), but you're just flat-out wrong when you declare that somehow the rest of the female population (which is, let us be clear, not a smaller part than the equivalent rest of the male population) - "decent women" - are "probably not as hot". That comment, however light-hearted it may be, very clearly denotes how ignorant you are of women - and, basically, of society (apparently beyond your circle of acquaintances). No, decent and intelligent women are not "less hot".
TL;DR: a sexist user is unhappy about the denunciation of patriarchal structures and lets his biases completely distort his view of women, men, and the relations between women and men. Did someone just post a feminist deconstruction of a Teamliquid user? Lol.. I stopped reading after the first line. Is it actually worth going through for the lols or is it the typical histrionic ranting? Please, the least you can do is at least make a half-hearted response rather than constantly engaging in this circle jerk with your other depressed male friends. You are only cultivating yourself if you ignore opposing opinions such as these and talking to those who are on a similar wavelength as you. While I agree with the premise that ignoring differing opinions and positions is generally wrong and narrow-minded... I have to say that nothing of value can be gained by listening to internet whiteknights do their best impersonation of a doormat as they worship the shit out of women and defend them no matter the context in hopes that their efforts will one day pay off. Some of the stuff SamsungStar says can be pretty childish sometimes, some of the stories he posts can be pretty far-fetched sometimes... but disregarding all that, I'd say his view on how the world works is far more realistic and accurate than that of these feminist men. I'd say his view on the world is pretty much a mirror of the bullshit we call out man hating feminists on. All he's doing is claiming that the other gender is untrustworthy, motivated by shallow desires and ultimately inferior based upon anecdotal evidence and broad generalisations. It's bullshit when women do it about men and it's bullshit when men do it about women because the only real pattern that can be drawn is that some people are assholes. In this case SamsungStar with his "lol I didn't read your long post cause I'm too cool" is an asshole but let's avoid his mistake and not extrapolate that to all men. Don't call me an asshole for having opposing views. I've responded to dozens of other arguments in this thread already. I'm not going to waste time on a long post of canned arguments. And at what point did I ever say women were inferior? I've been saying the exact opposite, namely that they are superior and are outmaneuvering men in modern day relationships. In this case, you have no idea what you're talking about, and your last line just makes you seem spiteful. Then again, it's Kwark, so pettiness is to be expected. Shira: You referenced Schopenhauer and said you're currently in a MM relationship because you don't think it's possible to form an emotional relationship with women and you're criticizing my views on women? .... I'm calling you an asshole for being an asshole. If you don't want to respond to a big post someone put a lot of effort into then just don't respond to it. Saying you didn't read it then dismissing it as a histrionic rant is an asshole move. Stop being an asshole. And claiming that women exploit and abuse men is part of your "women are bad" theory which I summed up as inferior. Your refutation of "technically I think they're superior because they exploit and abuse men" is meaningless semantics given the wider bitching about women that you do. It'd be like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil because of domestic violence and then when called out as sexist claiming "technically I wasn't sexist because I claimed men are stronger which is a good thing". Okay, so to you asking a question is making a statement? And saying something is exploitative and abusive means it's inferior? Like how America is inferior to Kuwait. Right? And it's meaningless semantics to say men should engage in counter-strategies to deal with the female offensive because I go on to detail how they are offensive. Wait, no it's not. It makes total sense. You're just too busy trying to fit me into the misogynist box to actually read anything that's been said. It's absolutely NOT like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil. What it is, is a man stating there are major social trends at work in Western society that are pushing gender biases in favor of women. Now I know you're a hardcore white knight, but that doesn't give you the privilege of forcing your agenda on me and drawing ridiculous comparisons. Which is all you've been doing so far. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in a less prejudiced way, and you'd see that I never once claimed all women were evil. I \also already openly stated that my experiences are only with a certain subset of women, that I am personally drawn to fucked up women because of my own idiosyncrasies, and that I don't hate women as a gender, but rather the horribly distorted views on relationships and monogamy that Western culture has produced, the blame for which lies on society as a whole, not one gender. And just as a tip, you and that other guy should both learn that starting your posts with insults rarely generates a respectful response. And it's really not the respondent who's being an asshole when he does. SamsungStar's points imply misogyny even if they don't explictly state it.
When you state :
On February 18 2013 08:26 SamsungStar wrote:
women are opportunistic, heartless sharks. That's what I've been trying to tell other people in this thread
including all women,
you have to be a good lawyer to claim you didn't explicitly state misogyny, or that
On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:
I never once claimed all women were evil.
|
On February 20 2013 02:56 Thurken wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:26 Shady Sands wrote:On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 16:12 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 16:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 15:56 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 15:47 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 19 2013 15:09 Shiragaku wrote:On February 19 2013 13:57 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 11:57 Shady Sands wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 19 2013 11:52 kwizach wrote:
SamsungStar, no offense but your prejudices towards the opposite sex permeate almost all of your posts.
No, what you call "female sexual empowerment" is not about women having a "free license to act without morals or conscience", it's about women being free to do what they want with their bodies without society condemning them for it on the basis of them being women and not men. It's about getting rid of slut-shaming. There is nothing morally wrong about having frequently different sexual partners as long as you're engaging in consensual sex and not taking advantage of the other person, and there should be no difference made between men and women on this matter. Nobody is saying that what is considered to be morally wrong for men (lying/deceiving for sex, abusing a position of power for sex, etc.) shouldn't be morally wrong for women. The point is that what isn't considered morally wrong for men shouldn't be considered morally wrong for women just because they're women.
You wrote "all I ever hear women say about decent men is "yeah... he's nice, but he's kind of boring :\." Then they go right back out to find a bad boy". This is such a ridiculous, caricatural statement that I genuinely wonder if you believe it yourself. If you do, my advice to you is to meet more women, or at least meet women from outside the little bubble you live in. No, women won't say about nice men that they're boring... unless they're boring - people of both sexes can be boring, and even then, it is an eminently subjective judgment. There's nothing about being nice that implies being boring. You can, however, be boring by never challenging/surprising/entertaining the person you're with. And even then, again, some people won't necessarily find you boring. If you actually think that women will "go [...] find a bad boy" because "nice guys are boring", you don't know women, and you probably don't know men either. Women go for guys that they don't find boring, just like men go for women that they don't find boring.
When you write, "this is no more than a feeble counterpunch to the massive amounts of man-hating women engage in at every level of discourse in society", my reply to you is that the only reason you think women are engaged in "massive amounts of man-hating" is that your sexist beliefs are making you both falsely interpret the denunciation of the patriarchal components of our society as "man-hating", and erroneously project over the entirety of the female population the actual sexism that can be found in a small portion of the said population - and their sexism is only a reflection of your own sexist beliefs, which are certainly not held by a smaller portion of the male population.
Finally, you write "What I will say, as a caveat, is that I have only ever had relationships with attractive, fit women. I'm sorry, but I've just never been able to get myself to date a less attractive woman. [...] So, I am probably just bitching about a specific subset of the female population when there are other, more decent, women out there. But they're probably not as hot". I'll repeat that yes, you're bitching about a specific subset of the female population (and even then, I'm not sure you actually understand that subset of the female population, and you're certainly lumping together different subsets of the female population that have nothing to do with each other), but you're just flat-out wrong when you declare that somehow the rest of the female population (which is, let us be clear, not a smaller part than the equivalent rest of the male population) - "decent women" - are "probably not as hot". That comment, however light-hearted it may be, very clearly denotes how ignorant you are of women - and, basically, of society (apparently beyond your circle of acquaintances). No, decent and intelligent women are not "less hot".
TL;DR: a sexist user is unhappy about the denunciation of patriarchal structures and lets his biases completely distort his view of women, men, and the relations between women and men. Did someone just post a feminist deconstruction of a Teamliquid user? Lol.. I stopped reading after the first line. Is it actually worth going through for the lols or is it the typical histrionic ranting? Please, the least you can do is at least make a half-hearted response rather than constantly engaging in this circle jerk with your other depressed male friends. You are only cultivating yourself if you ignore opposing opinions such as these and talking to those who are on a similar wavelength as you. While I agree with the premise that ignoring differing opinions and positions is generally wrong and narrow-minded... I have to say that nothing of value can be gained by listening to internet whiteknights do their best impersonation of a doormat as they worship the shit out of women and defend them no matter the context in hopes that their efforts will one day pay off. Some of the stuff SamsungStar says can be pretty childish sometimes, some of the stories he posts can be pretty far-fetched sometimes... but disregarding all that, I'd say his view on how the world works is far more realistic and accurate than that of these feminist men. I'd say his view on the world is pretty much a mirror of the bullshit we call out man hating feminists on. All he's doing is claiming that the other gender is untrustworthy, motivated by shallow desires and ultimately inferior based upon anecdotal evidence and broad generalisations. It's bullshit when women do it about men and it's bullshit when men do it about women because the only real pattern that can be drawn is that some people are assholes. In this case SamsungStar with his "lol I didn't read your long post cause I'm too cool" is an asshole but let's avoid his mistake and not extrapolate that to all men. Don't call me an asshole for having opposing views. I've responded to dozens of other arguments in this thread already. I'm not going to waste time on a long post of canned arguments. And at what point did I ever say women were inferior? I've been saying the exact opposite, namely that they are superior and are outmaneuvering men in modern day relationships. In this case, you have no idea what you're talking about, and your last line just makes you seem spiteful. Then again, it's Kwark, so pettiness is to be expected. Shira: You referenced Schopenhauer and said you're currently in a MM relationship because you don't think it's possible to form an emotional relationship with women and you're criticizing my views on women? .... I'm calling you an asshole for being an asshole. If you don't want to respond to a big post someone put a lot of effort into then just don't respond to it. Saying you didn't read it then dismissing it as a histrionic rant is an asshole move. Stop being an asshole. And claiming that women exploit and abuse men is part of your "women are bad" theory which I summed up as inferior. Your refutation of "technically I think they're superior because they exploit and abuse men" is meaningless semantics given the wider bitching about women that you do. It'd be like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil because of domestic violence and then when called out as sexist claiming "technically I wasn't sexist because I claimed men are stronger which is a good thing". Okay, so to you asking a question is making a statement? And saying something is exploitative and abusive means it's inferior? Like how America is inferior to Kuwait. Right? And it's meaningless semantics to say men should engage in counter-strategies to deal with the female offensive because I go on to detail how they are offensive. Wait, no it's not. It makes total sense. You're just too busy trying to fit me into the misogynist box to actually read anything that's been said. It's absolutely NOT like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil. What it is, is a man stating there are major social trends at work in Western society that are pushing gender biases in favor of women. Now I know you're a hardcore white knight, but that doesn't give you the privilege of forcing your agenda on me and drawing ridiculous comparisons. Which is all you've been doing so far. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in a less prejudiced way, and you'd see that I never once claimed all women were evil. I \also already openly stated that my experiences are only with a certain subset of women, that I am personally drawn to fucked up women because of my own idiosyncrasies, and that I don't hate women as a gender, but rather the horribly distorted views on relationships and monogamy that Western culture has produced, the blame for which lies on society as a whole, not one gender. And just as a tip, you and that other guy should both learn that starting your posts with insults rarely generates a respectful response. And it's really not the respondent who's being an asshole when he does. SamsungStar's points imply misogyny even if they don't explictly state it. When you state : Show nested quote +On February 18 2013 08:26 SamsungStar wrote:
women are opportunistic, heartless sharks. That's what I've been trying to tell other people in this thread including all women, you have to be a good lawyer to claim you didn't explicitly state misogyny, or that Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:
I never once claimed all women were evil.
I think he has apologized for being out of line (scroll up) so no need to belabor the point. Let's get back to the break up stories.
|
On February 20 2013 02:56 Thurken wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:26 Shady Sands wrote:On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 16:12 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 16:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 15:56 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 15:47 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 19 2013 15:09 Shiragaku wrote:On February 19 2013 13:57 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 11:57 Shady Sands wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 19 2013 11:52 kwizach wrote:
SamsungStar, no offense but your prejudices towards the opposite sex permeate almost all of your posts.
No, what you call "female sexual empowerment" is not about women having a "free license to act without morals or conscience", it's about women being free to do what they want with their bodies without society condemning them for it on the basis of them being women and not men. It's about getting rid of slut-shaming. There is nothing morally wrong about having frequently different sexual partners as long as you're engaging in consensual sex and not taking advantage of the other person, and there should be no difference made between men and women on this matter. Nobody is saying that what is considered to be morally wrong for men (lying/deceiving for sex, abusing a position of power for sex, etc.) shouldn't be morally wrong for women. The point is that what isn't considered morally wrong for men shouldn't be considered morally wrong for women just because they're women.
You wrote "all I ever hear women say about decent men is "yeah... he's nice, but he's kind of boring :\." Then they go right back out to find a bad boy". This is such a ridiculous, caricatural statement that I genuinely wonder if you believe it yourself. If you do, my advice to you is to meet more women, or at least meet women from outside the little bubble you live in. No, women won't say about nice men that they're boring... unless they're boring - people of both sexes can be boring, and even then, it is an eminently subjective judgment. There's nothing about being nice that implies being boring. You can, however, be boring by never challenging/surprising/entertaining the person you're with. And even then, again, some people won't necessarily find you boring. If you actually think that women will "go [...] find a bad boy" because "nice guys are boring", you don't know women, and you probably don't know men either. Women go for guys that they don't find boring, just like men go for women that they don't find boring.
When you write, "this is no more than a feeble counterpunch to the massive amounts of man-hating women engage in at every level of discourse in society", my reply to you is that the only reason you think women are engaged in "massive amounts of man-hating" is that your sexist beliefs are making you both falsely interpret the denunciation of the patriarchal components of our society as "man-hating", and erroneously project over the entirety of the female population the actual sexism that can be found in a small portion of the said population - and their sexism is only a reflection of your own sexist beliefs, which are certainly not held by a smaller portion of the male population.
Finally, you write "What I will say, as a caveat, is that I have only ever had relationships with attractive, fit women. I'm sorry, but I've just never been able to get myself to date a less attractive woman. [...] So, I am probably just bitching about a specific subset of the female population when there are other, more decent, women out there. But they're probably not as hot". I'll repeat that yes, you're bitching about a specific subset of the female population (and even then, I'm not sure you actually understand that subset of the female population, and you're certainly lumping together different subsets of the female population that have nothing to do with each other), but you're just flat-out wrong when you declare that somehow the rest of the female population (which is, let us be clear, not a smaller part than the equivalent rest of the male population) - "decent women" - are "probably not as hot". That comment, however light-hearted it may be, very clearly denotes how ignorant you are of women - and, basically, of society (apparently beyond your circle of acquaintances). No, decent and intelligent women are not "less hot".
TL;DR: a sexist user is unhappy about the denunciation of patriarchal structures and lets his biases completely distort his view of women, men, and the relations between women and men. Did someone just post a feminist deconstruction of a Teamliquid user? Lol.. I stopped reading after the first line. Is it actually worth going through for the lols or is it the typical histrionic ranting? Please, the least you can do is at least make a half-hearted response rather than constantly engaging in this circle jerk with your other depressed male friends. You are only cultivating yourself if you ignore opposing opinions such as these and talking to those who are on a similar wavelength as you. While I agree with the premise that ignoring differing opinions and positions is generally wrong and narrow-minded... I have to say that nothing of value can be gained by listening to internet whiteknights do their best impersonation of a doormat as they worship the shit out of women and defend them no matter the context in hopes that their efforts will one day pay off. Some of the stuff SamsungStar says can be pretty childish sometimes, some of the stories he posts can be pretty far-fetched sometimes... but disregarding all that, I'd say his view on how the world works is far more realistic and accurate than that of these feminist men. I'd say his view on the world is pretty much a mirror of the bullshit we call out man hating feminists on. All he's doing is claiming that the other gender is untrustworthy, motivated by shallow desires and ultimately inferior based upon anecdotal evidence and broad generalisations. It's bullshit when women do it about men and it's bullshit when men do it about women because the only real pattern that can be drawn is that some people are assholes. In this case SamsungStar with his "lol I didn't read your long post cause I'm too cool" is an asshole but let's avoid his mistake and not extrapolate that to all men. Don't call me an asshole for having opposing views. I've responded to dozens of other arguments in this thread already. I'm not going to waste time on a long post of canned arguments. And at what point did I ever say women were inferior? I've been saying the exact opposite, namely that they are superior and are outmaneuvering men in modern day relationships. In this case, you have no idea what you're talking about, and your last line just makes you seem spiteful. Then again, it's Kwark, so pettiness is to be expected. Shira: You referenced Schopenhauer and said you're currently in a MM relationship because you don't think it's possible to form an emotional relationship with women and you're criticizing my views on women? .... I'm calling you an asshole for being an asshole. If you don't want to respond to a big post someone put a lot of effort into then just don't respond to it. Saying you didn't read it then dismissing it as a histrionic rant is an asshole move. Stop being an asshole. And claiming that women exploit and abuse men is part of your "women are bad" theory which I summed up as inferior. Your refutation of "technically I think they're superior because they exploit and abuse men" is meaningless semantics given the wider bitching about women that you do. It'd be like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil because of domestic violence and then when called out as sexist claiming "technically I wasn't sexist because I claimed men are stronger which is a good thing". Okay, so to you asking a question is making a statement? And saying something is exploitative and abusive means it's inferior? Like how America is inferior to Kuwait. Right? And it's meaningless semantics to say men should engage in counter-strategies to deal with the female offensive because I go on to detail how they are offensive. Wait, no it's not. It makes total sense. You're just too busy trying to fit me into the misogynist box to actually read anything that's been said. It's absolutely NOT like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil. What it is, is a man stating there are major social trends at work in Western society that are pushing gender biases in favor of women. Now I know you're a hardcore white knight, but that doesn't give you the privilege of forcing your agenda on me and drawing ridiculous comparisons. Which is all you've been doing so far. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in a less prejudiced way, and you'd see that I never once claimed all women were evil. I \also already openly stated that my experiences are only with a certain subset of women, that I am personally drawn to fucked up women because of my own idiosyncrasies, and that I don't hate women as a gender, but rather the horribly distorted views on relationships and monogamy that Western culture has produced, the blame for which lies on society as a whole, not one gender. And just as a tip, you and that other guy should both learn that starting your posts with insults rarely generates a respectful response. And it's really not the respondent who's being an asshole when he does. SamsungStar's points imply misogyny even if they don't explictly state it. When you state : Show nested quote +On February 18 2013 08:26 SamsungStar wrote:
women are opportunistic, heartless sharks. That's what I've been trying to tell other people in this thread including all women, you have to be a good lawyer to claim you didn't explicitly state misogyny, or that Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:
I never once claimed all women were evil.
You seem to have missed the fact that I stated men should also be opportunistic, heartless sharks, and that it isn't evil, simply competitive. You see misogyny has to imply that I'm saying something terrible about women. When I'm not. Capitalist societies, like many of those in the West,have taught that being heartless, opportunistic sharks is the most profitable and effective way to go about life. That's pretty much the core philosophy of capitalism: rational, well-informed selfishness leads to the greatest quality of life for all. Therefore, really what I'm saying is that currently women are just playing the game better than men, and men should wake up to that fact instead of being emotional saps.
I have lamented the cruelty of such a life strategy. I have lamented the apparent irrationality that some women engage in when making these opportunistic decisions. I have lamented the legal environment which favors women in this power struggle, but at no point have I stated women are evil, inferior, etc anything that is misogynistic. Namely because I'm not a misogynist.
But yeah, levelping is right. I'm going to stop responding to these types of posts now. I've rebutted enough. Back to actual thread topic.
|
On February 20 2013 03:03 SamsungStar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 02:56 Thurken wrote:On February 20 2013 01:26 Shady Sands wrote:On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 16:12 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 16:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 15:56 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 15:47 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 19 2013 15:09 Shiragaku wrote:On February 19 2013 13:57 SamsungStar wrote:
[quote]
Lol.. I stopped reading after the first line. Is it actually worth going through for the lols or is it the typical histrionic ranting? Please, the least you can do is at least make a half-hearted response rather than constantly engaging in this circle jerk with your other depressed male friends. You are only cultivating yourself if you ignore opposing opinions such as these and talking to those who are on a similar wavelength as you. While I agree with the premise that ignoring differing opinions and positions is generally wrong and narrow-minded... I have to say that nothing of value can be gained by listening to internet whiteknights do their best impersonation of a doormat as they worship the shit out of women and defend them no matter the context in hopes that their efforts will one day pay off. Some of the stuff SamsungStar says can be pretty childish sometimes, some of the stories he posts can be pretty far-fetched sometimes... but disregarding all that, I'd say his view on how the world works is far more realistic and accurate than that of these feminist men. I'd say his view on the world is pretty much a mirror of the bullshit we call out man hating feminists on. All he's doing is claiming that the other gender is untrustworthy, motivated by shallow desires and ultimately inferior based upon anecdotal evidence and broad generalisations. It's bullshit when women do it about men and it's bullshit when men do it about women because the only real pattern that can be drawn is that some people are assholes. In this case SamsungStar with his "lol I didn't read your long post cause I'm too cool" is an asshole but let's avoid his mistake and not extrapolate that to all men. Don't call me an asshole for having opposing views. I've responded to dozens of other arguments in this thread already. I'm not going to waste time on a long post of canned arguments. And at what point did I ever say women were inferior? I've been saying the exact opposite, namely that they are superior and are outmaneuvering men in modern day relationships. In this case, you have no idea what you're talking about, and your last line just makes you seem spiteful. Then again, it's Kwark, so pettiness is to be expected. Shira: You referenced Schopenhauer and said you're currently in a MM relationship because you don't think it's possible to form an emotional relationship with women and you're criticizing my views on women? .... I'm calling you an asshole for being an asshole. If you don't want to respond to a big post someone put a lot of effort into then just don't respond to it. Saying you didn't read it then dismissing it as a histrionic rant is an asshole move. Stop being an asshole. And claiming that women exploit and abuse men is part of your "women are bad" theory which I summed up as inferior. Your refutation of "technically I think they're superior because they exploit and abuse men" is meaningless semantics given the wider bitching about women that you do. It'd be like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil because of domestic violence and then when called out as sexist claiming "technically I wasn't sexist because I claimed men are stronger which is a good thing". Okay, so to you asking a question is making a statement? And saying something is exploitative and abusive means it's inferior? Like how America is inferior to Kuwait. Right? And it's meaningless semantics to say men should engage in counter-strategies to deal with the female offensive because I go on to detail how they are offensive. Wait, no it's not. It makes total sense. You're just too busy trying to fit me into the misogynist box to actually read anything that's been said. It's absolutely NOT like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil. What it is, is a man stating there are major social trends at work in Western society that are pushing gender biases in favor of women. Now I know you're a hardcore white knight, but that doesn't give you the privilege of forcing your agenda on me and drawing ridiculous comparisons. Which is all you've been doing so far. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in a less prejudiced way, and you'd see that I never once claimed all women were evil. I \also already openly stated that my experiences are only with a certain subset of women, that I am personally drawn to fucked up women because of my own idiosyncrasies, and that I don't hate women as a gender, but rather the horribly distorted views on relationships and monogamy that Western culture has produced, the blame for which lies on society as a whole, not one gender. And just as a tip, you and that other guy should both learn that starting your posts with insults rarely generates a respectful response. And it's really not the respondent who's being an asshole when he does. SamsungStar's points imply misogyny even if they don't explictly state it. When you state : On February 18 2013 08:26 SamsungStar wrote:
women are opportunistic, heartless sharks. That's what I've been trying to tell other people in this thread including all women, you have to be a good lawyer to claim you didn't explicitly state misogyny, or that On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:
I never once claimed all women were evil. You seem to have missed the fact that I stated men should also be opportunistic, heartless sharks, and that it isn't evil, simply competitive. You see misogyny has to imply that I'm saying something terrible about women. When I'm not. Capitalist societies, like many of those in the West,have taught that being heartless, opportunistic sharks is the most profitable and effective way to go about life. That's pretty much the core philosophy of capitalism: rationale, well-informed selfishness leads to the greatest quality of life for all. I have lamented the cruelty of such a life strategy. I have lamented the apparent irrationality that some women engage in when making these opportunistic decisions. I have lamented the legal environment which favors women in this power struggle, but at no point have I stated women are evil, inferior, etc anything that is misogynistic. Namely because I'm not a misogynist.
Well put.
|
On February 19 2013 02:02 Pleiades wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2013 01:59 Garfailed wrote:
I've never had a break-up, as i've never had a girlfriend, only like, one night thingy's.
and im 18, feel kind of pathetic lol Don't worry dude, you're still young. You got several years to hit up places and talk to girls. If they reject you, you'll likely not see them again and find new ones.
Thanks for the comment 
Good to hear such a thing sometimes
|
On February 20 2013 02:49 marvellosity wrote:
Oh. Didn't realise this would cause confusion. Like, I like my partners to be feisty to an extent. And as lovely as he was, he'd just always agree with me. So sometimes I'd just say things that I didn't believe or were evidently incorrect to see if he'd pull me up on it, and he never did. It was basically at that stage I knew I had to end it.
Ahh okay. Sounds way better but still a bit like sabotage/testing. Is there not a way to handle such a thing better? Like tell him, that he agrees way too much?
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On February 20 2013 03:12 SkytoM wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 02:49 marvellosity wrote:
Oh. Didn't realise this would cause confusion. Like, I like my partners to be feisty to an extent. And as lovely as he was, he'd just always agree with me. So sometimes I'd just say things that I didn't believe or were evidently incorrect to see if he'd pull me up on it, and he never did. It was basically at that stage I knew I had to end it.
Ahh okay. Sounds way better but still a bit like sabotage/testing. Is there not a way to handle such a thing better? Like tell him, that he agrees way too much?
Maybe. He'd probably just agree with that though.
|
United States41938 Posts
On February 20 2013 03:05 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2013 03:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 20 2013 02:56 Thurken wrote:On February 20 2013 01:26 Shady Sands wrote:On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 16:12 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 16:03 SamsungStar wrote:On February 19 2013 15:56 KwarK wrote:On February 19 2013 15:47 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 19 2013 15:09 Shiragaku wrote:
[quote]
Please, the least you can do is at least make a half-hearted response rather than constantly engaging in this circle jerk with your other depressed male friends. You are only cultivating yourself if you ignore opposing opinions such as these and talking to those who are on a similar wavelength as you. While I agree with the premise that ignoring differing opinions and positions is generally wrong and narrow-minded... I have to say that nothing of value can be gained by listening to internet whiteknights do their best impersonation of a doormat as they worship the shit out of women and defend them no matter the context in hopes that their efforts will one day pay off. Some of the stuff SamsungStar says can be pretty childish sometimes, some of the stories he posts can be pretty far-fetched sometimes... but disregarding all that, I'd say his view on how the world works is far more realistic and accurate than that of these feminist men. I'd say his view on the world is pretty much a mirror of the bullshit we call out man hating feminists on. All he's doing is claiming that the other gender is untrustworthy, motivated by shallow desires and ultimately inferior based upon anecdotal evidence and broad generalisations. It's bullshit when women do it about men and it's bullshit when men do it about women because the only real pattern that can be drawn is that some people are assholes. In this case SamsungStar with his "lol I didn't read your long post cause I'm too cool" is an asshole but let's avoid his mistake and not extrapolate that to all men. Don't call me an asshole for having opposing views. I've responded to dozens of other arguments in this thread already. I'm not going to waste time on a long post of canned arguments. And at what point did I ever say women were inferior? I've been saying the exact opposite, namely that they are superior and are outmaneuvering men in modern day relationships. In this case, you have no idea what you're talking about, and your last line just makes you seem spiteful. Then again, it's Kwark, so pettiness is to be expected. Shira: You referenced Schopenhauer and said you're currently in a MM relationship because you don't think it's possible to form an emotional relationship with women and you're criticizing my views on women? .... I'm calling you an asshole for being an asshole. If you don't want to respond to a big post someone put a lot of effort into then just don't respond to it. Saying you didn't read it then dismissing it as a histrionic rant is an asshole move. Stop being an asshole. And claiming that women exploit and abuse men is part of your "women are bad" theory which I summed up as inferior. Your refutation of "technically I think they're superior because they exploit and abuse men" is meaningless semantics given the wider bitching about women that you do. It'd be like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil because of domestic violence and then when called out as sexist claiming "technically I wasn't sexist because I claimed men are stronger which is a good thing". Okay, so to you asking a question is making a statement? And saying something is exploitative and abusive means it's inferior? Like how America is inferior to Kuwait. Right? And it's meaningless semantics to say men should engage in counter-strategies to deal with the female offensive because I go on to detail how they are offensive. Wait, no it's not. It makes total sense. You're just too busy trying to fit me into the misogynist box to actually read anything that's been said. It's absolutely NOT like a feminist bitching about how all men are evil. What it is, is a man stating there are major social trends at work in Western society that are pushing gender biases in favor of women. Now I know you're a hardcore white knight, but that doesn't give you the privilege of forcing your agenda on me and drawing ridiculous comparisons. Which is all you've been doing so far. Maybe you should go back and read the thread in a less prejudiced way, and you'd see that I never once claimed all women were evil. I \also already openly stated that my experiences are only with a certain subset of women, that I am personally drawn to fucked up women because of my own idiosyncrasies, and that I don't hate women as a gender, but rather the horribly distorted views on relationships and monogamy that Western culture has produced, the blame for which lies on society as a whole, not one gender. And just as a tip, you and that other guy should both learn that starting your posts with insults rarely generates a respectful response. And it's really not the respondent who's being an asshole when he does. SamsungStar's points imply misogyny even if they don't explictly state it. When you state : On February 18 2013 08:26 SamsungStar wrote:
women are opportunistic, heartless sharks. That's what I've been trying to tell other people in this thread including all women, you have to be a good lawyer to claim you didn't explicitly state misogyny, or that On February 20 2013 01:04 SamsungStar wrote:
I never once claimed all women were evil. You seem to have missed the fact that I stated men should also be opportunistic, heartless sharks, and that it isn't evil, simply competitive. You see misogyny has to imply that I'm saying something terrible about women. When I'm not. Capitalist societies, like many of those in the West,have taught that being heartless, opportunistic sharks is the most profitable and effective way to go about life. That's pretty much the core philosophy of capitalism: rationale, well-informed selfishness leads to the greatest quality of life for all. I have lamented the cruelty of such a life strategy. I have lamented the apparent irrationality that some women engage in when making these opportunistic decisions. I have lamented the legal environment which favors women in this power struggle, but at no point have I stated women are evil, inferior, etc anything that is misogynistic. Namely because I'm not a misogynist. Well put.
Not really. Saying that all women are opportunistic, heartless sharks is misogynistic and strongly implies that they are evil (these are negative characteristics). Turning around and saying "ah yes, but then I say that all men should be just as evil to even the playing field" doesn't change the meaning of his first claim, that all women share this same group of negative characteristics. If I claimed all Jews were greedy and untrustworthy and then said that other people should also be greedy because capitalism and what is trust really anyway that wouldn't make my first claim not racist.
SamsungStar makes broad and unproven negative generalisations about groups based on a mixture of bad science, anecdotal evidence and naked prejudice, hence why he resorts to meaningless deflections such as "white knight" when called out on it.
|
oh snap kwark busts out with exactly what we're all thinking but lack the powers of articulation to express (or maybe just me). 5 stars.
|
United States7483 Posts
I once dated a girl for two weeks before I realized she was completely nuts and broke up with her. A week later she tried to run me over with her Jeep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
