|
Any PUA discussion is banned from page 42 and onwards. |
On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems. I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up.
And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age.
|
On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup.
Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex.
I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive.
It's not a fair game, never was, never will be.
|
Guys, do yourself a favor and stop measuring your self-esteem on the amount of pussy you get.
It is a zero sum game and most girls aren't worth it.
|
United States42884 Posts
On May 26 2014 08:25 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems. I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up. And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age.
You opened with "women aren't to blame... at least not individually". No shit women aren't to blame for some man shooting a bunch of people but for some reason you seem to think they might be collectively to blame? Because they didn't collectively make arrangements to ensure men like the killer got laid? Maybe they should have all drawn straws?
Could you please elaborate on what you meant by "at least not invidually" here so I can work out exactly why you think women might collectively be responsible for his actions.
You then move on to "Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled."
Well that's about a 6 on the Shauni scale already. You don't want to be on the Shauni scale. So, you think men are entitled to sex, the corollary being that you think women are obligated to give men sex.
Clearly you have some issues with women, take it up with a therapist, in the mean time try not to shoot anyone. k thx
|
United States42884 Posts
On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be.
No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit.
|
On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit.
No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap.
I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be.
I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious.
|
On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious.
You're stating your ignorance... have you never heard of a fucking gym?
|
On May 26 2014 08:40 Jormundr wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious. You're stating your ignorance... have you never heard of a fucking gym?
So you are seriously comparing going to the gym and working out maybe several times a week to simply putting on some makeup? Are you actually serious?
|
On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:25 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems. I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up. And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age. You opened with "women aren't to blame... at least not individually". No shit women aren't to blame for some man shooting a bunch of people but for some reason you seem to think they might be collectively to blame? Because they didn't collectively make arrangements to ensure men like the killer got laid? Maybe they should have all drawn straws? Could you please elaborate on what you meant by "at least not invidually" here so I can work out exactly why you think women might collectively be responsible for his actions. You then move on to "Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled." Well that's about a 6 on the Shauni scale already. You don't want to be on the Shauni scale. So, you think men are entitled to sex, the corollary being that you think women are obligated to give men sex. Clearly you have some issues with women, take it up with a therapist, in the mean time try not to shoot anyone. k thx
You're misunderstanding me, even though I have made efforts to clarify. When I say 'not individually', I mean to say that it is society, not women, that must bear responsibility. Forgive me but I'm quite certain I've gone over this more than once now.
I think men are entitled to sex, yes. Sex is a part of life, isn't it? Like social interactions, it's a pretty essential part of a healthy human life. Particularly for young men. The corollary is not that women are obligated to give men sex. But it is something that men should be getting, it is simply some men's misfortune to be born into a time that doesn't provide them with the tools to get it, and instead they end up sitting idly by in seething jealousy as the women they see as practically angelic jump from one more attractive, confident man to the next.
I can assure you I have no issues with women, but I worry very much about the men that do, but rather than simply dismissing them as hateful misogynists I just wonder if there is a cause for their issues. But hey feel free to make assumptions on my character and indeed mental health. 'k thx'
|
United States42884 Posts
On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious.
My wife spends more on makeup than I do on clothes. You have no idea how much effort women go to in order to try and achieve a physical standard set by photoshop. Men get away with looking like shit in comparison.
But you're still completely missing the point. Yes people try to make themselves appear better than they are. If I'm going out I might save a joke to appear funnier or think of something to say ahead of time to appear smarter but at no point during the saying of the joke have I fundamentally altered the gender balance of society. Makeup is no different.
|
United States42884 Posts
On May 26 2014 08:42 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems. I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up. And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age. You opened with "women aren't to blame... at least not individually". No shit women aren't to blame for some man shooting a bunch of people but for some reason you seem to think they might be collectively to blame? Because they didn't collectively make arrangements to ensure men like the killer got laid? Maybe they should have all drawn straws? Could you please elaborate on what you meant by "at least not invidually" here so I can work out exactly why you think women might collectively be responsible for his actions. You then move on to "Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled." Well that's about a 6 on the Shauni scale already. You don't want to be on the Shauni scale. So, you think men are entitled to sex, the corollary being that you think women are obligated to give men sex. Clearly you have some issues with women, take it up with a therapist, in the mean time try not to shoot anyone. k thx You're misunderstanding me, even though I have made efforts to clarify. When I say 'not individually', I mean to say that it is society, not women, that must bear responsibility. Forgive me but I'm quite certain I've gone over this more than once now. I think men are entitled to sex, yes. Sex is a part of life, isn't it? Like social interactions, it's a pretty essential part of a healthy human life. Particularly for young men. The corollary is not that women are obligated to give men sex. But it is something that men should be getting, it is simply some men's misfortune to be born into a time that doesn't provide them with the tools to get it, and instead they end up sitting idly by in seething jealousy as the women they see as practically angelic jump from one more attractive, confident man to the next. I can assure you I have no issues with women, but I worry very much about the men that do, but rather than simply dismissing them as hateful misogynists I just wonder if there is a cause for their issues. But hey feel free to make assumptions on my character and indeed mental health. 'k thx'
Okay, you seem to think this is a debate. It's not really, it's an intervention. You really need to understand this before you rape anyone. You are not entitled to sex, not from anyone. Women don't owe you sex. If you're not getting enough sex then that's not an issue with women, that's an issue with you. Your beliefs about women are frankly dangerous and the fact that you seem to not know this is even more shocking. Seek help.
|
On May 26 2014 08:44 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious. My wife spends more on makeup than I do on clothes. You have no idea how much effort women go to in order to try and achieve a physical standard set by photoshop. Men get away with looking like shit in comparison. But you're still completely missing the point. Yes people try to make themselves appear better than they are. If I'm going out I might save a joke to appear funnier or think of something to say ahead of time to appear smarter but at no point during the saying of the joke have I fundamentally altered the gender balance of society. Makeup is no different.
So you are really resorting to anecdotal evidence now? I'm sorry to say this and even at a risk of sounding rude, why would I care about what your wife does and how much money she spends on things? Are you asserting that your family's spending habits are in any way indicative of the spending habits of the general population? I mean I just don't see where you are going with this.
|
On May 26 2014 08:42 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:40 Jormundr wrote:On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious. You're stating your ignorance... have you never heard of a fucking gym? So you are seriously comparing going to the gym and working out maybe several times a week to simply putting on some makeup? Are you actually serious?
Yes? As a theatre major with a required stage makeup class, I can tell you that those two are comparable in terms of return on time invested. You're belittling a very nuanced art to the point of implying that women go to the store, buy a box simple labelled 'makeup', open the box and rub their face over the contents to magically look pretty.
|
United States42884 Posts
On May 26 2014 08:47 SlixSC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:44 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious. My wife spends more on makeup than I do on clothes. You have no idea how much effort women go to in order to try and achieve a physical standard set by photoshop. Men get away with looking like shit in comparison. But you're still completely missing the point. Yes people try to make themselves appear better than they are. If I'm going out I might save a joke to appear funnier or think of something to say ahead of time to appear smarter but at no point during the saying of the joke have I fundamentally altered the gender balance of society. Makeup is no different. So you are really resorting to anecdotal evidence now? I'm sorry to say this and even at a risk of sounding rude, why would I care about what your wife does and how much money she spends on things? Are you asserting that your family's spending habits are in any way indicative of the spending habits of the general population? I mean I just don't see where you are going with this.
I'm reasonably sure that my resort to a sample of two is infinitely more evidence than your claims which were not only nonsensical but completley unsubstantiated. Given this I am unsure exactly why you're deciding we should be attacking each other's argument based on evidence, nor why your own stance is somehow enduring this new qualifier. Is it possible you didn't think this through? Perhaps you have your own evidence which you just thought wasn't worth mentioning in your "makeup makes gender relations biased against men" whining.
|
On May 26 2014 08:46 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:42 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems. I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up. And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age. You opened with "women aren't to blame... at least not individually". No shit women aren't to blame for some man shooting a bunch of people but for some reason you seem to think they might be collectively to blame? Because they didn't collectively make arrangements to ensure men like the killer got laid? Maybe they should have all drawn straws? Could you please elaborate on what you meant by "at least not invidually" here so I can work out exactly why you think women might collectively be responsible for his actions. You then move on to "Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled." Well that's about a 6 on the Shauni scale already. You don't want to be on the Shauni scale. So, you think men are entitled to sex, the corollary being that you think women are obligated to give men sex. Clearly you have some issues with women, take it up with a therapist, in the mean time try not to shoot anyone. k thx You're misunderstanding me, even though I have made efforts to clarify. When I say 'not individually', I mean to say that it is society, not women, that must bear responsibility. Forgive me but I'm quite certain I've gone over this more than once now. I think men are entitled to sex, yes. Sex is a part of life, isn't it? Like social interactions, it's a pretty essential part of a healthy human life. Particularly for young men. The corollary is not that women are obligated to give men sex. But it is something that men should be getting, it is simply some men's misfortune to be born into a time that doesn't provide them with the tools to get it, and instead they end up sitting idly by in seething jealousy as the women they see as practically angelic jump from one more attractive, confident man to the next. I can assure you I have no issues with women, but I worry very much about the men that do, but rather than simply dismissing them as hateful misogynists I just wonder if there is a cause for their issues. But hey feel free to make assumptions on my character and indeed mental health. 'k thx' Okay, you seem to think this is a debate. It's not really, it's an intervention. You really need to understand this before you rape anyone. You are not entitled to sex, not from anyone. Women don't owe you sex. If you're not getting enough sex then that's not an issue with women, that's an issue with you. Your beliefs about women are frankly dangerous and the fact that you seem to not know this is even more shocking. Seek help.
I think I'm done being polite because your reading comprehension seems to be lacking.
How many times must I explain that I don't think women owe men sex before you actually believe it? I'm saying that if there is a society where large portions of men do not have access to sex then it is a problem. Is this difficult to understand? Do I need to put my reading glasses on just to make sure I'm not accidentally typing 'men don't get enough sex so women should fuck those men because those men deserve it and should take what they deserve'?
If it's worth anything to you, I'm not speaking from experience here. But that doesn't mean the subject isn't of interest to me.
|
On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:23 The KY wrote:
Not a week ago I was talking to a young lady friend of mine, she was making fun of a guy we know who is terrible with women and is a virgin in his early twenties. I was stern with her, saying that a lack of sex is enough to drive men mad. I asked her, the mass shootings that are perpetrated by young men on what seems like a bi-annual basis, do you think the vast majority of these young men were getting laid? Do you think they were virgins? Do you, if you'll forgive me being crass, think they would be killing their coworkers and schoolfriends if they had any chance of getting a girl to suck their dick?
This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway. But here is a fact (or so it seems to me); never in human history have young men been so bombarded with sexuality and yet have so many of them had so little access to sex itself.
In my opinion it's time to address the horrendously unlevel playing field that is the heterosexual dating scene. 99 out of 100 women spend their youths riding a cock carousel, because they can. They seek men not who are providers but who can excite and titillate them. A women doesn't even necessarily have to be attractive to be incredibly, almost ludicrously selective. They will jump into bed with whatever muscle bound ball of charisma they care to, safe in the knowledge that they will face no consequences and little judgement because they will always have an uncountable numbers of sadsack boys orbiting them. Boys who have been taught to be subservient to women, who are taught by the media they consume that by being a provider they will be rewarded with female affection.
Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled. The traditional idea is that everyone has a rough idea of where their level is on the scale of sexual attractiveness and you match up accordingly. But this is no longer the case because it is women who feel too entitled. Men are so desperate for their attention that even the ugliest, dullest girl could be sure of getting laid week in, week out if they really desired it.
And so, in youth, women fuck an increasingly small number of men, while a sexual underclass is created, and it is populated entirely by men. And for men, lack of sex is no laughing matter. They agonise over it. Their pride shrivels. They become bitter and angry, they despise men they see as obnoxious assholes who exploit women, while the women they put on such high pedestals disappoint them again and again until they despise them as well. But ah, the future is bright for our young friends. In their mid thirties they will be the guy who women settle down with, after their looks have faded and they've taken the dicks of a couple dozen more successful men.
Meanwhile anyone who decries these consequences of unfettered feminism is vilified in ways that can only be described as shockingly venomous. Anyone who proclaims to believe that retaining a semblance of traditional masculinity in society is mocked as a virgin loser or a misogynist or a creep.
I apologise for getting passionate but I am passionate about this. I don't dislike women, I am very fond of many of them in fact, but the fact that modern western society is so biased towards women in these situations is impossible for me to ignore. Men are left to fall through the cracks and live a sexless nightmare so that the sexual revolution can continue unabated. Such men are the butt of jokes, while feminists obsess over rape, men are kicked out of universities without trial for even being accused of sexual assault, women go on pointless, self satisfied marches like Slut Walk and Take Back The Night, and decry #EverydaySexism every time someone assumes they won't be any good at fixing cars.
Some sexual revolution. Some equality.
EDIT: And of course, a lot of the responses to this horrific killing spree claim that misogyny is the cause. Ha! this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit.
Except 1: that costs a lot more money than makeup, and 2: women also spend money on nice clothes and accessories.
|
United States42884 Posts
On May 26 2014 08:53 The KY wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:46 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:42 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems. I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up. And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age. You opened with "women aren't to blame... at least not individually". No shit women aren't to blame for some man shooting a bunch of people but for some reason you seem to think they might be collectively to blame? Because they didn't collectively make arrangements to ensure men like the killer got laid? Maybe they should have all drawn straws? Could you please elaborate on what you meant by "at least not invidually" here so I can work out exactly why you think women might collectively be responsible for his actions. You then move on to "Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled." Well that's about a 6 on the Shauni scale already. You don't want to be on the Shauni scale. So, you think men are entitled to sex, the corollary being that you think women are obligated to give men sex. Clearly you have some issues with women, take it up with a therapist, in the mean time try not to shoot anyone. k thx You're misunderstanding me, even though I have made efforts to clarify. When I say 'not individually', I mean to say that it is society, not women, that must bear responsibility. Forgive me but I'm quite certain I've gone over this more than once now. I think men are entitled to sex, yes. Sex is a part of life, isn't it? Like social interactions, it's a pretty essential part of a healthy human life. Particularly for young men. The corollary is not that women are obligated to give men sex. But it is something that men should be getting, it is simply some men's misfortune to be born into a time that doesn't provide them with the tools to get it, and instead they end up sitting idly by in seething jealousy as the women they see as practically angelic jump from one more attractive, confident man to the next. I can assure you I have no issues with women, but I worry very much about the men that do, but rather than simply dismissing them as hateful misogynists I just wonder if there is a cause for their issues. But hey feel free to make assumptions on my character and indeed mental health. 'k thx' Okay, you seem to think this is a debate. It's not really, it's an intervention. You really need to understand this before you rape anyone. You are not entitled to sex, not from anyone. Women don't owe you sex. If you're not getting enough sex then that's not an issue with women, that's an issue with you. Your beliefs about women are frankly dangerous and the fact that you seem to not know this is even more shocking. Seek help. I think I'm done being polite because your reading comprehension seems to be lacking. How many times must I explain that I don't think women owe men sex before you actually believe it? I'm saying that if there is a society where large portions of men do not have access to sex then it is a problem. Is this difficult to understand? Do I need to put my reading glasses on just to make sure I'm not accidentally typing 'men don't get enough sex so women should fuck those men because those men deserve it and should take what they deserve'? If it's worth anything to you, I'm not speaking from experience here. But that doesn't mean the subject isn't of interest to me.
"men are entitled to sex"
"I believe that society owes men sex"
So, we've established that men are entitled to sex and that society owes it to them. Who will be paying this debt? Presumably women, unless all the sexually deprived guys fuck each other which honestly wouldn't be a bad idea. But you believe that women should be meeting this obligation, or else face the consequences like this shooting which you believe are inevitable if they don't. A point you made when you wrote "This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway.", that they collectively caused this to happen by failing to provide the sex quota. You seem to think that unless women give sex out more freely and evenly then they'll get shot, something they should have known.
What you're experiencing here is the words that you wrote. Yes, they're idiotic. Yes, they're incredibly sexist. Yes, they're really quite rapey. They're still your words. You haven't clarified shit.
|
On May 26 2014 08:51 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:47 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:44 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:34 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 08:22 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:18 SlixSC wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 07:35 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
this is not only laughably wrong but is essentially the mindset the killer had My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. The real problem here is make-up. Make-up can turn even ugly women/girls into "beauties" so there will always be a higher percentage of "hot girls" with in a sense "too much" market-value compared to guys. In other words a guy we would rate 5/10 based on looks will never be able to find a girl that is naturally a 5/10 because make-up turns that girl into a 7/10 or 8/10 (out of his league). http://celebritytoob.toobnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/04/Celebrities_Without_Makeup_12-537x470.jpgGirls have easy tools to artificially increase their market value, men really do not (outside of getting rich or something extreme like that). So assuming equal distribution of "good looks" across both sexes, it will never be "fair game" unless we were to ban make-up. That's just how it is. Yeah.... no. Even if we accept your assumptions that the amount of sex a woman can have is based entirely on her looks and that the amount of sex a man can have is based entirely upon his wallet then a man can still dress as if he doesn't earn minimum wage, just a woman can put on makeup. Not what I said. My point is that a man cannot put on make-up and artificially increase his market value, a woman however can and in most cases does exactly that. You have to realize that women have it many times easier to make themselves look more attractive than men. That's just how it works and is precisely why 20% of men have 80% of the sex. I mean consider this, if a man publicly wears alot of make up there is a good chance they will be ridiculed, if a woman does exactly the same there is a good chance they will be idolized as a sex symbol and thought to be really attractive. It's not a fair game, never was, never will be. No, a man can't wear makeup. Instead he puts on a nice shirt, drives a car he can't afford and puts on a fancy watch. Same shit. No it's not. Most men cannot afford "nice clothing", a nice car and a fancy watch. Makeup on the other hand is comparatively extremely cheap. I mean all your post does is it tacitly admits how much more effort it takes for a man to get laid than it takes for a woman. That's EXACTLY what I mean when I say that it's not a fair game, it never was and it never will be. I'm not complaining about it, just stating the obvious. My wife spends more on makeup than I do on clothes. You have no idea how much effort women go to in order to try and achieve a physical standard set by photoshop. Men get away with looking like shit in comparison. But you're still completely missing the point. Yes people try to make themselves appear better than they are. If I'm going out I might save a joke to appear funnier or think of something to say ahead of time to appear smarter but at no point during the saying of the joke have I fundamentally altered the gender balance of society. Makeup is no different. So you are really resorting to anecdotal evidence now? I'm sorry to say this and even at a risk of sounding rude, why would I care about what your wife does and how much money she spends on things? Are you asserting that your family's spending habits are in any way indicative of the spending habits of the general population? I mean I just don't see where you are going with this. I'm reasonably sure that my resort to a sample of two is infinitely more evidence than your claims which were not only nonsensical but completley unsubstantiated. Given this I am unsure exactly why you're deciding we should be attacking each other's argument based on evidence, nor why your own stance is somehow enduring this new qualifier. Is it possible you didn't think this through? Perhaps you have your own evidence which you just thought wasn't worth mentioning in your "makeup makes gender relations biased against men" whining.
But you are missing the point, my point is that women have more and comparatively cheaper tools at their disposal to make themselves look more attractive than men do. (and to compare makeup with cars is a little bit silly, a more accurate comparisson would be makeup and facial plastic surgery - those are the two options people have of "changing" their faces, one is exclusive to women and definitely cheaper than the other).
I don't see how you can even dispute this. Makeup is almost exlcusive to women, everything else is equally availaible to both sexes.
This is exactly why so many men cannot find a (sex) partner, because almost every woman is wearing makeup, a tool men simply do not have.
And makeup has very serious implications on how we are perceived by others, it makes our faces look more symmetrical, more healthy, etc... men on the other hand are always stuck with their natural faces (outside of expensive plastic sugery).
And what exactly is makeup if not a simple yet effective tool to trick men into thinking your face is more beautiful than it naturally is (a trick that is not even really available to men outside of expensive plastic surgery, like I already said).
It's not a fair game, I don't understand why you can't see this.
|
On May 26 2014 09:03 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2014 08:53 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:46 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:42 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:32 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 08:25 The KY wrote:On May 26 2014 08:11 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:52 FiWiFaKi wrote:On May 26 2014 07:43 KwarK wrote:On May 26 2014 07:40 The KY wrote:
[quote]
I don't believe it is. My only point is this - 20% of the men are having 80% of the sex. Hook up culture is rampant. Long term relationships are either a temporary state of affairs or a joke for many people. It's a problem, and it's a problem for men exclusively. And there are consequences to problems.
I take some offense at the implication that I share a murderers stance; but perhaps in my anger at the situation I have mistakenly given the wrong impression. I do not share the killers judgemental attitude. When I say that women seek out the highest status men and fuck them because they can, I say it while understanding entirely that I would do the same thing. I don't believe women owe all men sex. I believe that society owes men sex to properly function, and society as it currently exists doesn't provide this for a large number of young men. You believe men are owed sex... wow No. He is saying it's unhealthy for a society where many men don't get to have sex, even though they are as attractive and everything else as women of equal caliber. Men are not entitled to sex, but at the same time, the culture of women should not be slots, and men should fuck everything that moves hurts both sides because they have different interests. So as a society, we should put emphasis on sex being a natural thing so more women partake, or convince guys sex is not important, and not worry about it, because currently there is a big struggle between young adult males and females about this issue. I agree that sex is a natural thing and the obsession that is put on sex as a way of validating masculine identity is very unhealthy but to turn around and say, as KY did, that "society owes men sex" is insane. Sex is an activity that requires another individual, to be owed it is to have an obligation on the body of someone else, it's a rapey mentality. I've gone a while without getting laid before and at no point did I go into some crazy identity crisis nor start hating women. Gender relations in society are fucked up and the media does a shitty job of promoting healthy attitudes because sex is big money and we'd all much rather buy into some ideal but men are not exclusively victims of that and the poster I was responding to completely undermined himself by attacking feminism, the movement that has done the most to fight fucked up societal views on sex. Women are predominantly the victims of sexual violence and the entitlement of men is a huge part of why that is, coming into the topic saying "well the guy had a point because men are owed sex and women are letting society down by not providing men with enough, men are owed sex" is fucked up. And yet I said almost none of that. I didn't say he had a point, and I didn't say women are letting society down by not sleeping with men like this. I merely said that the fact they exist and will continue to exist is a serious problem, and more importantly it's a problem that is new to our age. You opened with "women aren't to blame... at least not individually". No shit women aren't to blame for some man shooting a bunch of people but for some reason you seem to think they might be collectively to blame? Because they didn't collectively make arrangements to ensure men like the killer got laid? Maybe they should have all drawn straws? Could you please elaborate on what you meant by "at least not invidually" here so I can work out exactly why you think women might collectively be responsible for his actions. You then move on to "Perhaps some will say that such men feel too entitled. Well they are entitled." Well that's about a 6 on the Shauni scale already. You don't want to be on the Shauni scale. So, you think men are entitled to sex, the corollary being that you think women are obligated to give men sex. Clearly you have some issues with women, take it up with a therapist, in the mean time try not to shoot anyone. k thx You're misunderstanding me, even though I have made efforts to clarify. When I say 'not individually', I mean to say that it is society, not women, that must bear responsibility. Forgive me but I'm quite certain I've gone over this more than once now. I think men are entitled to sex, yes. Sex is a part of life, isn't it? Like social interactions, it's a pretty essential part of a healthy human life. Particularly for young men. The corollary is not that women are obligated to give men sex. But it is something that men should be getting, it is simply some men's misfortune to be born into a time that doesn't provide them with the tools to get it, and instead they end up sitting idly by in seething jealousy as the women they see as practically angelic jump from one more attractive, confident man to the next. I can assure you I have no issues with women, but I worry very much about the men that do, but rather than simply dismissing them as hateful misogynists I just wonder if there is a cause for their issues. But hey feel free to make assumptions on my character and indeed mental health. 'k thx' Okay, you seem to think this is a debate. It's not really, it's an intervention. You really need to understand this before you rape anyone. You are not entitled to sex, not from anyone. Women don't owe you sex. If you're not getting enough sex then that's not an issue with women, that's an issue with you. Your beliefs about women are frankly dangerous and the fact that you seem to not know this is even more shocking. Seek help. I think I'm done being polite because your reading comprehension seems to be lacking. How many times must I explain that I don't think women owe men sex before you actually believe it? I'm saying that if there is a society where large portions of men do not have access to sex then it is a problem. Is this difficult to understand? Do I need to put my reading glasses on just to make sure I'm not accidentally typing 'men don't get enough sex so women should fuck those men because those men deserve it and should take what they deserve'? If it's worth anything to you, I'm not speaking from experience here. But that doesn't mean the subject isn't of interest to me. "men are entitled to sex" "I believe that society owes men sex" So, we've established that men are entitled to sex and that society owes it to them. Who will be paying this debt? Presumably women, unless all the sexually deprived guys fuck each other which honestly wouldn't be a bad idea. But you believe that women should be meeting this obligation, or else face the consequences like this shooting which you believe are inevitable if they don't. A point you made when you wrote "This isn't to say that women are to blame. Not individually anyway.", that they collectively caused this to happen by failing to provide the sex quota. You seem to think that unless women give sex out more freely and evenly then they'll get shot, something they should have known. What you're experiencing here is the words that you wrote. Yes, they're idiotic. Yes, they're incredibly sexist. Yes, they're really quite rapey. They're still your words. You haven't clarified shit.
I can see why you think I haven't clarified anything when you take statements from my first post and ignore all the others that came after it, in which I attempted to clarify.
If you genuinely believe that my stance is 'yo all you women need to go and start fucking lonely guys before they pull out uzis on your asses', then you're a fucking idiot. There it is. I can think of no other way of putting that.
My actual stance is that we should be asking the question 'where did society go wrong that such large groups of men do not have access to sex, and how do we remedy this'. Soooo rapey, I know.
|
On May 25 2014 07:00 EarthwormJim wrote:
When will America change gun policy?
My heart goes out to your community.
Normally these kinds of threads make it past the first page before it turns to this discussion. You took it there with the first post. Impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
