You're obviously joking, so well done. I didn't click on them since I expect they're exploitative.
Men Are The Expendable Gender
- Thread starter Hermiod
- Start date
You're obviously joking, so well done. I didn't click on them since I expect they're exploitative.
No, actually, I don't. What's the conviction rate for car theft or burglary or any of a million other crimes ?
I don't think a low conviction rate for a crime where the vast majority of alleged victims are female is any more scandalous than any other crime because, as I have said thousands of times before, I don't feel the need to treat women as worthy of special attention just because they're women.
Show me the line where I denied that.
As you pointed out yourself, our legal system is based on the concept of innocent until proven guilty. The word 'alleged' applies right up until conviction.
As you also said, men should be given anonymity until conviction because too many people don't believe in that concept and prefer more simplistic ones like "mud sticks".
Now, you choose. I can either treat women equally, or I can treat them as unique beautiful snowflakes who need to be protected from the big bad world because they're incapable of looking after themselves - or having jobs, lives or minds of their own.
I'm sorry if this shows up my general misanthropy, but women didn't do anything to deserve special treatment.
Oh here we go. I'm sorry, but I must protest this; this is simply the fallback argument when anyone arguing about gender runs out of genuine arguments. Screaming "Misogynist!", in the hopes that everyone will forget rational standards of argument. Well, that label doesn't work. Are we supposed to take it seriously in this context? Show me where this guy has demonstrated misogyny. Go on. Show me. I see none. All he's done is point out- quite rightly- that a 6% conviction rate is entirely reasonable in an innocent-until-proven-guilty culture where there are also many false rape allegations (some for ridiculously viscious and/or petty reasons) many confused/conflicting accounts and many ambiguous circumstances as well as actual proven rapes. And the situation is even more difficult when we consider that, in a case of "Rape!" vs "False Accusation!", the innocent-until-proven-guilty model is damaged anyway, because assuming innocence for one party implies assuming guilt for the other. It's...hard. You may disagree with his position, but condemning it as misogynistic is simply silly and petty- just as accusing you of misandry for your position would be silly and petty.
Plus of course Hermiod is in trouble because he's challenged ideological status quo by having a generally concerned-about-males stance on the world, thus threatening the ideological power of certain dominant perspectives. Sorry to labour the point, but if I were to point at you and say "misandrist!" you wouldn't take it seriously would you, certainly not based on the comments you've made here? You'd roll your eyes, quite rightly I'm sure. Why then should your claim above be taken seriously? Seems quite suspicious to me. I can only assume that....well, you aren't getting your way in an argument about gender - this man won't see things on your terms and treat women's concerns as prime over men's - and so you retreat from the debate with a cry of "misogyny!". Hopefully now a bunch of competitive chivalrous males will jump forward and carry on the fight in your absence, spurred to your defense...your comment hardly screams "this is equality" to me, more "defend my honour, guys!". Anyway, it's beneath what has mostly been a reasonable, if misguided, discussion thread.
This is partly why I advised Hermiod in a PM to drop this thread. To stop it and give it a rest. Because he has to know it is not in any way productive. All he'll get is grief and no-one wants to listen- many people do not want a discussion on these issues but instead to shut down discussion on these issues so as to maintain the ideological status quo. The issue isn't agreement or disagreement- it's that no-one wants to hear multiple views no matter how reasonable all those views are, and they'll resort to all manner of name-calling and dirty tricks to ensure they don't have to hear and consider these things.
We've moved off topic insanely anyway. There isn't really any point to this thread any longer. I don't think Hermiod should have even started it in the first place.
Last edited:
Nuh huh. You don't get to pull that kind of stunt - labelling me with insults that are blatantly untrue and then running away.
Not having an abnormal love of women just because they're women does not make me a misogynist.
This is bizarrely paranoid, and rather unsubstantiated by the thread where I think most concerned have been more patient with your view and Hermoid's than I would have expected. An imaginary persecution complex is never a good idea, especially when, as I've observed, many of your own criticisms on how the working classes and the underclass are exploited - socially and economically in the capitalist system, or politically in a statist system, or used as cannon fodder in wartime, etc. - are neither uncommon nor unacceptable.
It does, however, place you in opposition to many Western, particularly anglophone, cultural standards and thus makes you a "legitimate target" for insult and derision, no matter how reasonable you try to be. Understand this: people- of all status levels, both sexes, etc- will defend a system that benefits them at any cost. Therefore, competitive, successful males and females of all descriptions will attack and accuse and do anything they can to silence an argument aimed at removing their benefit or privilige. Alpha males have the most power in human society. They therefore want to change nothing, and are concerned only with maintaining that power and keeping all the beta males down/fending off competitors. Women have less power than alpha males, and must negotiate carefully around them. Women- feminist influenced women particularly-are therefore both revolutionary and conservative at once. They want to change those aspects of society that give them less power than alpha males, but also to maintain those aspects that give them benefit over beta males. Beta males have least power and benefit of all, so: they either buy into the system and desire to topple/replace alpha males and thus compete with one another to do so, or else in some cases, like me and I guess like you, they desire to change things entirely.
That is all. Everyone works to increase their power and retain what power they have- alpha males, females, beta males- all buy into the same system and work to benefit themselves at any costs. Alphas by maintaining power and privilige, females by both maintaining power/privilige and aiming for that they lack, beta males by competing to become alphas and thus get the power and privilige. There is little to no point appealing to reason, fairness, compassion or anything of the kind, no more than there is a point to appealing to a government on the basis of such things. Moral considerations matter not in the least. Maintaining power and ideological supremacy is what motivates people- a few exceptions aside.
Which is why your whole "it's not fair!" angle to this thread is pointless.
The gender aspect is, however, usually ignored- at least the realistic male-centred gender view is (feminists were quick to try and use Marxist ideas to describe female positions in society, which is often less logical). And it isn't an "imaginary persecution complex". By no means. It is not imaginary when I point out how my people were and are treated as expendable, violence and suffering inflicted on them ignored, dismissed, justified or encouraged. Whether you agree my fuss is justified or not- see how Iquana argued it wasn't, for example- is something else, but it is not imaginary. Indeed, denying it is ignorance in action.
"More patient than I would have expected". How ignorantly patronising of you. I think I tend to be a lot more patient with the usual nay-sayers and ideologically blinded denialists than I have cause to be. Ignorance is usually what it is- ignorance, and a desire to see what you want to see. It's very, very frustrating to have your entirely valid and logical- and informed- viewpoints arrogantly dismissed by those who wish to maintain the ideological status quo.
I mentioned my view of young men and adolescent boys as "my people"- a subset of humanity treated in certain ways and viewed in certain ways. Would you tell a chinese person the Japanese invasion of China never happened? Would you tell a black person racism never happened? A woman that mass rapes never happened? A Jew the holocaust never happened? That these were all "imaginary?"
Last edited:
And yet, Deckerd still threw out the "misogynist" label because I didn't agree with her.
Kegg - if you look back through this thread you'll find a couple of people have said "oh, look, it's Hermiod again". Yeah, maybe I talk about this stuff too much, but I care about the subject.
What, quite frankly, I don't care about is being liked. The advantage of knowing that nobody gives a crap about you, that you're probably not going to die in a big house surrounded by your loving grandchildren and your wife of 60 years, is that you aren't afraid to tell the truth.
I don't have to be chivalrous, I don't have to put an entire gender on a pedestal. I don't have to feed in to this sense of entitlement they seem to have developed. Women are no better than men and don't deserve people patronising them by telling them they are.
If this thread means that even less people care what I have to say, then so be it.
Deranged Nasat - thanks for the PM, by the way.
The likelihood I'll be surrounded by granchildren is probably far less than yours, as I am your typical run-of-the-mill aggressively antisocial and unpleasant Star Trek nerd. But I don't really have these concerns about male identity you seem to.
As I observed, this is a fairly limited viewpoint. Say what one will of Marxism, but it does address the problems of the working class beyond warfare - here, for example, there hasn't been a war fought here in just under ninety years, so the issue of the working class has little to do that with that now.
And it is bizarrely paranoid because your viewpoint has been given a pretty fair hearing here, and there isn't exactly some regimented ideological viewpoint everyone has been subscribing too (definitely if there is I never got the newsletter.)
Check, and mate. This is exactly what an imaginary perseceution complex looks like. You're equating the people you're arguing with on this board with the Japanese militarists, the Nazis, and white supremacism.
However, the Nanking Massacre, the Holocaust, and race slavery cut a little deeper than a few impolite words on a forum.
It's not me who is the victim you deluded fool- it's my people. Your entire argument here is complete and utter tosh, and merely reveals an awful lot about you and your perception of those who challenge your political and social certainties. There is nothing imaginary in the maltreatment of excessive numbers of young men and adolescent boys. Nothing at all. Your conclusion in this post is so ridiculous and ludicrous it's completely laughable. I never once compared those I'm arguing against to anyone. How and where did I do that?
So to use your charmingly arrogant term: Check, and mate.
You, you, white supremacist-slavedriver-Nazi, you!!
Seriously, you set a new low in this post. How can I take you seriously now at all?
I'm pretty much restating your own argument back at you. You're either paranoid or spectacularly poor at reason, or both.
Let's review:
This comment clearly refers to the people posting on the board.
So does this:
So, to reiterate, you feel that the people on this thread aren't giving you and/or Hermoid fair hearing because they're ideologically regimented, and I submit this is an imaginary fear. Your response:
And this is a pretty good example of why I think people have been rather patient. There is a histrionic tend to hyperbole and conflation of your opponents on a BBS to the persecution of the working classes that makes you seem very unreasonable.
I gave one possible reading of this shift: You think the posters on the BBS are the ones persecuting and are as culpable as the examples listed. Another reading would be you can't or won't distinguish them; in which case we get back to the first reading anyway.
...or pissed off with the latest in a long line of arrogant denials from those who don't listen, don't take valid points seriously, and misrepresent comments so as to destroy the ethos of opponents with no concern for reality- covering the tracks and shutting down a debate by inflating and misrepresenting competing arguments so as to dismiss them and give you an excuse to ignore them. We don't have to think about and consider challenging viewpoints if we can twist them into sounding ridiculous and insulting- say, by twisting my arguments to make it seem as though I am accusing you of victimizing me as Nazis victimized Jews.
This is the latest trick- blow my perspective out of the water by reinterpreting it in the way least flattering to me, so destroying my credibility in a totally artificial fashion and eliminating threats to the ideological certainties I'm challenging.
Paranoid? Maybe. Correct? Quite probably.
Because of course a Jew moaning about the holocaust is obviously insisting that they personally are suffering.
How anyone could legitimately misunderstand my position like this is beyond me- you're obviously doing it deliberately as part of the little trick I mention above.
Last edited:
That's pretty much what you said. I went over that point by point. Shall we do this again, or is there anyone else who wants to point out any flaws in my interpretation (I'm all ears)?
Speaking of which:
Please provide a sample of quotes evidencing this?
This is your perspective- and I understand it. To those who don't share in a concern, those who make a fuss of it almost always seem unreasonable- especially when, as with me, there is strong emotion behind it.
But you'll find that when people actually understand and accept my position rather than dismiss it unreasonably to maintain their own supremecy and preserve the dominant ideology, I am very, very tolerant of opposing perspectives and alternate views.
Accusing me of equating my opponents here with Nazis, etc, and accusing me of claiming that I'm being persecuted as holocaust victims were. Which makes me so offensive and unreasonable no-one will take me seriously or do anything other than ignore me.
I said this. I did not, however, say anything like what you've decided to present my posts as.
Your actions here are the exact same as the "misogynist!" argument we condemned above- throw out offensive ideas and attempt to soil the opponent in the worst possible way. Paint them in such a light that no-one needs to even consider their arguments, because they are obviously rather disgusting people.
The difference is that a aggressively anti-social and unpleasant Star Trek nerd, just not a typical or run-of-the-mill one.
I don't delude myself in to thinking that if only I could meet the right woman I would be happy. She doesn't exist. I'm not going to be happy, ever. As far as I'm concerned the sooner this miserable pointless life ends the better.
The advantage is that I don't have to run around pretending that all women everywhere are special and their concerns are more important than men's. Nor do I have to put up with the sexist garbage spouted by those who do.
I'm giving women what they supposedly want - to be treated equally. I'm sorry that equality is not all chocolate and puppies.
There are plenty of women who know this. There are plenty among both sexes who want genuine equality, plenty among both sexes who never wanted things changed too much at all because they were quite comfortable where they were (IE, they never asked for equality), plenty among both sexes who are unreasonable and hypocritical. The whole point is that one small group of perspectives dominate and shout down any and all other perspectives on gender- and those dismissed and shouted down are from both sexes, and all levels of society. That dominant perspective is not "a woman's" perspective- it is the perspective of some people of both sexes. And it is a perspective that works to increase the benefits and power of those who promote it- again, of both sexes.
Which is what I'm protesting here- because I see in this thread (rightly or wrongly) the usual one-perspective-is-right-all-others-aren't-worthy-of-being-taken-seriously position that anyone offering any view of gender comes across.
I for one don't care if people agree or disagree. I only want them to take my position seriously and not try to dismiss it. Once I have a seat at the table I'm no more important than any of the other perspectives seated. Those who understand where I'm coming from but simply disagree- like Iquana, who thinks I'm wrong and says so quite clearly, but doesn't deny my position its validity even if he thinks it's unworkable- I respond to very well, truth be told. Now, some like Kegg will insist I am seated at the table by virtue of airing my opinions here. He has a point, but the general refusal to listen, the obvious desire to degrade, to call names, to make accusations of "misogyny" and so on against those of us who offer unusual views leads me to disagree. This is not a fair forum- this is all too often a disdainful attack on those not in line with ideological standards.
I for one have seen no "misogyny" or "misandry" anywhere in this thread. What I have seen is the usual attempt to deny any perspective not in line with the dominant one.
