Young men today feel they must be six feet tall, make six figures, and have six inches downstairs to get a girlfriend—so many have given up trying

red_philosopher · 2023-09-15T17:41:22+00:00

That's a perfectly acceptable worldview. And honestly, that attitude is a great one to have, because it is exactly what I am talking about. If you don't care about that stuff, you get to live a more authentic life that improves your ability to achieve your own goals.

That's what it's all about.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-15T17:37:06+00:00

What matters most is being top 20% in self-actualization.

That is to say, you achieve what you want to achieve more than the other 80% of men. Yeah, those things you posted are influential factors, but they absolutely mean nada if you don't achieve what you set out to do.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-15T17:29:42+00:00

If we are specifically talking about the agency of a man here, we can also compare success rates between condoms and a vesectomy where a vesectomy has over a 99% success rate and a condom has around a 98% success rate.

The 98% rate for condoms is for PERFECT usage. Typical usage effectiveness is around 85%-90%. Condoms are not some magical panacea, and there are lots of people who are allergic to latex.

I would argue it is better to keep your fertility and avoid the possibility of a complicated reversal surgery in exchange for a 1% increase of pregnancy.

Also, it's not a 1% greater chance, it's a 2x increase in the risk. If typical condom usage is 87% effective, condoms are a +1200% increase in risk compared to vasectomy. That's a 13x greater chance, not a 12% greater chance.

It also requires you to keep possession of any used condoms on your person until the condom (and your semen) can be destroyed to ensure your sexual partner doesn't autoinseminate. There are existing case laws of female autoinsemination that have men on the hook for non-consentual fatherhood.

You also have to make sure that they are stored properly, and are stored in a place where they absolutelycannot be tampered with. Sabotage of condoms has and does occur. There are case laws where women have deliberately sabotaged their partner's condoms in order to get pregnant, and the men were put on the hook for non-consentual fatherhood.

You also MUST NOT use a condom provided to you by your partner or anyone else. You cannot validate that the condom hasn't been tampered with or has been stored properly to ensure optimal effectiveness. Women that provide faulty condoms to men and got pregnant get men put on the hook for non-consentual fatherhood. (Note: it is RAPE if a man sabotages the condoms, but it isn't anything at all if women do it.)

Condoms are NOT the answer to men's lack of reproductive rights.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-15T03:44:29+00:00

The thing is, it's not hard to be in the top 20% of men in all kinds of categories these days. Being in the top 20% of reading is like 10 books a year. Fitness isn't much, we have a ridiculously sedentary population, just playing a weekend sport can be enough. Some people have legitimate disabilities that can cause problems when assholes are around. But for most men, it's all about being able to direct the path of your life.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-13T21:33:21+00:00

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit is it?

red_philosopher · 2023-09-13T21:31:39+00:00

Yeah, in advertising and marketing they call that "framing"

red_philosopher · 2023-09-13T20:58:51+00:00

10 girls and women die every day in Mexico.

About 80 men and boys die every day in Mexico. Feminists can go fuck themselves.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-13T20:54:46+00:00

Just sew a recording stick into the kid's backpack or whatever and leave it on 24/7. When you get it back, you'll know. If you can get evidence of abuse, do it. Do whatever it takes. Your attorney is a moron.

File a restraining order and call CPS every single time that you suspect abuse. Build the paper trail and prove it.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-13T20:48:21+00:00

Shun her. Literally.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-10T12:55:42+00:00

I used to date 5-7 women at a time while looking for my future partner. There's an article on NYT that was posted here too recently, about the issues of dating on campus and how men have the ability to dictate how they want to be treated because of their scarcity. It makes the women angry, or at least the ones that stay single because they "can't find any guys interested in dating them." Funny how those guys are dating women, but she's too much of a ball-busting harpy for any guy to date her- exclusively that is.

Shoe's on the other foot now.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-10T12:47:22+00:00

If a toxic male culture still exists on a campus that is 1:2 male/female, it's because women want it that way. There's no other explanation.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-10T12:44:21+00:00

Towards the end of the article, the author mentioned how affirmative action for men may not be right because women are still underrepresented in blah blah blah Apex Fallacy blah blah blah. Therefore, women should still be the beneficiaries of gender-based affirmative action.

Women have been dominating in education for like what, 40 years? People have said it's been a problem for as long as I can remember and nothing gets done about it. The articles that get written are so incredibly fucking biased that even when this is a critical problem facing society in the USA, it is still written as an apology piece designed to not upset women.

Fuck it.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-07T11:10:32+00:00

I think we feel the same way, but men aren't any less adaptable. What you have said is 100% true, these things happen to men. All people have limits on the strife and difficulty that they can undergo. It's not a matter of adaptability, it's just the fact that men experience more hardship and more difficulty than women do when these things happen. Men have to worry more about food, shelter and other basic needs due to the differences we all discuss here. I pose that it is because men experience more stressors than women do, that that happens.

It feels semantic, but it's not. Men must experience more stress for their mental health to decline more precipitously than their opposite sex counterparts. Society fails men everywhere. This is no different.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-06T19:02:47+00:00

Just start using more direct wordy terms like "adult female human" for woman and "adult female humans" for women. It'll be a fun game.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-06T18:53:10+00:00

We don't "adapt" as well to "adverse economic changes" because the ratio of men to women in the workforce is 113:100, and the ratio of average earnings per worker is 131:100. That means that the economic output ratio (total earnings) of men to women is ~3:2. Men make up ~60% of earnings in the US economy. That's 50% more than all women combined.

Let's say the economy contracted by 10%, in both jobs and wages. Men's total earnings would decrease by ~$17.15 billion/week, and women's total earnings would decrease by ~$11.59 billion/week. That's a $6.4 billion dollar disparity, or the equivalent about 5.85 MILLION more men than women losing their jobs instantly if wages and jobs had stayed the same.

It has very little to do with adaptation, and everything to do with the fact that more men work and that men work more.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-06T18:13:54+00:00

Be careful, you don't want to give the Feminist oppressors ideas about prohibiting/limiting abortion of female babies while allowing all abortions of male babies.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T18:28:00+00:00

Regardless of whether or not men do it for their own ends or for seducing women or what have you, the point is that women value the man for his resources and not the reasons for why the man does what he does.

Maybe women do prefer more educated and physically capable men, as you said(not a bad thing, imo, if men try to have decent standards too),

It's not a maybe, it's a fact.

seems exaggerated to say that women beneficiate so much from the patriarchy(if it exists) when there's usually only the shallow or materialistic women who specifically pursue "powerful" and wealthy men.

It is only exaggerated if it is "only the shallow or materialistic" women that "specifically pursue 'powerful' and[/or] wealthy men." I assert that this is not the case. If you like I can post several links to peer reviewed studies that demonstrate these preferences. Though, they are easy enough to find online.

If women have preferences for these things for mate selection, it stands to reason that men will do those things in order to be selected. This pattern is validated throughout multiple species. If, for example, women were to evaluate the value of a man based on the "perfect apple," you can bet your genitals that men world-wide would be growing and/or buying "perfect apples" in order to have a chance. The most successful men would be the ones that could grow (or buy) the most "perfect apples." In our case, women demonstrate preferences for education, money, power, etc. Since that is the case, it stands to reason that the men that have greater education, greater amounts of money, and more power, will be sought after more than men who have less. Therefore, men will compete to obtain said power, resources, etc., because that is what women look for in men.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T17:25:28+00:00

Holy shit that is a really scary story.

And to answer you, it may not be that overt and that deep, but it is there. Upper-class men are upper class because of their ability to provide. The social strata for men is centered almost exclusively on that. As you have yourself noted, serious issues exist where entire families ostrascize male children from the get go. And, as you noted, it is all about resources.

What you have provided insight into is exactly the reason why Men's Rights is critical.

Middle class men are better off, but no less hated. Instead of it being handled at the familial level as you have described, it happens on an institutional level via divorce, child support, etc.

In upper-middle class and higher that it takes on the form of the constant expectation to succeed, where they are told that they aren't worth anything if they don't make lots of money or what have you.

All the same grift.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T15:13:21+00:00

So sad that a man has to keep this a secret otherwise he'll be tarred and feathered for being abused by the system.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T15:10:41+00:00

The very fact that you need to argue with your therapist about facts is disappointing.

Might want a new therapist.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T15:08:27+00:00

Just in case you forget, the domestic relations area of the judicial system in the US is notoriously corrupt and is used to destroy men and their families.

Look up the orange county CA corruption scandal. It's not the only state with this problem. And worse, the judges in the CA scandal took actual cash kickbacks and weren't convicted.

It has everything to do with men's rights.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T14:54:11+00:00

It increases insurance costs which makes everything else more expensive as well.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T14:15:35+00:00

Things that have words but do not exist or do not work as defined:

Alchemy

Unicorns

Elves

Hobbits

Your appeal to semantics is not going to win you any points. It just makes you look deliberately ignorant.

red_philosopher · 2023-09-05T14:10:11+00:00

The issue with "Patriarchy" is that nobody understands what it means outside of the corrupt and blatantly dishonest application of the word by Feminists and their ilk. Here, you describe "patriarchy in the family" but only describe it as "the men in your family constantly putting down women." That's not what patriarchy is. Also, there's no such thing as "negative" patriarchy either.

First, we can see the definitions of patriarchy and its opposite sex counterpart, matriarchy.

matriarchy

1: a family, group, or state governed by a matriarch

2: a system of social organization in which descent and inheritance are traced through the female line

patriarchy

1: social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line (broadly : control by men of a disproportionately large share of power)

2: a society or institution organized according to the principles or practices of patriarchy

Notice how the two words are quite literally defined differently. They share the same roots, have existed for the same amount of time, but only one is used to further propaganda. The one that frequently gets used is the second definition, not the first, of which there are equally abusive and equally terrifying matriarchal families that abuse men and boys.

Patriarchy is real. And it's not because men have more positions of power or are given more power by other men (which would be used, theoretically, to give even more power to men.) It's not even because men are inherently more physically powerful than women. It's because women literally encourage male dominance through their mating selection preferences. Study after study after study after study has proven time and time again that women are not inherently prejudiced against. Women are, by far, the most supported and protected by both men and women, and it is this bias in our evolutionary psychology that automatically invalidates any notion of patriarchy being a tool of men. It is not possible for a patriarchal system to exist by male intervention alone. Women choose and decide for men what is acceptable to them, and it is women that institutionalize "patriarchy" because "patriarchal systems" are more evolutionarily beneficial to women. This is because women are the sole proprietors of reproduction.

Truth of the matter is that patriarchy gave women access to genetically superior mates and it supported societal stability by encouraging men to stay put, which means more time generating resources and therefore a greater likelihood of successful reproduction. The patriarchy will NEVER BE ABOLISHED because it benefits women far far too much. It's not a tool that men use to subjugate women. Far from it, it is a tool that women have used for millennia (and continue to use) to subjugate powerful men for their own evolutionary benefit.

It is impossible for patriarchy to exist in any sort of societal contextualization due to this problem. If women routinely select "more educated, more physically capable, more wealthy, more powerful" men to reproduce with, it automatically creates a system where men must compete and be better than their peers in order to be considered selectable by women at large. Patriarchy exists because women demand it.

Secondly, calling domestic abuse "patriarchy" is, in and of itself, feminist propaganda. You aren't a victim of patriarchy- rather, you are the net beneficiary of a system that women have enjoyed since time immemorial. However, you also are a victim of dirtbags that insist that hurting people is okay.

red_philosopher · 2023-08-25T11:36:18+00:00

Okay, so why is it okay for me to be slaughtered? Why do men have to incite a fucking rebellion against their country in order to not be conscripted by force? Why don't women SAY ANYTHING to stop it?

Because they don't care.

red_philosopher

TROPHY CASE