Do I really need to? This isn’t a matter of me saying “men are from mars to get more candy bars, women are from jupiter to get more stupider”; this is me discussing the taboo subject of men being systemically disadvantaged, and now society is turning on them as well a la feminism. I could drag race into this as well, but I’ve done that already and explained it in posts above.
I recommend reading into the uprising against the Kulaks in the 1920s for comparison (because the next closest comparison is 1930’s Germany, and logical discussion leaves the room once Nazis are brought into the conversation). You will notice similar societal trends throughout history where one particular group is habitually blamed for everyone’s problems, then the accused group gets genocided. There are similarities in modern culture that people dismiss and gaslight (which is common during the aforementioned periods, unironically) regularly.
To NOT talk about it is to beg for this kind of stupidity to happen again.
Why is it that every other group is allowed (and applauded) for speaking up about perceived injustices done unto them, but when I bring up the legitimately intentional disenfranchisement of white men - someone’s got a bone to pick?
You must not see my posts in every other subforum here then. Good to know that you’ve got enough time to read into my post history and track trends though; guess you’ve got nothing better to do. Keep on gaslighting though.
It would depend on the women. 100 skanks? They wouldn’t care one way or the other. That’s why men should be more picky. Do you trust a woman who will let you have unprotected sex with her on the first date? These wealthy athletes who need to hold onto their used condoms aren’t commenting on women as much as they are commenting on their own low standards and stupidity.
You understand it’s a hypothetical question that has no basis in reality? Thus, how could I be presumptuous enough to think I could give a definitive answer? The fact is, there are many women with kids that get support from the government, the tax payers, because they didn’t care one way or the other if the men they had sex with would support them.
You will notice similar societal trends throughout history where one particular group is habitually blamed for everyone’s problems, then the accused group gets genocided. There are similarities in modern culture that people dismiss and gaslight (which is common during the aforementioned periods, unironically) regularly.
Obviously white men are not going to be genocided, mostly because it’s such a large and powerful group. The kulaks and Jews were such a small minority group by comparsion, and the U.S. is so different than the early USSR or Nazi Germany that the comparsion honestly makes little sense. A better comparison is the segregated South, and even there the blacks weren’t genocided, even in the peak of the KKK. I can understand the fear caused by the all the anti-white and anti-white man bullshit, though. Being brown, I had to deal with a bunch of anti-brown bullshit from 2001 to around 2012.
Why is it that every other group is allowed (and applauded) for speaking up about perceived injustices done unto them, but when I bring up the legitimately intentional disenfranchisement of white men - someone’s got a bone to pick?
Guys in general get less sympathy from the world, and I honestly blame other men for this. I know “women hate emotional, vulnerable men” is a meme online, but my personal experiences have been the opposite since I make it clear I’m emotional at first.
Usually, if a guy talks about the difficulties with being a man, he’ll be attacked more by other guys than girls. For example, I’ve never been called sexist by a girl, but have been called that many times by guys haha.
Are you saying most other groups have only had “perceived” injustices? That’s my point - you act like all these other groups need to shut up, but when the group you’re a part of is being mistreated for basically the first time ever, it’s a problem.
No need to get worked up though - I’m a stranger on the internet. We really don’t need to see eye to eye. Obviously you have enough time to reply to literally everyone who says anything, even when you repeatedly threaten to block/ignore them, which is a pretty badass thing to do to strangers on the internet.
I disagree. As a well treated Asian, for whom English is a second language (kidding, though I am an immigrant so technically correct), I disagree strongly with the cavalier manner in which words are being tossed around out here in Tate Land. Dictionaries are freely accessible via the interwebz, there is no excuse.
Oh yeah. This reminds me of when I found out that my friends who prided themselves for “being there” for their friends only meant “being there for the good times” because when the going got tough- they had nothing.
Just a bunch of foot shuffling and elsewhere to be.
No, I’m saying that those injustices are in the past and cannot be fixed today. I’m not diminishing any of what happened to them, just that they aren’t currently being purveyed.
There’s a stark difference between one formerly marginalized group speaking up about injustices done to them, and every formerly marginalized group speaking up. That difference gets more significant when the blame is aimed at one particular group.
There’s also a point at which we need to recognize the difference between the wrongs of the past, and the wrongs we’re walking into (as a society). One of them is avoidable, I wonder which.
For a well off white male with two white parents, it’s strange that I’ll be the first in my family to graduate college. You’d think that my parents/grandparents would have done more with our history of non-oppression… it’s almost like white folks have been oppressed in the past or something, i dunno.
You’re right, I’ve sworn off PWI repeatedly too and have been massively unsuccessful with that. I have the same inability to stop responding to people I’ve put on ignore. I blame my ADHD for that. It seems you only come here to disagree with me on what i post though, which is probably more interesting than my repeated compulsion to respond to PWI posts.
The absurdity of US racial classification means that for example Middle Easterners can shift their identity to prosper in their respective social circles, whether being the “oppressed” (if they want to make it to the podium in the victimhood olympics) or an “oppressor” (if they hang out with “I’m not racist but” people")
There’s a bit of a conundrum going on here. I haven’t see you do this and I don’t think you will, but several posters on here have said race and ethnicity are inconsequential and that no one should be judged because of them; racism and ethnocentricism are bad, and/or “race doesn’t exist. “There’s no such thing as a white/black/Asian person.”
Yet with all that said, I’ve seen some of these people on here bash and dehumanize as a whole:
White people
Chinese
Bulgarians
Russians
Croats
Germans
Middle Easterners
This, in addition to calling other posters’ countries “shit holes.”
This is incongruent. We’re told race and ethnicity is unimportant yet the aforesaid groups have been insulted and ridiculed because of the groups they belong to.
Again, I haven’t seen you do this. I’m just making relevant conversation.
This is s exactly how it starts.
Yes it is, and that’s why I ignore it. Race is immutable and it’s not a matter of what one considers himself.
Holy shit, if this is the case I’m gonna win the victimhood olympics. I’m 3/7 and if we squeeze the Jooooz into the Middle Eastern category it’s 4/7
Race to a large extent a pseudoscientific term, in many instances influenced by culture and circumstances. A person with the same amount of melanin in one’s skin is white in Brazil and black in Russia.
How people on the shores of the Mediterranean look largely the same, despite belonging to different “races” is another topic altogether.
I see this thread has mostly shifted away from a discussion about colossal tool Andrew Tate and towards the plight of white men, mostly in regards to the victimhood of deadbeat fathers. I’ve enjoyed reading the posts in this most recent twist.
It does bring up a question this group is surely equipped to handle with nuance and well thought zingers. What is the more common problem? Is it men who are fine with siring offspring with no intentions of supporting them? That seems common.
Is there a faction of serial breeders out there, gathering up all the sperm they can in an effort to put the shackles on bank accounts of unsuspecting fools who dare enter? That seems, less common when worded that way, but I’m sure this dark cabal of baby makers exists.
Or, is it something else, maybe a stupid human issue. A lot of people, especially people on the low end of the economic scale, are really bad at considering the future when they act today. I’d guess there are a lot of factors that are involved in ones inability to consider the future, I won’t assume to have my finger on the impulse (badum-tiss) as an expert here though. What I do know is that people can make pretty dumb choices, kids get to suffer for it, the government gets involved in different ways, and no one wins.
Yes, and that is one reason.why there used to be a “double” standard, and other forms of sexual regulation, of which I’ve previously discussed the function. But that was “oppressive” and “hypocritical”.
I don’t think such men intentionally aim to sire offspring with many different women; they simply want to screw a lot of women with no thought of consequences.
I mean, isn’t sex, “just sex”? So we’ve been told. Surely it ends with just orgasm; stuff like children, disease, blackmail, abuse, objectification, and manipulation can’t come out of it.
So do I. For example, many men complain about the destructive consequences of feminism. Yet feminism only exists by permission of men! If all adult men did an about-face and said, “We’re done with feminism; the party’s over,” it would end. But… that means a lot of the fun for some men would end too, and that’s precisely why I think they don’t want it to end.
I know this is where you and I differ in belief and I’m OK with that. By saying it’s immutable, I obviously expressed that it’s a biological construct, and it doesn’t change no matter where on earth one parks oneself.
As said elsewhere, I don’t drive people up a wall for their beliefs. I don’t think you do either. So I’ll keep this as it is.