Null is out of touch with women

[Harbinger of Kali Yuga]

Where I fully disagree with you is that the woman-hate thread is mostly humor and shitposts. There's a lot of venom in that thread, and from a lot more unique user IDs than in the man-hate thread. And sorry (not really), but calling a man a dick or a scrote isn't on par with characterizing all women as whores incapable of rational thought and devoid of any sense of accountability. Calling or seeing all men as inhuman rapists is pretty close, but again, the number of people going full turbo death-wishing on the opposite sex in the man-hate thread is minuscule by comparison.

And this is what I'm getting at, you're taking this shit too seriously. Do you really think people here really want TOTAL NIGGER DEATH? I'm sure if you polled people, it'd only be partial. Why do you care what anyone says in that thread? I say the same thing to guys whining about the man hate thread. Yes, I think men in general have darker and crueler senses of humor. Boys and girls act differently since very early childhood and it's (mostly) innate.

grand, sweeping pseudo-scientific statements -> death (and rape) to harlots (i.e., every woman, either because she's had sex, or because she didn't want sex with the commenter or they assume she wouldn't...or that old chestnut that she's past the wall (at 25 or 30, lol) or ugly or fat).

Words like... "incel," right? I don't know why but women are invisible to the double standards they impose.

You kind of prove my point just by writing that all out. You didn't like the very generalization I made "women can't/don't interact or rib the way men do." Men joke about raping and murdering each other and all sorts of dark shit. The fact is that men and women do not interact the same way with people. A dude would've shrugged that statement off if it were reversed. And I don't know why, never have been able to figure it, but women are free to generalize men to high heaven and men and women can both understand what generalizations are, but when a man generalizes women...

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

You didn't like the very generalization I made "women can't/don't interact or rib the way men do."

I literally agreed with you on that point in my very first statement.

Do you really think people here really want TOTAL NIGGER DEATH? I'm sure if you polled people, it'd only be partial.

Lol. "Only mostly death wishing!"

Why do you care what anyone says in that thread?

Lemme quote me:

Personally, idg much of af about the issue

it's an all-around dumb thing to be gassed up about

You kind of prove my point just by writing that all out.

Don't mistake earnest-posting for rabidity. Or lots of words for lots of invested emotion.

I like discussion. I trust - actually, I know - that some people here can have reactivity-free discussion even about high-key topics. Iirc, you and I may have had such an exchange in the past. My mistake if I misrecollected.

 

[Ingmar Aspergman]

characterizing all women as whores incapable of rational thought and devoid of any sense of accountability. Calling or seeing all men as inhuman rapists is pretty close,

 

[Stoneheart]

The only woman Null ever touched is his mom, so yeah he is pretty out of touch....

 

[AgendaPoster]

[You rated my post tmi? Too long, sure, but tmi usually means personal info, and nothing I wrote was personal. Definitely in my bottom 10% of personal info comments.]

And lol, yes, we know you are exercised about that thread. But @Harbinger of Kali Yuga advanced the idea that it was "the correct thing to do"; I merely concurred that it was reasonable. Where's your sassy comment to him?

Personally, idg much of af about the issue, though as I said I think it's reasonable, or at least not unreasonable. Colorable claim. We can disagree on that.

The huffing and puffing is funny, though.

Here's an idea for all the "life is competition; shut up and play" types*: fine, but don't whine when the rules you counted on change. Adaptability is a hallmark of resilience and likelihood of survival.

*I'm only half-hearted about this paragraph, because it's an all-around dumb thing to be gassed up about, but okay

Yeah, I rate long winded autistic rants TMI too. If it's not serious, be more concise.
It's not the thread that's the real issue. The issue is that women think they should be protected, i.e. treated in a special manner, and that males swarming them should be kept away by Jersh. At the same time, the same women think they are equal to males. Which is a clear contradiction.
Also, that thread is basically some sort of anti-"patriarchy" seething bubble, it contains a lot of degenerate, hateful lesbians.
I have no sympathy for such witchcraft, and yes, such rebellion attempts should be absolutely be forced to face the realities of life and the grug males they fear so much.
Equality means no hugboxes allowed. Both sex hate threads should be smashed to pieces. And the incels in the woman hate also need to be removed from their LDAR state by any means necessary.

 

[Harbinger of Kali Yuga]

Also, that thread is basically some sort of anti-"patriarchy" seething bubble, it contains a lot of degenerate, hateful lesbians.

The woman hate thread can barely stay on topic and it talks about shit like BG3 all the time, while the other is hyper-focused. They're not the same. Again though, I think any male that has to go in that topic to whine, even argue about stats, is a real putz. I barely go in BP as it is, it's full of posters I don't recognize and that is very scary. Also being around women makes me knees quake and I get scared, the thought of cooties makes me shiver.

Don't mistake earnest-posting for rabidity. Or lots of words for lots of invested emotion.

It's not that, I don't think a man generally would have taken the comment to heart that much and would have just said niggerfaggot. I'm not going to fault you for long-winded autistic rants because I know I'm the king of 'em unlike AP. I do the same thing and it's relaxing to sit back and overthink. But most men would've just insulted me and called me a faggot instead of defending themselves.

View attachment 5773865

I know right?

 

[AgendaPoster]

The woman hate thread can barely stay on topic and it talks about shit like BG3 all the time, while the other is hyper-focused. They're not the same.

I am still more irked about the sneaky expectation that we should have socializing based on "rights" and social norms that somehow, coincidentally, always favor the weak, in this case, women. Men have to behave. Men have to not do X or Y. Women, they're like some cuddly speshul species that can do no harm, should be granted privileges, safety and so on.
So when men see this and go "oh so you need males to police other males so you feel safe, a feat you cannot achieve yourselves", and start wondering, suddenly it's all about equality again, and how the intellectual realm is different than the physical and blah blah blah endlessly, a cycle between these positions of strategic vulnerability and seething and hatred from the safety bubble that was provided by men later on and demands of equal treatment.
Make up your damned minds already. Which is it?
Are you equal? Then you will compete against men. Maybe even in sports, until that equality desire you have gets smashed under the heavy hand of reality.
Or are you weaker and in need of protections? Then, you WILL act like a lady, and you will admit being the weaker sex of the species, with all the consequences of this statement.
And we will protect you then. Even at great cost to us.

 

[Lurker]

I am still more irked about the sneaky expectation that we should have socializing based on "rights" and social norms that somehow, coincidentally, always favor the weak, in this case, women. Men have to behave. Men have to not do X or Y. Women, they're like some cuddly speshul species that can do no harm, should be granted privileges, safety and so on.
So when men see this and go "oh so you need males to police other makes so you feel safe, a feat you cannot achieve yourselves", and start wondering, suddenly it's all about equality again, and how the intellectual realm is different than the physical and blah blah blah endlessly, a cycle between these positions of strategic vulnerability and seething and hatred from the safety bubble that was provided by men later on and demands of equal treatment.
Make up your damned minds already. Which is it?
Are you equal? Than you will compete against men. Maybe even in sports, until that equality desire you have gets smashed under the heavy hand of reality.
Or are you weaker and in need of protections? Then, you WILL act like a lady, and you will admit being the weaker sex of the species, with all the consequences of this statement.
And we will protect you then. Even at great cost to us.

nigger, get laid

 

[AgendaPoster]

nigger, get laid

That has literally zero impact on my truthful statements.
Also, are you here to guntguard again?
At least it's not the trombonista-supervised hugbox.
Still, I consider you inoffensive and have no desire to argue with you, tbh.

 

[Harbinger of Kali Yuga]

I am still more irked about the sneaky expectation that we should have socializing based on "rights" and social norms that somehow, coincidentally, always favor the weak, in this case, women. Men have to behave. Men have to not do X or Y. Women, they're like some cuddly speshul species that can do no harm, should be granted privileges, safety and so on.
So when men see this and go "oh so you need males to police other makes so you feel safe, a feat you cannot achieve yourselves", and start wondering, suddenly it's all about equality again, and how the intellectual realm is different than the physical and blah blah blah endlessly, a cycle between these positions of strategic vulnerability and seething and hatred from the safety bubble that was provided by men later on and demands of equal treatment.
Make up your damned minds already. Which is it?
Are you equal? Than you will compete against men. Maybe even in sports, until that equality desire you have gets smashed under the heavy hand of reality.
Or are you weaker and in need of protections? Then, you WILL act like a lady, and you will admit being the weaker sex of the species, with all the consequences of this statement.
And we will protect you then. Even at great cost to us.

I agree with that and it confuses me what a website like this that hates trannies expects. Are men and women the same or not?

I think intuitively off here everyone knows you can't speak to and joke around with women the same way you can with men. The two sexes do not interact the same and it couldn't be more obvious watching them. Women don't really jokingly insult each other, but men do it all the time, for example. (and then like with gamergate it's the men expected to change when women come in because, well, this sort of thing).

 

[Lurker]

That has literally zero impact on my truthful statements.
Also, are you here to guantguard again?
At least it's not the trombonista-supervised hugbox.
Still, I consider you inoffensive and have no desire to argue with you, tbh.

your longwinded post is more of the same malding you've been on for months, which boils down to

WHY WON'T WOMEN DEBATE ME WHY DO THEY GET THEIR OWN SPACE EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO INVADE EVERYONE'S SPACES

fucking obnoxious

edit: lol I like how you refuse to debate me but won't shut the fuck up about women having no interest in debating you

 

[AgendaPoster]

and then like with gamergate it's the men expected to change when women come in because, well, this sort of thing

I saw GG mentioned the last week quite a few times, not even here can people let go lmao.
I don't really agree with the gaming being a safe space for men thing. But if women wanna play, they should be called niggers and faggots, and if that gets too hot, it's umm, out of the kitchen, yeah
Also it's funny how with women you get all the advantages of diversity in media.
Each time they come and infect a space, homosexuality, transsexualism, PoCs and everything else follows.
With the comical situation where all good looking female representations should be prudishly covered up so they don't fall prey to the male gaze.
The absolute state of the matriarchy.

WHY WON'T WOMEN DEBATE ME WHY DO THEY GET THEIR OWN SPACE EVERYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO INVADE EVERYONE'S SPACES

You cannot debate me, cause I would easily win, since I am not lying. It's that easy, and it's the reason you seethe so hard.
If you need a safe space from males, say so. It's an admission of weakness and inferiority.

 

[Lurker]

You cannot debate me, cause I would easily win, since I am not lying. It's that easy, and it's the reason you seethe so hard.
If you need a safe space from males, say so. It's an admission of weakness and inferiority.

"i won't debate you 'cause i'd win."

has this site rotted your brain, or have you always been this retarded?

 

[Harbinger of Kali Yuga]

I saw GG mentioned the last week quite a few times, not even here can people let go lmao.
I don't really agree with the gaming being a safe space for men thing. But if women wanna play, they should be called niggers and faggots, and if that gets too hot, it's umm, out of the kitchen, yeah
Also it's funny how with women you get all the advantages of diversity in media.
Each time they come and infect a space, homosexuality, transsexualism, PoCs and everything else follows.
With the comical situation where all good looking female representations should be prudishly covered up so they don't fall prey to the male gaze.
The absolute state of the matriarchy.

You cannot debate me, cause I would easily win, since I am not lying. It's that easy, and it's the reason you seethe so hard.
If you need a safe space from males, say so. It's an admission of weakness and inferiority.

I didn't say gaming was a safe space for men. I said "men's space," a place usually for men for an activity men are more likely to prefer than women. It was, however, a particularly male activity, one that women looked down on until media (Bing Bang Theory) and other things made nerds "cool." Then when the women came in the men were expected to change for the women. It would be like going into a knitting meetup group with all the boys and taking over the women's conversation, talking about eating beef, lifting at the gym, how smelly your farts were yesterday, guy stuff, it would drive out the women. Hell, it's one reason it feels weird for me to post in or even browse BP.

In any case, historically, men and women's social activities were segregated, and I think maybe there were a lot of good reasons for that that weren't "sexism" but "they're not the same."

Each time they come and infect a space, homosexuality, transsexualism, PoCs and everything else follows.

I always say it, but nobody wants to take it seriously or they find a way to strip women of agency (when it's about accountability, that's when they don't want it) and somehow blame men for it, but it's women pushing this stuff now in society. The only reason trans creatures are even in women's groups is that the women are letting them in and INVITING them in. With trannies, here it may be different, but knowing women I am quite certain some of these women probably have entirely different expressed attitudes to their in-person friend groups.

You literally have women starting to come out and say that they're refusing to date men if they aren't woke socialists etc, what more evidence do people need?

 

[Friend of Dorothy Parker]

Yeah, I rate long winded autistic rants TMI too.

Fair.

If it's not serious, be more concise.

No.

It's not the thread that's the real issue. The issue is that women think they should be protected, i.e. treated in a special manner, and that males swarming them should be kept away by Jersh. At the same time, the same women think they are equal to males. Which is a clear contradiction.
Also, that thread is basically some sort of anti-"patriarchy" seething bubble, it contains a lot of degenerate, hateful lesbians.
I have no sympathy for such witchcraft, and yes, such rebellion attempts should be absolutely be forced to face the realities of life and the grug males they fear so much.
Equality means no hugboxes allowed. Both sex hate threads should be smashed to pieces. And the incels in the woman hate also need to be removed from their LDAR state by any means necessary.

Disagree with your follow-on assumptions about the requirements of equality. Equality is not identity (identity in the sense of being identical, not meaning sense of self, which isn't relevant to the point).

But whatever.

"Rebellion" is a loaded and dumb word in context, though (even dumber than "witchcraft"). It implies women should rightfully be under a male thumb - which, as I long-windedly pointed out before, is a very common, earnest and often-serious venomous perspective articulated in the woman-hate thread. Stoopid.

In any case, sex-wars aside, the topic in each of those threads is " -hate," so off-topic is reasonably excluded. If the exclusion is not so laser-accurate as it could be, meh. Two internet discussions among thousands. And men have posted and do post on that thread.

But if you hate it so much, why don't I see you railing against my and other women's exclusion from the man-hate thread on the basis of our sex just as much as you go on about the other one? Is it the italicized text at the top? Sorry that the women worked the system better than the men, I guess. Otherwise, there's no difference between the two threads' orientations.

I barely go in BP as it is, it's full of posters I don't recognize and that is very scary. Also being around women makes me knees quake and I get scared, the thought of cooties makes me shiver.

Lol. Omg, Harbinger has a sense of humor! [See, look how affirming I am! So womanly.] [and I will not put reddit /abbreviations after my comment, but bc I never know around here, I want to be clear that the foregoing is lighthearted teasing in a positive way and not angry sarcasm]

(I assume that was humor...right?)

(when it's about accountability, that's when they don't want it)

You literally have women starting to come out and say that they're refusing to date men if they aren't woke socialists etc, what more evidence do people need?

Men say the same shit*, and both men and women say it about whatever political views they don't like. That's 21st-century hyper-prescription in action.

* I haven't been on dating sites in years, but "if you like/hate Trump; if you like/hate cops; if you like/hate banks; if you like/hate abortion; if you like/hate Jesus, etc., we have nothing to talk about so keep it moving" has been out there forever. (I refer to dating sites because that's where you can see it in black & white.)

But most men would've just insulted me and called me a faggot instead of defending themselves.

I wasn't defending myself. I was responding. Those are different things.

And sure, maybe some men would've just called you dumb. What's that got to do with me?

It's not that, I don't think a man generally would have taken the comment to heart that much

Oh, I see. Yeah, no, I mainly like to think about things or think things through. Someone says something kind of interesting, and I think, "hmm, is that true?". Or might first think,"that's crap!" but then take a step back and actually walk through what they said and what I do think. Which is why I went through what I agreed with and didn't. And in the spirit of discussion, which I generally enjoy, tried to get to why.

My point was that a long reply (from me) doesn't mean I took anything "to heart," rather that it sparked a line of thought.

Men have to behave. Men have to not do X or Y. Women, they're like some cuddly speshul species that can do no harm, should be granted privileges, safety and so on.

Lol. Women have been being told to "behave" forever. I can't guarantee I'd find those exact words in your posts (and I'm not going to go look), but half of your comments on women effectively say precisely that (...lol, I should've scrolled to the end of your paragraph for an example).

Are men and women the same or not?

Equality =/= same

A pound of feathers weighs exactly what a pound of rocks weighs. They are equal, but that doesn't mean they are the same.

Equality is about acknowledging equivalent value. It's not about pretending that one group is as a whole lesser in essential value (though of course individuals or their adopted points of view or conduct have varying levels of merit, both objectively and subjectively) or insisting that one group gets to define how the other should "behave." There's a difference between,"I envision to marrying a woman who wants to be a homemaker" and "women are too stupid/emotional to hold a real job and also should be pressing my pants, so therefore they should not be allowed [by us across-the-line superior sorts, who own the right to decide] to have one."

In any case, historically, men and women's social activities were segregated, and I think maybe there were a lot of good reasons for that that weren't "sexism" but "they're not the same."

It's contextual. A gynecologist's office is a reasonable place to say "it's only for women*"; a boardroom is not a reasonable counterpart place to say, "it's only for men." Some girls are good gamers; some men are good knitters. Both should be able to compete/participate in those things without being specifically targeted or excluded for things irrelevant to interest or skill. Men's clubs exist; women's clubs exist. That's different than general/subject-matter interest groups that aren't inherently based on sex.

The NFL is competitive; participants have to be able to hang at the competitive level. The type of competition means it's all men. But if some woman were able to compete at that level, she shouldn't be excluded purely because of her sex. And a woman participating in, say, a football discussion board, which has zero barriers to entry and requires nothing but interest, should be completely uncontroversial. (Not for nothing, but I've done so, and I know a lot more than many of the male fans do, and less than some. Should I be excluded? [Side note: most of those types of boards have a lot stricter rules about interaction, especially commenter-to-commenter ragging, and a lot more and prissier moderation, despite being 95% male, than you find here. Seems that not all men view being called/calling other guys a dick-eating nonce as an important identity point.])

*many men do go there, though, to accompany a woman, especially with a pregnant wife. I hate it, but whatever. And yes, I'm excluding the whole dumb trans-woman situation bc it's dunb.

 

[AgendaPoster]

"Rebellion" is a loaded and dumb word in context, though (even dumber than "witchcraft"). It implies women should rightfully be under a male thumb - which, as I long-windedly pointed out before, is a very common, earnest and often-serious venomous perspective articulated in the woman-hate thread. Stoopid.

Well yeah, cause I am intentionally acidic in circumstances like this.
Also, we lived in patriarchal societies for many millennia, and they are the result of the physical dominance males enjoy.
Instead of females being thankful for Western males giving them "rights", they are seething even harder.
Also you might remember I am quite hostile to liberalism and I consider "rights" quite the fake concept.
What is needed is a new social contract, where all rights come with responsibilities. If those are not met, well, it's time to see what rights are to be expunged.

But if you hate it so much, why don't I see you railing against my and other women's exclusion from the man-hate thread on the basis of our sex just as much as you go on about the other one?

Unfair accusations. I asked that both threads are to be dismantled/merged. I have not ONCE made a pro-incel argument, I've always argued against safe spaces and hugboxes. The whole isolation thing is retarded, and most arguments in that thread are low IQ and generally coming from unfucked deathfat men, with whom I have basically no sex-solidarity.

The NFL is competitive; participants have to be able to hang at the competitive level. The type of competition means it's all men. But if some woman were able to compete at that level, she shouldn't be excluded purely because of her sex.

The WNBA is competitive. Participants have to be able to hang at the competitive level. The type of competitions means it's all women. But if some men were able to compete at that level, they shouldn't be excluded purely because of their sex.

---

Read your posts. You want protections for YOUR sex. You essentially want the state to make sure women are protected from men, when YOU consider it necessary. You want women to have spaces, sports etc. away from men.
But women should be able to come and mix with men when they feel like it? And men should not be able to kick their asses out just based on their sex?
How fucking lunatic is this expectation?
Again.
If you want special treatment for women, we shall grant it to you.
As a feature of the patriarchy.
And you women will have to DO STUFF for men too. You should not be granted ANYTHING without a transaction that's convenient to males too.
We can negotiate. In fact, we should renegotiate all the social contracts.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

"i won't debate you 'cause i'd win."

has this site rotted your brain, or have you always been this retarded?

Haven't bothered reading the full context of this spat but this comment is funny coming from a 2013 poster.

 

[Lurker]

But women should be able to come and mix with men when they feel like it? And men should not be able to kick their asses out just based on their sex?
How fucking lunatic is this expectation?
Again.
If you want special treatment for women, we shall grant it to you.
As a feature of the patriarchy.
And you women will have to DO STUFF for men too. You should not be granted ANYTHING without a transaction that's convenient to males too.

lol no

 

[Molag Bal]

Shit isnt that hard to get with a younger girl in your 30s assuming youve kept in shape. I can still pull 21yos in my mid 30s, especially living in a college town. Add thay most zoomer males are on medication or brown and its been easy. Nocap frfr

In case that wasn't obvious, the whole "noooo you can't date young women, dating women in their twenties is creepy" shit is just women PAST their prime trying to forbid you from dating women who are still IN their prime. And there's no moral reason for it, they only repeat this meme because a 37 year-old woman with inflated ego who is set in her ways, cannot compete with a 25-year-old woman who might still be reasoned with (and unlike the former, can still reliably have children).
It's like if men started collectively arguing that dating a guy who has a stable income is somehow immoral.

 

[KittyGremlin]

In case that wasn't obvious, the whole "noooo you can't date young women, dating women in their twenties is creepy" shit is just women PAST their prime trying to forbid you from dating women who are still IN their prime. And there's no moral reason for it, they only repeat this meme because a 37 year-old woman with inflated ego who is set in her ways, cannot compete with a 25-year-old woman who might still be reasoned with (and unlike the former, can still reliably have children).
It's like if men started collectively arguing that dating a guy who has a stable income is somehow immoral.

I can see that point, but if I'm in my 50s I just don't see myself having the same values and priorities as someone in their 20s or even 30s. But that's just me.