Yes, 100%. I am morbid curious about the inevitable moid replies to that tweet.
Thought hating women came from the way women treat them not cause they can't get a gf. Wouldn't it more be like 'they only want muscular guys' or something and 'they're so shallow'. They probably also resent false rape accusations cause they get brought up in new media a lot. I don't know, end of the day one isn't any more legitimate than the other, who's to say you're allowed to hate someone for one reason and not another.
Incels think they own woman in some way and are entitled to sex.
They have terrible personalities in nearly all cases.
Looks do not always matter look at Elliot Rodger.
>>69320>came from the way women treat them
My bf has told me woman can treat men pretty badly, but at the end of the day it's only related to dating. Their hate comes from rejections. As bad as it might be, it does not compare to hate born from fear.
Twitter moids are parasites. Pathetic gangs come around screaming about how our fear/trauma doesn’t mean that we should be “bigots”. Constant drops of “what if you said you feared black ppl!!!” as well.
Your feelings of rejection do not matter when it comes to mine and other women’s safety. Period.
Also yes OP is spot on
>ALMOST happened to me
In other words, women don't have that ability. Thanks, pickme.
no one said all women were innocent. weird thread to get defensive in
Weird thread to go on the offensive in. You read like a moid pretending to be a man-hating woman.
There's that word again. Guess women really do need evidence in order to ruin people's lives, huh?
Yeah, just like "almost raped" doesn't mean the experience was altogether unpleasent and anxiety inducing. Doesn't matter because it didn't actually happen right? /s
There are more reasons to hate men than there are to hate women, but hating men is still wrong.
It's kind of like hating Muslims instead of Christians. Sure Muslims are way more violent and do all kinds of terrible things, but that doesn't give anyone the right to paint all of them with the same brush.
do not bring your twitter tone indicator bullshit on here
idk what you guys are arguing about but this tweet is objectively true so
Maybe for some people but I have a list much longer than that for hating: men, women, animals, plants even some very provocatively placed rocks. I can't forgive existence itself for keeping me in a cycle of building and disappointing expectations so my dreams of getting back somehow just hit whatever is around.
Sure, but only because most women have been socialized into not finding ways of defending oneself a good thing to learn, despite the countless of workshops about women's self-defense, gun safety classes, etc.
It is an absolute privilege that I am able to live somewhere where I have something to defend myself, and if you do also, you should be able to use it as well, for which it is very likely that some wonderful woman was able to make it legal instead of illegal like some literal shitholes around the world.>latter part
Yes, with the addition of what >>69299 said + "can't get harem of 11/10 underage girls" and "muh feminism."
>>69390>but hating men is still wrong.
No it's not, you dumb scrote/handmaiden. There was zero hate crimes commited by women against men in human history, crimes commited for the sole reason of them being men etc. Meanwhile femicide is a thing.
That's kindergarten level logic, they were mean to us so we should be mean to them. Might as well genecide the germans and japanese then, hate and violence begets hate and violence. You're gonna have to do more than propel the cycle to end it
I feel it's somewhat true.
Lots of manhating is for the reason described but a nontrivial amount is also due to "can't get bf"
Except male desire to subjugate women is literally biologically ingrained in them, but not vice versa. You can't change men.
Anyone can get a bf, but 99% of men aren't worth having as a bf
Why do you think this? I think most men are ok but I want good
Looking at the warring history of some nations you may conclude the same, that somehow it's something inherent in them that causes it but it's a weak argument among gender/race/national lines.
Why would males want to subjugate women anyways? That wouldn't serve their purposes, they want a female to pick them so they subjugate and put down other men. Or do something to show their status so they're picked. Men are naturally defensive of women, how do you square that with a biological urge to subjugate women?
If you can hate man for what's biologically ingrained in them, why can't a man hate us for what's biologically ingrained in us? Because our biological ingrainments are inherently "good" by default?
>>70060>men murder women>women are mad about being murdered>HURR DURR IT LOOK SAME
i'm going to tentatively say yes. i try to think of reasons why men hate women specifically that don't somehow relate to sex or relationships but am coming up quite dry.
i mean, if a guy hates women because he was assaulted/raped by one at some point (probably in his youth), then sure, understandable. but if it's a dude that's seething at women because nobody will fuck him and all his past girlfriends got mad at his bdsm obsession or he's ugly as fuck and pissed that some unattainable femme ideal with never look his way then it's like…shut up bitch
this all sounds retarded to me but i don't feel like changing anything
From what moral standpoint do you say murdering people is bad? From a moral system a male created?
>>70081>from a moral system a male created?
Nonviolence is a female concept, not a male one. The stats prove it.
Will to morality would state instead that females tend to have less opportunity to commit acts of violence without consequence as males tend to do so. Oldest records I can find codifying murder as being immoral are Sumerian legal code and Moses in Biblical record, both male dominated societies.
>>70085>women are actually the violent ones because thought crimes
Woah how do you even manage to misread a sentence that badly? Again, why is violence bad? Yes, we establish that men commit more violence on average. This is true, but why is violence bad
Assuming violence is physical pain inflicted from one party to another.
Humans function well in groups. We have social needs (feels good to spend time together) and have different individual skills, sharing these skills can better everyone.
Groups need peace and agreement to function efficiently (relationships get complicated if we don't trust each other). When people are violent and out of control, no one can trust anyone not to beat them up or kill them at any time for any reason. This fear discourages people from interacting, so no group.
People do not like violent acts done to them as it hurts and can disable them. People do not like pain (generally) and do not want to be disabled or die (generally).
I'm not a philosopher OR a man, but this seems like common sense.
On an emotional level, I also don't like hurting people. I have empathy and always have. But for people who don't, a culture of nonviolence will keep them in check.
Death penalty is another issue obviously. So is sado-masochism.
But basically it's not preferable to be in a culture where I feel threatened at all times, so I wish for a group of people who feel the same way since it will be agreed upon that we won't be beating on each other regularly.
stupidest fucking argument i've ever seen in my life "hurr durr violence isn't inherently bad"
if you're a pickme or something or a moid just get out of here lol
Doesn't seem like that was the argument at hand, the question is 'is it right to hate someone for what is biologically inherent in them?', if so the implications are endless. Who and how will you determine what is good or bad, how do you separate nuture/nature influence?
At that point anyone could anyone else for countless reasons, men are aggressive, women are passive, people have an ingroup bias, people are discriminatory, etc.
Doesn't seem right to hate someone for something they can't control. Psychopaths are like this, they're cruel and terrible people with little exception but roll it back far enough and they're the 7 year old in a certain environment with certain parents destined to become a psychopath.
What if violence is used to save you from violence?
violence breeds violence. that'll just create more violence in turn
What is law then. Are you not supposed to punish a rapist?
you're not supposed to rape in the first place
Correct, now, as you said, violence creates violence, so why does the law committing violence by punishing the rapist not count as perpetuating the cycle?
i didn't say that it doesn't count though
Oh I see, so you agree that it would be incorrect to punish the rapist as we wouldn't want to use violence to create more violence then, no?
he (and it's probably a he) should just be killed lol
harm reduction i guess. murder is still violence but at least he won't be alive and bitter anymore. that way the cycle would still continue, his family (if he had one) would def hate it but it'd motivate parents to tell their moid children to respect people's boundaries. thus less rapes would be committedyes it sounds naive i know but i have no fucking idea how to reduce the harm by any other means.
Wow, great. Yes. A non-violent utopia is absolutely impossible to achieve because someone will always betray the rules. Some people will just choose to be selfish and this will never change because people are individuals. It's stressful to exist around other humans but we also need each other.
This isn't some monumental discovery you've made that none of us are aware of. We know. We're all adults here (unless some sub-18's are making selfish choices) and have had bad experiences with others.
Anyway, all this deconstruction of basic knowledge aside, I don't even hate men nor do I fully condone other women doing so. I have male friends and they're neat. But it's understandable why someone may be cautious around them, as we should be with everyone. They're big, they're more aggressive on average. I'm also cautious around big, stray dogs.
So I agree with you (assuming you're the original >>69390
or agree with her) but you asking us why we don't want to be murdered is an odd way of expressing your point. Whatever your tactics, it's likely the man-hate anons won't change their minds until they deal with their feelings on their own.
Rape and abuse towards women is present in hunter gatherer societies and typically femininine activities are seen as "lesser" because females themselves are seen as lesser. Also male chimps stalk and beat females, even among bonobos, where males are less agressive than among chimps, you still have sexual coercion. Females form groups to defend themselves from male abuse but the sons of dominant females are still allowed to sexually coerce lower-hierarchy females. Dominating females and seeing them as lesser is cross-cultural and happens among all hominids.
Men being naturally aggressive doesn't equal women being naturally passive, it's not dualistic. Read about sexual conflict. Females across species don't just passively take male abuse.
I didn't mean it like that, more like males are aggressive and females are less aggressive which is just a valid a reason as any other to dislike someone. Aggression evolved as a problem solving mechanism and it's helpful in short term conflict. Disagreeable people are paid more for similar reasons. In any case it was only an example.
You could dislike females for being more neurotic despite it being helpful to be sensitive to danger cause then you're more cautious. Point being who's to say, and on what basis, biological features makes it right to hate someone. We wouldn't have evolved the range of personality we have unless it was useful at least one environment.>>70162
Extremely high murder rates are also present in hunter gatherer societies but I don't see what bearing that has. I agree feminine activities are seen as lesser but only among men which makes sense. The way masculine activities are seen as lesser among women. I'd also be careful to anthropomorphize bonobos in such a way and assuming they see their females as lesser than they. It's an evolved mating strategy that you're applying human psychology to.
Except female nautoticism doesn't make them more dangerous towards women (or men), they're not resposible for the wast majority of pedophilia, rape and murder. 58% of female homicide victims dies from the hands of their male partners or family members. So no, female neuroticism is not as valid as a reason to hate someone. Women literally pay the highest price for being with and around men.
And having natural tendencies doesn't mean you're literally forced to act on them. Men KNOW what they're doing and they know it benefits them or it just gives them pleasure, so they choose to do it.
Also, read what Bryan Sykes and Steve Jones said about males. From biological point of view, they're parasites who exploit females. Dawkins also categorized sperm carriers as "exploiters" while explaining sexual reproduction in The Selfish Gene. It's in their nature to exploit. But humans choose to add all the extra sadism and control to it, besides the basic breeding process, which already is asymmetrical.
My point wasn't female neurotocism is undesirable, it was just that any reason is as valid as any other, your line of reasoning isn't universally applicable. Someone could hate neurotic people cause they're always anxious and get emotional when it comes time to problem solve. I only used that example cause females happen to be more neurotic that males.
Again this is just one example, you could hate groups for having a biologically instantiated in-group bias. You could hate people for having a novel response which results in apparently racist behavior. The endless list of reasons that open up when it's right to hate someone for what's inherent in them biologically is the problem.
I have a few points about what you're saying but I do largely agree, you're tackling the wrong thing though. This is an inordinate fixation on not the point itself but a demonstrative example off the top of my head. Yeah most female homicide victims dies from the their partner or family but almost all homicide victims die from someone close to them.