Gynocentrism Sucks
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Excellent article. Anyone know how to obtain a copy of that research?
@Kate: Is it not true that if women delay or forgo pregnancy the overall birthrate goes down?
If we do not breed enough to replace ourselves what happens?
Do we make up the shortfall with immigration? Or simply allow the general population to dwindle?
Can Western culture survive if the Westerners disappear? Do feminists even want Western culture to survive?
Here's quite an irony: at the present rate of birth and immigration, a possible majority Islamic UK state could be achieved within just a few generations. An Islamic state must be the exact opposite of what feminists want.
BTW, whatever happens, white anglo saxons/celts will be small minority.
Yes it is ironic, one theory is that feminists actually want this subconsciously, ie. they are looking for stronger men than they see around them in the West
@Kate: Is it not true that if women delay or forgo pregnancy the overall birthrate goes down?
If we do not breed enough to replace ourselves what happens?
Do we make up the shortfall with immigration? Or simply allow the general population to dwindle?
Can Western culture survive if the Westerners disappear? Do feminists even want Western culture to survive?
John Beynon, a Welsh cultural studies academic, examined how masculinity was portrayed in the British quality press including The Times, The Guardian and The Sunday Times over a three-year period from 1999-2001 and in books such as Susan Faludi's 2000 best-seller Stiffed: The Betrayal of Modern Man. Beynon concluded in his 2002 book, Masculinities and Culture, that men and masculinity were overwhelmingly presented negatively and as "something dangerous to be contained, attacked, denigrated or ridiculed, little else".
That biological differences exist between the sexes is beyond dispute.
To argue that such differences has no bearing on violence is also very unrealistic.
For example if men and women commit domestic violence at a similar rate, women will get hurt more. Not because of more evil will from men, after all they initiate equally, but simply because men are bigger and thus hit harder.
I find it ironic that you blame us for trying to deny logical consequences.
I have read a lot of feminist literature and very, very often will it say some trait is biological when it favours women and that it is a social construction when it somehow disfavors women. Then they will hide behind "yes, but there are different kinds of feminisms". Well, how appropriate. This way feminism will never be made to account for it body if incoherent ideas.
I don't mind touching as long as it is platonic. Anything weird just annoys me.
And all of this in a world that constantly tells us: Men have all the power and women are weak/innocent beings with no rights/power in our society. I feel like I am in the frickin Twilight Zone.
The grandfather who bounces his grandchild on his knee is at risk.
Overall note to everyone: from what I can see, the main problem with your arguments is that on the one hand, you argue from biological differences to promote policy changes in schools etc. Yet you will not acknowledge the part biological differences may play in issues of violence, including rape and domestic violence. If ANYONE here can refute this apparent contradiction in a logical way, I would like to hear it....also, if anyone actually wants to answer any of the questions I have asked about the MRM that would be nice, too.
August 2, 1999--Women are just as violent to their spouses as men, and they are almost three times more likely to initiate violence in a relationship, according to a new Canadian study, as reported in the National Post.
Perhaps the most surprising aspect of the study, however, is the source of the data -- a 1987 survey of 705 Alberta men and women that reported how often males hit their spouses.
Although women were asked the same questions as men in 1987, their answers were never published until now. When the original study was published in the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science in 1989, it was taken up by feminist groups as evidence of the epidemic of violence against women.
Brian, as we discussed briefly, I am interested to know how you connect feminism to the poor image of men and boys presented in the media. I understand what you are saying about not feeling needed, but really, why would the views of some women, lesbians, that they don't need men, affect you so negatively? They were talking about their own preferences. Why is that so threatening to some men? Furthermore, I would be interested to know why you think (if you think) women aren't presented in negative ways in the media. I think they are.
"They are branded as troublemakers in schools - and they often have no role models in the home because of the high rate of single-parent households - and then in the media the role models they see are overwhelmingly negative."
And the trend towards "demonising, marginalising and trivialising of men and male identity" could turn into a tug-of-war with serious mental health consequences for a generation of young boys.
"We are probably having a negative impact on young men's esteem and we are definitely having an impact on young boy's self esteem," he says.
"Ultimately such portrayals could lead to negative social and even financial costs for society in areas such as male health, rising suicide rates and family disintegration."
I still don't think I should stop believing in the scientific method & the scientific findings because of the few that cover their asses to appease the PC crowd or promote junk science to get their names in print.
So why the hell do they keep touching me? Heck that Hawiian airline got sued for some pilot just touching some stewardess's ass. But its always touch touch touch. I can't touch but they can? I'm not supposed to touch anyone so why do they get the right to touch me whenever it suits them? I am so sick of the double standard.
Quote from: brian44
As I said above, when a research grant is at stake, research method and interpretation can be affected. I've seen lots of dodgy stuff out there from 'eminent' people. So I don't agree that the problem is just the way feminists accept/reject science to suit themselves. Some of the science is wrong as well.
Right. Scientists are sometimes wrong. Wrong theories... wrong methods... wrong motivations. No one is perfect.
I want to see the fems apply the same logic to feminism that they applied to science. Unless... they feel feminism is infallible.
