Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[tesseract]

I disappear for a few months thinking that possibly the white knights had come up with a different approach other than name calling and tired old cliches.


Nope.

Ad hominem and shaming are the preferred method of the mangina, and they resort to this because they lack rational, logical and reasoned responses. Manginas show they're out of their depth on the subject. The average guy seeks the truth and uses logic as a tool to find it. The goal of manginas when confronted by those who see feminism differently to them isn't the seeking of truth, rather it seems to be about filling a psychological need. Male feminists are more aggressive than female feminists because male feminists need to prove themselves before they're considered part, or an ally, of the sisterhood. Female feminists are automatically given inclusion and title. Female feminist also don't have to be as aggressive because they can leave that to their male underlings and say that they're not like that. Female feminists can play the plausible deniability game when they have their useful idiot hatchet men to do their work for them. This aggressiveness by male feminists is used to impress their female masters of which they need and get their validation as "good men". Realize that male feminists act the way they do to otherize themselves from the average male. These male feminists are not like those bad men, they're different and good. 'See... see... didn't I do good in abusing that guy who talked shit about feminism'? It seems as though the male feminist considers: 'If I call him names and shame him, will I then be able to join the feminist club and be considered a "good man?"' So, unlike the average male who doesn't need outside validation and can simply be/exist and be comfortable with who he is, that's simply not the case with the male feminist, due to their psychological need for female validation. To a male feminist, being the recipient of female validation is the same as receiving his man card. With it he can say 'I am now a man'. The average bloke sees this goings-on and and views it as shameful behaviour, yet the mangina cares not about this, for his eye is squarely on the prize - a pat on the head by a female feminist.

Feminists use shaming tactics because shame works by getting its object to blame himself rather than being blamed by others. So the woman’s weapon must not be seen to be wielded by the woman. It's a covert and indirect attack, that's how women attack, and that's what has always been the nature of female power; they're not as direct and confrontational as men, but instead wield influence and manipulation that manifests itself through others. This covert method of using shame to attack is a form of psychological abuse and emotional manipulation.

Also, welcome back.

 

[romeoh]

Yep women do hurt men and they do hurt their children. But every study, in pretty well every country tells us that men hurt-other men, women and children a fair bit more than women do.
When you look at the evidence and can't reach a logical conclusion and instead find ways to dispute the numbers, or reinterpret them, or rewrite them. Or rant about feminist conspiracy theories, or post demented clips from one of the many nutters who abound on all sides of this debate, then it is telling.
So carry on, but the real information will defeat you every time. More importantly, whilst you are unable to see the cold, hard facts in front of you, this issue, which needs attention, is hampered.

 

[cartwright]

I can't take a grown "man" seriously when they use the term mangina.

 

[tesseract]

Yep women do hurt men and they do hurt their children. But every study, in pretty well every country tells us that men hurt-other men, women and children a fair bit more than women do.

I've already contradicted your dogmatically held belief that men commit DV more than women by sighting the world's largest bibliography of studies in the Violence Against Women thread. These studies do not come from the MRM or feminists, so the bias isn't there. These are peer reviewed studies. Your post amounts to 'la la la la la... I can't hear you... la la la la la' when confronted by evidence contrary to your belief. I hope Cartwright gave you a pat on the head or a tickle behind the ear for your effort, even though it was a lame one.

Btw, where are the studies that indicate men "hurt" men, women and children more? Framing your post in such a way is an attempt at sophistry, for "hurt" is far too vague to be of any value in matters pertaining specifically to the implied DV.

When you look at the evidence and can't reach a logical conclusion and instead find ways to dispute the numbers, or reinterpret them, or rewrite them.

Considering your stance, this coming from you is projection at its finest considering the bibliography I've previously produced.

Or rant about feminist conspiracy theories, or post demented clips from one of the many nutters who abound on all sides of this debate, then it is telling.
So carry on, but the real information will defeat you every time. More importantly, whilst you are unable to see the cold, hard facts in front of you, this issue, which needs attention, is hampered.

Given you've failed to take on board the bibliography of studies disproving your view on gender violence, you're not qualified to speak on "cold, hard facts". I'll leave you and your feminist handlers to deal in feelz > realz.

Btw, what feminist conspiracy theories are you specifically referring to?

Indeed I will carry on showing up intellectually dishonest ideologues like yourself.

 

[tesseract]

I can't take a grown "man" seriously when they use the term mangina.

That's good, because no one cares what a feminist cheerleader, like yourself, thinks. This whole thread has gone well over your head anyway, as displayed by your liking posts rather than contributing posts with actual substance. So keep on being a good little cheerleader while your mangina bunnies do all the heavy lifting for you.

 

[cartwright]

That's good, because no one cares what a feminist cheerleader, like yourself, thinks. This whole thread has gone well over your head anyway, as displayed by your liking posts rather than contributing posts with actual substance. So keep on being a good little cheerleader while your mangina bunnies do all the heavy lifting for you.

Don't you have a block of text, ripped off from some hate site, that no one will read - to post ?

 

[tesseract]

Don't you have a block of text, ripped off from some hate site, that no one will read - to post ?

Don't you have cheering, star-jumps and intermittent liking of posts to get back to, all while being in denial about not reading my posts? I find it amusing that you contradict yourself in your post by saying that no one reads my posts, while also pointing out that I use "mangina" in my posts. Perhaps your cheering and contradictions can be found to add some small amount of value to this thread after all - even if that value only exists in the form of lolza producing gaffes.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Only this clown will denounce ad hominen attacks whilst referring to those people as manginas.

 

[cartwright]

Lol. The Catholic Church is a mess, must be the womenz fault.
I actually thought this was a joke at first. Nope, he's serious

http://m.chippewa.com/news/local/st...5513-9e8a-929212176aee.html?mobile_touch=true

 

[scon]

I can't take a grown "man" seriously when they use the term mangina.

I have heard 'front-bum'
Never heard a grown man use the mangina term unless making a joke.

 

[Vic Vinegar]

interesting that when I first outed you as menzel, you acted all innocent - like you had no idea who that was, now you apparently know it was someone elses alias, someone who stopped posting shortly after you phoenixed into Raz0r6ack - amazing...

You are a moron.

 

[boytroy]

I think that a lot here has got to be said about who claims to be a feminist and especially when comparing them to mens' rights advocates. Mens' Rights people seem to be often married with children or straight young males while feminists seem to often be women who were rejected by men or even more commonly ugly/manly Lesbian types.

Clementine is a good example on this. The fact she can somehow attempt to justify she can comment on issues relating to married women who are mothers is hilarious and baffling considering she is a lesbian and has absolutely no first hand experience into these type of women's lives.

 

[cartwright]

I think that a lot here has got to be said about who claims to be a feminist and especially when comparing them to mens' rights advocates. Mens' Rights people seem to be often married with children or straight young males while feminists seem to often be women who were rejected by men or even more commonly ugly/manly Lesbian types.

Clementine is a good example on this. The fact she can somehow attempt to justify she can comment on issues relating to married women who are mothers is hilarious and baffling considering she is a lesbian and has absolutely no first hand experience into these type of women's lives.

Nice try.

 

[boytroy]

Nice try.

Seems you cannot refute the subject matter.

 

[skilts]

I've already contradicted your dogmatically held belief that men commit DV more than women by sighting the world's largest bibliography of studies in the Violence Against Women thread.

Now it's refutation by mere looking. Is English your first language? I exhort all posters to keep feeding this clown's paranoia. I sense that an overdose is imminent.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

I think that a lot here has got to be said about who claims to be a feminist and especially when comparing them to mens' rights advocates. Mens' Rights people seem to be often married with children or straight young males while feminists seem to often be women who were rejected by men or even more commonly ugly/manly Lesbian types.

Clementine is a good example on this. The fact she can somehow attempt to justify she can comment on issues relating to married women who are mothers is hilarious and baffling considering she is a lesbian and has absolutely no first hand experience into these type of women's lives.

So who's alias are you?

 

[tesseract]

Now it's refutation by mere looking. Is English your first language? I exhort all posters to keep feeding this clown's paranoia. I sense that an overdose is imminent.

Thanks for your keen attention that just contradicted Cartwright's call.

 

[cartwright]

So who's alias are you?

Mottrain.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Mottrain.

Yep. Funny they feel the need to make a new alias just so they can log in and make a lesbian joke.

 

[cartwright]

Yep. Funny they feel the need to make a new alias just so they can log in and make a lesbian joke.

yep.. and thinks a lesbian woman cant comment on a married woman's life, but a kissless, MRA supporting virgin can.

 

[scon]

Seems you cannot refute the subject matter.

Didn't think it was much of an effort myself and what you refer to as subject matter completes its own mangled demise.
Non-sense does not demand or warrant refutation bigfella.

 

[Chief]

Ad hominem and shaming are the preferred method of the mangina

This is hilarious. Tess you are so completely entertaining.

 

[Chief]

Only this clown will denounce ad hominen attacks whilst referring to those people as manginas.

Snap.

 

[Slax]

Lol. The Catholic Church is a mess, must be the womenz fault.
I actually thought this was a joke at first. Nope, he's serious

http://m.chippewa.com/news/local/st...5513-9e8a-929212176aee.html?mobile_touch=true

It'd pretty clear why the Pope stripped him of all power and sent him off to a backwater of the church where he can't do any more damage, but I like the idea of blaming all the world's problems on feminists, just tell me when and where the public lynching of Germaine Greer will occur and I'll be there to take part.

 

[tesseract]

This is hilarious. Tess you are so completely entertaining.

Mangina is a common use term referring to a male feminist. 'Mangina' and 'male feminist' are interchangeable, for they mean the same thing. I'm glad you're so easily amused... and confused.