• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Why can't we hate men?"

pharphis said:
Was that his reason, though? That he can't control himself? I thought it was to protect himself from any possible questions (false allegations, lack of trust between him and his wife...).

Whether that's a reasonable precaution or not is a different question but it's not completely absurd to keep oneself out of danger. Lots of teachers have a similar policy with "no closed doors" around students
Click to expand...

I am a teacher and I have that particular policy. However, I don't think Pence has cited that as his reason not to be alone with women. I think his rule is in the same category as the "Billy Graham rule" which is not done for reasons of avoiding baseless accusations from women.

ETA: I should add that while I try not to be alone with children, I have no prohibitions about eating with any of my female coworkers without my wife present. I do not anticipate any problems on that front.
 
Last edited:
Fudbucker said:
I am a teacher and I have that particular policy. However, I don't think Pence has cited that as his reason not to be alone with women. I think his rule is in the same category as the "Billy Graham rule" which is not done for reasons of avoiding baseless accusations from women.

ETA: I should add that while I try not to be alone with children, I have no prohibitions about eating with any of my female coworkers without my wife present. I do not anticipate any problems on that front.
Click to expand...

ah I see. Well I don't know his actual cited reason, and missed it if it was mentioned. Has he said why, specifically, he does this?

That said, I don't have such fears but I will be a teacher in a few years and I will absolutely never be alone with a student, since I'm male. Better to play it safe with minimal effort than risk completely ruining your life based on a false allegation. I can see why someone would hold such a policy not based on thinking they lack self-control but external factors. Now, if you're a high status politician I can only imagine the risk is much much higher.
 
d4m10n said:
So . . . a draft law which only targets men also opens that door?
Click to expand...

A little bit. Which is one reason to avoid such a draft except at great need. And if there is great need, it provides a benefit sufficient to justify the risk.
 
Ziggurat said:
A little bit. Which is one reason to avoid such a draft except at great need. And if there is great need, it provides a benefit sufficient to justify the risk.
Click to expand...
Have you ever complained about the draft law hitherto just now?
 
MRA's, PUA's, and Incels spew misogynistic hatred all over the internet all day, every day.

But never mind that, let's all get hung up on one single op-ed from a radfem.

Because that makes sense. :D
 
Can anyone find a single example of such hatred in a mainstream op-ed directed at women? Any other group? Maybe white people?

I would be genuinely shocked. Maybe something racial 50+ years ago?
 
Lambchops said:
MRA's, PUA's, and Incels spew misogynistic hatred all over the internet all day, every day.

But never mind that, let's all get hung up on one single op-ed from a radfem.

Because that makes sense. :D
Click to expand...
When invited to comment on the op ed one can oppose it without being "hung up". I have an opinion on it. Just as I have an opinion on mysogyny. While noting that mysogyny is more common and more influential than this radifem misandry, I am entitled to have an opinion on the latter phenomenon.
 
Last edited:
Lambchops said:
MRA's, PUA's, and Incels spew misogynistic hatred all over the internet all day, every day.

But never mind that, let's all get hung up on one single op-ed from a radfem.

Because that makes sense. :D
Click to expand...

One thing is spewing hatred in small forums and on SoMe. Spewing hatred in a publication like Washington Post is another thing altogether..

I bet you 10 broken matches that the "reverse" op-ed would never see the light of day in e.g. WaPo.
 
erlando said:
One thing is spewing hatred in small forums and on SoMe. Spewing hatred in a publication like Washington Post is another thing altogether..

I bet you 10 broken matches that the "reverse" op-ed would never see the light of day in e.g. WaPo.
Click to expand...

Here's a Q&A with a PUA that was hosted by...Washington Post.

Incels, in particular, only got introcuded to the mainstream after a handful of mass murders and shooting sprees, but related enraged male movements (eg. Gamergate, the "alt-right" aka Nazi fetishists, the "Intellectual Dark Web") have all received some obnoxiously friendly coverage in their own years.
 
Mumbles said:
Here's a Q&A with a PUA that was hosted by...Washington Post.

Incels, in particular, only got introcuded to the mainstream after a handful of mass murders and shooting sprees, but related enraged male movements (eg. Gamergate, the "alt-right" aka Nazi fetishists, the "Intellectual Dark Web") have all received some obnoxiously friendly coverage in their own years.
Click to expand...

Answer honestly did you read the article in your link?

Not even going to say why it seems like you didn't can you tell?
 
sadhatter said:
Answer honestly did you read the article in your link?

Not even going to say why it seems like you didn't can you tell?
Click to expand...
Can you be specific about this observation, for the benefit of other readers? Please therefore tell us why it seems as if Mumbles didn't read the linked article.
 
Mumbles said:
Here's a Q&A with a PUA that was hosted by...Washington Post.

Incels, in particular, only got introcuded to the mainstream after a handful of mass murders and shooting sprees, but related enraged male movements (eg. Gamergate, the "alt-right" aka Nazi fetishists, the "Intellectual Dark Web") have all received some obnoxiously friendly coverage in their own years.
Click to expand...

Would you kindly quote relevant passage that shows whatever you are after?
 
d4m10n said:
I cannot seem to find the part of the transcript where the PUA bros say it's okay hate women.
Click to expand...

sadhatter said:
Answer honestly did you read the article in your link?

Not even going to say why it seems like you didn't can you tell?
Click to expand...

erlando said:
Could you point out the hatred or misogony in that transcript?
Click to expand...

Klimax said:
Would you kindly quote relevant passage that shows whatever you are after?
Click to expand...

1. Assume that PUAs think it's okay to hate women.
2. Further assume that everything a PUA says translates to "it's okay to hate women".
3. Cite something a PUA says, as evidence they think it's okay to hate women.
4. ???
5. Profit!

Also there's a huge difference between:

We found someone who advocates misandry. We have interviewed them and published the interview.​

And:

We found someone who advocates misandry. Specifically, we have given them a platform to publish their advocacy.​
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
So . . . a draft law which only targets men also opens that door?
Click to expand...

Ziggurat said:
A little bit. Which is one reason to avoid such a draft except at great need. And if there is great need, it provides a benefit sufficient to justify the risk.
Click to expand...

d4m10n said:
Have you ever complained about the draft law hitherto just now?
Click to expand...

If Ziggurat won't, I will. I consider the requirement for men only to register for the Selective Service to be INCREDIBLY unfair to men and I would prefer that women be required to register the same as men. Either that or abolish the requirement altogether; it's an antiquated requirement from a time before we had a sufficiently large volunteer force to be able to handle most conflicts. It's not strictly necessary any longer. Our military is, including reserve forces, nearly two million strong; that is a more than sufficient force to protect the country, especially given the recent advances in military technology. And I've stated as much in other sites or in comments on articles many times. Should our volunteer force drop below sufficient numbers to be able to protect the country, then perhaps it should be reinstituted, but for now, it's outdated and unnecessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom