"Why can't we hate men?"

[d4m10n]

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...

First the former, then the latter, IMO. [emoji6]

 

[pharphis]

Selective Service enrollment is needed for various things, too. It's not like you can just avoid it and get all the privileges in life that others do. I believe it's necessary to get student loans off the top of my head, as well as some other things.

Some men's rights groups have tried opposing it many times in a legal way. IIRC the NCFM has been working toward that.

 

[Fizil]

While I agree Selective Service should be done away with, I have to disagree that if it isn't women should also have to register.

If the occasional woman wants to join the professional military, and engage in combat, that is fine by me. Few enough women want to that it doesn't have a huge effect on society. However the wholesale drafting of large chunks of women in wartime, then sending them off to fight and die, could be disastrous.

Men are more disposable than women. Only women can bear offspring, and every woman killed in battle means a lower population in the next generation. Men killed in battle can be relatively easily replaced by other men in the reproductive process.

Forcing equal representation in a military draft would be stupid social policy.

 

[d4m10n]

You seem to be assuming that the draft would assign everyone to combat roles.

 

[luchog]

Men are more disposable than women. Only women can bear offspring, and every woman killed in battle means a lower population in the next generation. Men killed in battle can be relatively easily replaced by other men in the reproductive process.

Last I checked, neither the US, nor any other part of the world, is in danger of running out of people anytime soon.

And modern warfare does not have the enormous attrition rates that previous-century warfare did. At least not any war that we're likely to engage in, that does not also involve nuclear weapons.

 

[pharphis]

Came across a possible example, but haven't had time to read it (it's not long, but I want to post it before I forget about it and the link)

https://huffingtonpost.com/entry/op...b2a7597e4b0f0b9e9a7b6d8?utm_source=reddit.com

A very very cursory glance suggests it's a "white women are evil because they support the truly evil people, MEN", but we'll see. Not quite what I want thinking but it's at least closer to the mark (though it's huffpo) than random interviews with PUAs

 

[Ziggurat]

Last I checked, neither the US, nor any other part of the world, is in danger of running out of people anytime soon.

The US fertility rate is now below replacement rate. That will cause problems. Immigration is a sub-optimal solution to that, and may not be available if major war breaks out.

We are not past the point where demographics matter.

Oh, and Russia is already dropping in population. And they cannot get immigrants to prop up their numbers.

 

[Mumbles]

I cannot seem to find the part of the transcript where the PUA bros say it's okay hate women.

Those particular guys don't. But what the "PUA"s often do, outside of very basic advise, is sell high-priced CDs and seminars promising lonely men that they'll "get laid" with their techniques. Some are benign, some are...not, such as admitted rapist "Roosh V".

Guess what happens to at least some guys that find these techniques aren't solutions to some Rubik's Cube of sexual conquest, though?

And I'll note that you ignored my point about the loving coverage of people like Richard Spencer (until he organized violent hate rallies), or as another example Milo Whatever (oops, there was footage of him advocating sex with underaged people, on Joe Rogan's very popular show.)

 

[d4m10n]

Where were Spencer or Yiannopoulos permitted to advocate hate in a mainstream news outlet? WaPo? NYT? New Republic? The Atlantic?

 

[Klimax]

Those particular guys don't. But what the "PUA"s often do, outside of very basic advise, is sell high-priced CDs and seminars promising lonely men that they'll "get laid" with their techniques. Some are benign, some are...not, such as admitted rapist "Roosh V".

Guess what happens to at least some guys that find these techniques aren't solutions to some Rubik's Cube of sexual conquest, though?

And I'll note that you ignored my point about the loving coverage of people like Richard Spencer (until he organized violent hate rallies), or as another example Milo Whatever (oops, there was footage of him advocating sex with underaged people, on Joe Rogan's very popular show.)

So what was point of that link?

 

[erlando]

Those particular guys don't. But what the "PUA"s often do, outside of very basic advise, is sell high-priced CDs and seminars promising lonely men that they'll "get laid" with their techniques. Some are benign, some are...not, such as admitted rapist "Roosh V".

Guess what happens to at least some guys that find these techniques aren't solutions to some Rubik's Cube of sexual conquest, though?

Pick-up artists are perhaps douchebags. I think we can agree on that But you specifically offered your link as an example of a mainstream media outlet allowing for misogony and spewing hatred against women.

 

[erlando]

Came across a possible example, but haven't had time to read it (it's not long, but I want to post it before I forget about it and the link)

https://huffingtonpost.com/entry/op...b2a7597e4b0f0b9e9a7b6d8?utm_source=reddit.com

A very very cursory glance suggests it's a "white women are evil because they support the truly evil people, MEN", but we'll see. Not quite what I want thinking but it's at least closer to the mark (though it's huffpo) than random interviews with PUAs

You do realize that this article is written by a woman, right? That it actually speaks about women sacrificing themselves to protect the patriarchy and that it is those women referred to as evil? By the female writer?

 

[Mumbles]

Where were Spencer or Yiannopoulos permitted to advocate hate in a mainstream news outlet? WaPo? NYT? New Republic? The Atlantic?

Breitbart is another (I've given you enough to find two already) obvious example - just check out Milo's writing there, including his assistance in bringing Spencer's white nationalist rebranding called the "Alt-Right" into mainstream politics.

 

[Sabrina]

While I agree Selective Service should be done away with, I have to disagree that if it isn't women should also have to register.

If the occasional woman wants to join the professional military, and engage in combat, that is fine by me. Few enough women want to that it doesn't have a huge effect on society. However the wholesale drafting of large chunks of women in wartime, then sending them off to fight and die, could be disastrous.

Men are more disposable than women. Only women can bear offspring, and every woman killed in battle means a lower population in the next generation. Men killed in battle can be relatively easily replaced by other men in the reproductive process.

Forcing equal representation in a military draft would be stupid social policy.

Again, we have a two million+ size VOLUNTEER military at the moment, of which approximately 15-20% is women. We're not exactly hurting for volunteers at the moment. All making the Selective Service registration a requirement for everyone would do is ensure that we have a sufficient pool to draw from IF (and I cannot stress the "if" enough) by some horrible chance our military loses a sufficient number of its forces to necessitate the need for conscription again. You're also neglecting to take into account that not all roles in the military are combat-focused; in the US Army alone, out of sixteen branches, twelve are support focused, only four are combat focused. People would be assigned to the roles best suited for their available skills and not thrust willy-nilly into combat, barring a complete collapse of the military structure.

Then too, we're in a bit of an OVERpopulation issue at the moment, not an UNDERpopulation. The U.S. has over 300 million people living in it; the world over seven BILLION. Unless the war literally lasts for decades and involves an untold amount of casualties, we're not exactly in danger of becoming extinct as a species. Any other specious arguments you'd like to bring to the table?

 

[theprestige]

Those particular guys don't. But what the "PUA"s often do, outside of very basic advise, is sell high-priced CDs and seminars promising lonely men that they'll "get laid" with their techniques. Some are benign, some are...not, such as admitted rapist "Roosh V".

Guess what happens to at least some guys that find these techniques aren't solutions to some Rubik's Cube of sexual conquest, though?

And I'll note that you ignored my point about the loving coverage of people like Richard Spencer (until he organized violent hate rallies), or as another example Milo Whatever (oops, there was footage of him advocating sex with underaged people, on Joe Rogan's very popular show.)

Help me understand: There are so many examples that what you're talking about that you cited... Not an example of what you're talking about.

What are we supposed to make of that?

 

[Mumbles]

Pick-up artists are perhaps douchebags. I think we can agree on that But you specifically offered your link as an example of a mainstream media outlet allowing for misogony and spewing hatred against women.

Again, there are enough other examples, so I can do without this one in particular. As I said, the path from PUA advise to incels is not direct - PUAs are mostly seminar shills, but they don't generally endorse outright violence against women (a few do, but not, as far as I know, these guys in particular).

 

[theprestige]

Breitbart is another (I've given you enough to find two already) obvious example - just check out Milo's writing there, including his assistance in bringing Spencer's white nationalist rebranding called the "Alt-Right" into mainstream politics.

Then you should have no problem citing a Breitbart piece that openly advocates misogyny, or misandry, or mis-any-damn-thing.

You should have no trouble citing a Breitbart piece written by Spencer on any topic.

 

[theprestige]

Again, there are enough other examples, so I can do without this one in particular. As I said, the path from PUA advise to incels is not direct - PUAs are mostly seminar shills, but they don't generally endorse outright violence against women (a few do, but not, as far as I know, these guys in particular).

You can do without the one citation you chose to try to make your point? You had one job, Mumbles. You had one job, and this conspiracy theory, connect the dots bs wasn't it.

 

[sadhatter]

Those particular guys don't. But what the "PUA"s often do, outside of very basic advise, is sell high-priced CDs and seminars promising lonely men that they'll "get laid" with their techniques. Some are benign, some are...not, such as admitted rapist "Roosh V".

Guess what happens to at least some guys that find these techniques aren't solutions to some Rubik's Cube of sexual conquest, though?

And I'll note that you ignored my point about the loving coverage of people like Richard Spencer (until he organized violent hate rallies), or as another example Milo Whatever (oops, there was footage of him advocating sex with underaged people, on Joe Rogan's very popular show.)

We did that because you thought you could search " PUA major news paper" in Google, give us a random link and think it made your point.

Just admit you were being lazy and move on. We all make mistakes.

 

[sadhatter]

Again, there are enough other examples, so I can do without this one in particular. As I said, the path from PUA advise to incels is not direct - PUAs are mostly seminar shills, but they don't generally endorse outright violence against women (a few do, but not, as far as I know, these guys in particular).

Then link one.

Or just admit you were lazy and move on.