Misogyny. Misandry, self-imposed Double Standards: Reversed Stupidity

Reversed Stupidity Is Not Intelligence  ^*

. I am sick and tired of women who embrace American Dad-brand machismo, eschewing all forms and appearances of weakness or vulnerability in people of their sex, and the other sex. To them women who act cute or vulnerable are playing to male expectations, either out of internalized sexism or with ulterior motives, while men who do that are pussies, weaklings, unworthy and deserving of contempt. Now while the "not showing vulnerablity" bits of the classic Rated M for Manly stereotype (which some people seem to think is part of American exceptionalism for some reason) signal power in a sexist in-egalitarian society whenre a man had to take all responsibilities and fake being a reliable leader to his family and his subordinates, which somehow meant never showing weakness ever, appropriating it does not automatically mean you will appropriate the prestige, the responsiblity and the power it symbolizes:

• Dressing like a winner won't make you a winner.
• Are you really sure this is the best way for you to win?
• Even if that were the case, why impose your taste on how to win and how to look like you win on others?

My other problem is with gynophobic and misogynistic men. First, it'd be nice if people stopped confusing the two, even if there is some overlap.

I know quite a few men who have an extremely poor opinion of women, but will gladly seek their companyuse—- and women who are attracted to these guys like magnets, because they play to the deeply-entrenched prejudices they have on how a real man should be, falling for the same tricks once and again. It's a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, one many PUA try to invoke, to the detriment of their public image, and one of the most depressing realities out there.

And I know dudes with self-esteem issues, or with trauma, or whatever, who are terribly afraid of women, in particular of women hurting them. Again, a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy, one I had fallen to and of which I was saved by a woman genuinely liking me for who I was. Of course, I ruined that particular relationship by reacting in all the wrong ways because I could never quite believe she really liked me. But it changed everything later: now I know women can like me for all the wrong reasons, and that this should not weight either way on my slef-esteem. Some men haven't understood that yet, and allow lack of romantic success to impact their self-esteem, negatively affecting their attractiveness, etc. etc.

The most extreme cases of this are the men who have abandoned "3D girls" (with holographic cinema on the rise I wonder how long this stupid terminology will survive) in favour of "2D" ones. These are gynophobic, and are about the complete opposite of the misoginists desribed above. I was lucky to be saved, but they... they are left to devise a way to save themselves. How? What hope is there for them to find a Stocking who has a fetish for whiny assholes? Why stop being whiny assholes when they have all reason to be?

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

Some of us just aren't attracted to real life women, Raw. Doesn't make us misogynists, the minority does not equal the majority.

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

Reminds me of the "Reverse -ism" thread. Reverse Priapism for the win!

♥♥II'GSJQGDvhhMKOmXunSrogZliLHGKVMhGVmNhBzGUPiXLYki'GRQhBITqQrrOIJKNWiXKO♥♥

^^ Indeed. Some people have priorities differing than "What would a $GENDER think of this?" in regards to how they live their lives.

It's my personal opinion that a lot of people out there treat sex and relationships like it's a competition for status and prestige and not enjoy it for what it is, and I think that's the reason for a lot of what you're talking about.

It's reflections of bigger social problems where people put social standing in front of happiness. Or to put it another way, they'd be happy eating sparlings living under a bridge as long as the guy next to them didn't have a sparling.

I do think that the way our society puts such a social standing on these things turns a lot of people off to it as well, as not to seemingly reinforce the "loser" status or what have you.

Just my personal opinion however.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

I'm not sure how to really reply to this thread, but.. I hate those people, too, TC. The misogynistic and/or gynophobic men, people who believe vulnerability is terrible.. and.. all that. I hate them. >_< So many times have I been called a "pussy," a weakling.. all that stuff, though mostly it's been by my dad.

..to be honest, I'm scared of men like that. I.. yeah, I don't know if this is a.. bad response, sorry, but.. I don't get how men can just.. ah, I dunno.

tout est sacré pour un sacreur (Avatar by Rappu!)

I don't really understand what the problem is. Men have always tried to hide any signs of weakness in order to become a better defender of their tribe.

Me

Well, the thing is, we no longer live in a tribal comunity.

♥♥II'GSJQGDvhhMKOmXunSrogZliLHGKVMhGVmNhBzGUPiXLYki'GRQhBITqQrrOIJKNWiXKO♥♥

Right, plus just because it's biological doesn't mean all men are like that/want to be like that. The problem is that some men want to express their weaknesses and emotions like, you know, true human beings. And yet there is a lot of backlash to that attitude.

"Without a fairy, you're not even a real man!" ~ Mido from Ocarina of Time

Most of the people who turn to 2D (i've been close) have probably been shunned or mocked by women in the past.

I belong to a certain imageboard community where this is a popular mindset (how seriously its taken I dont know) where they say 3DPD(Pig Disgusting)

They want a woman who will treat them well, and feel that 3D women just cannot do that. Yes its misogynistic but I can hardly blame them if they went through shit. Some people try to cope and improve, others find alternative methods.

People keep using "misogynistic". I'm not sure it means what we think it means, and by that I mean do we agree on one meaning? I thought misogyny was just... the stereotypical pimp behaviour, which wasn't so much "hatred of women" as "contempt and a patronising attitude towards women". This isn't what the 2D lovers are doing, is it?

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

No, its definitely contempt/hatred/dislike/whatever.

They want low key women (not necessarily as a means to control them) but just because they dont want conflict.

I mean, I'm pro female, but militant feminists (feminazis as they are called sometimes) REALLY piss me off.

It may be safe to assume that they see all women like this.

(Edit: MILITANT not Military)

edited 29th Jan '11 1:53:02 PM by Thorn14

Very well, let me update and summarise my thesis so far. These are the people I want to talk about. I believe they are wrong and their action lead to a net increase in injustice and unhappiness in this world, and I want to understand their motives better and perhaps unwrap a way to compel them to change their views for the good of all.

• Women who could be said to advocate the elimination of the "woman" gender role and all its associated traits, in humans of both sexes. In my opinion they are misguidedly trying to escape the fetters sexism has imposed on them by paradoxically buying into its rhetoric of exaltation of traditional virility/virtue, of which they have changed only one element: women are now as obligated to be "men" as the men themselves, instead of being expected and encouraged to take the inferior role. While this does make the system more consistent (why impose values one thinks inferior on a sector of people and then blame them, despise them, and strip them of all power, for identifying with those values and following them?), in my view it only turns a system that is cruel, unfair and unhealthy to both men and women in a different way to a system that is cruel, unfair and unhealthy to everyone in the same way. This mentality can be called "misogyny" in that it is against "women" and "womanliness" as a social role and an associated trait.

• Men and women who buy into the old system. Men who act abusive because not only is that what is expected of them, it also works, and who in many cases despise women because they keep coming to them despite everything, and because the relationships they achieve that way are shallow and unsatisfying. Such men are, in the best of cases and while being entirely benevolent and well-meaning, patronising and overprotective, as part of the whole role. Women who allow themselves to be abused because of this internalised system, and who almost seem to be acting parts out of a bad movie: I have met those in Real Life, and they make me feel like cryingfacepalm. This can be called "misogyny" as an attitude of condescension, patronising, and disrespect towards the "woman" as the person bearering of the role, both by men and women themslves.

• Men who abandon the game entirely, and prefer to go for fictional women that they aren't afraid will hurt them. The entire gender-issues debate between the two above does not interest them because it is lose-lose for them either way: they don't believe they have the qualities to be a competitive, nay, a merely competent "man", and cannot hold the role. Even in a society where arranged marriage might allow them to get a slave-wife who conforms to the roles, they would be subject to their scorn and their manipulation (when one is stripped of all power, resorting to manipulation becomes a necessity). In a society where women are "men" too, they are nothing but scum. Their attitude can be called "misogyny" in that they fear contact with women, and resent them for "hurting" them in the past, despite how much such emotional injuries might be a result of their own thoughtless actions.

edited 29th Jan '11 2:06:17 PM by RawPower

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

Why do you assume that they would manipulate women? They dont want 2D because they want women they can manipulate, they just dont want someone who would be a hassle. They would not want to put up with fights.

I agree, those who control are bad, but its not always about that. Some prefer the idea of just letting men be men, and women be women. Theres no amount of control desired at all.

Sorry if I'm reading you wrong, but somehow you are striking me like you think all men want to have women as 'slaves'. Yes it happens, but its not some epidemic.

Hell, alot of people would tell you its the other way around (although not in a serious way)

Paradoxically enough, men who are actually into BDSM and have actual woman "slaves" tend to treat them better than the Abusive Boyfriend sort I was talking about. Also, that post doesn't cover all of humanity, only some sectors that I feel are problematic as pertaining to this particular topic. Most people live in a sort of intellectual and moral limbo around this issue and just go with the flow, never having thought much about it, and never assuming a stance other than what they deem to be the consensus around them.

But Old!Men seem to me to have been looking for slaves or domestics or nurses in women, and Old!Women seem to have been looking for masters, bosses, or meal tickets in men, rather than look for partners for each other with whom to establish a relationship of trust and mutual understanding.

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

Its true older generations had a sort of "Men in front, Woman in back" mentality, I dont think its fair to say "slaves."

Some people dont mind being in a passive role you know.

@Raw in post 11- contempt/hatred is what the miso part of misogyny and misandry means. If the attitude is more like condescension, it's sexism.

edited 29th Jan '11 4:08:45 PM by Jordan

Hodor

I almost read stuff in your post that wasn't there. This is why I think kids must be raised into traditional tribal values before having those values deconstructed and being presented with a more modern outlook. First it teaches them to always keep reasonable doubt on their current beliefs. Second, it allows them to better understand the people who are still attatched to the older beliefs, and be sympathetic to them.

I think I know where you come from when you say this. Perhaps you have the image of the complimentary couple in mind: the man goes out and suffers and fights toes and nails for the material well-being of the family, and provides a balance of fairness and rigour, a moral compass, a support for the children to lean on or push against. The woman cares for the whole group. She makes their lives tidy and comfortable, she tends to their wounds, she soothes their pains, sometimes to the point of overindulgence, and she is fiercely protective of them, but she can also be very demanding. Together, they keep a Good Cop/Bad Cop Routine that keeps the group functional and united, running at full gear.

Now that's an arrangement I have nothing against in principle, but I'd just like to know: why should these roles exist in an inseparable bundle? Why should they be reserved exclusively to men or women, as bundles or as individual traits? Why are women past and present not taken seriously in a working environment unless they assume the more socially violent elements of the male bundle, if not all of it? Why are men expected to fail at domesticity, culture, refinement, elegance, and emotional range and expressivity? Why are those who actually succeed in those looked down upon as Camp Straight in the best of cases? Why this compartmentalisation? Don't you think it's oppressive?

And I'm talking about the idealized traditional model. I didn't go into all of the ways this system can be abused by all parties For Massive Damage. One work of fiction that seems to go out of its way to collect and display all those ways could be Mad Men, a deconstruction of the values of The '50s and an exploration on how people in the early sixties came to the conclusion that such mentalities got to go.

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

I would agree with that. Action Girl is one of my least favorite tropes. Not because women can't or shouldn't be in the same roles as men, but because there's no Action Boy (or Man, which I guarantee is what we'd come up with if we did do this).

I actually don't find women who can beat me up more sexy than women who can't. And I don't find women who display pointlessly agressive behavior attractive at all. Oddly, that seems to put me in a minority on this forum.

Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.

I have to admit, I'm not quite sure I understand what Raw Power's point/argument is.

Hodor

I, in turn, am not quite sure why you called him "Rott."

“Love is the eternal law whereby the universe was created and is ruled.” — St. Bernard

He did what? (no offense meant)

'''YOU SEE THIS DOG I'M PETTING? THAT WAS COURAGE WOLF.Cute, isn't he?

Raw/Thorn: I direct you again to post #2.

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

So you two are already taken for one another. Good... Good... Just as according to my expectations...

"Atheism is the religion whose followers are easiest to troll"

Freudian slip I guess...

edited 29th Jan '11 4:09:00 PM by Jordan

Hodor