A knot of sexist logic in the Western mind

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

Sir-Sister-of-Suck, I agree that one can often amass evidence on both sides of an argument, leading to an impasse, but I don’t think that is the case here.

No I am saying that neither side supplies any real evidence, making a case based on anecdotes. I believe this is what you're doing a lot here, in a bit of an ironic response to the feminists who are also doing just this.

And its not about doubting your own experiences, like I'm sure that you've seen men being chastised for insulting women while the reverse, you haven't - I just don't believe that paints a picture for any sort of hard statistics. The political left has become obsessed with thinking like this, in things like police shootings, and I go at them in length about why this is shown to be such a bad thing to do when we look at actual studies on 'racial bias' in the police force. I can't sit here, and pretend like you're not doing just that.

I give you high profile cases of men recently getting into serious trouble for pointing out some female inferiority: Edward Wilson, Larry Summers, Tim Hunt, James Damore, BA Systems manager in the UK.

Those are also anecdotes, though. They may not be a personal anecdotes, but the problem still applies - it doesn't make a case for hard statistics of a specific bias. If a feminist were to try to make an argument for 'rape culture' by listing off a bunch of Hollywood accusations, I'd have an issue with that as well. Or the thing I was just talking about with racial bias in the police force. There is a growing obsession in the west, particularly America, that tries to make statistics out of headlines.

I challenge you to identify one high profile example of a man getting ‘applauded’ for identifying female inferiorities. Similarly, I challenge you to identify one instance of a woman getting into trouble for identifying a male inferiority (such as our patriarchal behaviour)

Apparently I can just tell you that I've seen it and that'll be good enough, because that seems to be the ground we are treading.

I rely on my own experiences and intuition to supply me with data, plus information related to me by others. Rather than presenting and referencing evidence, I leave it to the reader to establish his own, by trying out the phenomena I describe. This is easy to do because the behaviour is common to all cultures. In this way the reader can prove my propositions for himself (if they are right) -- far better than any scientific evidence. He can adopt my ideas as his own. The whole world is my peer reviewer and critical colleague.

Your conversation with Lacewing and some of the others on here shows that it's not that easy. At parts, you guys are just screaming over each other saying that the exact opposite thing has been experienced. In truth, all these things probably exist simultaneously, because the world's a big place. It's just impossible to say what's more common from human experience alone.

You say ‘few women identify as feminist’, which is true, but how many are actually organising to give up the gains feminists have made? Even those valiant ladies in the Men’s Rights Movement don’t, in general, want to give up female advantages. The truth is that the feminist activists have the backing of the vast majority of women, if they were honest about it.

I mean we were just talking about how most women have a critical view of feminism. Is this not the same thing?

There's not a coined group like 'feminism', but there's a hefty amount of people who are highly critical of what feminist talking heads are trying to do. It's a popular thing on youtube. There's also someone like Jordan Peterson, but I'm not entirely sure what it is you're expecting. People who are critical of the things slanted against men, like custody battles? There are people like that, too

[Skip]

It's consoling to know that, meanwhile, in the real world, a lot of real and quite healthy men and women are happily co-existing, co-operating, cohabiting, canoodling, sharing meals, sharing work, raising kids, standing up for justice, respecting and appreciating one another.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

Sir-Sister-of-Suck, I agree that one can often amass evidence on both sides of an argument, leading to an impasse, but I don’t think that is the case here. I give you high profile cases of men recently getting into serious trouble for pointing out some female inferiority: Edward Wilson, Larry Summers, Tim Hunt, James Damore, BA Systems manager in the UK. I challenge you to identify one high profile example of a man getting ‘applauded’ for identifying female inferiorities. Similarly, I challenge you to identify one instance of a woman getting into trouble for identifying a male inferiority (such as our patriarchal behaviour).

Having looked back on this, I actually retract some of the stuff I said. What we were talking about originally, was the perception of such things in everyday life; That's what I think can't be sufficiently argued for by supplying anecdotal support. This seems to have shifted more to a point about media bias, which you do make a good case for by supplying these examples.

I would agree with you that men are more likely to be fired for seemingly criticizing women than the other way around. We don't need a larger sample size to determine, as we would if you were making a general claim about what the average joe thinks. Also doesn't lead to that issue of the other person just using their own subjective experience over yours. I think that there's a clear left-leaning bias in a lot of these media companies, anyway, and a lot can be assumed with that.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

It's consoling to know that, meanwhile, in the real world, a lot of real and quite healthy men and women are happily co-existing, co-operating, cohabiting, canoodling, sharing meals, sharing work, raising kids, standing up for justice, respecting and appreciating one another.

I think some of them would be a lot happier if they'd put aside their activism for friends and family. Like if the notions you have about men and women conceived from your politics are so important that you feel the need to judge or see them differently because of that, then you're just a frickin loser.

[Duncan Butlin]

Lacewing, show me one quote where a man justifies and celebrates all men hating all women, based on unacceptable female behaviour in the past.

Sir-Sister-of-Suck, I am not sure where you are coming from: are you wanting to reduce the influence of women like I am? Or perhaps you don’t care? I’d love to know where you stand on what to me is a most important issue. Thanks for reviewing your opinion of my sacking data and I’m glad we agree.

Skip, yes, there are many happy people still, but are you content with the general state of the family? Duration of marriage, divorce, cohabitation, single mothers, shared parenting after divorce? All of these spell disaster for the children, the last persons people seem to be caring about.

[Skip]

I think some of them would be a lot happier if they'd put aside their activism for friends and family. [/quote]
It's possible, as long as you don't care if your friends and family members are mistreated, disenfranchised and gunned down by sick bastards who project their own dysfunction onto innocent bystanders.

Like if the notions you have about men and women conceived from your politics are so important that you feel the need to judge or see them differently because of that, then you're just a frickin loser.

I've known that for decades. If your convictions demand that you respect and aid individuals who belong to some designated "other" group currently out of political favour, you may even be a criminal. The American president has declared that there are some fine folks in the KKK; I guess that makes them winners. Oh well, I'm too old to turn my coat.

[Lacewing]

Lacewing, show me one quote where a man justifies and celebrates all men hating all women, based on unacceptable female behaviour in the past.

I'm not going to dance for you, Duncan.

My statement was that "Men have said far worse for so long". If you deny and/or are oblivious to that, and need some sort of specific quote as "proof" that men have spoken terribly about and to women in every sector of life and culture throughout history, then I suggest you start researching all the years you've been asleep if you really care to speak of balanced truth.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

Sir-Sister-of-Suck, I am not sure where you are coming from: are you wanting to reduce the influence of women like I am? Or perhaps you don’t care?

I don't think it's an issue like you do.

I might have my own subjective experience on certain things, but I realize I can't effectively argue by using them, most of the time. As I said, I hate people on the left and feminists who try to do this, so I distance myself from that as much as possible. People genuinely experiencing different things in this diverse world of ours is one thing, but it could also be a matter of perspective; Things may not have actually been as they seemed in someone's experience, especially when we already know that there's a bias for that person to believe their own perspective, although that would actually depend on what came first. Do they think that women are treated worse in something because they've experienced it, or have they experienced something and took a certain interpretation to that event because they think they are treated worse? This is just another issue in using anecdotes to determine what the populace thinks.

To cut through all of that to give you my opinion from nothing but my own experience, anyway - I would say that men and women are generally treated equally. There are definitely things I've seen that seemed to be slanted against someone based on their sex, but it's nothing that I'd want to frame in a side-by-side comparison of 'who has it worse'. I don't even think I could.

My own research has pretty much back up this sentiment. As you could imagine, I find most of the ideas popular in modern feminism just don't hold water. I also don't feel the need to take up some sort of opposing philosophy like MRA. I find that to be equally false.

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

It's possible, as long as you don't care if your friends and family members are mistreated, disenfranchised and gunned down by sick bastards who project their own dysfunction onto innocent bystanders.

You can still care about something like 'police violence' without projecting your typical mentality about it, onto your friends and family - even if it is something that affects them. You can look at them as individuals, and not a propulsion in your game of politics.

You know, I've recently taken ownership of this stray cat that had been hanging around my development for a while. My neighbors up and left it after they had been feeding it for a couple months, so when it had been waiting around an empty dish for a few days, just waiting for its owners to come back, someone really just needed to start feeding it again. I've gotten some judgement from my other neighbors because he's pretty huge, in fact he could practically pass as a baby panther, though he hasn't bitten me even once. He is amazingly docile, for whatever he is, I've even taught him a couple tricks. Anyway, when I started feeding it, I've sort of attracted this bigger, more aggressive stray that now likes to hang around where I feed the little guy. Typically, it just runs away as soon as I come out, so it hasn't been too much of an issue.

Well, the other night, I was out with my cat smoking this dube, and I started to hear a rustling in the bushes. Then I started to hear a noise that was significantly more unpleasant, when my cat straddled a little too close to those bushes; The huge devil cat came out, and straight up tried to murder my cat. I guess it was on its last straw, because this time, the cat didn't seem to be backing down so easily when I ran up to pull it off my cat. So I did what had to be done, I pulled out my salt gun, and shot it right in the face - less than a foot from its face. It ran off with a gaping wound, not to be seen from that fateful day.

The moral of this story, is that I didn't hesitate for one second to think about how this was 'another cat'. It was 'me', it was 'cat', and it was 'cat I need to get rid of'. My mind and body only operated in a way that was imperative to protect that which was important to me, untainted by any sort of political consideration. I did not see this cat as any sort of 'cog' in a machine of animal activism, I don't even agree with that stuff. I placed him on a pedestal that is much higher - he was something that I cared about, and not because he belongs to a concept that I care about.

I've known that for decades. If your convictions demand that you respect and aid individuals who belong to some designated "other" group currently out of political favour, you may even be a criminal.

I'm not quite sure if I know what you're referring to.

Also, when has trump ever said that there are 'fine folks in the KKK'?

[Skip]

I'm not quite sure if I know what you're referring to.

That I'm a loser.

Also, when has trump ever said that there are 'fine folks in the KKK'?

August 14, 1917.

Your behaving horribly to a cat explains something, but not something I needed or wanted to know.
(And I really don't want to know what kind of ***** carries a salt-gun.)

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

Being a 'loser' is a pretty far and exciting stretch from being a 'criminal'. But I can't really make that judgment for you, lots of people separate their politics from their family and friends, without even realizing it.

...Well that was a less receptive response than most of the people I've told that story to. Sometimes, you need to do something horrible to one cat in order to protect another cat. It's a cat-eat-cat world out there, skip. Maybe you are the type of person who is so hung up on their own politics, that you wouldn't suspend a moment of disregard in order to protect someone you care about? Because you looked at that person as an individual that you know, and not as someone who can just fit into a 'group'.

[Lacewing]

It was 'me', it was 'cat', and it was 'cat I need to get rid of'.

Another shoot-first mentality who hates feminists and people on the left, and cares only about what is important to himself.

Duncan, is this the male pinnacle you think so brilliant to be in control?

[Sir-Sister-of-Suck]

It was 'me', it was 'cat', and it was 'cat I need to get rid of'.

Another shoot-first mentality who hates feminists and people on the left

That is such an unsympathetic and gross misinterpretation of my point; You would have preferred if I let this fully grown, aggressive animal maul my kitten to death?

You know bobcats don't typically hunt other cats for food? They hunt them for sport; It's not like this cat was even looking for food, it was looking to kill my kitten for fun. It was literally trying to murder my cat. But I'm apparently the psycho, because I didn't want the defenseless kitten who clearly would have been killed had this feral cat had a latch on his neck much longer?

I thought that killing baby kittens was one of those things that is so bad, it's usually talked about, parodically. But apparently for you guys, it's preferable to harming an animal enough to drive it away from doing that. That's absurd.

cares only about what is important to himself

No, I just care more about what is important to me. So do you, because that is basically a tautology.

Duncan, is this the male pinnacle you think so brilliant to be in control?

The idea that predators should just get their prey if they can best them, is about the most picture-perfect, underlying concept you could have given to describe 'toxic masculinity'. You do fucking realize what it is you're defending?

[Lacewing]

Another shoot-first mentality who hates feminists and people on the left

That is such an unsympathetic and gross misinterpretation of my point; You would have preferred if I let this fully grown, aggressive animal maul my kitten to death?

Interesting how we've gone from this:

stray cat that had been hanging around my development for a while... /...I've gotten some judgement from my other neighbors because he's pretty huge, in fact he could practically pass as a baby panther

To this:

my kitten

And from this:

I've sort of attracted this bigger, more aggressive stray that now likes to hang around

To this:

bobcat

So you started feeding a stray cat, and that attracted another stray cat, which resulted in territorial fights -- all very natural and understandable -- and then when things got ugly, you "didn't hesitate for one second" to shoot one of them in the face.

Yes, I get it: It never occurred to you to consider more of the elements involved and how they might unfold, so that such a situation could be avoided. And then when you were faced with the fallout, a gun was your immediate answer.

I do have experience with such things... and have been face-to-face with a cougar, as well as a large stray dog who was a threat to my livestock. No shots were fired, and no one was killed. I also feed stray animals at times, which I recognize could pose a threat to my resident animals -- so I take measures to prevent issues and keep everyone safe. And if there is a scuffle... I don't kill the "others".

You do fucking realize what you're defending, right?

I just care more about what is important to me. So do you...

Are you unaware of the qualities of compassion and selflessness? Not everyone cares "more" about what is important to themselves all the time -- people can care "more" about others because their hearts and minds are that broad. So don't try to drag me into your limited single-answer reality.

The idea that predators should just get their prey if they can best them, is about the most picture-perfect, underlying concept you could have given to describe 'toxic masculinity'.

Good try... but ridiculous. Humans have the ability to think more broadly (or at least they should unless they have a mental disorder), and what creates toxicity is what they do with their ability.

[Skip]

Being a 'loser' is a pretty far and exciting stretch from being a 'criminal'.

Not all that far. You called me a loser and I concur. People are jailed for siding with a disenfranchised minority (I knew several who were arrested for voter-registration in black communities) and for disagreeing with government policy, people are regularly maced, kicked and thrown in jail. Also for being the children of parents who flee from unspeakable conditions, created and fostered by the very nation that's keeping them out.

But I can't really make that judgment for you

No. You've made it about me.

Sometimes, you need to do something horrible to one cat in order to protect another cat.

No, you do not. We host up to a dozen feral cats at any given time, and I've had to resort to the garden hose to break up fights; once I had to trap an aggeressive tom and isolate him. I have not had to kill one, but if it comes to that, it comes.
What I do not condone is torture. In any circumstances.

It's a cat-eat-cat world out there, skip.

No, it is not. Cats eat kibble, chicken soup, canned food, table scraps, fish if they can get it, the odd sparrow. Mice, they mostly just sample and leave for me to step on in the dark. They do not eat cats.
They do fight over scarce resources, choice furniture, status and un-neutered females.
So do people.

Maybe you are the type of person who is so hung up on their own politics, that you wouldn't suspend a moment of disregard in order to protect someone you care about? Because you looked at that person as an individual that you know, and not as someone who can just fit into a 'group'.

This is odd.
I specifically said I do not regard persons as just part of a category or group. This has been my contention all along regarding Duncan Butlin's attempt to foment war between men and women, and why I condemn his hostility toward half the human population as if they all fit into a category.

It's even odder that you should zero in on one phrase

in the real world, a lot of real and quite healthy men and women are happily co-existing, co-operating, cohabiting, canoodling, sharing meals, sharing work, raising kids, standing up for justice, respecting and appreciating one another.

interpret a reference to justice as political hang-up that necessarily excludes caring for family, and disregard the rest.