Discussion
Douglas Quaid said:
It shows most people are f
king stupid. A bear would kill them by eating them stomach first. Anybody who had experience of bears would never say they’d rather be eaten by a bear than come across a man.
the bear is acting on instinct, eating or killing you to survive. A man however (if they have no morals) will do things to you for their own pleasure, and probably keep you alive in the process. If you manage to run from a bear that bear won't think 'hmm let me try and find them'. king stupid. A bear would kill them by eating them stomach first. Anybody who had experience of bears would never say they’d rather be eaten by a bear than come across a man. it comes down to the male gaze.
NRS said:
Douglas Quaid said:
It shows most people are fking stupid. A bear would kill them by eating them stomach first. Anybody who had experience of bears would never say they’d rather be eaten by a bear than come across a man.
There’s also many stupid men, who seem to have no idea of an analogy or something to make you think, instead everything is taken literally.king stupid. A bear would kill them by eating them stomach first. Anybody who had experience of bears would never say they’d rather be eaten by a bear than come across a man. I’d hate to think what some of you might think if I said I started taking the piss out of someone, would I literally be taking the piss out of them via an operation or something?
ambuletz said:
it comes down to the male gaze.
No it really doesn't and another poster said something similar but cannot be bothered to trawl back to also quote them. The problem is not normal sexual attraction but the violent minority. If you try and make normal sexual attraction secret and sinful you don't create a well balanced society that suddenly has no males attacking females, you are just increasing sexual repression and likely increasing sexual aberration.
Straight men find women attractive and a large part of sexual attraction is visual stimuli. Moaning about the "male gaze" is great if your premise is men should apologise for being men, but less helpful if you actually have any desire to tackle societal problems.
Edited by JagLover on Monday 13th May 07:07
g3org3y said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Yeah I don't think men are the victims in all of this.
Incredible how many people have asked their wives too. Samples of one eh!
What did your wife/gf say when you asked her?Incredible how many people have asked their wives too. Samples of one eh!
But I could have put money on what the wives of the "But that's illogical how many pounds of pressure would a bears jaws exert on a females head" types would say.
That's assuming they haven't run off and taken half the latinum.
JagLover said:
ambuletz said:
it comes down to the male gaze.
No it really doesn't and another poster said something similar but cannot be bothered to trawl back to also quote them. The problem is not normal sexual attraction but the violent minority. If you try and make normal sexual attraction secret and sinful you don't create a well balanced society that suddenly has no males attacking females, you are just increasing sexual repression and likely increasing sexual aberration.
Straight men find women attractive and a large part of sexual attraction is visual stimuli. Moaning about the "male gaze" is great if your premise is men should apologise for being men, but less helpful if you actually have any desire to tackle societal problems.
Edited by JagLover on Monday 13th May 07:07
There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
wildoliver said:
Don't try to apply logic to the simps/white knights. They are too busy virtue signalling in the desperate hope they get a pm from a woman to listen.
There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
Very few women think this. It's far more widespread that women don't know which men are the problem ones, and so have to adapt their behaviour towards all men to reduce the risk to themselves if they encounter a problem one. You could probably go into a lot of fields with a bull and be completely fine, but not many people walk into a field with a bull just in case it's an aggressive one as you'd be in trouble if it is. Does that mean you hate all bulls? No, that would be stupid to say. But it does make sense you adapt your behaviour (don't go into the field) just in case it is dangerous. There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
It's frankly very strange to say that someone adapting their behaviour to reduce the risk to them means they hate all men, when there is a real risk there - which isn't always being killed, but also stuff like being groped, robbed etc.
wildoliver said:
Don't try to apply logic to the simps/white knights. They are too busy virtue signalling in the desperate hope they get a pm from a woman to listen.
There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
If it's unwanted attention I'd say it's wrong wouldn't you?There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
You've highlighted the point I made earlier which is why you read stories of women wearing headphones specifically so random men won't try to "chat them up" and as for the building site thing there have been threads on here before and predictably enough lots of men said wolf whistling was absolutely fine and (get ready for a surprise) when they asked their wives what they thought if someone wolf whistled them they f
king loved it.wildoliver said:
Don't try to apply logic to the simps/white knights. They are too busy virtue signalling in the desperate hope they get a pm from a woman to listen.
There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
Your final line suggests you agree that other people are as entitled as you are to a view on where the best place on that scale should be? There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
wildoliver said:
Don't try to apply logic to the simps/white knights. They are too busy virtue signalling in the desperate hope they get a pm from a woman to listen.
There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
re the bold, just because it's not literal violence doesn't mean it's acceptable. Teenage girls and young women are treated like pieces of meat daily, it's gross.There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
Also lol at people who don't think that women should just put up with it being single "white knights" when all the backlash to this bear thing has had heavy incel energy.
I was reading this on the local news https://www.kentonline.co.uk/maidstone/news/i-told...
Some guys can be right turds.
Some guys can be right turds.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I'm going off the wider survey results rather than "my wife agrees with me so I'm obviously right".
Are you? How do you know?The original post I saw claimed that when asked, the majority of women chose the bear, but there was nothing about when and where this survey was carried out, how many women were asked, etc, etc. In the absence of that information, how do you know that this alleged survey ever even happened?
I've (in separate conversations) asked my wife, daughter, SIL and mother, and all of them have replied with "The man". When then asked how they arrived at that decision, their thinking was the same in all cases, along the lines of "Women see loads of men every day. If we saw as many wild bears every day, I'm not sure there would be any women left!"
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:wildoliver said:
Don't try to apply logic to the simps/white knights. They are too busy virtue signalling in the desperate hope they get a pm from a woman to listen.
There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
If it's unwanted attention I'd say it's wrong wouldn't you?There is a sliding scale of right and wrong, at various different times of human history (and present) it has definitely been in the wrong place, violence towards women (sexual or otherwise) is obviously to any normal person totally wrong, yet in backwards parts of the globe is currently acceptable and in our past has been too. What isn't sexual violence however is normal men looking at women and thinking they are attractive and going up and chatting them up, or even the ultimate horror of a whistle from a building site. When that turns in to some nutter following a woman till she's in a dark alleyway that's where the problem lays. We've ended up in a place that some women have been convinced all men are rapists and some idiot men white knight it up to try to win over those women. It's obviously a highly successful strategy as they are usually single.
I am of course a massive misogynist for not agreeing with their nonsense narrative. There can only be one point of view for fear of offending delicate souls.
Yes, of course. Only, you don’t know it’s unwanted until after you approach somebody, do you? Or do the ladies in your town wear some sort of lanyard to state if they’re single, looking, and what their preferences are?
Harrassing women is very much wrong (and that does include builders’ whistles, yes), but that isn’t the same as the basic human instinct of finding somebody attractive or politely asking somebody out. You seem to be promoting a sanitised society where basic, instinctive human interactions are outlawed and everyone finds a partner via some sort of government mandated dating app. Confusing (deliberately or otherwise) basic day to day human interactions with sexual harrassment or rapey murdery types really doesn’t help anybody in all of this.
Southerner said:
Yes, of course. Only, you don’t know it’s unwanted until after you approach somebody, do you? Or do the ladies in your town wear some sort of lanyard to state if they’re single, looking, and what their preferences are?
Harrassing women is very much wrong (and that does include builders’ whistles, yes), but that isn’t the same as the basic human instinct of finding somebody attractive or politely asking somebody out. You seem to be promoting a sanitised society where basic, instinctive human interactions are outlawed and everyone finds a partner via some sort of government mandated dating app. Confusing (deliberately or otherwise) basic day to day human interactions with sexual harrassment or rapey murdery types really doesn’t help anybody in all of this.
Yeah someone always makes the leap to you aren't allowed to even speak to a woman these days and lanyards don't they Harrassing women is very much wrong (and that does include builders’ whistles, yes), but that isn’t the same as the basic human instinct of finding somebody attractive or politely asking somebody out. You seem to be promoting a sanitised society where basic, instinctive human interactions are outlawed and everyone finds a partner via some sort of government mandated dating app. Confusing (deliberately or otherwise) basic day to day human interactions with sexual harrassment or rapey murdery types really doesn’t help anybody in all of this.
Nobody is suggesting that "basic, instinctive human interactions are outlawed" simply that the majority of women don't appreciate being wolf whistled or spoken to by random men on the bus train or just walking along minding their own business.
Probably less so if it starts at 13 or 14 years old.
That isn't confusing men with rapey murdery types but it is part of the reason a lot of women have a fairly low opinion of men as a group.
Everyone agrees harassment is wrong yet oddly enough when women get harassed the definition seems to move around over what "real" harassment is.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff