Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Everyday Unbeliever

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hi,

    I stumbled over the sentence "Men's investment in reproduction is lower than women's" again.

    Starting with the marooned island scenario, with 9 women and one man,
    simpleman formulated what I'd like to henceforth be known as simpleman's law:

    Without men to supply resources, children die. (Women, too, perhaps.)

    So men _are_ actually investing a lot of resources in reproduction; the result is what we call civilization.

    But this has a corollary.
    While it is relatively easy for women to get sex, men have to work harder in order to get it.
    Isn't that work also an investment in reproduction?

    One might say it is not a direct investment in the offspring, but is that the same?

    M

    Comment


    • Hi,

      Happy New year, all around

      Stumbled over a book by Erving Goffman, famous psychologist and sociologist.
      (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erving_Goffman )

      The book is called "Gender Advertisements", and it's a treasure trove ...
      It can be found at http://www.publiccollectors.org/Goffman_Gender.pdf

      It contains the root and nucleus of at least a few of the fourth wavelet of wymynysm talking points:
      - that we are not men and women, we "perform gender roles"
      - the male gaze
      - implicit in the analysis of the above, the notion that the male gaze, and the male in general, is evil and oppressive

      Wymynyst theory is just so .... woozly.

      Speaking of individual academics that are to blame for today's gender malaise, have a look at this gender gander:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raewyn_Connell

      The Professor Formerly Known As Bob singlehandedly .... singlemindedly ... hatchered the concept of 'hegemonic masculinity'

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemonic_masculinity

      a subset of which is, of course,Toxic masculinity:
      "Connell argues that an important feature of hegemonic masculinity is the use of "toxic" practices such as physical violence, which may serve to reinforce men's dominance over women in Western societies.[3] Other scholars have used the term toxic masculinity to refer to stereotypically masculine gender roles that restrict the kinds of emotions allowable for boys and men to express, including social expectations that men seek to be dominant (the "alpha male") and limit their emotional range primarily to expressions of anger.
      [69] "

      People who think men limit their emotional range to expressions of anger cannot have opened a single volume of poetry, let alone the canon of Western Litterature.

      This drivel is now "true" because the source is "academic" - these are the people called upon to advise schoolboards, municipalities, states, governments, the UN.

      Tell me again that a pursuit of MHRM in Academe would not be important.

      M





      Comment


      • Hi,

        Feminism is a historical and society-wide example of Briffault's Law: whatever you have put into a relationship is always zero measured against future potential contributions.

        AFAIK this is a commonplace in economy, avoiding throwing good new money after bad old money, AKA "sunk costs".

        Who knew feminists could be explained by accounting theory.

        M

        Comment


        • Hi,

          occasioned by Sargon's discussion of Deadly Patriarchal Dodgeball ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtnM6pOp7ng ... , I wanted to highlight the projection aspect of a lot of SJW/feminist speculation.

          Look at the texts that are referenced below, and insert "men" for "the group" etc..
          To me it then reads as a summary of much of what is discussed on this website and on this forum.
          It reminds me of "men's lived experience", which never appears in any feminist tract, as no one ever bothers to ask men.

          Sargon quotes Five Faces of Oppression referenced in the unfortunately paywall-protected newspaper article.
          I found them on a kind of FFoO Wiki - http://categorism.com/wiki/Five_Faces_of_Oppression - with other comments than the WP article.
          Worth a glance, though, in relation to this post.

          Here is one more:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abusive_power_and_control
          When the article is "man-gendered", it reads like a journal of a man who didn't heed the advice to "never stick your dick in crazy".
          Or the starting point of many a PE video on relationships, and the dangers of narcissist and BPD/Borderline females.


          "... A relationship or marriage (Abusive power and control (also controlling behavior and coercive control)) is the way that a female ( an abusive person ) gains and maintains power and control over a man (another person) in order to subject him to psychological, physical, sexual, or financial abuse. The motivations of the female are varied and can include devaluation, envy, personal gain, personal gratification, psychological projection, or just for the sake of the enjoyment of exercising power and control.

          Females use tactics to exert power and control over men. The tactics themselves are psychologically and sometimes physically abusive. Control may be helped through economic abuse thus limiting men's actions as they may then lack the necessary resources to resist the abuse.[1] The goal of the female is to control and intimidate the man or to influence them to feel that they do not have an equal voice in the relationship.[2]

          Females control men with a range of tactics, including positive reinforcement (such as praise, superficial charm, flattery, ingratiation, love bombing, smiling, gifts, attention), negative reinforcement, intermittent or partial reinforcement, psychological punishment (such as nagging, silent treatment, swearing, threats, intimidation, emotional blackmail, guilt trips, inattention) and traumatic tactics (such as verbal abuse or explosive anger).[3]

          The vulnerabilities of men are exploited with those who are particularly vulnerable being most often selected as targets.[3][4][5]Traumatic bonding can occur between the female and the man as the result of ongoing cycles of abuse in which the intermittent reinforcement of reward and punishment creates powerful emotional bonds that are resistant to change and a climate of fear.[6] An attempt may be made to normalise, legitimise, rationalise, deny, or minimise the abusive behaviour, or blame the victim for it.[7][8][9]

          Isolation, gaslighting, mind games, lying, disinformation, propaganda, destabilisation, brainwashing and divide and rule are other strategies that are often used. The man may be plied with alcohol or drugs or deprived of sleep to help disorientate them.[10][11]

          Women (Certain personality types) feel particularly compelled to control men (other people). ...."

          ...and so on down through the article.


          The weird thing is that no one sees this.

          M

          Comment

          Working...
          X