Women are villains, men are saints

Ryan Wood98 said:So, I suppose this is an instance of a woman who does NOT actually want gender equality.

Perhaps she wants all the same rights and opportunities that men have, but she also wants to retain all those extra advantages that come from the current "unequal" status quo.

It is something a previous commenter touched upon—it seems to be part of human nature to crave as much power as possible. Not necessarily equal power, but just... more.

A completely different question regarding feminism could be raised here: do feminists even have a legitimate right to represent the interests of the entire female population?

Can feminists advocate for equality on behalf of women (assuming for a moment that they truly are advocating for equality) if most women DO NOT want equality? What if they prefer a "Prince Charming" type who opens doors for them, provides for them, and comes home saying, "Honey, I'm home," while they live out the life of a housewife from an American TV sitcom?

Do we actually have any data that would allow us to claim we know what the female population wants, and are feminists truly representing those desires?

True. The system is teeming with brainwashed individuals. But the question remains: should we judge a system's effectiveness by how successful it is at laundering minds?

A second instance: even though inheritance laws are technically egalitarian, it is more common than not that women waive* their inheritance in favor of male relatives.

* "Voluntarily." Because that’s what one does. Because that’s how things are handled. Because it's the custom. Because it is the only socially acceptable way to behave.

We exist within a framework that is equal in theory, yet profoundly unequal in practice.

And no, I am not a victim of this system. I possess the resources necessary to manipulate it to my advantage. That doesn't mean I am oblivious to the fact that these resources aren't available to everyone—that mine were merely a stroke of luck regarding my birth—nor am I unaware that manipulating the system is simultaneously an act of conforming to it, which inevitably chips away at one's sense of human integrity.

Raymond Nguyen3 said:Given how late you're posting, you probably should've just gone to sleep. Or, I don't know, read a book if you couldn't sleep.
And even with that post, I don't really see much point in arguing with him. For his own sake, I really hope he's just using this thread to troll.🤦 If he actually cared about his mental health, he'd probably be pretty worried right now. Being a jerk doesn't really have anything to do with what your zodiac sign is.

I mean, fair point.🙂
And honestly, this whole debate—especially with this specific tone and title—is pretty much pointless.
Nobody here, at least nobody with half a brain, is actually trying to claim anything related to the title or "castrate" anyone, but apparently, it’s impossible to have even a slightly serious discussion about certain topics without people throwing tantrums and hurling infantile accusations left and right.
As if I need to explain all over again how feminism has absolutely nothing to do with defending some "author" like Nicole Kidman, or how some women just love playing a part in the media and would probably defend Kelly Clarkson from angry eco-activists tomorrow if they could. I've already said everything there is to say on this thread.

boldwalker12 said:Oh, absolutely. We’ve got this endless flood of these "stars" who only made it into the spotlight because of sheer luck and their looks, yet everyone gives them all the credit—completely ignoring the disgusting, sexist mindset of a society where women basically have to choose between two roles: being a gold digger or a housewife. Anything else is just a struggle to survive. It's not guaranteed for her like it is for men. Her successes get swept under the rug. They’re always pushed to the sidelines.
It's not like someone like Ava Karabatić is inherently flawed; it’s because of all those insecure losers running the media who embarrass us daily with their garbage news. It’s easy to slip into thinking some random woman might actually be responsible for a crime when the culture is this toxic. For instance, look at how people reacted recently when some wannabe celebrity had a tragic accident—half the comments were basically "good riddance to that slut." These people don't even realize how pathetic they are, or that they’re the exact clientele fueling this kind of trashy content day in and day out.
And don't even get me started on the current trend among frustrated young guys—if a girl isn't handing herself over, she's automatically labeled a "gold digger." 😁

You’ve analyzed our media landscape quite well. It's populated by compliant, sexist men who view women as nothing more than legs, backsides, and breasts—devoid of brains, knowledge, or character.
That defines all our shows and those various competitions, like Top Model, where a mindless mannequin walks the runway under the thumb of some fraud owning a newspaper, thinking he's discovered the United States when he knows nothing about actual art.
Simply put, anyone with enough money can pay a network to produce content that serves as a commercial for their business. Children—girls—are exploited. Their dreams of fame and beauty are used as mere "meat" to fill airtime for these worthless programs.
A catastrophe.
So, what should women do?
I know what needs to be done. Be virtuous, study, and make sure you are number one in your own home. If not, kick a bad man to the curb.
Therefore, ladies, choose men who actually have value—not based on their bank accounts—and avoid that sexist, small-minded, nouveau riche male mob.
Things will improve instantly.

Sure, women can be absolute nightmares—it’s hard to deny—but I won't go so far as to generalize every single one of them... obviously not everyone belongs in that category, just like not every man is a saint.
Personally, I find myself gravitating toward male-dominated circles. It's simpler. I find it much easier to find common ground with men than with the opposite sex—they’re generally more laid-back, more open, and actually fun to be around. Getting on the same page with a guy is easy; trying to align with a woman? Not so much. From what I've dealt with, women are often just malicious, envious, and hypocritical. They constantly drone on about trivial nonsense that bores me to tears... so, in that regard, men definitely win. But hey, that’s just my experience. Everyone has their own take, and different strokes for different folks.

Grace Anderson5 said:If women are bothered by being treated like sexual objects, then maybe they could just stop acting like them.

A man always sees what he wants to see.
Women look attractive and desirable even in plain jeans; that is just human nature.

But a person's sex shouldn't define their entire existence.
To treat someone purely sexually or to judge them solely by their physical traits—that is exactly what it means to reduce a person to their sexual attributes.
It isn't that we suddenly discovered our breasts are attractive; it's that men find them so. This applies to everything else, too.
We know breasts exist to nourish an infant. Men fetishized the female body, and now it seems women are being held responsible for it.
Do you think we should be wearing sacks instead of lingerie, like the women in those countries governed by Sharia law?

I believe men lack self-control. The less self-control a man possesses, the less of that true, noble masculinity remains within him.
A man should be judged by the strength of his character first, and only then by his knowledge, his beauty, or his wealth.

Bradley Taylor24 said:Should those very same organizations be spending their time demonizing the entire male gender every single day?🤷

No man has done more than men in that regard. It’s simply impossible.
You hunt for sponsors, and you get them. Then comes the inevitable whining: what on earth is wrong with women?
You got exactly what you asked for.
So, what's the deal? Are we really ignoring the hardworking women out there—the ones holding their families together through eighteen-hour workdays—just because they aren't walking models? Does beauty really matter more than grit?
You won't find those types of women on the covers of glossy magazines in skimpy outfits. You won't see them singing along to country hits or chasing after chauffeurs. They are nothing more than bottom-feeders—even if they happen to be the wealthy kind. Just trash.
So, what now?
Who is going to bear the children? Who will foot the bill for them, and who will actually raise them? Who is left to be the soul of their own home or the head of their own firm?
Who will be responsible for raising the next generation of men and women—those capable of identifying true values within human society?
Are we really suggesting this won't just be women who have spent their lives performing in adult films, posing for provocative photoshoots, or even picking their boyfriends' pockets? Are these the individuals tasked with raising the next generation of honorable men or virtuous daughters? Is that the plan? Give me a break.

As the old-timers say: you can't get something new out of the same old cat.

I have a question. If women are ruthless when competing at work, does that automatically mean men are honest? Does it imply men aren't using dirty tactics or low blows, since those are typically labeled as "feminine" traits? And what about the bosses who sleep with their secretaries? I suppose that’s considered fine because even the old nobility used to exploit their maids. Look at the witch hunts. Those women were branded as witches simply because they refused to submit. It's obvious. So, are we saying men have improved over the centuries while women have regressed? Regarding the guy complaining that men aren't admitted to the Women's Studio—that program is run by women. I don't see why a man would focus on women's issues unless he was a lawyer.

Steven Johnson3 said:I have a question. If women are ruthless when competing at work, does that automatically mean men are honest? Does it imply men aren't using dirty tactics or low blows, since those are typically labeled as "feminine" traits? And what about the bosses who sleep with their secretaries? I suppose that’s considered fine because even the old nobility used to exploit their maids. Look at the witch hunts. Those women were branded as witches simply because they refused to submit. It's obvious. So, are we saying men have improved over the centuries while women have regressed? Regarding the guy complaining that men aren't admitted to the Women's Studio—that program is run by women. I don't see why a man would focus on women's issues unless he was a lawyer.

Men tend to advance more easily based on innate abilities; people are naturally inclined to take them seriously in business, so they don't necessarily need to be jerks to succeed. Sure, some are jerks, but a woman often feels forced to act like one just to climb the ladder. To stay at the top, she has to become a complete shark.
It isn't that she wants to be that way; she has ambition, and her environment dictates the rules of the game.
Unfortunately, it is difficult for a woman to reach a high position. No one is eager to help her, so she has to be a fighter to achieve success and maintain it.

And regarding the bosses sleeping with secretaries?
If it is coerced through the threat of losing a job, then it isn't sex—it is abuse, or even rape. However, if it is consensual, then it doesn't matter if it's a boss and a secretary or a director and a dockworker. It is simply two people from the same workplace having sex.
As far as I am concerned, if a man is dealing with women's issues, he shouldn't be there; in fact, he certainly shouldn't.😍

Quentin Tarantino:

boldwalker12 I can't even begin to process what they just said. Seriously? Is anyone actually buying this? It’s like people just stop thinking the second they open their mouths. Honestly, how does someone even come up with this kind of nonsense? Man, I could've saved myself all that wasted effort if I’d just read this a second sooner. I can't believe I have to deal with this again. Honestly, does anyone else feel like we’re just circling the drain here? Every time someone brings up these "traditional values" arguments, it feels like a step backward. We've been talking about how patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, but people still act like it's some kind of lost utopia. It isn't. It's just outdated. Why are we even entertaining these regressive ideas in a modern society? It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck. We should be pushing for progress, not clinging to old-school power structures that clearly don't serve everyone. Does anyone actually think things were better when one group held all the cards? I highly doubt it.

Come on, don't stoop that low. So what if he was out chasing skirts? What does that have to do with the actual points he's making? Should I start digging up everyone else's dirty laundry and dragging their private lives into this? Would that be any fun? I don't think so.

goldenranger5 said:

Green Man says:
I’ll say it again: you haven't earned my mockery. But Miss goldenranger5 certainly has. Initially, I assumed she just struggled with comprehension, but... she actually admitted there’s some secret connection binding us together. It seems it isn't a lack of intellect, but rather a personal vendetta against me. That is her burden to carry, not mine.

Is that so? 😂 My level of obsession with you is truly staggering—mostly because (by some miracle, I can actually recall things from last week, which is quite an achievement...) your reaction to someone refusing to entertain your "facts" was particularly amusing. It stands in stark contrast to your previous little episode where you attempted to overdose on vomiting emojis as a substitute for actual argumentation.

A secret connection... (cue the fanfare)... is simply this: when one possesses a memory capacity slightly larger than that of a goldfish, one can actually retain a few names. It saves the trouble of reading every single word surrounding them. One might say you are secretly connected to many people through your various outbursts, and I would be more than happy to re-establish that connection once you realize that quoting me is fundamentally bad for your health.

There isn't a single reputable source in existence that would claim we live in a matriarchy. However, of course, if the facts don't fit the narrative, one simply declares the existing sources inadequate because they don't align with certain fantasies. Then, those fantasies expand to include the idea that such sources will exist in the future. Perfectly logical.

Look, if you aren't actually reading what I write, then you really have no business commenting on it. You’re basically admitting you haven't even read my posts, yet you still feel this desperate need to come at me? Honestly, I'm sorry for whatever happened in your life that made you this bitter, but sorry, babe—that's not on me. 🤷 I didn't screw you over. Seriously. ☕

Ryan Wood98 said:I'm afraid I can't agree with that.

However, I am glad this was brought up, because I think the argument itself illustrates exactly why there is such an aversion toward feminism.

In theory, the struggle for equality sounds wonderful. But in practice, I think we see two distinct trends:

- The clear discrimination men face during divorce proceedings.
- A tendency among certain women to link everything—even things that have nothing to do with it—to the patriarchy, simply because those issues are directed at men, thereby portraying themselves as victims of a non-existent discrimination.

To be clear, I agree that there are many situations in our society where women are disadvantaged, and those are issues worth fighting against. However, I think what causes people to turn away from feminism are all those OTHER instances where people protest against things that have no actual connection to discrimination or the patriarchy. It's somewhat like the story of the boy who cried wolf.

How am I supposed to take an organization seriously when they view a case like Cyclops vs. Nives Celzijus as gender discrimination? Or when someone blames the patriarchy for the fact that men are often placed at a disadvantage by default during divorce settlements?

By definition, a patriarchy implies Male Power, or greater rights for men over women. Therefore, in a truly patriarchal society, a woman would have no chance at all in a dispute against a man regarding child custody.

We could certainly discuss the stereotyping of gender roles in society, which is amplified by the media and the education system, but I don't think we can call that patriarchy, nor can we attribute that stereotyping to men. In fact, given how much women represent the educational system, perhaps—if anything—that responsibility might actually lie with those women.

Look, you’re wasting your breath. It’s like trying to say good morning to someone who’s stone-deaf. Honestly, the motivation behind most feminists—and I use that term loosely—is purely personal. That’s exactly why they get so aggressive and why they always act like they're being victimized. I’m with you on pretty much everything, except for the whole divorce situation. That is a massive, incredibly messy issue. There isn't a perfect solution out there, period. At best, you're just looking for the least terrible option available. Is there discrimination involved? Sure, in a way. But I don't think the courts are out to get anyone intentionally; it feels more like they're just taking the path of least resistance. It’s a complicated mess, but regarding everything else? Yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

Ryan Wood98 said:So, I suppose this is an instance of a woman who does NOT actually want gender equality.

Perhaps she wants all the same rights and opportunities that men have, but she also wants to retain all those extra advantages that come from the current "unequal" status quo.

It is something a previous commenter touched upon—it seems to be part of human nature to crave as much power as possible. Not necessarily equal power, but just... more.

A completely different question regarding feminism could be raised here: do feminists even have a legitimate right to represent the interests of the entire female population?

Can feminists advocate for equality on behalf of women (assuming for a moment that they truly are advocating for equality) if most women DO NOT want equality? What if they prefer a "Prince Charming" type who opens doors for them, provides for them, and comes home saying, "Honey, I'm home," while they live out the life of a housewife from an American TV sitcom?

Do we actually have any data that would allow us to claim we know what the female population wants, and are feminists truly representing those desires?

Let’s be real here... most women act completely un-feminist. And that’s exactly what drives feminists absolutely insane. They go off on these massive rants, blaming thousands of years of tradition like those women are just mindless robots without a single thought of their own. As if they aren't capable of using their own heads—no matter how smart or cunning those heads might actually be.

slymaker9 said:Exactly. She doesn't want equality, and most tragically, she isn't even aware of it. By acting this way, she actively sustains the fraternal patriarchy, which is precisely what I told her at the time.
She envies men while simultaneously demanding that they respect certain "female" privileges. There is a massive amount of cognitive dissonance at play here.
It likely stems from a deep-seated desire for power. She wants both "female" and "male" advantages. She wants everything.

Feminists advocate for the right to free choice, and that is why they don't need external legitimacy. You only need legitimacy when you are standing against something.

So, you're actually trying to tell me that there's zero choice left for women today? Give me a break. How "free" he really is—that's a whole different ballgame, and honestly, I think it's more of a philosophical debate than anything else. But seriously, what exactly am I missing here? In what way do women lack choice in this day and age?

Drew Lee7 said:Quentin Tarantino:

boldwalker12 I can't even begin to process what they just said. Seriously? Is anyone actually buying this? It’s like people just stop thinking the second they open their mouths. Honestly, how does someone even come up with this kind of nonsense? Man, I could've saved myself all that wasted effort if I’d just read this a second sooner. I can't believe I have to deal with this again. Honestly, does anyone else feel like we’re just circling the drain here? Every time someone brings up these "traditional values" arguments, it feels like a step backward. We've been talking about how patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, but people still act like it's some kind of lost utopia. It isn't. It's just outdated. Why are we even entertaining these regressive ideas in a modern society? It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck. We should be pushing for progress, not clinging to old-school power structures that clearly don't serve everyone. Does anyone actually think things were better when one group held all the cards? I highly doubt it.

Come on, don't stoop that low. So what if he was out chasing skirts? What does that have to do with the actual points he's making? Should I start digging up everyone else's dirty laundry and dragging their private lives into this? Would that be any fun? I don't think so.

Look, if you aren't actually reading what I write, then you really have no business commenting on it. You’re basically admitting you haven't even read my posts, yet you still feel this desperate need to come at me? Honestly, I'm sorry for whatever happened in your life that made you this bitter, but sorry, babe—that's not on me. 🤷 I didn't screw you over. Seriously. ☕

Look, you’re wasting your breath. It’s like trying to say good morning to someone who’s stone-deaf. Honestly, the motivation behind most feminists—and I use that term loosely—is purely personal. That’s exactly why they get so aggressive and why they always act like they're being victimized. I’m with you on pretty much everything, except for the whole divorce situation. That is a massive, incredibly messy issue. There isn't a perfect solution out there, period. At best, you're just looking for the least terrible option available. Is there discrimination involved? Sure, in a way. But I don't think the courts are out to get anyone intentionally; it feels more like they're just taking the path of least resistance. It’s a complicated mess, but regarding everything else? Yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

Let’s be real here... most women act completely un-feminist. And that’s exactly what drives feminists absolutely insane. They go off on these massive rants, blaming thousands of years of tradition like those women are just mindless robots without a single thought of their own. As if they aren't capable of using their own heads—no matter how smart or cunning those heads might actually be.

So, you're actually trying to tell me that there's zero choice left for women today? Give me a break. How "free" he really is—that's a whole different ballgame, and honestly, I think it's more of a philosophical debate than anything else. But seriously, what exactly am I missing here? In what way do women lack choice in this day and age?

Yeah, right. Most people have never even looked my way.

I just wanted to point out that you really went for the low blow there. Seriously. So what if he admitted to being out with some hookers? What does that have to do with anything we're actually discussing here? You acted like you could have saved yourself the breath of replying if you’d just read that part. Like he isn't even a human being. Like he doesn't even deserve the time of day from you. My point was that he could easily turn around and do the exact same thing to you, which would be totally pointless. And let's be real—this stuff affects you, me, and mnogi everyone else, even when we claim it doesn't. We don't live in a vacuum, after all.

And if we're talking about her, people today would probably just claim she was only hanging out with that guy for his money.😳😉

Drew Lee7 said:I just wanted to point out that you really went for the low blow there. Seriously. So what if he admitted to being out with some hookers? What does that have to do with anything we're actually discussing here? You acted like you could have saved yourself the breath of replying if you’d just read that part. Like he isn't even a human being. Like he doesn't even deserve the time of day from you. My point was that he could easily turn around and do the exact same thing to you, which would be totally pointless. And let's be real—this stuff affects you, me, and mnogi everyone else, even when we claim it doesn't. We don't live in a vacuum, after all.

Please, spare me the sermon.
I responded to him point by point.
I don't make a habit of debating frustrated people. And yeah, you're right, he doesn't deserve it because he hasn't put forth a single decent thought, word, or sentence worth debating. I only replied out of pure muscle memory.

Drew Lee7 said:I just wanted to point out that you really went for the low blow there. Seriously. So what if he admitted to being out with some hookers? What does that have to do with anything we're actually discussing here? You acted like you could have saved yourself the breath of replying if you’d just read that part. Like he isn't even a human being. Like he doesn't even deserve the time of day from you. My point was that he could easily turn around and do the exact same thing to you, which would be totally pointless. And let's be real—this stuff affects you, me, and mnogi everyone else, even when we claim it doesn't. We don't live in a vacuum, after all.

No, just because the small town is gossiping doesn't mean it hits everyone. You can only really claim that for yourself.

Drew Lee7 said:Quentin Tarantino:

boldwalker12 I can't even begin to process what they just said. Seriously? Is anyone actually buying this? It’s like people just stop thinking the second they open their mouths. Honestly, how does someone even come up with this kind of nonsense? Man, I could've saved myself all that wasted effort if I’d just read this a second sooner. I can't believe I have to deal with this again. Honestly, does anyone else feel like we’re just circling the drain here? Every time someone brings up these "traditional values" arguments, it feels like a step backward. We've been talking about how patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, but people still act like it's some kind of lost utopia. It isn't. It's just outdated. Why are we even entertaining these regressive ideas in a modern society? It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck. We should be pushing for progress, not clinging to old-school power structures that clearly don't serve everyone. Does anyone actually think things were better when one group held all the cards? I highly doubt it.

Come on, don't stoop that low. So what if he was out chasing skirts? What does that have to do with the actual points he's making? Should I start digging up everyone else's dirty laundry and dragging their private lives into this? Would that be any fun? I don't think so.

Look, if you aren't actually reading what I write, then you really have no business commenting on it. You’re basically admitting you haven't even read my posts, yet you still feel this desperate need to come at me? Honestly, I'm sorry for whatever happened in your life that made you this bitter, but sorry, babe—that's not on me. 🤷 I didn't screw you over. Seriously. ☕

Look, you’re wasting your breath. It’s like trying to say good morning to someone who’s stone-deaf. Honestly, the motivation behind most feminists—and I use that term loosely—is purely personal. That’s exactly why they get so aggressive and why they always act like they're being victimized. I’m with you on pretty much everything, except for the whole divorce situation. That is a massive, incredibly messy issue. There isn't a perfect solution out there, period. At best, you're just looking for the least terrible option available. Is there discrimination involved? Sure, in a way. But I don't think the courts are out to get anyone intentionally; it feels more like they're just taking the path of least resistance. It’s a complicated mess, but regarding everything else? Yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

Let’s be real here... most women act completely un-feminist. And that’s exactly what drives feminists absolutely insane. They go off on these massive rants, blaming thousands of years of tradition like those women are just mindless robots without a single thought of their own. As if they aren't capable of using their own heads—no matter how smart or cunning those heads might actually be.

So, you're actually trying to tell me that there's zero choice left for women today? Give me a break. How "free" he really is—that's a whole different ballgame, and honestly, I think it's more of a philosophical debate than anything else. But seriously, what exactly am I missing here? In what way do women lack choice in this day and age?

Then explain to me why we are constantly hearing about being "threatened" when we aren't the ones in danger—it is clearly you who are.

Jeffrey Rivera2 said:Then explain to me why we are constantly hearing about being "threatened" when we aren't the ones in danger—it is clearly you who are.

Oh, wow, looks like someone's making clones now. 😉

Since we're in the psychology section, I assume you've at least heard of projection. It's this fascinating little trick where the human brain convinces itself that it isn't responsible for anything, so it just points the finger at someone else instead. Yeah. Exactly.

goldenranger5 said:

Ryan Wood98 The user states:
I find myself unable to concur with this.

I am glad this was put into writing. It clearly illustrates exactly what fuels the backlash against feminism.

In theory, the fight for equality sounds noble enough. In practice, however, we are faced with two distinct phenomena:

It’s hard to ignore the blatant bias against men during divorce proceedings. It feels less like a pursuit of justice and more like a rigged game where the deck is stacked from the start.
There is a certain tendency among some women to link everything—even the most nonsensical grievances—to the concept of patriarchy. If an action is directed at men, they immediately frame it as a systemic issue. They present themselves as victims of a discrimination that simply doesn't exist.

One. A textbook example of blatant discrimination against men. I’m not disputing that it exists, but in my earlier posts, I laid out exactly why this happens—specifically regarding the elevated role of motherhood within our mainstream culture, which serves as a direct byproduct of the influence exerted by the dominant religion here in America.

That "series of events" can be broken down into a vast number of what others might call "obvious cases of gender discrimination." These instances will undoubtedly be... More than one.Their attempt to downplay everything by pointing to that one single outlier is, predictably, driven by what our mainstream culture still insists is a woman's primary—if not only—purpose. You simply cannot reconcile the claim that "discrimination doesn't exist" with the sheer volume of actual incidents reported. What are those incidents supposed to be? Mere coincidences?

Ryan Wood98 The user states:
Patriarchy inherently relies on Male Power, granting men significantly more leverage than women. In such a society, if a man and a woman find themselves at odds over child custody, the woman stands virtually no chance.

Let’s start by reviewing the definition of patriarchy. If we intend to have a serious discussion, we should probably agree beforehand on which sources we're actually going to consider relevant.

Ryan Wood98 The user states:
We could certainly discuss the way gender roles are stereotyped within our society—how they are reinforced by both the media and the public school system—but I refuse to label this phenomenon as "patriarchy," nor will I pin the blame on men. In fact, given that women make up the vast majority of the workforce in our education system, if anyone is responsible for perpetuating these stereotypes, it would arguably be those women.

The version of ourselves we eventually become as adults is essentially a byproduct of this stereotyping. It triggers various behavioral patterns across both genders. But where does this stereotyping actually originate? Isn't it precisely the very thing we claim to be fighting against—even if we tackle it through various, sometimes rather absurd methods under the guise that any publicity is good publicity?

For the sake of further discussion, I ask that we move past the notion of "attributing" behavior to men or holding them responsible for these systemic issues.

Patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and is dependent on female subordination.

Encyclopedia of Sex and Gender, according to Wikipedia.

goldenranger5 said:

Ryan Wood98 The user states:
I find myself unable to concur with this.

I am glad this was put into writing. It clearly illustrates exactly what fuels the backlash against feminism.

In theory, the fight for equality sounds noble enough. In practice, however, we are faced with two distinct phenomena:

It’s hard to ignore the blatant bias against men during divorce proceedings. It feels less like a pursuit of justice and more like a rigged game where the deck is stacked from the start.
There is a certain tendency among some women to link everything—even the most nonsensical grievances—to the concept of patriarchy. If an action is directed at men, they immediately frame it as a systemic issue. They present themselves as victims of a discrimination that simply doesn't exist.

One. A textbook example of blatant discrimination against men. I’m not disputing that it exists, but in my earlier posts, I laid out exactly why this happens—specifically regarding the elevated role of motherhood within our mainstream culture, which serves as a direct byproduct of the influence exerted by the dominant religion here in America.

That "series of events" can be broken down into a vast number of what others might call "obvious cases of gender discrimination." These instances will undoubtedly be... More than one.Their attempt to downplay everything by pointing to that one single outlier is, predictably, driven by what our mainstream culture still insists is a woman's primary—if not only—purpose. You simply cannot reconcile the claim that "discrimination doesn't exist" with the sheer volume of actual incidents reported. What are those incidents supposed to be? Mere coincidences?

Ryan Wood98 The user states:
Patriarchy inherently relies on Male Power, granting men significantly more leverage than women. In such a society, if a man and a woman find themselves at odds over child custody, the woman stands virtually no chance.

Let’s start by reviewing the definition of patriarchy. If we intend to have a serious discussion, we should probably agree beforehand on which sources we're actually going to consider relevant.

Ryan Wood98 The user states:
We could certainly discuss the way gender roles are stereotyped within our society—how they are reinforced by both the media and the public school system—but I refuse to label this phenomenon as "patriarchy," nor will I pin the blame on men. In fact, given that women make up the vast majority of the workforce in our education system, if anyone is responsible for perpetuating these stereotypes, it would arguably be those women.

The version of ourselves we eventually become as adults is essentially a byproduct of this stereotyping. It triggers various behavioral patterns across both genders. But where does this stereotyping actually originate? Isn't it precisely the very thing we claim to be fighting against—even if we tackle it through various, sometimes rather absurd methods under the guise that any publicity is good publicity?

For the sake of further discussion, I ask that we move past the notion of "attributing" behavior to men or holding them responsible for these systemic issues.

I suppose I don't see why I should exclude that idea, given that it seems to be a factual reality. 🤷 It appears in several posts within this debate, and I think it stems from the premise that we live in a patriarchal society—that is, a society managed by men, which would imply that those same men are responsible for the flaws inherent in that society.

ruggedscout91 said:No man has done more than men in that regard. It’s simply impossible.
You hunt for sponsors, and you get them. Then comes the inevitable whining: what on earth is wrong with women?
You got exactly what you asked for.
So, what's the deal? Are we really ignoring the hardworking women out there—the ones holding their families together through eighteen-hour workdays—just because they aren't walking models? Does beauty really matter more than grit?
You won't find those types of women on the covers of glossy magazines in skimpy outfits. You won't see them singing along to country hits or chasing after chauffeurs. They are nothing more than bottom-feeders—even if they happen to be the wealthy kind. Just trash.
So, what now?
Who is going to bear the children? Who will foot the bill for them, and who will actually raise them? Who is left to be the soul of their own home or the head of their own firm?
Who will be responsible for raising the next generation of men and women—those capable of identifying true values within human society?
Are we really suggesting this won't just be women who have spent their lives performing in adult films, posing for provocative photoshoots, or even picking their boyfriends' pockets? Are these the individuals tasked with raising the next generation of honorable men or virtuous daughters? Is that the plan? Give me a break.

As the old-timers say: you can't get something new out of the same old cat.

I suppose you could flip that logic around to suggest that women who experience abuse are to blame because they chose those men, or that women handling both career work and all the household management are responsible simply because of their choice in partners.

Your argument implies that we are all entirely responsible for our own choices and that, consequently, no one has any right to complain about the outcomes.

Well, I guess one could look at it that way, 🤷 but I suspect things might be a bit more complex than that.

Ryan Wood98 said:I suppose you could flip that logic around to suggest that women who experience abuse are to blame because they chose those men, or that women handling both career work and all the household management are responsible simply because of their choice in partners.

Your argument implies that we are all entirely responsible for our own choices and that, consequently, no one has any right to complain about the outcomes.

Well, I guess one could look at it that way, 🤷 but I suspect things might be a bit more complex than that.

Whatever happened to free will? Isn't that one of the fundamental qualities that defines a human being? I haven't met anyone quite like this walking around out there.

Yes, matters are certainly more complex and rather chaotic, but each of us possesses the capacity to observe and interpret those variables. From there, one can arrive at a decision through independent thought. People who lean on concepts like "fate," "divine will," or similar notions are merely offering excuses—it is a way to evade taking responsibility for one's own decisions and actions.

Jeffrey Rivera2 said:Then explain to me why we are constantly hearing about being "threatened" when we aren't the ones in danger—it is clearly you who are.

You've got a perfect example right there. Once a year, some article pops up about workplace accident rates in the US. They list how many people were injured, how many became disabled, and how many died on the job.

When it comes to injuries, men are hit twice as hard. And when it comes to fatalities, it's almost exclusively men.

That's a solid, undeniable argument regarding just how burdened—or "threatened"—one gender is compared to the other in our society, or any society for that matter.

Everything else is just noise: people arguing over perceptions, who didn't get enough affection growing up, or legal rights that people are too afraid to exercise because they're worried about what the neighbors will think, which is basically 🙂

William Watson3 said:Sure, women can be absolute nightmares—it’s hard to deny—but I won't go so far as to generalize every single one of them... obviously not everyone belongs in that category, just like not every man is a saint.
Personally, I find myself gravitating toward male-dominated circles. It's simpler. I find it much easier to find common ground with men than with the opposite sex—they’re generally more laid-back, more open, and actually fun to be around. Getting on the same page with a guy is easy; trying to align with a woman? Not so much. From what I've dealt with, women are often just malicious, envious, and hypocritical. They constantly drone on about trivial nonsense that bores me to tears... so, in that regard, men definitely win. But hey, that’s just my experience. Everyone has their own take, and different strokes for different folks.

I certainly wouldn't want to make a broad generalization, but I feel like that is exactly what you're doing right now. 😁

Do you have any examples of female villains? I’m looking for characters that sort of capture the essence of most women, if that makes sense.

To be perfectly honest, I’ve always found myself gravitating toward male-dominated circles. There’s just something about the dynamic that feels more intuitive to me; I find it much easier to strike up a conversation and truly find common ground with men than I ever have with the opposite sex.

Do you happen to be on the same page as I am regarding this matter? 🙂

I’ve found that I tend to get along much more easily with men; there’s just a certain relaxed, open, and genuinely fun energy about them that I find really refreshing. To be perfectly honest, based on my own personal experiences, I’ve often found women to be somewhat more difficult—tending toward being unkind, envious, or even a bit hypocritical. It seems like our conversations frequently drift toward trivialities that simply don't capture my interest or leave me feeling quite bored, so if we’re talking about ease of connection, I definitely give the edge to the guys. Of course, I realize this is strictly my own subjective take on things, and I’m sure many others would have a completely different perspective to share. After all, there's a saying for a reason—different strokes for different folks!

I certainly respect that it’s your personal take on the matter, but I have to wonder—where is the actual evidence to support the claim that women are inherently unpleasant?

To be honest, I find myself gravitating toward male company quite often. It isn’t necessarily about being in a large group where it’s five guys and me, though; more often than not, it’s just those meaningful one-on-one conversations that I truly value. In fact, if I look at my inner circle, I actually have more close male friends than female ones. My relationships with women tend to stay a bit more on the surface level—usually centered around grabbing coffee, going out for drinks, or just chatting about the latest guys we've encountered. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but I find the depth I share with my male friends to be much more fulfilling.

I also have a few wonderful girlfriends in my circle whom I can say, with absolute certainty, are truly lovely people. They aren't just friends out of habit or convenience; they are genuinely kind souls through and through. 🙂

I honestly can’t quite wrap my head around how the title even relates to the actual topic at hand. It feels completely disconnected. From what I can gather, it just looks like a gathering of some well-known, rather frustrated men.

What truly weighs on my mind—and I find it genuinely unsettling—is that even when you weigh all those arguments regarding the historical suppression of women, there remains this lingering question. I was actually discussing this recently with an old friend of mine, much like how one might sit down for a long chat over coffee in Seattle, and we touched upon a profound paradox. If women finally have the autonomy to choose their own paths—choices that previous generations quite literally fought and died for—why is it that some still gravitate toward being exclusively a mother, a homemaker, and a wife? It’s a complex puzzle that I can't help but dwell on.