User Tag List

First 85898106107108109110118158 Last

Results 1,071 to 1,080 of 1614

  1. #1071
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Nice. Now, would you like to explain how gynocentrisicm can be used as a distinction between MRA & MGTOW, perhaps relating it to the perceived leader of the MGTOW movement...
    Since forever feminists have been battling traditionalists back and forth. The traditionalists want to protect women by doing the warring, keep them in the home making babies and sammiches and not earning a wage/salary. Both positions start from female interest/need and it's the female traditionalists that have blocked feminists the most.

    The schism between MRA and MGTOW was like I mentioned above. Most MRA are traditionalists at heart and traditionalism is a manifestation of gynocentrism. Feminism is also a manifestation gynocentrism. Trads are covert, fems are overt but they both place the female first. How can you have equality when you place the female first...

    MGTOW are anti-gynocentrists so they are therefore anti feminist and anti tradtionalist. However within the MGTOW community the consensus has been to ignore feminists/ism. I am not a MGTOW ftr.

    There is no leader of MGTOW per se.

    Females started to abandon 'traditionalism' decades ago, it's about time more men did as well and while doing so be aware of the 'true' nature of feminism, i.e. females first.

    Here is a video of a MGTOW who advocates not bothering with feminism and why.

    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft
    Likes jixmixfix, asynartetic liked this post

  2. #1072
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    MGTOW are anti-gynocentrists
    Can you explain how MGTOW is anti-gynocentrist?

    And given that...
    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    Gynocentrism is not a random anomaly, a mental illness, a philosophy, or a derivative of some other philosophy; it is an instinctual predisposition. This instinct is in most, if not all, other animals as well as humans. In simplest terms 'it' isn't good or bad, it just is.
    It isn't good or bad, it just is... Why would it be anti-gynocentrist?

  3. #1073
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Can you explain how MGTOW is anti-gynocentrist?

    And given that...

    It isn't good or bad, it just is... Why would it be anti-gynocentrist?
    Let us take the lion tamer for example. When a large creature roars or makes threatening gestures, it is our hard wired instinct to feel fear. When we experience fear coming from an object or physical source, our instinct is to quickly distance ourselves from that source. ergo it is our instinctive nature to run when the lion looks at us and roars aggressively. But the lion tamer has been trained that turning his back and running will most certainly get him killed. Instead of obeying that instinct, he does the opposite, he gestures back with intimidating gestures. A well trained lion tamer learns how to posture, gesture, position himself and the lion, in a way that triggers the instinctive drive of the lion to back down and submit. In this example we see two different species behaving in an unnatural way. The lion backing down from a creature that should otherwise be a meal. The human aggressively taking charge of a creature he should be running from. Gynocentrism is an instinct, the urge to run from danger is many times a more primal instinct with more emotion, more hard wired into our brain, than gynocentrism.

    Another example of how we can over come our instinctive behavior is the fact that we do not go around stealing from people, in spite of the fact we are all born with the tendency to take what we want. Babies/toddlers are notorious kleptomaniacs

    Perhaps all of us have stolen something at some point in our lives. And there are still people who steal from others very often. But most people don’t steal things most of the time.

    Gynocentrism will always be an instinct, like the urge to steal.
    But it can be overcome in a society, just like our urge to steal.

    Gynocentrism is found in both men and women, and therefore we must work towards building a society that alters the behavior of both men and women. Realize that the behavior of women is often dependent on the behavior of men, and the behavior of men is often dependent on the behavior of women. Therefore, we must slowly and constantly work on examining the role between men and women, and figure out which behaviors in each of the sexes produces a change in the other.

    When men think about women, it has always been in the context of:
    How do I get girls to like me?
    How do I get girls to give me sex?
    How do I make them happy?

    It is only now that men are beginning to think about women in the context of:
    How does her nature exploit me?
    How does my own nature lead to my exploitation?
    How do I get society to value me as much as them?

    Gynocentrism has served civilization for millenia and could serve us in the future if our species were facing extinction due to low numbers. Zombie apocalypse anyone? Watch how fast a feminist will man up for provisioning & protection if that were the case. With 7 billion and change humans on the planet this is no longer needed and is creating problems.
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft
    Likes asynartetic liked this post

  4. #1074
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Thank you - You have answered the first question of how they plan to overcome it, but not the 2nd one:
    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly View Post
    Gynocentrism will always be an instinct, like the urge to steal.
    But it can be overcome in a society, just like our urge to steal.

    Gynocentrism is found in both men and women, and therefore we must work towards building a society that alters the behavior of both men and women.
    Why would you think we should overcome something that you believe is neither good nor bad? You give the example of stealing, doesn't the need to overcome that urge stem from viewing the act of stealing as bad?

  5. #1075
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Why would you think we should overcome something that you believe is neither good nor bad? You give the example of stealing, doesn't the need to overcome that urge stem from viewing the act of stealing as bad?
    It's two different perspectives.

    In the meta-perspective, stealing is neither good nor bad, it just is. It's a factor to be included.

    In the moral perspective, stealing is set to "bad" if it happens to be an undesirable factor in the meta-perspective.

    More aptly, "property rights" are set to "good", which makes stealing "bad".

    If you want to understand how this could even be a question in the first place, think "Robin Hood". Stealing from the rich to give to the poor is "good" in that perspective.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes Julius_Van_Der_Beak liked this post

  6. #1076
    Level 8 Propaganda Bot SpankyMcFly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    461 so/sx
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Why would you think we should overcome something that you believe is neither good nor bad? You give the example of stealing, doesn't the need to overcome that urge stem from viewing the act of stealing as bad?
    Like I said it (gynocentrism) served humanity for millenia and could serve us again (unlikely but who knows). Call me agnostic on this point . Gynocentrism is creating problems in society though so it's time to 1) be aware of it 2) work to eliminate it because of the problems that it creates. By problems I mean things that 'we' society have deemed bad, treating a person differently based on male/female.

    The instinct to be a violent strong armed robbing thief? It just is
    "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents... Some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new Dark Age. " - H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #1077
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    MGTOW is the first step towards men to step away from gynocentrism, both traditional gynocentrism and present day gynocentrism. In traditionalism men were still servants and self sacrificing to women but they we rewarded and respected for their self sacrifice and hard work by women and society. In the present day gynocentrism men aren't rewarded by women and society for their self sacrifice and hard work you can see this by how much men get screwed over in the divorce courts, so what has happened is the phenomon of men opting out of society all together formally known as "MGTOW". This isn't necessarily a new phenomon around the world, in Japan these type of men are known as the herbivore men who stay locked up in their rooms without socializing and participating with the rest of society. MGTOWs do not support the idea of men staying locked up, they want men to succeed for themselves without the presence of a women especially when conforming to the current marriage laws.
    Likes SpankyMcFly liked this post

  8. #1078
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    Edit: Since uumlau doesn't seem to want to play (Admittedly that was a tad condescending of me): Ideologies don't, movements do.
    Yeah, I don't tend to play rhetorical games. Say what you think or don't.



    And that is what's under critique. Given that most of the accusations are about how the beliefs. historical actions and practices counter gender equality it should be pretty damn obvious that the critique isn't against gender equality as an ideology. Trying to look through a feminist lens and fact-checking in the same time is a constant circle of attributing things done by self-proclaimed feminists and feminist organizations to the patriarchy by either using a true-scotfeminist argument or trying to rationalize how the patriarchy seemingly controlled their minds.

    What's so hard about the alternative: Taking them for their word, that they are part of the feminist movement and believe themselves to act in it's advantage. Again and again I see an argument where you can't critique the feminist movement for been hypocritical with it's principles because anything that doesn't fit the ideology isn't real feminism, but the feminist movement isn't the ideology, it is the movement. The two are about as related as the soviet union and Marxism, except that having failed to evolve into a revolutionary state regime, it evolved into an interest group within the existing one, a gender based interest group, and it's entirely reasonable to critique it as such. It is not the abstract concept incarnated.

    TL-DR: @<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/members/9811.html" target="_blank">Coriolis</a> has the right idea, and frankly the most honest depiction of feminism I've seen coming from any of the feminists here, that it can not be separated from a central focus on females.
    There are two different things being analyzed here. The ideological battle is on one level.

    If you're analyzing current feminist ideology, it's easy to point out a gazillion flaws and hypocrisies:



    But if you want to analyze what's going on in society, you need to remove the ideologies, first. This is a bias of mine with which some might disagree. In general, I believe that people frame the ideology around what already exists in society, and they don't tend to frame ideologies that actually shape society. That isn't to say that ideologies don't shape society, but rather that there's a very strong feedback loop, and you can't just willy-nilly put random pet peeves into your ideology that will stick unless it has already stuck to some degree in society.

    This might not make immediate sense to a lot of people, because they see ideologies shape society all the time. I don't see it that way. Ideologies cold read public opinion and propagandize things to push things politically in a particular ideological direction, but the process is very inexact and imperfect. It's a Ouija board, not a chess board. As such I see society framing the ideology, more than the reverse.

    Feminism, in this view, in what I regard as a practical sense, is very paternalistic. Every law or societal more that "favors" women is based on a paternalistic idea that women are weak and need that kind of help. That gets combined rather ironically that women are perfectly capable of handling things on their own without men's help. This pretty much sums up the current laws: women are independent and strong and in control of their lives with full responsibility for their reproductive system, and well if they need extra financial help in the form of welfare or child support payments that's only fair because they're women and they need help.

    The solution is to make successful arguments in terms of what is fair. It takes a while to make them stick, but as long as the unfairness is blatant enough, political goals can be achieved. Such arguments aren't particularly logical. They involve getting people to empathize with the legal difficulties men have to deal with in the modern world. Making arguments in terms of MRA or MGTOW rhetoric will go nowhere. E.g., from the book "Men on Strike" which Spanky McFly referenced earlier, and I've partially read, how is it fair that a 15 year old male who was statutorially raped be held responsible for child support payments to his 34 year-old female rapist? This is the kind of argument that you could present to anyone other than a radical feminist, and their reaction will be, "WTF?! That can't be true!" THEN you provide sources.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    That incidentally reminds me of an interesting article I read months back that I almost made a thread about:
    The internet is full of men who hate feminism. Here's what they're like in person.

    So much seems both true and relevant that I wouldn't know what to highlight.
    Now this is kind of funny: let's have an outspoken liberal writer psychologically analyze someone he politically disagrees with. Nothing could possibly be biased, here. Not that the object of his interview is particularly admirable: that was kind of the point, wasn't it? Find someone mildly despicable and characterize them in a calm, authoritative clinical voice? Am I right?
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.
    Likes Mane, SD45T-2, SpankyMcFly, Robopop liked this post

  9. #1079
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Feminism, in this view, in what I regard as a practical sense, is very paternalistic. Every law or societal more that "favors" women is based on a paternalistic idea that women are weak and need that kind of help. That gets combined rather ironically that women are perfectly capable of handling things on their own without men's help. This pretty much sums up the current laws: women are independent and strong and in control of their lives with full responsibility for their reproductive system, and well if they need extra financial help in the form of welfare or child support payments that's only fair because they're women and they need help.
    So women are independent except when they require extra financial support in form of welfare or child support payments. I don't know about you but that doesn't sound very independent to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    The solution is to make successful arguments in terms of what is fair. It takes a while to make them stick, but as long as the unfairness is blatant enough, political goals can be achieved. Such arguments aren't particularly logical. They involve getting people to empathize with the legal difficulties men have to deal with in the modern world. Making arguments in terms of MRA or MGTOW rhetoric will go nowhere. E.g., from the book "Men on Strike" which you referenced earlier, and I've partially read, how is it fair that a 15 year old male who was statutorially raped be held responsible for child support payments to his 34 year-old female rapist? This is the kind of argument that you could present to anyone other than a radical feminist, and their reaction will be, "WTF?! That can't be true!" THEN you provide sources.
    Feminists already know that a 15 year old male who gets raped by a 34 year old is held responsible for child support payments but they make absolutely no mention of this sick law because it doesn't support their agenda.

  10. #1080
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    So women are independent except when they require extra financial support in form of welfare or child support payments. I don't know about you but that doesn't sound very independent to me.
    Yes. You're making my point for me.

    Or rather, I had already made it, and now you're stating it again for everyone unable to draw simple inferences.


    Feminists already know that a 15 year old male who gets raped by a 34 year old is held responsible for child support payments but they make absolutely no mention of this sick law because it doesn't support their agenda.
    And again ...
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO