The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive is on! If you haven’t already, please consider donating through the PayPal button below. Thanks!
Members of that strange internet subculture known as Men Going Their Own Way face a bit of a dilemma: they hate women, a LOT, but at the same time most of them want very much to put their penises in them, which kind of gets in the way of the “Going Their Own Way” part of that whole “Men Going Their Own Way” thing.
But one Reddit MGTOW by the name of Isaiah4verse1 has found a solution of sorts to this little problem: He’s simply stopped seeing women as full human beings.
“I am actually no longer attracted to females,” he explains in a recent comment on the Men Going Their Own Way subreddit.
I haven’t looked at porn in over a month. I can’t look at them without a deluge of Red Pill knowledge coming to mind. It’s great.
You’ve trained yourself to be repulsed by women. Congratulations.
I find it completely dishonourable to my mind, body and spirit to be bound sexually to such creatures therefore I took care of it with brute force and it’s done.
Wait, what? What exactly did you take care of “with brute force?” This didn’t involve a rusty steak knife and a lot of blood, did it?
Actually, it has worked too well. I don’t have any feeling towards women. I do not recognize them as complete human beings but unevolved persons.
Unfortunately, he’s not the first to arrive at this, er, enlightened position.
I am completely and utterly free and feel like a kid! (remember back before puberty when this garbage didn’t pollute your mind?)
Huh. My memories of life before puberty involve ugly cars, bad hairdos and songs by ABBA, but then again it was the 70s.
If the name Isaiah4verse1 sounds vaguely familiar to you, well, we’ve met him before. He was one of the MGTOWs who thought it was hilarious that Charlie Sheen might have passed his HIV along to a number of women.
Oh, and earlier this year he set forth his theory that women are basically a bunch of overpriced vagina buses. Maybe you remember that.
H/T — r/BestOfOutrageCulture
Technically not a mathematician here, but I was a psych major who took too many classes in research and statistics, so I’ll give it a go. We’re after all women they date or attempt to date being horrible and that being 50%+ of women? Cuz this is how the estimated numbers seem to work, said women are 15-64 — 65.9% of the population is in that age range. Sex ratio is close enough to 1:1 for our purposes, and the world population is 7.3~ billion.
7.3/2 = approximately 3.65 women on the planet
3.65 * 0.66 = 2.4 billion women aged 15-64
Assuming these guys are including “she ignored me”, which they are, they’re idiots, I’m thinking 100 rejections isn’t unlikely — most dating site messages go ignored don’t they?
So then 2.4 billion / 100 rejections each = 24 million MGTOW. Yeah, nope.
Limit to the US?
By age, cuz I need to transfer these numbers between devices:
15-19 = 7.1%
20-24 = 7%
25-29 = 6.8%
30-34 = 6.5%
35-39 = 6.5%
40-44 = 6.8%
45-49 = 7.4%
50-54 = 7.2%
55-59 = 6.4%
60-64 = 5.4%
15-64 = 67.1%
Out of a population of 328,729,000 that’s 220,580,000 cuz I’m rounding. Half of them women means 110,290,000 women aged 15-64. Divide by the assumed 100 failures each and that still gives us just over a million MGTOW.
Hell, lets narrow it to that “magic” 15-30 age window (is that too wide for them?) — 20.9% of the US population, assume half women makes for just over 34 million women of an age they’d acknowledge they exist. At 100 failures each, that’s fucking still over a quarter million of them.
200 failures each? 170,000
300? 113,000
400?! 85,000
500?!? 68,000
Well, that’d be if all women they failed with where horrible, so half all of that I guess? But that would mean they’d have to have struck out with a thousand women each if there are 68,000 of them. So yeah, math says they’re full of shit. Of course, I can’t well narrow it to HB8+ or whatever standard they use to acknowledge a woman exists, I could approximate it will a bell curve, but my pizza is here!
You’ll be sad to learn it’s mostly volunteer based, and even when they include it as part of passing intro to psych, we still got to pick which study to “volunteer” for (and were, you know, college students, so varies bases built in there).
Good solid psych research is hard, it’s why I get so angry about them twisting the CDC report on rape and sexual assault — they actually did it.
As for Yudcultsky, I think that says everything I have to say on the man.
Fistpound, Argenti. There is no such thing as too much statistics and too much rigour in research.
Also, “Yudcultsky.” Heeee! I’m remembering that!
Going on from the topic of grossly generalising women (sort of), I think I dodged a Nice Guy style bullet the other night. It was my colleagues 21st and we were at a karaoke bar when I got talking to a dude at another table. We shared an interest in retro video games and talked about Legend of Zelda for a few minutes…and he got a little too attached based on that single piece of common ground. Before I know it he’s talking about how women are generally social and men are generally engineers and then how women are so superficial but I’m not and could I give him my number? Sing a song together? I wasn’t getting a good vibe off of him but wasn’t sure (I have very little experience on the dating scene and I’m still learning the basics) so I said I’d hang with my friends some more then approach him if I wanted to do either.
He got weird after that. Kept asking. Approached me and did a very unsubtle “mistaken” ass-stroke when trying to put his hand on the small of my back. Approached me again and went into a spiel about how he didn’t want to let me walk out the door cos I’m so speshul and then again with the women are superficial but I’m apparently not blah blah please give me your number we could just be friends if you want to (*cough*bullshit*cough*). With his arm over my shoulder by the way. I made up my mind and said not interested. Didn’t want to duet, didn’t want to give my number.
HE STILL DIDN’T STOP. Tried to join in when me and the birthday boy were singing Uptown Funk, asked said friend to get me to add the guy on Facebook when I’m RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEM BOTH, then tried to leave with us and get us to go to another bar when we were just planning to all go home.
I’m really fucking glad I didn’t give my number.
Between Esmay’s history with the truth and the fact that your average MRA invents three new people before breakfast… Let’s just say I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s Canadian.
Ewwww. That was a fortunate dodge, sunnysombrera.
@M:
I always pictured Ms Esmay as heaving a long-suffering sigh as she notices him scurrying back to his laptop to assert his masculinity online. Some husbands have train sets, she thinks to herself, some husbands drink, some play football; at least mine doesn’t spend money on his absurd pasttime.
In case any of ya’ll are curious what Isaiah 4:1 is, well…
(Isaiah 4:1, JPS 1985)
Mr. Isaiah4verse1 seems not to realize that, in context, this is a passage about the sack of Jerusalem. I.e., the reason all the women are begging one man to marry them is that all the other men are dead:
(Isaiah 3:25-26, JPS 1985)
And here I thought the manosphere thought that men dying in war was misandry…
It looks like men can’t win judging by feminists impossible standards. You look at porn and your a pervert. You stop looking at porn and you a msygonist.
Straight men would have to condition themselves to quit porn, because it’s addictive. If your gonna quit smoking or drinking your gonna need to develop a distain for cigarettes or alcohol, in order to quit them.
I don’t see any problem with cultivating a distain for porn because overall I think any addiction is unhealthy and unlike what the modem “right on” concessions is with porn, I’m not really in favour of it. The reason the MSM is so accepting of porn these days is due to the fact it’s too popular to condemn.
Sex is more of a biological addiction with men and it skews male judgement on women, it prevents an honest dialogue between the sexes. This is why women largely believe men are habitual liars. We lie in order to tell women what women need to hear, so that we can have sex with them.
This is also why many men become feminists, I know because I was once a male feminist. Today women may like me less for speaking my honest opinions but I also get laid more so go figure.
Sunny,
He sounds like a total m’lady from the Amy Schumer sketch.
If anyone wants a laugh, read the comments under the YouTube video of that sketch. There’s so much nice guy whining that completely proves the whole point of the sketch.
@sunnysombrera
Yes, you did dodge a bullet. Good instincts on your part.
I’m from the engineering/computer science side when it comes to doing statistics. Generally, when trying to draw a conclusion about a population, we want a completely random sample, where every combination of data points of a given size are equally likely (as opposed to every individual data point being equally likely, which could happen if the population is divided into two equal-sized groups selected by coinflip). I imagine that stratifying it into groups and selecting a proportional number of data points from each group at random tends to give similar answers but probably does odd things to modelling curves.
However, when you’re doing sociology you’re interested in differences between groups and can carve it into groups that you have an actual reason to think will be different, so stratifying it will let you compare groups and have a meaningful total model. Plus even the ones that aren’t exclusively college student volunteers have trouble with making things actually random; phone surveys in the first half of the 20th century were biased towards the rich. Stratifying it means groups aren’t systemically underrepresented.
And yeah, their sample is actually from women that they attempt interaction with and is ignoring the possibility that the problem is them, which means it’s much less accurate than a random sample of equal size. Technically a random sample could include exactly the same people, though, which is why any sample smaller than the entire population can draw an invalid conclusion. The odds of that fall rapidly if you repeat the experiment with new random samples and generally get the same result.
Hey, nice getting a story into an anthology! That Ninja Turtles book sounds kind of fun too.
Yes, Beale is so proud that his book reached number 1 bestseller…in Ideologies & Doctrines. Alongside books by Ann Coulter, Michael Savage and Dinesh D’Souza. Oh, and the forward is by Mike Cernovich, so you know it’s a quality product!
This is why real authors say “New York Times bestseller,” because just “bestseller” can mean anything.
That ad…
“Here’s a half-naked feeemale for no reason at all, so when you buy our product you KNOW you’re not a sissy-boy! What? Relevance? Goddamnit Dave, just add some lines and car words to it, do I have to do all the work around here?”
Not to side with this guy or anything, because I won’t, because he’s a disgusting creep, but I can guarantee that not being attracted to females anymore would be the best thing that could ever happen to me. I’ve literally thought that since I was like 12. But I sure as hell won’t be getting there by hating women so much that I’m overwhelmed with entitled manbaby rage whenever I think of them.
I don’t place my ego above everything else like every MRA type does, the only person I blame for my problems is me. And of course the bloody skeleton god of death Mictlantecuhtli, who clearly placed a curse on my head when I was born, but that goes without saying, I don’t think I need to tell you all about Mictlantecuhtli!
That’s because– no, fuck it, too easy.
@MaleSuicide
Other than the fact that I somewhat agree with you on the fact that porn can be addicting, and it could be beneficial for many men to break that addiction, you’re doing a great job of being wrong about everything.
Stop talking like a disgusting Ferengi and address us as women. And I can guarantee you that whatever makes you say that is because you see “females” as something other than human. Just fucking stop defending this mentality. It’s really gross.
Back about 20 years ago I decided to go MGTOW. Not that it was a thing then. And not that I was a horrible human being who hated women. But I had a rough go of dating in a small town so I decided to hang up my dating hat. I decided to focus on learning things I had always wanted to learn. I signed up for classes and went and talked to people who did all the cool things I wanted to do.
I also started taking people up on offers to do things I’d never done. I went to the gun range with some RCMP friends. I climbed a mountain. I learned how to blow stuff up. I was shown how three phase power works. I took singing lessons (they were a waste but I had a good time). I went on trips to places I always wanted to go. I learned about the future of film editing and sound editing when I was shown early versions of AVID and Pro Tools. Basically I put my energy into all the things I love.
You know what happened? I met my wife after I went to a medieval faire. I was confident, interesting, and funny because I worked on me. So, there is something to this ‘going your own way’ for a while but none of it involves being an asshole to 50% of the populace.
And what standards would those be, Mr. 3Edgy5Me Username?
No one said if you stop watching porn you’re a “misogynist”, and no one said you’re a “pervert” if you watch porn. What we object to is men bringing up porn standards everywhere else. Some men can’t tell the difference between porn and real life.
Read to understand, not to respond, please.
[Citation Needed]
I imagine many alcoholics and smokers already have a disdain for drinking/smoking. It takes far more than just “building up a disdain” for something to kick an addiction or something similar.
[Citation Needed]
I’d say that’s more of porn/society’s doing, rather than just boners doing what boners do. Men are told what women should be like via porn and other forms of media, and that skews their perception.
So, women believe that men are habitual liars because men lie to them just to get laid?
And people think feminists are misandrists.
So, you were one of those “I’m a feminist, and I’m a man! Sleep with me! Give me Basic Human Decency Cookies!” kinds that we’re all very wary of? Thanks for confirming for me that men shouldn’t call themselves feminists.
Aw, looks like your tactic didn’t work and now you’re bitter. Poor bby.
On the evolution question, I’m surprised no one else has yet brought up the basic principle that all animals are by definition currently at the exact same place in our evolution, because that is how evolution works; that is, the human is not more evolved than the shark, because the shark is perfectly suited to her (ha! sneaky feminism!) environment at this time (Even though the shark was pretty much the same however many millions of years ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth and my dad started making dad jokes).
I would postulate that it may be possible for one sex to evolve changes while the other does not. I’m just an evolution fan and a student tho. I cant even think of a possible example; I thought of female hyeanas evolving a sort of female penis but it occurred to me that the male probably had to evolve in some way to adapt to that change.
Men and women did not evolve as if they were a dramatically different species. This is one of the most annoying things that people seem to believe. We here at WHtM surely know that gender and sex is a spectrum. First of all, all animals having evolved from a common ancestor, humans have commonalities with other animals (our hand bones are the same basic pattern as bat wings, hooves, even fish). We arent even as drastically different from other animals biologically as some people want to think the sexes are different. Sex development in the womb just doesnt produce an entirely different offspring, like we dont just get a bunch of “Women-Only” genes, it’s all utter nonsense. People seem to think they can just make up shit about history and science and call it a fact. We barely even know how “primative” humans lived ffs, we have a handful of remains and the more we learn the more we find that previous assumptions were incorrect. For example, women have a HUGE influence on the development of agriculture. I think the Cherokee tribe are one of the best preserved and documented examples of this – they were practically matriarchal (they were too equal to be compared to patriarchy though). It just made logical sense for women to “stay home” and do the hard work of farming while men went out after game and to war. Because of this, women controlled most of the food and all of the land. Women would have been responsible for all those agricultural developments that, say, kept Pilgrims from starving (yea jk that was a different tribe of course) and probably still influence farmers of those crops today. It’s just that as Europeans got more patriarchal the record reflected these prejudices by omission of the role of women in past incarnations of society. You can see evidence of the active destruction of women’s power in myths that undermind older pagan traditions that were more female-centric (like the hunting of witches). So I dont really buy modern-day men’s guesses about women ‘huddling in caves” (really, they had no way to defend themselves when men were away? How is that gonna help their babies survive?) esp when STEM fields are so full of ridiculously sexist dudes.
There was a troll on here earlier that didnt seem to get attention for his deliberate straw men against feminists, but I just wanted to say for the record, not only are feminist not WGTOWS, a lot of us are men. Some of us were even assigned a female role at birth and are so manly and love manhood so much that we take on a male role as adults. So it’s not terribly inaccurate to make some crack about how we are feminists because we are so manly althought that one has never made sense to me – why would someone ditching the female role care about how females are treated more than a femininie woman who dates men and therefore has to navigate all the worst parts of sexism? Whatever, sexist dudes never are very good at the whole logic thing. At any rate, no, women who want to vote and get paid fairly and have needed medical care and not be assaulted or harassed dont hate men, we hate men who treat us like shit and the stupid system they created to keep us down.
Also, for the record, having lost more than one man and more than one woman in my life to suicide, and seen people I love struggle with it and struggle with it personally…
first of all I hope you are not suicidal, if you are dont read past this part and just go get help….
but If you arent suicidal yourself (or mourning a suicide) and are merely using suicide as some sort of anti-feminist gotcha?
FUCK. YOU.
Seriously.
MORE WOMEN THAN MEN ATTEMPT SUICIDE. Suicide is not evidence of how women are somehow oppressing men. Some men may commit suicide due to the patriarchal system women are opposing. For example, men who committ suicide due to failure to conform to the male gender role? Yea, feminists dont want men to have to coform to that. Guys stressed from work? Feminists want women to have equal access to jobs, and men to be able to take time off and share the burden of the household. feminists want men to express emotion. A lot of feminists are for socialistic programs and/or private charities to help the poor in general and for mental health care….
not to mention the main reason for more male suicides is that more men have guns. That’s patriarchy by the way, men literally are the ones who are supposed to get the most access to the most advanced weapons. That’s also a major reason so many women die every year – men owning guns….
So stop insulting suicide victims, stop using them. Some of us have actually experienced the horror of suicide, it is real and painful, it isnt a fun game to play in your wierd hate campaign against women. Just stop.
Also, someone asked for a Biologist! Warning, TL;DR incoming
Contrapangloss, B.S. is here! Anyone who specialized in non marine, or has a M.S. or Ph.D. would probably have a better answer, but for general knowledge.
We’ll start with the fun one!
Carnivorous Llamas
As SFHC pointed out, we haven’t found any. Yet. We find weird things all the time, though, so it could still happen!
Also, Llamas could potentially digest meat. It wouldn’t be good for them to have a steady diet of meat, though, because they kind of need the fiber. A llama eating meat and supplements would likely have terrible, terrible diarrhea.
Also, you’d have to figure out nutritional supplements, because the proportional mix of amino acids in animal vs. plant matter is fairly different.
Amino acids are kind of important. In fact, amino acid content is one of the reasons you really shouldn’t feed cats dog food and dogs cat food on a regular basis. Cats stealing nibbles of dog food is okay, but if they only eat dog food, they don’t get enough taurine which can lead to heart disease and other issues.
Dogs on the other hand… cat food is a little too high protein. It’s an excellent treat (yay dog training) but if they eat it too much, it can cause them vomiting and diarrhea, because too much protein and not enough fiber.
So, yeah, carnivorous Llamas could have existed. Current Llamas could potentially eat meat for a limited amount of time with additional fiber and nutritional supplements. Getting them to eat it? A little harder. If they’re starving, maybe?
Is it possible for one sex (particularly the ‘female’ sex)to be less evolved than the other
Warning: I’m going to be using female in the Biology Student sense, of ‘the phenotype that produces the larger gametes during the reproductive phase’. I say ‘phenotype’ because not all organisms have genetic sex determination. Also, some organisms have sex determination, but it’s backwards relative to ours.
I’m doing this warning because sometimes biology definitions can be wacky and not nice, and if anyone is a woman who happens to be stuck with a body that produces smaller gametes (or visa versa), I’m not trying to call you male. This thing really has nothing to do with you and everything to do with the in general thought experiment.
Back to the biology!
First off, the easy answer. No, you aren’t going to have one sex that’s less ‘evolved’ than the other.
Buuuuut, for the sake of argument lets play the Ancient Aliens game. You know the one where you start with a huge “what if”, assume it’s true (when it’s really not) and then try and build a plausible thingy off of that.
So, “What If” a sex could be less evolved than the other?
We’ll start with the mechanism of evolution. Evolution is defined as a change in the proportion of an allele through a population, over time. While there are a whole kit and caboodle of things that can influence the changes in the proportion of an allele (a specific form of gene – think of genes as “Ice Cream” and alleles as “vanilla” or “strawberry”: the genotype is the specific combination of alleles an organism received from their parents for each gene), there’s one thing that you kind of have to have for evolution to occur:
Mutations.
Yes. We are all mutants. Take that, MRD!
…sorry. I’m a nerd. Sorry.
Evolution can (and does play) with alleles without mutation, but for anything ‘new’ to arise, we have to have mutations.
Luckily, mutation happens all the time! Most mutations are detrimental, but some mutations can be ‘silent’, and some mutations are beneficial!
Well, or were beneficial at some point in time. Or were close enough to another beneficial allele on a chromosome (within 50 base pairs of nucleic acids on the DNA strand) that they didn’t get selected against. Or just got lucky through random assortment, or an evolutionary bottleneck event…
Bad mutations sometimes endure. It happens. I digress, back on topic.
Mutations are the slowest form of evolution (selection is much faster) but they are the most fundamental unit of evolution.
But, we’re going to have to throw out selection, because selection just acts on mutations that are already there. Also, even if selection selects for dimorphism of sexes in some species (i.e. selection pressures are different for each sex) they’re still both equally evolved because both are responding to selection pressures at the same time.
Unless, of course, one sex just has more mutations for selection to play with…
Okay, enough with the background. Back to Mutation, Evolution, and Sexes!
We’re going to have to throw organisms without genetic sex determination right out the window here. Sorry turtles. I love you, but I’m sorry.
The reason for this is because if one sex needs to be less evolved than the other, that means they have to have a reason for their alleles to be different from one another. If there’s no genetic sex determination, and the population is breeding (which is kind of the biological point of having different sexes), then there’s really no difference between the two sexes from evolution’s standpoint.
So, we’re limiting ourselves to organisms with genetic sex determination. Yay.
We’ll also have to limit ourselves to the sex chromosomes, as all other alleles will have all the usual crossing over and breeding shenanigans. There’s a reason independent assortment of alleles is a general rule of thumb. Your chromosomes from mom and your chromosomes from dad don’t stay nicely packaged together as a bundle for you to bequeath to your offspring. They mix, they mingle, they sidle alongside each other and go “Hey, you’ve got the same genes I do! Wanna swap some alleles?”
Except for, interestingly enough, the sex chromosomes.
Well, to be more accurate, the sex chromosomes in organisms with a mismatched set… like XY. Or if you’re a bird, WZ.
So, only females (in XY determined species) will be able to gain any mutations caused by mistakes in allele swapping (called crossing over), because only females will have two sex chromosomes of the same size with the same gene loci. Basically, XX can swap ice cream flavors with each other. XY can’t.
In chickens, though, only the roosters would get the extra mutation boost. Lucky roosters, eh?
Moreover, females of XY determined species (and males of WZ) would also have a higher likelihood of more typical mutations: insertions, deletions, and other errors caused during the replication of the DNA strand forming the chromosome during cell division.
Why?
Because the X and W chromosomes are thousands of base pairs longer than the Y and Z chromosomes. Basically, more base pairs for a polymerase to screw up with.
So, that means evolution would have more mutations to play with in ‘female’ humans or ‘male’ chickens. Thus, if a sex is capable of being more evolved than the other, it’s clear that it would indeed be the sex with the matching sex chromosomes.
It’s still BS, though, because our initial “What If?”is a bogus question.
We’re all equally evolved, dudes.
Live with it.
Aaand ninja’d by Kale with a much simpler “No, that’s not how evolution works”
Also, I guess I need to look back at the first page because something came out of the mod queue that apparently needed a PI patented truth-bomb.
Sorry for the above deer made of teal.
@contrapangloss
fuck yes! Thanks!
I would LoVE if you would kinda clarify what I was trying to remember and articulate about how sex is a spectrum and when we are born we dont just inherit strictly “female-only genes” or whatev. Im trying to learn as much as possible about gender/sex in particular.
*[I prefer your in depth and better educated explanation!]
@kupo:
Yep, you got me, I said the word “females” which can only mean I see them as subhuman. Congratulations on deciphering my code.
Wait. You think objecting to someone referring to women as not complete human being is an impossible standard? What standard do you think we should be holding men to? As long as a man isn’t serially killing us, he’s okay? Or would that be an impossibly bar too?
Also, it’s cute that you think there’s a monolithic feminist opinion regarding porn. Actually, this is a contentious issue that feminists argue about all the time.
You can get addicted to anything. That doesn’t mean porn is addictive for everyone. Kind of like the alcohol you compare it to. However, the analogy doesn’t work all that well because you don’t need to hate something to quit it. I quit smoking 7 years ago and have never hated it. Another reason your analogy fails is that he’s not disdaining porn. He’s disdaining women. Comparing half of humanity to a toxic substance like booze and cigarettes is actually quite offensive.
They like porn because it gives them an excuse to get angry at women for not acting like female porn characters and angry at women because they don’t have the sex life of a male porn character. They like porn because most mainstream porn objectifies women.
Oh good. Gender essentialist evo psych nonsense. I wasn’t expecting pseudoscientific bio truths at all!
/s
In all seriousness, how do gay people fit into this little narrative? What about trans and non binary people?
We do? That’s news to me.
Maybe you do. Don’t assume everyone acts like you and your I’m sure equally scummy friends.
First of all, if you were only pretending to be a feminist to get into women’s pants, you were never actually a feminist.
Second of all, has it occurred to you that you can’t win with feminists because the feminists you’ve interacted with realized you were a creep even when you were masquerading as a male feminist?
Men who are asexual exist. So do men with low libidoes. So do monogamous men. So do poly women with high labidos. One size does not fit all sexually.
Is “evo pysch” short hand for people who didnt properly study biology or history thinking that anything they imagine can be stated as medical fact?
Kale, not shy about asking the complicated questions, are you!
I’ll try and dig up a couple papers for you, and then put together a not overwhelmingly complicated answer to a thing that’s pretty stinking complicated.
The spark notes will eventually boil down to:
Traditional sex determination for humans is XX -> female, and XY -> male: however, the expression of the genotype can vary dramatically in the phenotype due to hormonal cascades, epigenetics, and other factors.
That is, biology is super complicated for something that is supposedly so simple, and genotype sometimes doesn’t match the phenotype. At all.
Since the Y chromosome is so short, relatively speaking, most of the actual structural information is somewhere else and only activated by the Y chromosome. And for various reasons that can trigger when there’s no Y chromosome and can fail to trigger when there is, and sometimes people can have three X chromosomes or two X chromosomes and one Y. That last category is where male calico cats come from; because of how cat fur color genetics work calicos need two X chromosomes. It can cause various genetic issues in humans, but generally it’s entirely possible for someone to have a genotype-phenotype mismatch and live their entire life without even their doctors knowing.
It stands for Evolutionary Psychology, which is a legitimate field of study but extremely prone to errors resulting from assuming that cultural traits are genetic and assigning them evolutionary explanations, so discredited studies are frequently cited as fact to justify various forms of bigotry.
Legitimate studies explain things like why we tend to see patterns that aren’t there, because that was historically considerably less likely to get you killed than not seeing patterns that are there when “pattern” meant “predator”.
Oh. It’s not even a different troll on the first page that Kale was talking about. It’s Male Suicide again.
Some? It’s not cherry picking if it’s an entire misogynist orchard. Time to play the game that no troll has ever played and won. Name three manospherian bloggers or even prominent commenters who aren’t misogynists.
Can you provide a link or at least a couple of more details so this can be easily Googled. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that no Guardian columnist has ever actually advocated this. Chances are high this is an obvious satire. I can’t really disavow something I’m not aware of. Of course, it doesn’t even matter that much because it’s a false equivalency. All MGTOW are misogynists. Few feminists actually hate men.
Presented without comment.
Actually, intersectional feminism is not all that gender centric. I think what you’re trying to say is that feminists want to install some sort of matriarchy. That’s just untrue. Your whole premise is just faulty.
For the same reason white history month or a straight pride parade would be ridiculous. Does this really have to be explained to you?
Your reasoning for the mainstream media being feminist is one unnamed Guardian article? Really? If the media is so feminist, why are the vast majority of movie directors and TV showrunners men? Why are the minority of speaking parts in theatrically released movies female? Why are the vast majority of Sunday news talk show guests men? Why do men’s sports get daily primetime coverage on the broadcast and prominent cable networks but women’s sports are lucky to get any coverage on TV at all? I could go on.
There you go wanking on about the Guardian again. I can guarantee you that online misogyny existed long before whatever column you have a bee in your bonnet about was written.
And BTW, you are clearly confused about the purposes of this site. We’re mocking misogyny. We’re protesting them all that hard.
You keep complaining about these evil man hating feminists we should be kicking out of the club. But you’ve failed to name any feminists who are so extremist. You’ve failed to even name any criteria for what constitutes an extremist feminist.
It’s because they never actually go their own way. They obsess about women and how much they hate us and they constantly troll feminist/social justice spaces. They seek attention from us far more than we’ve ever sought attention from them.
No they aren’t ignoring us. But nobody asked you for your advice. So why are you here giving it to us? Doesn’t that kind of disprove your claim about MGTOW ignoring us?
@Gosuamakenatek
It was more than just that, but thanks for playing. You decided you’d rather not be attracted to a subset of people and the only thing that subset of people has in common is gender. The gender that you’re actually attracted to. What other fucking conclusion could I draw from that? I could understand not wanting to be attracted to specific people, like I’d rather not be attracted to my ex, but not an entire gender. Then you’re just a bigot.
I just really geek out about science.
Im known for asking hard to answer questions bc my brain just goes there
– “yes but what *is* Gravity reeeealllly?!!”
unfortunately this has fooled teachers into thinking Im super smart and then they get surprised and disappointed when I struggle with more basic facts
– “uhm, which side is the midline? Or is it the medial…?”
;p
dont sweat it I can google I just love it when ya’ll talk science to me. …. um not on a creepy way.
😀
Kale — random fish fact before I catch up here: bony fish do have a very similar skeleton to us, if you ignore pesky things like a pelvis and legs. But ribs and skull and spine? You’d never tell it wasn’t a mammal skull if you didn’t know what you were looking for. (Non-bony fish, well, they don’t have bones, so aren’t exactly relevant here!)
Wow. He’s willing to throw half the human race under a bus because of his selfishness. What a shitstain.
I refuse to comment on the topic of suicide, because I will start screaming obscenities, so instead…
*scoops up Darwin* no throwing turtles out windows contrapangloss! Shell injuries are Very Dangerous!
I can help with that, WWTH, I’m apparently not non-binary, I’m a bisexual asshole (I don’t see how my standards on what goes up my bottom are relevant, but it’s true, gender is not the first thing I notice)
Aka, we don’t. At best they hand wave away how they weren’t talking about us, more likely it’s insults.
*dies* I just heard my brother going “I’m sorry, I’m sorry, I’m sorry!” in the voice of “kitty stop biting me!” Our upstairs cat have an attitude problem over our basement cat.
In political science, samples are usually not constructed, but taken at random. The problem lies with the fact that taking a truly random sample is basically impossible, so different weighting may be assigned to try to re-align the sample with the known reality, or other techniques used to sample groups that are hard to contact. The homeless, for instance, aren’t going to be sampled at anything like their actual proportion with a randomized phone or mail survey, but their views are just as important as the views of wealthy retirees who have nothing to do with their time but answer surveys. A entire subfield of political science is dedicated toward designing surveys that are as close to the true random ideal as possible.
You need to go sit in the corner and have a long think about why you reflexively categorize women into their gender presentation, rather than as “women.”
Because hating women and facilitating other men in their hatred of women does not actually constitute men going their own way? I’ve seen MGTOW message boards; 90%+ of their chitchat is about women, and how much they loathe same. Occasionally they will give one another dating tips. That’s only going their own way if it’s opposite day.
When you show us a man going his own way, for realsies, no longer caring about women at all, I will show you a comment board full of feminists happily waving him into the sunset.
Okay. I did find what Male Suicide was talking about.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150904155320/http://www.radfemcollective.org/news/2015/8/29/an-interview-with-julie-bindel
I had to wade through the manosphere to find it though 🙁
He’s talking about Julie Bindel. I don’t know too much about her myself, but I think I’ve only heard her name because other feminists criticized her. So there’s that.
Here’s the passage he was talking about
Now there’s definitely some stuff to side eye in here. Including that bit about the camps. But I think I get what she’s saying here. Which is that women won’t have enough solidarity to dismantle patriarchy as long they are paired up in heterosexual relationships with men. Because people tend to regard their spouse as the most important to them. I do think that as bad as segregation (whether formal or informal) is, it does have one unintended benefit of creating solidarity when people who are marginalized due to race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation etc. live in neighborhoods, work, and go to school with primarily each other. Because women spend just as much, if not more time with men as they do with each other, we find it easier to turn on one another, not see women as a marginalized group, and decide we don’t need feminism.
I don’t think the answer is segregating ourselves though. I think the answer is to be mindful of this dynamic and recognize that you can love a man and still hold him accountable and ask him to adjust his behavior and hold other men accountable.
I’m not sure she was being literal about the camps though. I think it was a wrong thing to say, but I also think the point was more that as long men have the power, we’re going to live in a patriarchy.
And now I’ve spent way too much time on what was probably a drive by troll. But what the hell else do I have to do on a Monday night? Watch (American) football?
@kupo:
Ok, I’m not gonna try to defend myself from your wild and far reaching assumptions about me based on one word that I used, because in the past, that exact thing has gotten me banned from several places. All I’ll say is that you don’t know me or what I’ve had to live with or why, just believe me when I say my life would have been a lot easier and I could have avoided a lot of permanent damage if I was asexual. It has nothing to do with what I think about women, if I was gay I might be going through the same thing right now and feeling the same way about men, I’d just be a lot less miserable and screwed up if I was attracted to nobody.
Who has a problem with men going their own way?
Not me. My problem is with self-described “MGTOWs.” And my problem with them is not that they’re going their own way. I’m all for them going their own way. I’d be glad to help them pack.
My problem with them is that they’re misogynists. The dingleberry David quotes in the OP–That dude’s living apart from women is not the problem. Contempt for and feelings of superiority to women is the problem.
I was invisioning a specific set of bones and a specific ancestor fish from a book called “your inner fish”. evolution is neato.
All I know about Bindel is she is transphobic. which means she already hates me so I cant possibly be on her side.
Something menosperians need to get is that I can be a feminist and not even read “feminist lit”. Feminism isnt a cult of personality. There is no femipope. All you need is to believe women are equal and must be treated equally. Bringing up this or that self proclaimed feminist who said a dumb thing means nothing. Theres a lot of debate anyway.
She wasn’t. IIRC her point was that ifmen were really as hopelessly violent and rapey as defenders of toxic masculinity imply they are (“boys will be boys!”), then, hell, better lock ’em up after dark.
@Gosu – for real, I highly recommend seeing a psychologist if you are feeling that way. For some, antidepressants can help and if you truly want to be celibate – which is a fine choice – antiDs can reduce your sex drive.
Im (mostly) asexual and its not so easy. we are pressured to date too. we get sexually harassed and stuff too. Aces sometimes do genuinely like to date. For someone on the borderline like me its all the more confusing. Theres no easy outs in life, or few.
idk exactly what you said before so Im not gonna go back and get into it but for the record no one here has an issue with everyone’s different sexualities, what we have an issue with is men who hate and harm women, The OP is clearly about a man who hates women.
Translation: I wanked with a death grip, muttering gendered slurs the entire time. That’ll show those gendered slurs for arousing me so!
As opposed to yourself, of course, who are a paragon of evolution and all that shit.
(snork)
@Gosuamakenatek
I think I know what you meant. When for whatever reasons you just can’t, either with finding someone where you’re both attracted, or with making it work if you can, and life would just be so much easier if you weren’t tormented by sexual desires.
I’ve been there. Hang in; it will almost certainly get better. Hugs offered.
@Kale:
Hmm, I never knew that about anti-depressants. That does sound pretty appealing…unfortunately there are some things you can’t talk to a psychologist about, not in this state anyway, so there’s nothing I can do about it.
As for being asexual though, absolutely nobody has ever pressured me to date, so that wouldn’t be a problem, and as a guy I don’t get sexually harassed either, so that’s also not a problem. But I know what you’re talking about though, one of my best friends is an ace (cool term, never heard that) and she’s had to put up with crap like that too.
@Lady Mondegreen:
Yeah, it’s kinda like that, but it’s much worse and more complicated. Some things don’t ever get better, they will only get worse, because you’re stuck with them for life, unless you have your brain chemistry drastically altered or something. I don’t mean to sound melodramatic or anything, that’s just how it is and I’m used to it.
Being Ace (asexual) is pretty awesome. It isn’t a cure all box of hugs and puppies, though.
Things that Are Obnoxious/Hazardous to Ace Folks:
1) People assuming our lives are happy go lucky and drama free
2) People assuming if we aren’t sexual, we must be emotionless robots
3) People (especially doctors) not believing us when we say we aren’t sexually active/interested
4) People not believing you when you say you aren’t interested
5) People taking your lack of interest as a challenge and trying to ‘fix’ you with their magic kissing prowess (or their magic genitals)
6) Not noticing sexual subtext until after someone’s admitted they’re interested in you, and then having people accuse you of ‘leading them on’.
7) People assuming that you must have been abused to be ace, and offering you links to therapists websites
8) It being next to impossible to find fiction with platonic wonderfulness
9) When you do find fiction with platonic wonderfulness, having the internet shove webpages at you that ship all the characters
10) People asking you if you just have a hormone deficiency and don’t you want that fixed?
11) “You’ll meet that special someone, someday”
12) Feeling awkward watching shows because all the fanservice (which is totally not a service).
13) Feeling awkward singing along to the radio or in public because every single song is either religious or about love.
14) People talking about their crushes… and expecting you to know what they’re talking about.
15) The feeling like you can’t ever have a relationship because everyone acts like relationships = sex, and you’d be letting your partner down if you really don’t want sex
16) Your parents assuming you must be gay/lesbian because you’ve never brought a boyfriend/girlfriend home to meet them
17) When you actually like hugs and cuddling, but you don’t want sex, and people take hugs as proof you aren’t ace
18) Having an awesome friend that you love in every way… except the way they really, really want you to.
19) “You’re not ace, you’re just shy/socially awkward”
There’s a bunch more.
I haven’t had to face all of these, but I know people who have. I’m super glad to have avoided 5 (with only a couple exceptions, which fortunately were not the genital people), but 3 is super obnoxious.
Especially when you’re under 30 going in to try and renew a prescription for birth control pills used to manage PCOS, and then having to spend 30 minutes convincing the OB that you aren’t sexually active, are a super low risk for cervical cancer, and you really don’t need a pap-smear this year.
@Gosuamakenatek
If you honestly don’t have anything against women, then please try to call us women and not females (when using it as a noun–female is fine as an adjective) and please try not to blame your dating issues on them. If you’re just saying that you personally would be better off without sexual and/or romantic relationships, then say that. Don’t say your problems would be solved by removing a whole gender from the equation. And don’t even try to defend the position from the OP.
Kale, still working on your super interesting question.
It might be a bit.
Kale — “I was invisioning a specific set of bones and a specific ancestor fish from a book called “your inner fish”. evolution is neato.” — that it fucking is!