>From a discussion of feminist men on the perversely misnamed NiceGuy’s MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) forum. (Requires registration, so here’s a screencap.) There is so much wrongness packed into this brief comment; it’s really quite impressive.
Categories
>The Stepford Solution
>@Yohan"Where does it say, that women should not be replaced but destroyed?"When you use Stepford Wife to describe the sex-bot. If you'd seen this movie, that's exactly what happens."Anyway, this is entirely wrong, as MRAs never support such crazy statements like 'to destroy all women', but they recommend to reject and to ignore certain groups of malicious and greedy women. "Oh noes! Just like they're not rape apologists and abuser excusers…eye rollsYou actually are saying MRAs would NOT choose to replace all womankind with some sort of automaton – whether a robot or a 1950s-style housewife who is completely under her husband's control – when several of their comments indicate exactly that? Bullshitter.That being said, MRAs have every choice to "go there own way" just you know, without any raping or otherwise exploitation of women, please.
>There are sex toys that are made specifically for men, too, and they've been using them for quite some time. Vibrators for women came into being at a time when women were thought to be (and prized if they were) completely asexual, aside from "for reproductive purposes".Guys that are excluded from the sex market are given shameful labels as are girls who are included in the sex market.Men are shamed for engaging in self-gratification whereas women not so much. However, men are cheered for their sexual conquest of women (not referring to conquest in a rape sense) whereas women are shamed for their conquest of men. And from what I have read at MRA sites, they don't seem to mind that double-standard……well, as far as keeping slut shaming alive, that is.
>"Where does it say, that women should not be replaced but destroyed?"What I said was: Yeah, in the case of the Stepford wife the actual person is not only replaced but destroyed. It is the ultimate rejection of humanity in favor of machine.That's what happens in the movie Stepford Wives. The women are destroyed and turned into robots.
>The sad tragedy of all this is: the guys who actually need these lady droids will not be able to afford them. We know that for a fact. Think George Clooney (or any normal male) will want one of these?Please, please, can we start a Make-a-Wish for Manboobz organization?Dork and droid: it's a love match!
>Yohan: "David changed the link already to another MRA forum, which does not require registration."No it's not. The link was originally wrong, now it's fixed.
>Okay, now I get what you're saying, Tec. My apologies for misunderstanding you. However, in defense to the OP, I don't think he meant to imply gendercide, I think he was just talking about wanting an artificial woman and didn't know about the murder part in Stepford Wives.
>(TEC: Oh noes! Just like they're not rape apologists and abuser excusers…eye rolls…..Bullshitter……That being said, MRAs have every choice to "go there own way" just you know, without any raping or otherwise exploitation of women, please. I recommend TEC to consult a psychiatrist and to stop to look horror-movies about zombies etc…It seems you are suffering severely of hallucinations – you see too many MRA-rapists day and night, in the street, in the supermarket and even in your own bedroom. About going our own way, yes, we MRAs are doing this. Whaaahhh, the MRAs… they are going their own way.About rape apologists and abuser excusers, you should better look up the sad story of male feminist Kyle Payne.
>Yohan, every comment you make repeats one of two tired points:1. Feminists are bad too, see X feminist.2. You're all haters. I hate you.Maybe you can save yourself some trouble and create a fillable comment template.
>Sandy said… Yohan, ….. You're all haters. I hate you…… Maybe you can save yourself some trouble… You still don't get it. We told you many many times, MRAs do not hate anybody.I feel sorry for you, you must be a very lonely bitter person trolling the internet. And now I am going home, and have dinner with my family… bye for now
>Sandy.I wonder if that double standard that you mention is all that relevant now? I also notice that women are often the first to slut shame and attach value to the male that is attractive to many women. As for double standards, thats the only one we hear about but when we think about it, there are far more sexual double standards that effect men and work in favour of women than there are the reverse.Some examples, man with a younger woman is pathetic and a pervert, woman is liberated and a couger. Woman with a faux penis is liberated, man with a fauz vagina is a pervert and a loser. If a man cheats he is wrong if its a woman cheating the man must be doing something wrong. Male sexuality is often portrayed as dirty and dangerous, female sexuality is portrayed as beautiful. Rape and sexual abuse are ok when its female on male, when its male on female its the crime that trumps all crime. When a female school teacher is with an underage student, its labelled seduction or an affair, when a male does its labeled predatory rape. When a woman is jealous she just is protecting her relationship, when a man is he is a controlling psycho, and men aren't really supposed to talk about the double standards that affect them, where as women are encouraged to talk about the one sexual double standard that doesn't work in their favour..You'll notice that a lot of those double standards I mentioned are enforced by women.Katsthats a good point, if a man is not well off enough to have value in the sexual market, how are they going to afford a sex bot? At the same time, a sex bot might be cheaper and easier in the long run for someone looking to avoid litigation and personal relations with a female.Kats when these guys are talking about separatism and sex-bots, its in reaction to women like you that equate the sexual and human value of a man with how much material and social value you stand to gain from having sex with him. Many guys are now conscious enough to reject this objectification and gender role that is by and largely enforced by females, many view female to male objectification as darker and more sinister than male to female. Sandy, can you see Kats sexual double standard re. objectification?
>It is perfectly fine with me if MRA's practice "going their own way" as there will be less risk for women to become involved with a man who is out to expoilt her for their own needs based on ridiculous ideas of what they should be, do, say, think, etc.. There will be less risk of a woman becoming involved with a man who will pop her around for not meeting the MRA's unrealistic expectations and resisting his control. Women will have better odds of finding a partner who understands women and knows how to have healthy relationships with them. The drawback is those MRA's who practice "game" in order to exploit women for sex and other benefits.
>I shouldn't have said exploit women for their own 'needs' in comment above…it should have been for their own 'wants'. The bot would be a good substitute for MRA's seeking to rule over a woman and have her submit to him and serve him. They don't recognize women as human anyway, but as a tool to serve them…clean their homes, cook for them, raise their children, give them sex, agree with them, and otherwise submit. What selfishness.
>ChristineIm not sure that many of these guys want to rule over women at all, "going their own way" is a rejection of legal and social inequality and increased personality disorder related behaviour eg. narcissism, abuse… you will find the odd ejit saying something to the effect of wanting obedience, but using those odd comments to stereotype the meaning and members of the whole movement is just the same fallacy that David repeatedly uses here on this blog And women wont have better odds of finding a partner. When monogamy/marriage breaks down, what we have is a PUA paradise and unofficial harem system or a system like any of the great apes have.. 20% of the males (the ones with resources) having sex with 80% of the women (hoping to gain socially and financially), thats evident in the casual sex scene and from what I know, the distribution of stds. Whats more stereotyping men engaging in casual sex as "The drawback is those MRA's who practice "game" in order to exploit women for sex and other benefits" is just another way of saying, men having causal sex without paying women some long term price for it is shameful and wrong, isn't it? So here you are openly trying to use shaming tactics to enforce objectification and gender roles.
>while I take it that you support women in having casual, no strings sex…Sandy, see the sexual double standard?
>@eoghan…many, many MRA's are quite open about their "superiority" over women and their desire to exercise control over them. It's a common theme throughout the MRM community.
>PamIts not, and the idea that men have an inherent need to control women as a group, is feminist political rabble rousing, that myth was arrived at by taking the characteristic of a minority of people with personality disorders, pretending that only men with PD have these characteristic and then mapping them on to men as a group. You dont seem to contribute anything here bar backing Davids false premises and I think before you throw stones at other's attitudes to gender roles and sexual double standards you should look at how women enforce them, as I said to you above."Whats more stereotyping men engaging in casual sex as "The drawback is those MRA's who practice "game" in order to exploit women for sex and other benefits" is just another way of saying, men having causal sex without paying women some long term price for it is shameful and wrong, isn't it? So here you are openly trying to use shaming tactics to enforce objectification and gender roles, while I take it that you support women in having casual, no strings sex…"Men shouldnt have to pay women for sex and there should be no same in having casual, no strings sex. If you are saying that men should pay a long term price to women for sex, and that seeking casual sex is somehow dirty or wrong you are no different from some oddball on an obscure blog saying so crap about traditional domestic roles for women, same crap different perspective.
>@Vagrant's VoiceIt's pretty clear that many MRAs would want an automaton – whether flesh or metal – with no free will. If you want to give them the benefit of the doubt though, go right ahead. Personally, I've done that for a long time, and now I don't because always, given enough interaction time, they leave no doubt. Take a look at Eoghan and Yohan's rants about false rape and male victims and then their rants recently illustrating that they don't respect consent…@Yohan – with regards to MRAs being rapists and apologists, in your own words, "the truth hurts don't it?"@EoghanThere are so many things wrong with your posts. Let's look at a small snippet of the underlying assumptions, just of the top of my head:1) A majority of men would prefer sexbots to women2) A majority of women would NOT prefer sexbots to men but in fact3) NO women would prefer sexbots to men so that4) There will be a large disparity between men and women looking for partners and this is the result of5) The tired "men want sex/women want intimacy" meme that goes a little further to say6) Women don't have sex for enjoyment, in fact 7) Women don't enjoy sex at all it is just8) Women are gold-diggers looking for a man to exploit which are part of 9) The exact stereotypes you go off on are part of feminism* because10) All feminists are anti-sex and anti-male*In fact the stereotypes you describe are part of the whole slut/virgin dynamic that is you guessed it – the Patriarchy (TM) and feminists are trying exactly to deconstruct those stereotypes.MRAs on the other hand, have no problem espousing said stereotypes against women, so really you're raging against the flip side male stereotypes that you yourself support and proselytize… doublethink or what?
>Christine said… @eoghan…many, many MRA's are quite open about their "superiority" over women and their desire to exercise control over them. It's a common theme throughout the MRM community. It depends what you consider as superiority or control. Maybe you can explain. I got more the impression over the last 30 years or so, that most feminists are very unhappy and lonely people, who envy and even hate the existence of functioning families.Of course, if a family – often 3 generations sharing the same rooms – should function over decades without falling apart, there are rules to be respected by everybody in this family regardless if it is the husband/father, the wife/mother, the children or the grandparents.Within a family you cannot just do what you like, you have to consider the other ones next to you. – This is something what feminists do not understand. Their response is often so-called shaming language.MRA = superiority, control over women etc… – that's nonsense talk.MRA means to say NO to feminist unreasonable demands.
>Only problem is Tec, I didnt make any of those assumptions in the first place, with one exception maybe, I say that most women practice hypergamy meaning that female attraction and objectification of men involves the mans having material and/or social resources, as a few of the feminist confirmed with their posts.As usual you are making a large post based on things are aren't true.This whole blog and 99% of what the feminists here say, is based on misrepresentations and fallacies.
>Eoghan, I would disagree that a lot of the double standards you posted are realities. But for the sake of common ground: there are sexual double standards against both men and women and they are enforced by both men and women. The fact that women enforce double standards against women and men enforce them against men does not make them less relevant. In fact, if it were not for the help of men in oppressing men and women in oppressing women, sexism would much more easily be overcome.
>Yohan, when you say hateful things like "you must be a loser" it shows that you are hate. Or at least dislike or have disdain towards. I was being flippant with the "You guys are haters, I hate you."
>Yohan, also it is really funny that your response to my "template" post flips the template. "You hate MRAs. You are a pathetic person." I think I will design the fillable template for you.
>SandyWith respect, I think that you will only see the double standards that feminism promotes as the double standards, when double standards that are not given feminist approval are discussed they are deemed not to exist, but only by feminists as you can see with the out of hand dismissal of everything and every piece of independent research that does not conform here. Men discussing their roles and the enforced roles that women and feminism promote is deemed incorrect speech and thought. I think that is demonstrative of just how far behind men are of women in terms of gender role liberation and addressing the double standards that affect them. As for the women needing permission to be sexual, its mainly just left over rhetoric from the last century thats no longer relevant in todays world or media. If women hold back sexually, its generally done for self serving reasons as opposed to following societal norms that dont really exist any more. It also serves to keep feminism going, the sexist wage gap, gendered abuse and this idea that women are some how more sexually restricted than men are all outdated, now falsified and political.
>Eoghan, that is not true. I see many double standards that hurt men, just not all of the ones you list. I think some of your "double standards" are overstated. For example, a woman who uses a strap on is seen as a pervert in many circles.I agree that men are far, far behind women in terms of liberation from their gender role. Even acceptable dress of men demonstrates this. A certain vein of homophobia also demonstrates this: the vien that focuses on effeminate men.However, you have overstated the advances in female liberation from gender roles. Women are still no free to be as sexual as men (while men are not free to be anything but fanatically sexual). There is still stigma against women for sleeping around, engaging in one night stands, etc. Furthermore, there are still societal norms that injure women every day. An assertive woman is a bitch, an assertive man is simply assertive.
>(Also I'm not a feminist, in the sense that I do not frequent feminist blogs, although of course I am concerned with gender equality. As a divorce attorney, I'm actually a disillusioned men's rights supporter. I am extremely frustrated with the ineffectiveness of the men's rights movement.)