So a bunch of the regulars on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit have their collective knickers in a twist about dudes getting called “pedophiles” just for saying they think 14-year old girls are hot. Because that’s “ephebephilia,” dontchaknow, not pedophilia! And besides, thingsarebad argues
Normal heterosexual males will generally have sexual attraction for pubescent females of child-bearing age, from puberty till they start to get old and gross (late 20s, early 30s usually haha).
That’s pretty much “eww.” But so is the rest of the discussion, really, from this “joke” about all women being as immature as children to this heavily upvoted claim that feminists have created a “pedo-scare … to criminalize healthy and normal male sexuality,” to this Evo-Psych-flavored argument for lowering the age of consent.
Is it just me or are dudes who get indignant when people don’t carefully distinguish between ephebephilia and pedophilia just really really creepy?
Is “the right to lust after underage girls without having to feel icky about it” really a Men’s Rights issue? Why this preoccupation with 14-year-old girls, on r/mensrights and Reddit generally?
Oh, God Damn right you are privileged, you stupid cunt. Imagine the response if you were a man and I had just called you a stupid dick. Lackluster. But boy, I called you a stupid cunt, and just because you are a man-hating twat! I must be a misogynist, who hates women only! No, bitch, women *are* privileged, and you love it.
Well, I’m convinced. This guy should definitely be allowed to fuck middle-schoolers.
TAB, you keep on going on about all these “obvious” things, but you haven’t given us any actual evidence. Please show us some scientific studies that prove “women are far more “inspired” (turned on by) power or ambition.” No, a made-up conclusion about homeless rates doesn’t count. No, a 100-year-old disaster doesn’t count. No, just asserting something and saying it’s obvious doesn’t count. I would be far more convinced by real, actual, evidence gathered by real, actual scientists showing that women are inherently more status-focused than men, and that this is independent of say, social factors that reduce women’s ability to gather money or status of their own.
“So, TAB, your fiancee knows that you consider her a “privileged little girl” who shouldn’t have the same legal rights as a man”
Actually, my fiancee is well aware of her privileges, and believes, just as I do, that women should have the same legal rights as men. Sadly, they do not, seeing as women are given far more lenient sentences for all crimes than men. Look up the sentencing disparity or look at the sentencing of female teachers who sexually abuse children if you somehow disagree in error.
To be honest, I’m disappointed that someone as intoxicated as I currently am can so thoroughly destroy your flimsy (presumably sober) arguments.
“and that you plan to cheat on her regularly”
You see, men *are* naturally polygamous, but that doesn’t mean I have to sleep with other women. I find my woman vastly superior to other women, in fact. I will not apologize, however, for occasionally masturbating to other women due to my natural male desire for other women’s bodies. The fact that so many American women are untrustworthy, diseased whores, certailnly helps. My fiancee is the only woman I will *ever* make love to, my dear.
Actually, I take it back. You’re just mindlessly parroting the same old tired MRA talking points, which is boring and really not worth arguing against.
Good luck finding that harem of twelve-year-olds you’re just naturally driven to seek out!
“Well, I’m convinced. This guy should definitely be allowed to fuck middle-schoolers.”
I have no such desire. Straw man anyone?
@mayfly
“I would be far more convinced by real, actual, evidence”
Good on you my dear! Please feel free to circumnavigate the world of men’s rights so that you may thoroughly understand the problem of misandry.
See you on the other side, toots.
Who wants to bet TAB’s fiancee is inflatable?
TAB is drunk and from thespearhead? Lol
Things Are Bad:
Did you by any chance go to the same history classes as NWO? Because it seems like historical fact bounces off of you as effectively as it bounces off of him.
“Women *are* viewed as human beings, and they always have been.”
Bwahahahahahahahaha. Oh, sweet delusional misogynist. That is some funny shit right there. And by “funny” I mean “completely out of touch with reality”.
In ancient Greece and Rome, women were chattel. No arguments here– they. were. End of story. In what way is that even remotely viewing women as human beings? They were walking (but not far from the loom/stove/etc, mind you), talking (but never speaking their minds) wombs, important only in that they allowed men to have sons.
Or are you implying that a woman’s ability to pop out sprogs is what makes her human? Surely you’re not that vile.
TRIGGER WARNING like whoa for this next one, everyone. Seriously.
After the death of Genghis Khan, his son Ogodei (who had taken his place as Great Khan) perpetrated one of the most horrific acts of the time and especially in Mongol history. To strike at his sisters, to whom Genghis Khan left large portions of his empire (portions that they, incidentally, had been successfully ruling for years), Ogodei had his soldiers round up 4000 girls aged 7 and up. From these, the noble girls were divided out, stripped and raped, in front of their families, by every single soldier. Two of these girls died, and the rest the soldiers divided amongst themselves for later use.
Those girls that weren’t raped were confiscated–yeah, you know, that thing that’s usually done to objects, not people–and given away. The less attractive girls were given into lives of sexual servitude, and the ones who were unfit to serve were simply left to be carried off by whomever could find a use for them.
This, by the way, completely violated Genghis Khan’s laws on how women should be treated, which outlawed among other things rape, kidnapping, and–OMG, brace yourself for this one, dude–having sex with them before they were 16. Age of consent laws: Not just a modern concept.
Genghis Khan may have treated women as human beings but his sons, in their lust for power, treated women as no better than animals.
The idea that women were “always” viewed as humans because our reproductive system is invaluable to the survival of the species is absurd. Your car might be vital to you getting to work on time, but you don’t view it as human. All too often in history, women have been treated the same way — a useful tool, a prize, a possession, but not a human. Even in times when women have been treated as human, inevitably men (yes, men) have turned on them, at times with utter brutality, to strip them of what power they’d gained. People don’t do that to those they view as human.
So what was that about always?
One last thing: I don’t think I speak for only myself here when I say escaping the Titanic or the Draft simply because my womb is useful does not make me feel particularly like I’m being treated like an equal human being.
“Bwahahahahahahahaha. Oh, sweet delusional misogynist. That is some funny shit right there.”
To be honest, I ignored everything else you said after your blatant disregard for men with your implication that men have always viewed women as less than human. As a man who views his fiancee as an equal, I find this extremely disrespectful and sexist. If you ever ventured into the real world, you would realize that men care for women deeply; fuck, most of them even care for women they don’t know – they protect them without asking anything in return.
Your sick hatred for men disgusts me, and I’m sorry that due to your hatred I can’t read any of the rest of your comment. Please, next time, try not to display your hatred so openly, as it honestly makes me not only sad, but sick.
To be honest, saying that women have always been viewed as humans when women had no legal personhood or citizenship in Ancient Greece, were banned from politics in Ancient Rome, had to give ownership of any possessions to their husbands until the mid-1800s, and were considered to be automatically consenting to their husband to any sex at any time no matter what they actually wanted (marital rape was only made illegal in the 80s and 90s) is extraordinarily short-sighted. Either TAB has had a very poor education indeed or his male privilege just allows him to be shortsighted on such matters.
@ mayfly, exactly, he is just parroting the low IQ version of the typical MRA script, he is not interested in (or capable of?) debate at all.
“TAB is drunk and from thespearhead? Lol”
Oh, I *am* drunk right now, and freely admit it. Funny how I am more coherent than most here, though I’m sure you would deny it.
As far as being “from The Spearhead”, no. I do follow The Spearhead, and I have contributed to The Spearhead, but I am not “from the Spearhead”, which, as I am rather intelligent, mind you, I understand you to mean that I am a frequent commenter there, characteristic of “those misogynistic bastards”. Sadly, that’s not true. I rarely comment at The Spearhead, and I’m not a misogynist.
<3
“To be honest, saying that women have always been viewed as humans when women had no legal personhood or citizenship in Ancient Greece, were banned from politics in Ancient Rome, had to give ownership of any possessions to their husbands until the mid-1800s”
So you’re saying women today have absolutely nothing to complain about? I agree.
“@ mayfly, exactly, he is just parroting the low IQ version of the typical MRA script, he is not interested in (or capable of?) debate at all.”
Always in the 99th percentile, I laugh at the notion that I have a low IQ. It’s a cheap shop, and perhaps you’ll convince your fellow misandrists, but it doesn’t hurt someone who was summa cum laude at a top engineering university and has *always* been the top of his class, sillypants.
^Cheap shot. Even geniuses are fallible, my dears.
You see, TAB, this is why you’re in idiot. Because you chose to decide I’d said men have always viewed women as less than human, instead of what I actually said — that being that the idea of women having “always” been viewed as human by men, which is not the same thing, is absurd — you completely missed my actual point. Not that it would have supported your ridiculous claims.
The hatred and disrespect here is certainly not coming from me. You’re the one who dismissed everything I said based on what you IMAGINED I was saying. If you actually had some respect for women, which you clearly don’t, you would have read what I wrote and seen this:
“Genghis Khan may have treated women as human beings but his sons, in their lust for power, treated women as no better than animals.”
That is directly contradictory to what you’re accusing me of saying. If I was implying that men have always viewed women as less than human, how could I possibly praise Genghis Khan for his treatment of women? I couldn’t, obviously.
I strongly doubt you treat your fiancee as an equal, since you’re in the practice of completely dismissing what women say before they even say it based on perceived slights. When a person only hears what they want to hear, treating other people as equals is impossible for them.
Now, since I’m so relieved I’m not married to you, I’m going to go give my husband a hug and a kiss. Because I hate men so very, very much. All men. Even my husband. Who I have sex with. Who I’ve been with for four years. Wow, man, your logic is breaking down pretty fiercely now, isn’t it?
I think it’s clear who’s the sick one here.
What’s the matter TAB? You are seesawing, or “hamstering”? You started out full of machismo but are now going all SNAG on us! Is it because noone is upvoting your swagger?
No, TAB, that’s not what I’m saying. It’s also not what the discussion was about, though I see you can’t actually rebut my argument since your original point (that, and I quote, “Women *are* viewed as human beings, and they always have been”) has been completely destroyed. Stop moving the goal posts. Take responsibility for what you write.
TAB, your an ignorant poser. You have proven you don’t have a historical clue and have avoided providing any iota of data to further reinforce your “naturalistic” claims. You and Owlsave really have got to stop trying to bump yourself up as internet tough guys. I thought one was bad enough when he can’t do math and claims himself as an engineer. But your just fucking bad at history.
“If you update your view of the world to 2011 you’ll find we don’t really care anymore.”
Among the upper classes of the really rich countries of Europe and the Anglosphere? Yes.
Everywhere else? The traditional rules still do very much apply.
“I strongly doubt you treat your fiancee as an equal, since you’re in the practice of completely dismissing what women say before they even say it based on perceived slights.”
Actually, I completely dismiss what stupid people say, whether they are female or not. 🙂
Oh, Yoonie, I take full responsibility for what I write. Do you? Do you think misrepresenting what I said is some sort of triumph? Pathetic. :/
“But your just fucking bad at history.”
My just fucking bad at history? I think you mean “I’m” just fucking bad at history. Next time, try “you’re”, smartypants. Other than that, your babble flew over my head; sorry, but I don’t speak idiot.
Could someone else please entertain my drunken ass while I wait to be able to post my comments at reddit/2x?
Your foolish responses sustain me!
“Actually, I completely dismiss what stupid people say, whether they are female or not.”
It must make for strange conversations, then, having to dismiss every word that comes out of your own mouth.
Juan, I’m not upper class. I’m a lower middle class British girl. And I know what I and my friends think and feel much better than you, some stranger on the internet, do. Don’t tell me what I value.
TAB, I still don’t see any actual facts. Come on, mr. “99th percentile”. Actual use that supposed all powerful brain. Back up the fake shit you’ve been saying.