From Human Stupidity, an MRA blog rather obsessed with underage girls and the alleged evil of age of consent laws:
[I]f a 15 year old … can decide to have sex with a 16 year old … [h]ow come she cannot have sex with a 35 year old? Age discrimination by law?
Are you worried about manipulation of the tender 15 year old? I have a solution:
what about legalizing sex with underage adolescents, if they first undergo an hour of mandatory counselling and a 2 day cool off period? That should take care of this issue. This would guarantee safety for the 15 year old against being conned or manipulated. More safety that is offered to 21 year old tipsy Friday night party girls who may feel sorry for what they did yesterday
I think he might actually be serious here. Though it’s pretty clear he’d be happy with any excuse to make it legal for 35 year-old men to have sex with 15 year-old girls.
MURR’kn
Merkin?
Yank
We should also assume that babies spring fully-formed from the uterus without male involvement, until proven otherwise! It’s sexist to presume there is any paternity at all, really!
Hold on, what do you mean by Indian cultural “shit”?
Like Rutee said, I meant “stuff, goods.” It’s slang. I meant no disrespect; actually, I’m quite impressed with Indian thought.
Magpie, you leave Dracula’s merkin alone!
MURR’kn
Merkin?
Yank
Aaaaa-yup.
I damn near died of laughter just now.
It’s a paternity suit. I know why he’s suggesting this shit; it’s written all over his ‘evidence’ of paternity fraud (Cause there’s no other way that those tests say the defendant could possibly not be the father besides bitchez b’ lyin’, amirite?). But for once we’re talking about a thing easily provable. I don’t see a problem with cutting out the rest of the proceedings and just getting a paternity test.
I like Thai visual arts. I have a Tarot designed by a Thai artist and some Thai comics.
And while white people might not be marginalized…that doesn’t mean we don’t face pressures to conform to society. I am not saying whites have it bad. Just that being white doesn’t magically make all your problems go away. Or that those problems should be minimized because “other people have it worse than you”.
Nobody is saying you don’t have pressures, or that your problems are “minimized”… it’s b/c you’re the one who said that you shrug off social pressures, therefore social pressures are not a big deal, and ppl are pointing out that others face social pressures that are much more daunting and different, and/or have deeper consequences associated w/ them… it’s not saying that your problems aren’t a big deal, it’s countering your implication that b/c you aren’t bothered by social pressures you as a white straight cis male face, therefore everybody else’s social pressures aren’t a big deal. -_-;; They’re saying that your problems are a big deal, and are hoping you can understand that therefore other problems might be even bigger deals. 🙂
Actually that probably goes for the implementation of VAWA which was written as gender neutral except for one provision and had gender neutral guidelines written for it but was still not actually implemented as gender neutral. Granted there is very little awareness of male victims of DV so that might have something to do with it-it is something the MRM should be focused on but since their movement is all about hating women, going to not happen anytime soon.
It is worth noting that elimination of presumed paternity laws also harms fathers. It harms custodial and caretaking fathers of nonbiological children. If a man raises his kids for a decade, and finds out that they are not his bio kids, without presumed or assumed paternity rights, that means he would have absolutely no legal rights or legal access to his kids. See, the thing you can’t seem to get is that rights and responsibilities go together. So, states that have a rebutable presumption of paternity (fyi, most states that have presumed paternity do allow a challenge to paternity if done in a timely manner, if you assume a parental role of your spouse’s child for years and years, you have parental responsibilities, yes, but you also have parental rights) or assumed parenthood (this derives from acting as the parent for a certain statutory time period), actually provide custody seeking fathers far more legal rights in many cases than states without such laws. Most of these “paternity fraud” arguments make the assumption (amoung other huge, huge assumptions), that fathers want nothing to do with the kids whenever possible. I think that is a huge discredit to male parents. The legal standard you call for would strip parental rights from one of the most ardent fathers who fought for custody rights that I have ever seen. His concern upon divorce was not to try and cut of financial responsibility towards his daughter, and his concern upon finding out during the custody proceedings that she was not his bio kid was not relief, but rather fear that it might affect his ability to get custody. What would you say to men like him who have custody or visitation only because of presumed paternity laws?
The desire to move to Thailand is nothing but a desire and some preliminary research. I have no date set or a way to earn an income while there. If I had some actual concrete data, then you could accuse me of lying…but there is nothing to lie about since there is no data to lie about.
No, there is. You want to move out of the country. You don’t know when, you may not even know where, but you want to move out of the country.
Not telling a partner that is a lie of omission. It might be one of those, “Nope, sorry, I can’t be with someone who wants to do that, because I won’t, and it’s not worth it to me to be in a relationship where my partner is going to leave.”
It’s possible you won’t ever be able to do that. It’s possible you don’t really mean it, and are yanking our chain. But if it is something you really want to do, and are seriously considering, than you aren’t being honest with, nor fair to Ahsley (and, as an aside, if Ashely stays in the states, yes, you can get all the sex you want; in the states. If you are living in Thailand, it’s not as trivial as calling her up and asking if she wants to go grab a pizza and then go back her place).
Ok, you don’t think it is narcissism.. How do I explain it better than?
I don’t know. but narccissim ain’t it.
nar·cis·sism /ˈnɑrsəˌsɪzɛm/
1.inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity.
2. Psychoanalysis . erotic gratification derived from admiration of one’s own physical or mental attributes, being a normal condition at the infantile level of personality development.
That’s a far cry from I think Voip was making an assumption that men should always take into account women with every decision we make.
Which is a far cry from what VoiP did.
When I thought of visiting/moving to Thailand the idea of sex tourism didn’t really pop up in my mind. I just saw a country with great food, Muay Thai and fantastic looking beaches.
So… when you said all the things you like about Thailand… There’s great Thai food all over. Theres good beaches in lots of places (some of which even have great Thai food). Mauy Thai is nice, and I happen to really like Aikido, but while I’d like to spend some time at Hombu Dojo, I don’t think that’s enough of a reason to rearrange my life so I could live there. sure as hell know that my partners wouldn’t be happy about it. They probably wouldn’t leave me over it, per se, but if I actually did move, with no intent to return, I know the relationships would change.
I also know that if I didn’t discuss it with them, well in advance of the possibility, they’d be pissed. At that point, they might dump me for it.
“In the best interests of the child” is the most vague, infinitely changing phase. Everyone has different beliefs in what is in the best interests of a child. This is why we have so many different parenting methodologies. What one person might see as in the best interests, another might see as detrimental.
That’s not an answer. That’s a repetition of what you said before, with more words.
Ya, it’s late man so I am not going to hunting for a bunch of links but you can Google “site:.edu paternity fraud” to start.
Nope. I’ll wait. You made the claim, you get to defend it. In part this protects you; you don’t have to defend things you’ve never read. In part it defends me, because I don’t have to put up with finding, (and perhaps debunking) things, only to have you say, “that’s not what I was talking about.”
As you said, If this behavior happens enough it has the potential to cause a chilling effect.
So, until you can explain why a stat which ranges from 3-30 percent is something I need to worry about, it’s a non-starter.
Just because the sports aspect is just “small potatos” doesn’t mean it isn’t important. I agree that men and women should have equal access to education and activities surrounding schools. But I don’t like the idea that if only 10% of women want to play sports and 20% of men want to play that 10% of men are forced to go without. Seems like heavy handed government regulation to me.
And that’s not what happens. What happens is the male sports that take all the money, suck up the other sports. Stanford just cut a whole lot of slots for non-football. Not because there weren’t women who wanted to do sports, but because the budgets didn’t balance. So it’s not the “big bad gov’t” that killed those, it was administrators deciding that spending money on football was more important than men’s gymnastics and baseball.
Japan didn’t just take an isolationist attitude towards outsiders…they were xenophobic about western influences being accepted in mainland Japan.
That’s because the Tokugowa shogunate had the ability to do it. It’s one of the interesting questions about Thailand. What made the Kings of Siam able to do what only Japan was also able to do, and how did they pull it off when they had pressures from other cultures; in direct contact with them, who weren’t able to do it.
The Japanese address system hasn’t changed much. Major streets have names but secondary roads don’t. I often got lost in Tokyo because I was so used to streets having names…so it was interesting trying to figure out how to navigate the city.
That was my point… if you look I said the reason for that was because it makes outsiders easy to spot. The same is true today (and the Japanese police have a lot of authority to deal with suspicious persons, no need to think a crime was committed).
So what is your point on Marriage? What does your mother not able to get credit cards affect marriage today? My point is by definition dependency and equality are mutually exclusive. One can not be equal and subordinate at the same time.
And you keep saying that marriage is bad because it makes the man unequal. When the contrary is pointed out… you stick your hands in front of your face and pretend it goes away.
I am a house-husband right now (and no, the odds of my gettig alimony are slim, because I have get disability compensation). Trust me, it’s work. Yeah, I could probably spend less time cooking than I do (and I am blessed in that I don’t have to do the after dinner dishes, one of the nice thing about three people in the house). It’s easier than working as a caterer, or a line cook, or a brigade chef, but it’s still work. I do shopping, and I menu-plan, and I deal with sudden changes (as when my fiancée fell down some stairs, and so we had company coming over, instead of us going out to see them). I also sweep the floors, vaccum the carpets, do the laundry, haul out the trash when it’s in my way, tend the back, work on my photography, and generally find ways to fill my days.
If… ignoring the things I do for myself, someone were to pay me for that… hell, just for the work as personal chef, well there are people who make a decent living being a personal chef. So yeah, it’s work. And it’s work the larger society doesn’t see as “work”. It’s dismissed as, “just a housewife”.
Add kids, and it’s a lot of work. It’s, at least, the equivalent of a part-time job; but one with lots of on call hours, and no sset schedule. No, not every couple chooses to do it (most can’t afford to; the only reason we can manage it is because there are two other incomes in the house. If that weren’t the case I’d be searching for a part-time job, instead of waiting for the one I want to open up, so I can go back to it).
And it’s not for you. All well and good. But you spent a lot of time trying to pretend it ought not be for anyone, and that it ought not for specious reasons (reasons that boiled down to you didn’t want to risk becoming responsible for something you weren’t going to let happen… to be snarky, you might want to look at the definition of narccissism again, and think about those statements you made).
@Pecunium: I can’t take on all your points right now since I have to go to work.
So in order to not lie to Ashley all I have to say is “I think it would be cool to live in Thailand”….hold on a sec…..Done!
If I was still with Ashley when those plans were closer to happening, I would have a choice to make: Stay with Ashley or break up with her and move.
You don’t think it is worth rearranging your life to make a big decision like moving to a foreign country…fine. Others might see the move as more beneficial and worth making those big decisions. It’s all about what you want and how much you want it. Is packing everything up and going through all the hoops of moving to a foreign country worth it? Some would say yes others no. I say yes.
My comments on Japan weren’t about challenging your POV. More like agreeing and reinforcing it.
Marriage isn’t bad because it just makes men unequal it makes women unequal too. As I said before, you can’t depend on someone for living then be equal to that person at the same time. The closest example is children. Are your children equal to you? No…because you support them. They need you to live.
Me a narcissist? Now that is funny. No one that knows me would classify me as a narcissist. A smartass, yes but not a narcissist. I would have to be vain, conceited, selfish or indifference to other peoples pain.
So lets go through them:
Vain: Ya, I am pretty average. While not unattractive no one would pay me to be a model.
Conceited: I think a positive attitude and believing in yourself is good. I don’t think I am better than others and that I am overly important. I am just one random dude in the world.
Selfish: While I do think people should take care of themselves first, that doesn’t mean they can’t help others. One should look after themselves first…then others second.
Brandon: You don’t think it is worth rearranging your life to make a big decision like moving to a foreign country…fine.
I didn’t say that. I said that Aikdo, sushi and scenery aren’t enough to chuck the life I have now; to tell my partners, “I”m moving to Japan/Germany/England/Ireland/Ukraine now, join me if you like.”
Marriage isn’t bad because it just makes men unequal it makes women unequal too. As I said before, you can’t depend on someone for living then be equal to that person at the same time.
As we keep saying, that (making one person unequal) is not a requisite function of marriage.
Lets go through them:
Vain: Ya, I am pretty average. While not unattractive no one would pay me to be a model.
Looks are not the summa of vanity.
Conceited: I think a positive attitude and believing in yourself is good. I don’t think I am better than others and that I am overly important. I am just one random dude in the world.
Who knows more than anyone else about marriage.
Selfish: While I do think people should take care of themselves first, that doesn’t mean they can’t help others. One should look after themselves first…then others second.
But never for any reason you don’t think is worth the time/effort.
So… there is a strong tendency to two out of those three. If we take some of the ways in which the latter two seem to manifest, that comes out a moderately vain: Your ends are the important ones. See the ways in which you say feminism isn’t worth your time/effort/money because the primary goal (bringing women to parity with men) doesn’t help you in a direct, concrete, obvious way.
If, you say, women will put your agenda to parity with theirs, then you will support “feminsism”, even though at that point one might more honestly call it “Brandonism”.
Nope, nothing self-centered in any of that.
“Marriage isn’t bad because it just makes men unequal it makes women unequal too. As I said before, you can’t depend on someone for living then be equal to that person at the same time.”
A lot of people aren’t getting married in order to sit at home all day eating bonbons, sport. In modern marriages, both partners usually *work* for a living.
But if *either* partner loses their job/needs health insurance, it can make it easier to help them out. Or do you think a person is no longer “equal” to you if they have a job without health insurance?
Brandon, every single post you make is ‘what about me’ or ‘my worldview is correct’ or ‘it doesnt matter unless it effects me’
how can you possibly believe youre not a narcissist?
Societal Contract | September 9, 2011 at 12:15 am
Brandon, I don’t see what Christianity or Judaism has to do with it. In the US there are many devout Christians and Jews, and there are even more “cultural Christians” and “cultural Jews” – meaning those religions have a long history in their family tree and they celebrate Christmas or Hannukah but don’t neccessarily believe in the folklore and mythology of those religions, and STILL Americans are quite open and “shameless” if you will, when it comes to sex.
Aside from a minority of extremely religious or extremely sexually conservative people, I’m not seeing the “shamed over sex” phenomena in the States. If anything I see the opposite.
So what is the approach to sex in Japan? Are parents A-OK if their teenage kids want to have a romp in the sack with their boyfriend/girlfriend before homework and dinner, while the parents patiently wait in the living room?
Do Japanese religions like Shinto and later Buddhism not say anything about controlling the passions?
Societal Contract | September 9, 2011 at 12:17 am
@Pecunium, “That would be because the eglatarian aspects of Christianity are amazingly destabilising of the social order.”
That’s what Christian missionaries like to tell Indians. However, when they convert the same caste system prevails within the Indian Christian church!
Brandon:
By using a word that means what you want to say?
“And don’t forget to be ashamed of your penis.”
Anyway, urban legend, just like the feminist who sailed through a door and then berated the man holding it.
PFKAElizabeth:
I was thinking of my school ending its football program, which I’d always thought served the dual goals of a) not giving anything to icky girls and b) blaming an unpopular action on feminism. But Pecunium’s comment suggests an alternate hypothesis, at least as far as (a) goes.
@Hershele: 1) Ashamed of my penis? WTF does that even mean? Also, it isn’t an urban legend because trying to be “chivalrous” (read…polite) has got me into some uncomfortable situations. I have seen both extremes. I have had women spend a lot of time thanking me and women snap at me for holding a door open. One woman even screamed at me and said “I can open the door myself asshole”. So I shut the door without letting her in so she can do it herself. If you are going to snap at people for being friendly and polite, expect rudeness in return.
Also, I am using chivalrous in rather generic way. I am talking about polite gestures you would do for anyone, not just women. If I wasn’t going to do it for a man, I don’t do it for a woman.
@Pecunium: I don’t really want to get into another marriage debate with you. You find marriage beneficial…I don’t. Let’s just agree to disagree.
In response to the vanity/conceited/selfish comments.
I have my viewpoints and others have theirs. Everyone will come to different conclusions. I see marriage as an obsolete institution that serves little to no purpose. Someone else might come to a different conclusion. You obviously feel that marriage is good and I see it as blocking progress. An obstacle that must be disassembled and the benefits of marriage being awarded to everyone not just the married. Same institution different opinions about it.
This is just my opinion on one topic…that hardly makes me conceited.
I do tend to be more selfish than others. I see little point in trying to help people when you yourself is in shambles. I see it as working to better yourself so that you are in a better position to help. I look after myself first because no one else is going to care more about me than me.
I do believe in helping people. This is why I spend time working at a food pantry to feed the homeless. It is just a great experience to know that people value what you are doing for them and that what you are doing is truly helping someone.
There is also only so much time and effort I have. I need to prioritize and spend my time and energy on things that can be accomplished or that produce the best results.
Anyways, I got to get back to work.
Brandon: @Pecunium: I don’t really want to get into another marriage debate with you. You find marriage beneficial…I don’t. Let’s just agree to disagree.
If you don’t want to talk about it, don’t. But when it was mentioned you stated untrue things about it. That will get a response. You may have noticed I am not the only person who responded to what you said.
You obviously feel that marriage is good
What I think of it, as regards “good” or “bad”, isn’t relevant to the comments I have made to you about marriage. You are (again), reading into my statements about the factual nature of marriage a value judgement which I’ve not made, and one which is irrelevant to the task at hand.
Telling me I see it as good, or bad, BTW, is not a way to agree to disagree. That you seem to think you should be allowed to charactarise others, while asking to be left alone in your beliefs (which no one here has said they are unwilling to do) is one of the reasons I snarked about you have narccissitic traits.
But, since you have such insight… tell me what my views on marriage actually are. I am curious as to the insights you think you’ve gained on my beliefs.
I am not mocking you with the question.* I’m quite serious.
*I am, actually, not fond of mockery, it takes being an NWO, or a Meller; and them some work at it, to get me to make mockery of the person, not the ideas.
Still waiting to hear whether Brandon is willing to A: retract his utterly unsubstantiated claims of fraud (Even your own source confuses fraud with error) and B: whether he’s willing to actually pay for the testing that he says should be used more.
Also curious to see what he has to say about Darksidecat’s post; I clearly took a headlong flying leap into something I didn’t understand the full nature of given presumed parenthood serving positive functions for fathers.
Oh, and what he has to say about mine, in general.
@Pecunium: When I am talking about marriage being good or bad I like to think of a practical way of looking at it. I think of a big poster that has written down line by line everything factual that you will get, the benefits you will receive and what actually changes when you get married. Now each person goes up to the poster and starts making check marks near each line to signal they like that benefit. After say 100 people do this, you will notice that some people made a lot of check marks while others didn’t.
So while factually speaking marriage might come with a lot of “benefits”. People have to actually value those benefits in order for them to actually be benefits. I think as more time goes on, people are making fewer and fewer check marks on the marriage poster.
So the crux of the matter is I don’t view the benefits of marriage as actual benefits. I think out of the 100’s of changes that happens when you get married, I think I value 3-5 of them. Mainly visitation rights in hospitals.
My only insight is that you have debated me through out the last post; So you either value marriage or you are playing the devil’s advocate.