I’ll give Sofia, the antifeminist bloggress behind the blog Sofiastry, credit for one thing: unlike a lot of Men’s Rightsers, she doesn’t deny that there is a wage gap between men and women. She just thinks that it’s justified – that women should be paid less.
Why? Well, I admit I don’t quite understand her explanation, which has something to do with women getting worse grades in school, working less, and, well, whatever the hell she’s trying to say here:
women who are likely seen in executive and higher-earning positions are estrogenically flawed in their lack of sufficient desire to prioritize family life. Its the equivalent of a man who has no creative, intellectual or ambitious drive — all hallmarks of testosterone.
Oh, and because, like Barbie, women think that math class is tough:
can it not simply be reduced to the fact that the average man has more of of an aptitude for finance and numbers than the average woman?
No, I’m pretty sure it can’t.
In a followup post, Sofia raised a critical issue that she somehow had overlooked in her earlier analysis: women are a bunch of blubbering crybabies.
I couldn’t count on one hand the number of times a female co-worker cried on the job (myself included), but I couldn’t name a single male (homosexuals excluded & even then…). Women are more emotional, more likely to take days off for such reasons (or no reason) and quantifiably put in less hours on the job. Depending on the field, I’d also wager that women are less likely to revolutionize an industry or make the same amount of exceptional contributions men do.
Seriously, gal. Don’t be a bunch of Lady-Boehners. Stop all of your sobbing! (Oh, oh oh.)
MRAL: Pecunium, remember, language isn’t static, LOLZ. I want smug to mean what I want it to mean, holy shit I think I want it to mean cotton candy!
Did you miss the part about consensus? Yes, of course you did, because you are throwing the sort of tantrum a two year old would be proud of, when he discovers the use of the word “no” and a five year old would be embarrassed to watch.
Anyway I would accept something from a REAL sociologist, as opposed to some fuck mangina and/or Her Holy Highness bitch that spends who has a huge axe to grind regarding gender issues. Basically, someone who doesn’t concern him or herself primarily with the bitches. Someone like Freud. But you can’t because it’s all fucking bullshit.
Is that okay XDXFDXXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDXD?
No, because what you have just said is, in short, “A word means what I want it to mean, and when someone who agrees with my definitions, my prejudices, and my politics agrees with me, that’s an authority”.
That’s no consensus, that’s cotton candy.
(p.s. Freud? And you are saying Freud didn’t concern himself with “the bitches”? “Whiskey, Tango, FOxtrot, Over” This is the dude who invented penis envy, and made shit up about how prehistoric men were so hot for momma they ganged up to kill daddy and then got guilty and sex has been fucked up ever since. This is your idea of a “real sociologist.” Dude… I don’t know what classes you took, but you either slept through them, or need to ask for your money back)
I actually haven’t taken any sociology courses, I was lying to give myself credibility. Anyway, there IS NO consensus regarding Rutee’s definition, unless you consider a handful of mentally retarded feminists good enough. I don’t.
So I guess we’re at the point where we need to prove a mainstream consensus one way or the other. I’ve cited… the dictionary. Rutee’s cited… herself.
Since unsubstantiated whining is so common MRAs are like well hell Sovereign Citizens, White Supremecists, Petulant Teenagers… the list of valid overlaps is much too long.
Based on the evidence, ignorant twits, one and all, some of them wilfully.
I actually haven’t taken any sociology courses, I was lying to give myself credibility. Anyway, there IS NO consensus regarding Rutee’s definition, unless you consider a handful of mentally retarded feminists good enough. I don’t.
So I guess we’re at the point where we need to prove a mainstream consensus one way or the other. I’ve cited… the dictionary. Rutee’s cited… herself.
And her definition (the one which is A: more favorable to you, and B: which you keep using, in practice) has been supported by the general consensus here (which is part of why you are fighting so hard to convince us that the Merriam Webster’s you looked up is the one and only way, while ignoring the definition I gave), as well as by the outside source I referenced, and by flib.
So… you have a single source, and a rigid use of the word (at odds with the actual ways in which language works…. “ain’t” for example is still used as an example of, “poor english” as is the canard that one may not end sentences with prepositions, nor split infinitives, while others insist that all serial pronouns must take the subjective form of the first person singular; which is patently false).
And you admit to lying in argument. This is not the way to convince people of the validity of your claims. Who among us can now be sure you aren’t refusing to admit to having found a definition more in keeping with the usage you are being told of here?
My books aren’t in Texas, you asshat. Other folks in sociology are specifically agreeing with me. One of them cited you a study using misandry the way I use misogyny (But because we’re talking about men, it’s specifically referring to the shit black men take, because it’s not the same stupid shit black women take). You’re just a petulant child who refuses to learn about the world.
This much was patently obvious.
BTW, good job, you’ve further destroyed your own credibility.
MRAL, for host of reasons, YOU should not be throwing “mentally retarded” around.
It’s probably in the same category as “credible”, as MRAL defines it.
A sociologist is a psychologist? Oh, honey. No. And if you say that in front of an actual psychologist or sociologist, they will laugh their asses off.
A sociologist studies SOCIETY. A psychologist studies AN INDIVIDUAL PERSON. It’s a pretty obvious difference.
It’s fair to get confused about the difference between anthropologists and sociologists, though; to be honest, I’m not sure of the distinction myself.
Ozy: Psychologists study how/why people think the way they do. It can be individuals, or groups. Psychiatrists tend to be focused on treating individuals.
Sociologists and anthropologists overlap.
I’m saying that there’s a lot of overlap between sociology and psychology, and since both are mostly bullshit, they kind of merge together. IMO.
Also, don’t condescend to me Ozymandias, I’m smarter than you are.
Also, don’t condescend to me Ozymandias, I’m smarter than you are.
Show don’t tell, MRAL.
Ozy has a popular blog and an active love life. (And zie knows what sociology is, and doesn’t try to cover for fucking up by saying “everything I don’t understand is crap anyway.”) Perhaps, just perhaps, zie knows something you don’t?
But I’ll admit, I’m sick of this definitions argument too.
I don’t really care what you consider “misandry”–just so long as you don’t consider it an excuse for misogyny.
If you feel like your life is hard in some ways because you’re male, you have the right to protest against those things. You just don’t have the right to blame women for them.
What the fuck does “zie” know that I don’t? How to be a whore?
Fuck you.
Translation: “I know nothing about either field, and I just really can’t cop to it”
Statement assumes facts not in evidence.
Actually, she doesn’t even know that, because as we all know women can get dick on demand, so it’s not a skill at all. It’s basically as hard as taking a dump. If she was a 7-ish male (she’s a 7-ish female now) she’d more than likely be left with nothing.
What you don’t know about the sex lives of women, sociology, and psychology could form the core of a neutron star.
This forum is full of pretentious fFUCKIGN BITCHES.
Oh wait, this is MRAL. So I suppose if we added in what you don’t know about sex in general would collapse it into a black hole.
I think the pretentious whores around here should shut the fuck up and let the MEN with real pain talk it out in peace.
Ozy knows a lot more than you. Like how not to be a complete and utter fuckwit in public. That opinion and fact are not the same thing. That bare courtesy would seem to require that you respect a person’s self definition of their gender and preferred pronouns.
Whoop, there goes MRAL’s notoriously microscopic fuse. Fwoom.
And here I was half-agreeing that the definition of “misandry” doesn’t matter half so much as how you apply it.
What the fuck does “zie” know that I don’t? How to be a whore?
Er… yeah, actually. I mean, assuming “whore” means “person who has sex,” then yes, exactly.
MRAL: Get your own fucking blog and quit bothering us ‘pretentious whores,’ then.
By the way, MRAL, the reason I’m picking on you for not having sex (besides that you don’t seem to restrain yourself in picking on others, so I don’t feel the guilt I would if you were decent) is because it’s the only “pain” you can claim to have personally experienced.
It’s not like your ass is getting drafted or paying alimony.
“Zie” is a bullshit term for pretentious douchebags. You’re either he or she, unless you have a vagina and a ballsack, in which case, fair enough, you can choose. Quite frankly, people who use the term are traitors. It pisses me off almost as much as “USian”.
Stay classy there, MRAL.
btw, how’s that therapy coming along, anyway? I see it really hasn’t really helped you in your endless quest to get laid.