Men Going Their Own Way have a keen eye when it comes to spotting subtle injustices that the rest of us often miss.
Like, for example, the terrible injustice that is … fat chicks dating dudes who aren’t themselves fat.
One Reddit MGTOW recently reminded his comrades just how pervasive this terrible injustice has become in the contemporary world.
Preach it, brother!
Others in the MGTOW subreddit reported their own findings.
He THOUGHT he was happy. Just as the German citizens under Hitler THOUGHT they were free!
Little did he know that his life could have been snuffed out in a moment had his girlfriend — *shudder* — decided to sit on him. We have lost too many men, cut down in their prime by hambeast girlfriends who thought it might be “funny” to pretend that their boyfriends were chairs.
Another MGTOW Redditor applied some powerful STEM logic to the problem:
Can society long survive with the attractiveness ratio so far out of whack? What kind of world is it when dudes who are EIGHTS are saddled with level 5 plain janes? Or when men who are average joes find themselves trapped in completely voluntary relationships with level 2 hambeasts, some of whom are quite angry and/or stern.
It is the thoughtful ovendice — we’ve met him before — who brings real clarity and wisdom to this difficult issue.
I can’t argue with that! Mainly because I have no idea what he’s talking about. How does working hard prevent men from being pigs?
Here’s a song I don’t think MGTOWs are going to like very much.
NOTE: This post contains
@Brony;
I seem to recall you asking how my name is pronounced in some other thread – i’m sorry for not replying there! It’s pronounced “shield-freya”, sort of. Maybe more “skilled-freya.” The “sc” is tough to pronounce! It means “Shield Maiden” as compounded in Anglo-Saxon, from “scild” for shield and “freja” for woman.
I’m not sure if that helps, but there you go!
Ive read plenty of Rand & studied her life. She sucks.
She also wrote “We the Living,” which isn’t terrible as a novel. I enjoyed both it and “Anthem” in high school. Never bothered trying to get through “Fountainhead.”
I mean, I read widely and enjoyed a lot of stuff, and they weren’t brilliant, but they were kind of interesting and I don’t regret having read them.
@ scildfreja
So can we use
#notyourscild
@a POIsonous snack
If it’s assigned reading for an English class then of course you’re not excused from studying it. But in the real world there are a huge number of people who believe different wrong-headed things. There’s just so many that I don’t think we have an obligation to do an in-depth study of how each-and-every-one of those people came to their wrong-headed conclusions.
Anyway, I’ve read “Atlas Shrugged” a couple of times. Even better, I read it when I was an angsty teenager who was receptive to its message: “Why, yes, superior people (such as myself, for example) *do* get persecuted by people of lesser talent, probably due to jealousy.”
But even at the time, I realized that it was basically mindless wish-fulfillment fantasy. The characters were all stock pulp-fiction heroes and villains, with some extra dialog tacked on showing that the heroes agreed with Rand’s world-view and the villains were strawman opponents.
When you read it, did you spot the story’s underlying flaw? John Galt could have had a much easier life if he’d joined the looters and then used his superior intellect to beat them at their own game. Why didn’t he do that? The only answer consistent with Rand’s philosophy is, “He wouldn’t have been able to respect himself.” But then he has no way to respond to the looters saying, “That’s nice. We’re able to respect *ourselves*, though.” It’s impossible for him to argue that they’re wrong without relying on “collectivist” ideas like “fairness” or “empathy” or “social stability”, which Rand explicitly rejected.
Anyway, many years later, I discovered Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle”, which is really quite a similar book, but with the political philosophies swapped. I like it better because it’s internally consistent, and because the events aren’t speculation about a dystopian society that might exist in the future; they’re all things that were actually happening in the real world at the time the story was written – I think this makes the arguments more persuasive. Have you read it? It’s fairly short, and it’s available for free at Project Gutenberg: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/140/140-h/140-h.htm
@ScildFreja
Interesting. I wonder if the word ”Freja” has anything to do with the name ”Freyja”. Or the other way around. Or maybe it’s just coincidence.
Just to quickly revisit the idea of feeling bad for not being attracted to XYZ group–I’m trying to rein in the tealness of my deer, but we’ll see.
IMO, any time you have a blanket, “Oh I’m just not attracted to [a broad category of appearance]”, it’s probably worth doing some self-reflection as to why, especially if the broad category also happens to be an oppressed group of people.
For instance, when I hear a white person go, “I dunno, I’m just not attracted to Black people,” it gives me pause. Everything about western media has prioritized and idolized white features, skin tone, hair texture, etc. etc. etc. Most of our supermodels have been white. Most of our heartthrob actors are white. Most of the imagery surrounding beauty, cosmetics and high fashion are white.
But somehow, for white people (including myself), growing up steeped in a culture where both subtle and overt racism is all over the place, somehow we’re just organically attracted to a certain “type” that also happens to pretty much perfectly align with what our media outlets sell us. And we are SO sure of our type (which is totally not influenced by our media), that we are willing to categorically dismiss the possibility that there would be even one person who is not our usual “type”, but so breathtakingly amazing that we become deeply attracted to them anyway. After all, we can’t help it; that’s just our hardwiring.
I can’t help but feel like that explanation seems a bit too convenient. If societal narratives can shape who I think is trustworthy, smart, respectable, safe, etc., I can’t help but feel like it must also factor into who I think is cute.
However, emotions and attractions don’t operate on a switch. I can’t magically decide to start being attracted to a different “type” because I feel guilty about who I actually am attracted to. And dating or making a move on someone because “Hey, you are diverse, therefore I am morally obligated to like you” is pretty exploitative and gross.
So for groups that are frequently stereotyped, if there is a blanket, “No thanks” towards the entire group in my head, I want to stop and examine it.
So say I prefer tall dudes; is that because I just really, really like being the little spoon? Or is it because I’ve picked up on the patriarchal idea that the man should always be bigger (and ostensibly tougher)? If a certain race is “not my type”, is that just because I haven’t met someone of that race who I wanted to date (yet?), or because I think that “they” are all like XYZ? Say I find fat people unattractive–is that because, I dunno, they just don’t do it for me, or is it because I assume that they are unhealthy, lazy, stupid, bad partners, whatever?
And if I discover that I’ve got some harmful attitudes and assumptions that need unpacking, I should work to unpack them. I can read blogs and books by the “not my type” people. I can pay attention to them when they do show up in mainstream media, and think critically about how they’re being represented (especially if they are underrepresented, because they probably are). I can have my internal radar on the alert for how this group gets marginalized, and make sure I don’t even casually condone it.
Now that may not do a thing to change who I get tingly feelings for, but it will definitely help me push back against harmful cultural narratives in my own mind. It can make me a better and more empathetic person, as I invest time and energy into appreciating people, even if they never make me twitterpated. But maybe it will ultimately broaden my “type”. Who knows? Only time and meeting cool people will reveal that.
In the interest of full disclosure, though, I don’t think I have a physical “type”? Like maybe I’m demi? I definitely notice that various people are cute–and I haven’t figured out a distinct pattern there–but I only ever get truly smitten with people I know and like. And the cooler I think the person is, the cuter they start to look.
So YMMV there, but it seems to me that, “I’m not attracted to [marginalized group]” is a great opportunity to work on listening to and humanizing that group in your own mind, whether or not it ever affects your romantic attraction. I don’t think it’s helpful to feel guilty about the attraction (or lack thereof), because you truly don’t consciously choose that, but I don’t think it ever hurts to do a quick self-check for any potential cultural hangups.
I used to teach architecture in the US, and The Fountainhead was the bane of my existence. One year at the end of term I arranged with one of the student pubs to show it on the wall one night, with popcorn, beer and MST3K commentary, and a good time was had by all.
@Alan,
#neéowscild !
(or #neéowlind if you want to be more precise. I do not!)
@a POIsonous snek, Chaos-Engineer
That is actually a very good point!
Mr. poisonous snek, did you read the theology of St Andrews to discount it? Did you need to read the bible front to back to decide that it wasn’t true? Did you meditate on the writings of Luther, or consider the wisdoms of the Saints?
I imagine that you did not read the entire library of theological thought before discounting it. Why is that acceptable, and someone else declaring that Rand doesn’t need to be read to be discounted is bigoted?
That is an honest question! I hope you can answer it – even if your answer is “i don’t know.” That’s possibly one of the best answers one can give to a question, honestly.
@Victorious Parasol – I don’t think I read Anthem, so I suppose I may have only read those 2 books of Rand’s. In any case, it was puh-LENTY. Also, thanks for the link, I will be checking that out!
@ScildFreya – I just want to say yet again how much I admire your argument style. I definitely wish to emulate it.
@Makroth,
they’re the same word. Freja, Freya, and Freyja are all from a time before precise spellings – oh, what a glorious time that must have been, before pedants. The goddess Freyja would be translated as “The Maiden”, basically, or “The Woman,” to my understanding. Man is Frej/Frey, Woman is Freja/Freya.
Note – I am not an expert!
@Kootiepatra,
Thank you for sharing 🙂 I am similar in that I am probably pretty demi. I haven’t really investigated deeply, though, as I guess it’s not much of a priority for me? I dunno. My sense of what good-looking is has extremely little to do with appearance, and nothing to do with race. I almost never see someone and think they’re ugly, and usually instinctively pick out the nice features of a person, and think of them in that way. If that makes sense!
Goodness, this code is taking a long time to upload.
@Scildfreja,
I’ve noticed that in my personal experience, the “type” I am attracted to tends to get reset to match the specific person I’ve most recently been interested in. So, I’ve always had a thing for skinny, wiry short guys. But then I got a huge crush on a specific tall guy, and found I wasn’t so into short guys anymore (even after I got over him). Then I met my current boyfriend, who is more the barrel-chested, muscular type (though not fat, really) and I find I don’t see the appeal of skinny dudes anymore.
For me, at least, being open to all kinds of people based on personality has made it easy to see the appeal of people even if they don’t quite fit my usual type.
@dreemr,
Aw, thank you :3 I’d have to say that my argument style isn’t very effective (but what sort of argument could penetrate the fog of self-embellishment?), but it has its perks! It’s mostly a self-help exercise, to confront opposition without feeling anger, and without feeling the need to defend my side. Conditioning myself to feel optimism and happiness in the face of insult. That sort of thing! If it provides everyone with some entertainment and good-feels too, well, that’s excellent :).
It does get ignored an awful lot by the trolls, though, so if you want to actually engage it would probably be better to use more invective. It’s just bad for you if you’re high-anxiety!
I really should write that book on the zen of rationality. Not that I think I’m qualified, but, well, is anyone qualified? Maybe you are, @a POIsonous snek; are you a Rationality Master? I’m only an apprentice.
Sorry, I’m still rambling! This jar is taking a long time to upload.
That is a great way to be, @Saffron 🙂 I’ve never understood the mindset of saying that X is the only attractive thing. Like, guys, yes, redheads are nice, but that is hardly the only qualifier! Howabout, you know, being nice?
(‘nice’ is such an interesting word. Meaningless and filled with meaning.)
(I get a bit odd when i haven’t slept well! apologies)
@Scildfreja – I remember you making mention of how you developed this as a way to deal with your anger that would arise when arguing a point. I think this is very very useful, for myself as well.
I tend to avoid engaging because it makes me so upset.
If it’s any consolation, I doubt anything would change an entrenched mind. That said, if anything COULD change it, I’m sure treating the other person with kindness and dignity would be the way.
@kootiepatra : I agree that thinking about your tastes is good. As you said, one’s tastes aren’t random and follow his culture and history. However, that should not come too much at the expense of actually enjoying life.
To take a specific example, I find the average asiatic ugly. I know from where it come from culturally (and likely not from good things), and knowing why is a good thing and can help appreciating the performance of (ugly to me) asian actors. However, it don’t mean I should be ashamed of not finding asians to my tastes. In fact I believe the good attitude is to remember to neither caricature my taste in loudely saying that all asiatic are abominably ugly, nor trying to say “well, if everyone seem to enjoy that actor, I should enjoy it”. To do that, it’s good to have a bit of self reflexion indeed.
A relatively common problem of people is to caricature their tastes to fit their exterior persona. I have seen that happen most often for mangas, with some people going out of their way to say they hate all form of manga who clearly are all childlish pornography-laden comics, even thou I know them enough to know their real opinion is significantly more balanced.
Note that it don’t mean I would rule out having an asiatic partner (because s/he can have a load of other qualities), and if I actually had an asiatic partner, I would go out of my way to make sure s/he don’t learn that I usually find asiatic ugly. Doubly so if I find his/her lovely but ugly :p
@ scildfreja
I’d have to disagree; I think it’s very effective. The mere fact that your opponent doesn’t publicly capitulate isn’t an indicator of how well you’ve argued.
To use an analogy; in advocacy training we point out to aspiring lawyers that the first rule of cross examination is “it’s not the witness you’re trying to persuade!” You’re really just making your points to the judge or jury. So when you engage in your elegant but gentle rhetorical sparring, our trolly friends may not acknowledge your points but an objective third party observer will understand. And even if the troll won’t concede your point that doesn’t mean it hasn’t been driven home, it’s just an ego thing that sees accepting your argument as an unacceptable loss of face. You may well have caused them to rethink their position, even if they can’t admit that.
You’re a lot more effective than you might think.
@Ohlmann – A heads-up: When conversing in English, “Asiatic” may prove problematic.
I’m not sure why it would have more of an air of racism than “Asian” – perhaps because it seems too clinical when used to reference people, perhaps because those who wish to dehumanize a group tend towards clinically describing it – but it does tend to.
Perhaps someone with a more solid grounding in etymology would know.
Hate to do a drive-by, but I’m on my lunch break and just saw this:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/04/20/the_real_story_behind_the_kid_whose_mom_used_craigslist_to_find_him_a_feminism.html
I know slate isn’t an obscure site and probably a lot of people have seen it already, but WOW.
@scildfreja – I’ll echo the above.
I <3 your troll-response posts.
Aside from their thorough picking apart of their arguments, you very often bring up points that I had not yet considered.
Also: Ponies!
http://orig00.deviantart.net/6476/f/2011/339/a/0/pony_dance_gif_by_gibsonflyingv-d4ia62q.gif
I’ve never encountered the word Asiatic applied to human beings before.
It is good and bad; it’s far from a perfect solution. It really reinforces the “you have to be a nice person to everyone!” mentality that was drilled into me when I was young, which has the effect of making me bottle my feelings until they sour into vinegar. It’s a common problem.
This said, I don’t think that being upset at other people really helps, even when they’re drastically wrong about things. I am trying to make it about accepting my feelings about things without expressing them outwards, if that makes sense. I acknowledge that Mr Poisonous snek is an entitled jerkbutt who takes joy in barging into other peoples’ internet houses and telling them off. This feeling is a part of me, but it does not define me.
Insert picture of fluttershy meditating in front of a sunset here!
This is my holy grail, it’s what I am pursuing! These channers (our snek’y friend may not be from there, but night as well be) have been so swallowed up by anger and depression though, which makes it very hard to break through. They are so used to being hated, shouted at, and insulted, that honest kindness reads as sarcasm on the screen; and as patronization off of it. It is quite a riddle, but I’m sure that there is a solution.
@Alan,
This is very true, all of what you said! Part of why I engage is for other people who wander by – I don’t want to leave a harmful comment without a rebuke! This said, that’s not really a challenging goal for me, I guess.
It’s my hope that our Dustinzeit’s and Poisonous Sneks and whatnot will remember some measure of my reply and that it will bring change to their lives at some point in the future, when the walls they’ve built around themselves have weakened a little and they’re ready to face uncomfortable truth. I hope that they can remember that not everyone was angry and upset with them, and that perhaps they can find a place in the world, too. That’s more my goal than anything else. Who can say whether it’s successful?
@mockingbird,
It’s the ponies that are the important part, I think.
POM,
Whoa. That’s creepy. Maybe it was just a troll. But maybe this was a plan to take his hatred of women and feminism into meat space and he was seeking a victim to idk, stalk? Rape? Kill? Yikes.
I know this isn’t the most important part of the article or anything, but I think this was my favorite part
I know this guy wasn’t in a gender studies class for real, but I have to imagine he thinks of these courses as a hostile environment for men, who are in the minority.
I also imagine he thinks that hostile environments for women in STEM are no excuse for women to drop out or seek other careers after graduating because the hostility and sexism is worth it. I’m sure, like our faux Russian friend from early in the thread, he thinks the wage gap is all down to women’s choices and all our fault.
I’m not sure why this was what stuck out to me in the article, but it did.
I also wonder if this Nate guy has ever trolled here. He sounds a lot like the kind of person who would gravitate here.
@ dreemr
You’re welcome! Have fun reading the comments – there are some would-be Rand defenders there, but also some ex-Rand fans, so the discussion tends to be lively and with more signal than noise.
@ Scildfreja
I really admire your grace in the face of stupidity, ignorance, and anger.