The glaring inconsistency of the manosphere

[jurry]

Agree 100% espi..

The only thing worse than blaming the past is blaming the present.

 

[Soolaimon]

Hooooooly $hit Solly!!!! Your reading comprehension is so low, that you think I said "ALL women". I said ALL orbiters. Holy hell no wonder you make posts that are a mile long which are unreadable. You can't even get your own straw-men straight. Your WHOLE obsession with me is based upon your inability to read properly. Good god man, go get an education and some reading skills.

Typical coward, has to put up lies and accuse the other person of it.

Solly,

Listen, it just isn't working.

you think I said "ALL women". I said ALL orbiters.

women do not know what is and isn't acceptable in a committed relationship.
Women need to be taught what is respectful for a relationship.

She doesn't know any better.
So YES, these need to take place because she simply does not know any better
Women simply do not understand the term exclusivity.
That women will automatically cut off all men is completely false.

You are a liar. Nothing in your quotes says anything about "orbiters". It's all about women.

Where does it say orbiters?

Everything you state is about women cause she doesn't understand the term exclusivity according to you.

Your new claim of orbiters make no sense when you are saying "women don't know any better."

Nothing about orbiters.

Keep trying to save face with more lies and projection.

The primary purpose of a boundary is to inform her of your expectations and the definition of exclusivity.

No, I am pointing out that women do not know what is and isn't acceptable in a committed relationship. This is why you must give your definition of exclusivity when she asks it of you

She must be reminded of this because a large number of women think they can date other men while being committed

Women need to be taught what is respectful for a relationship.

girls have never been taught was is respectful in a relationship.

She doesn't know any better so when the time comes that she wants to, she will engage in behavior unacceptable for a committed relationship

No, I am pointing out that women do not know what is and isn't acceptable in a committed relationship. This is why you must give your definition of exclusivity when she asks it of you

How will she know what is and isn't acceptable when she has been conditioned by beta's to do as she pleases?

Because nobody had the discussion with them on what exclusivity means.

So YES, these need to take place because she simply does not know any better.

In a world bombarded by media creating AFC's and masculine women, what on earth makes you think she will automatically know what is expected of her?

It needs to be defined because so many women today want to have a boyfriend plus an army of orbiters

You are a pathetic liar.

You are talking about women in all your quotes here. Not orbiters. Anybody that has common sense can see that.

Your whole false premise on your boundary theory is based on women not knowing any better for what is acceptable in a relationship.

Now you are lying and talking about all "orbiters"? Hilarious!

You are the coward cause you can't admit to all your lies.

Everything you lied about is in your own quotes that I posted for all to see.

You can lie and project on to me but you can't hide from what you actually said in your contradicting quotes.

That women will automatically cut off all men is completely false

You are saying that women will not cut off all men. That is your quote.

You argued with me in 4 threads when I told you that my girlfriend cut men out before we became exclusive.

You said that is completely false and argued with me.

That is what our argument was about.

Now you claim you won't commit to a woman with orbiters when your claim is women all have them.

All of your lies and contradictions are posted to for all to see.

Zekko you are an idiot too cause you were arguing with me about "women" and not orbiters" in those threads. You are a beta as well.

The411 aka Dem feeelz aka Tictac the same.

I will likely not commit to a girl who already has male orbiters

That women will automatically cut off all men is completely false

This is a contradiction. This claim of yours makes no sense.

You are saying you won't comitt to a girl who has orbiters.

Then you say women won't cut them off.

You are a liar.

You are not talking about orbiters. You are talking about women not cutting them off.

You are a coward cause you can't argue your own lies and contradictions.

Anybody that has common sense can see the lies and contradiction of yours and that you are full of $hit except for zekko and The411/demfeeelz.

 

[The411]

[/B]


You are a liar. Nothing in your quotes says anything about "orbiters". It's all about women.

Where does it say orbiters?

Everything you state is about women cause she doesn't understand the term exclusivity according to you.

Your new claim of orbiters make no sense when you are saying "women don't know any better."

Nothing about orbiters.

Keep trying to save face with more lies and projection.





You are a pathetic liar.

You are talking about women in all your quotes here. Not orbiters. Anybody that has common sense can see that.

Your whole false premise on your boundary theory is based on women not knowing any better for what is acceptable in a relationship.

Now you are lying and talking about all "orbiters"? Hilarious!

You are the coward cause you can't admit to all your lies.

Everything you lied about is in your own quotes that I posted for all to see.

You can lie and project on to me but you can't hide from what you actually said in your contradicting quotes.



You are saying that women will not cut off all men. That is your quote.

You argued with me in 4 threads when I told you that my girlfriend cut men out before we became exclusive.

You said that is completely false and argued with me.

That is what our argument was about.

Now you claim you won't commit to a woman with orbiters when your claim is women all have them.

All of your lies and contradictions are posted to for all to see.

Zekko you are an idiot too cause you were arguing with me about "women" and not orbiters" in those threads. You are a beta as well.

The411 aka Dem feeelz aka Tictac the same.




This is a contradiction. This claim of yours makes no sense.

You are saying you won't comitt to a girl who has orbiters.

Then you say women won't cut them off.

You are a liar.

You are not talking about orbiters. You are talking about women not cutting them off.

You are a coward cause you can't argue your own lies and contradictions.

Anybody that has common sense can see the lies and contradiction of yours and that you are full of $hit except for zekko and The411/demfeeelz.

U mad playhersooli? Perhaps you can print out your posts and use them to "impress" those boundary less chick's at the coffee shops you frequent bagel boy? Shalom. Lmao

 

[jurry]

Lol, a true AW you are danger.. isnt soolaimon giving you enough?

Based off how you argue, you would be the perfect used car salesman.

"This thing is a piece of junk."

Danger: "yea but it has new tires!"

"The interior is trashed and the seats are ripped."

Danger: "but look at that paint job!"

The process for sexual assault is the same for men and women, you're just framing it in the context of the man being accused so that your argument makes sense.

For the LAST time, there is no way I am getting drawn into another multi page debate over hypotheticals and theory with you, after how painful you made the last one about equality and your same tactics employed with sooli.

Evidence. Support. It should be quite easy if men are being screwed over as bad as you seem to think they are.

 

[The411]

Lol, a true AW you are danger.. isnt soolaimon giving you enough?

Based off how you argue, you would be the perfect used car salesman.

"This thing is a piece of junk."

Danger: "yea but it has new tires!"

"The interior is trashed and the seats are ripped."

Danger: "but look at that paint job!"

The process for sexual assault is the same for men and women, you're just framing it in the context of the man being accused so that your argument makes sense.

For the LAST time, there is no way I am getting drawn into another multi page debate over hypotheticals and theory with you, after how painful you made the last one about equality and your same tactics employed with sooli.

Evidence. Support. It should be quite easy if men are being screwed over as bad as you seem to think they are.

And do you have evidence to prove men aren't getting screwed over?

Why don't you provide your evidence?

If you take Foolimon serious..LMFAO.

 

[The411]

Well done at trying to completely evade Danger's question and turn the conversation.

Rational argument made. Your response? Petty insults. Classy.

You aren't fooling anyone mate.

Ya gotta love how those who troll require you to provide them "evidence" while they avoid it themselves.

I'd guess Jaylan really has an axe to grind with Danger even if it means siding with playherman= sooliamon a laughable oversized clown shoe.

 

[jurry]

Lol if you look through the thread you will see ive done more than one person ever should to address dangers arguments.

Some men do get screwed over, so do some women. Im not denying either. What I am saying is there is no evidence of some feminist takeover of the government and our society where men are being screwed over on any meaningful scale. In fact me and danger do agred that our society is still unquestionable male dominated.

How do I provide evidence of something that ISNT HAPPENING?? Lol you guys cant be serious with these questions..

 

[sylvester the cat]

http://youtu.be/q2linl05qpo

 

[jurry]

hahaha..

"Im not saying it is different for men and women, although it is, but i wont show you evidence because i dont have any"

This is actually what you are saying danger, what sane person would engage a discussion with that kind of nonsense?

And no, no one has to get a lawyer if they dont want to.

 

[jurry]

If i was legitimately charged for sexual assault in a scenario where I felt i could be guilty, of course I would get a lawyer. Has this ever happened to me or anyone I know, no. Has it ever happened to you or anyone you know?

This is why i have no interest in arguing these points, of course the law could be manipulated in any number of ways, it is not a perfect system. But you're getting into these extremely unlikely scenarios that have no reality in the larger perspective of an entire country.

Where is the evidence that it is actually happening? If you can present that, id be more inclined to go along with it. Im not interested in back and forths over the possibilities of remote scenarios happening though.

 

[jurry]

Men are by default guilty? So then why are they bothering with the trials and lawyers?

I can go and accuse a female co worker of sexual assault right now, her name will be tarnished, she'd have to get a laywer if it was legitimate. What is the difference?

I agree the yes means yes law is garbage, only been around a month or two though hard to really say what will happen with that. I dont know the particulars of the duke lacrosse case or the other example but id prefer to avoid one off stories and focus on actual large scale studies of the issue, because we can go back and forth with one story/incident says this thing, one says that all day, doesnt really help us.

Im glad you finally got around to citing a source, even if it is from a manosphere blog and cites a study of virginia men during a 15 year period more than 30 years ago. The link to the study does not work, so no way to see their methodology, but I dont see how one study of one state during a 15 year period decades ago saying false conviction rates were between 8-15% supports a misandric court system? It says it is about 5% higher than the rate for false homicide rates. Is that more than 50 or 60 years ago? Is it more than what it is now? We dont know.

As I said many posts ago, I am not interested in protecting feminism (or any -ism), I am interested in what reality is showing us. If theres a point where men are getting totally fvcked over in the court system id be right there with you to push against it, but nothing your showing me supports that idea.

 

[VikingKing]

Men are by default guilty? So then why are they bothering with the trials and lawyers?For show. A woman doesn't have to prove you sexually assaulted you in the work place, women and betas will believe her crys and side with her

I can go and accuse a female co worker of sexual assault right now, her name will be tarnished, she'd have to get a laywer if it was legitimate. What is the difference? No it wouldnt, people wouldnt really believe you especially if she denied it.

I agree the yes means yes law is garbage, only been around a month or two though hard to really say what will happen with that. I dont know the particulars of the duke lacrosse case or the other example but id prefer to avoid one off stories and focus on actual large scale studies of the issue, because we can go back and forth with one story/incident says this thing, one says that all day, doesnt really help us.

Im glad you finally got around to citing a source, even if it is from a manosphere blog and cites a study of virginia men during a 15 year period more than 30 years ago. The link to the study does not work, so no way to see their methodology, but I dont see how one study of one state during a 15 year period decades ago saying false conviction rates were between 8-15% supports a misandric court system? It says it is about 5% higher than the rate for false homicide rates. Is that more than 50 or 60 years ago? Is it more than what it is now? We dont know.

As I said many posts ago, I am not interested in protecting feminism (or any -ism), I am interested in what reality is showing us. If theres a point where men are getting totally fvcked over in the court system id be right there with you to push against it, but nothing your showing me supports that idea.

You need to get real or get out. Laws may be written gender neutral, but they are not applied that way. I mean what are you naive? or blind? Perhaps you are in denial because of your liberal/ feminist brain washing.

 

[Evan]

It's not something that is happening left and right but it does happen. The thing is rape is so easy to assume a man is guilty. Especially if alcohol is involved. Most false rape cases happen in college where a women and guy are intoxicated at a party or bar and end up having sex with each other. The girl wakes up and regrets it to the point where she claims rape. Now there are cases where men take advantage of a women when she is drunk and that is wrong but were talking about false rape cases. It happens mostly in college or in professional sports. Those are where most of the cases I have seen. Most places you will not see these problems.

But let's be real. Most of these women who do this are fvcked in the head but this is not the majority of women. Women are not looking to **** over men. Not even feminists. ****ed in the head feminists who are broken emotionally will do these things but most women will not. Men do not need to crawl around in fear. The yes means yes law is ridiculous. I know women who laugh about it because they know that lots of women go to parties and bars and end up in strangers houses all the time. It's part of the college experience and part of being a young sexually active person. The biggest reason why this is happening now days is because fat feminists leaders, who aren't getting any alphas, are pissed and feel the need to patrol and be SJWs. Most sexually active women and mentally healthy women are not giving two ****s about these new laws. Most mentally healthy women are not in relationships with men where they feel the need to divorce rape them.

So what is my point? Men need to be smart about who they bring into their lives and the situations they put themselves in. It doesn't matter if there are false rape cases or not. Doesn't matter if the yes means yes laws exists. Men need to take responsibility for their lives. If a man isn't getting pvssy, it's his own damn fault. If a man gets divorce raped it's his own damn fault. If a man has a false rape cases brought against him, guess what? It was his own damn fault. You know why? Because he didn't do a good enough job screening the girl and he put himself in a vulnerable position. The guy was probably desperate for pvssy and didn't care about who she was. These things do not happen to smart men. Because smart men will not have a girl around him who will fvck him over.

Does these things happen to good men? Yes but it only happens to men who do not screen women and happens to men who put beauty and sex on a pedestal. Those things don't make men bad. But it clouds men's judgement. They shouldn't be fvcking an intoxicated girl. They shouldn't be putting a ring on a girl just because she is hot and fvcks him really good. They should fvck a girl because she is really that into you. He should put a ring on her because she has truly proven to be worthy of it.

So many men get married because they are afraid that they won't find another girl that they like as much as her. And on the flip side of that, men are afraid to get married because they think she will divorce rape them. Well these things wouldn't happen if men sacked up and took responsibility for their lives. If they didn't get so fvcking lazy and sloppy. Sometimes you have to date and fvck lots of different women to find a decent one. Lots of cases this is true. Sometimes it isn't many at all. It's many factors that men need to be aware of.

The problem is that a lot of men just think it's all about how hot she is and the sex. While these are important there are far many other important factors that are different for everybody. And the issue is that you have too many people telling others how they should live their lives forcing their own values on others. There's not enough people thinking for themselves. There's not enough people taking responsibility for their own lives. So it's so much easier to be a victim and blame somebody else for their negativity in their lives. It's their own god damn fault.

 

[crazyboy]

this thread omg needs to die. There no inconsistency in the manosphere different things work for different people. Since most you guys are obviously nerds do excess need to prove something as absolute fact and some fck up equation. Lets not get people themselves are variable and not fixed. something that works for danger may not work for jurry or vice versa. danger has a rule if we are exclusive i don't want you hanging out other male friends than me. Find if that works for him fine doesn't make him seem little insecure sure but who isn't to be honest. woman have no problem telling men not to hang with females friends.


Thank you EVAN FOR THE LOVE OF GOD putting to some sense to this epeen debate. THERE ISNT ONE WAY TO LIVE YOUR DATING LIFE. even with in the dj bible there are several different ways go about things. What you do is keep trying things in your system that works for YOU. When you have something that works for you. you can have different women bed or you wait till you marry scan and test your dates as marriageable material. most men that get rape thru courts didnt pre scan there women to well to see if they were martial prospect probably went something likes this she pretty she screw me and she tell me what i want to hear all the time. ok lets get married then you get married she start putting on weight well obviously you didn't check to see if she exercise oops , now your living together and not having much sex maybe you should made sure she was attracted to you and not thing you do for her. Now she says hateful and rude things to you maybe should waited a lil bit to saw you both sides her personally there 3 sides to every person the good the bad and the ugly you need make sure you see all three before you make a lifelong commitment rant over.

 

[Zarky]

A male dominated, relatively monogomous culture (like the 1950's) is great for low value betas. They have the law and societal expectations and norms on their side, and a higher value woman is more likely to settle with a lower value man for financial security, start a family, etc.

A more equal (gender wise, but is still unquestionably male dominated), less monogomous culture like we have now is disastrous for low value men..

I'm a little late to this party but I'd opine that it's not that "low value men" were somehow propped up in the mid-20th century (and before), I'd say that the definitions of "low value" and "high value" have changed.

Now that women don't need men to support them, the solid-job trait is lower and the good-genes trait is higher. That is, the hot but poor guy back in 1955 was a low-value man. The unattractive but financially successful man was high-value.

Those values have now flipped.

Women want good genes (ie., "hot guys"). They no longer need as much of a financial provider. Therefore, guys who rely on traits that were high-value 50 years ago are getting the shaft because now those traits are no longer considered high-value.

The problem I've always had with the manosphere is that they seem to be trying to shift the culture back to what it was 50 years ago. That's not going to happen, at least not any time soon and certainly not as a result of their whiny blog posts. They have to change, and they either can't or won't.

Manospherians are basically guys that got the red pill stuck in their throats. The reason they only have ad hominem attacks is because they can't really argue with the logic: western culture has left them behind. Whether's that good or bad (it's certainly bad for them), it ain't gonna change. Either they can change or they will be left behind. That is all.

Bob: You can't chill with other men in an exclusive relationship.

I thought we went over this before, but AFAIK "boundary setting" is not about telling the other person what he/she can't do, it's about letting them know what you'll do in any given circumstance.

The only good way to set boundaries is to say something along the lines of: "You're free to do X, and here's what I will do if you do X." Boundary-setting is about your boundaries, not theirs. I never tell my plates what to do, I just let them know (and, better yet, show them) that their actions will have certain consequences.

If you ever find yourself telling your girl(s) what they "can" and "can't" do, you're doing it wrong. Trying to control someone else's behavior is what a beta does. Controlling your own behavior, that's what an alpha does.

 

[( . )( . )]

The problem I've always had with the manosphere is that they seem to be trying to shift the culture back to what it was 50 years ago.

western culture has left them behind.

lol @ snarky contributing to this pozzed thread, passing through pretending it's just another throwaway casual comment. Trying to stifle the excitement and sell yet again the story of those poor old squares who like just can't get with the times wowjustwow it's 2014 douchecanoe.

Yes yes zarky we are all well aware of your hatred for *GASP* ......TRADITION!!

Zarky's been pissing and moaning and trolling over the "evil manosphere" for years under various names and many many different sites. A lot of females post as men for the simple fact they know if they post as females they generally are laughed off the boards. That's not to say there aren't any chicks who can post decent stuff, there are quite a few red pill lite chicks (who post as chicks)
Zarky however is a different ball of wax. Her hatred toward men "looking under the hood" as Rollo puts it and men in general goes beyond the odd blow in chick who's pissed off about some home truth's, spews some blue pill feeelz crap and then fvcks off again. Zarky is commited, she's been doing this for years and she can fool quite a few of the noobs when she's in her " I'm just a dandy playa who sleeps on couches" mode. She always drops her guard though and shows her hand when the feeelz are too much. Basically it boils down to everything your average blue state dyke is angry/passionate about so is zarky. This is some of the stuff I've called her out on over the years:

* hates traditional gender roles

* concerned about the plight of LGBT community (she's eased back on this one thank fvck)

* hates the fictitious "patriarchy"

* hates traditional marriage

* loves tall women with short hair(and comfy shoes if you get my meaning)

* hates men who play video games

* hates "rednecks" (I guess "rednecks" are a symbol of the patweearchy)

* hates Christians (another symbol of the patweearchy)

* hates fox news (another you guessed it)

* drones on about polygamy laws

* a devout sh1tlib

* hates the manosphere

* hates the MRM/MGTOW's with a passion

Although I've been told jurry is actually zarky by a few people. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt, I got to say though if these two start bouncing their gyno-babble back at each other this sh!t is going to become painful to read. Picture these two retards trying to out "1950's baaaaad coz evil patweearchy" each other.

 

[jurry]

Danger, have a read.. Right on queue with our discussion: it seems to lend some support to your argument, and also that men and their lawyers are setting a precedent to push back against the "guilt by default" idea.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/n...l-assault-cases-counsel-for-the-accused.html?

You'll also see a study in there which says less than a third of the men found guilty of sexual assault on campus were expelled.

These are extremely difficult charges to prove or even find reliable info on, from what I see prosecutors only bother with cases that are totally cut and dry, a pretty small percentage.

 

[Evan]

This is a very common defense erected by apologists for a misandric system. It basically equates to the NAWALT argument, which is the platform for the "you are just bitter", "you don't get any" personal attacks or "smart men shouldn't have to worry".

I am not an apologist for anything. It's pretty simple. You have to take responsibility for yourself no matter what system is in front of you. No matter what situation you find yourself in. It's not the system to blame. It's yourself. You choose which situation to put yourself in. If you find yourself in a bad situation you take care of it. You don't whine about the system. The system is what it is. You can vote or do something about it but some things won't change no matter what you or others say about it. So all you can do is what you can and that's it.

First and foremost, the issue isn't about the women, it is about the misandric process. Changing the subject about women is just another way to dodge the issue. That it CAN and IS being used against men. That men, even with just an accusation, can be stripped of so much. It is a basic violation of human rights and the right to due process.

The system is what it is. Whether it is fair or not does not change the fact that you need to take responsibility for the situation you put yourself in. What are you doing to make the system fair instead of talking about it on a website? My guess is nothing. So if you find the system to be unfair why would you put yourself in position to be fvcked over? And if you get fvcked over your going to deal with it. Whining about it does nothing. Just like your boundary. Talking about it does nothing when the truth and reality presents itself.

You did not fail one bit in this process either. You took an obviously misandric process and blamed the men, saying they have to take responsibility for their lives, while defending the women saying "they aren't all like that".

Like I said the system doesn't make the man. The man decides which position he wants to put himself in. If something goes wrong he needs to take responsibility and take care of it. He decides what women he wants to let into his life and which ones he doesn't. Not all women are the same because not all women are fvcking over their man. Is that so hard to understand?

The point is Evan, NO MAN should have to go through that process in a society which claims to be "free" or where people are supposed to have the right to due process. Even the stupid men should have this same basic right. This inherent right is independent of how many women would exercise the misandric process itself.

Equality and justice is not determine by who WOULD abuse the system, but on whether the system itself is flawed.

What system isn't flawed? That doesn't mean that you need to be a victim of it. I'm not seeing a majority of men being hurt by the system. What I'm seeing is some men being unfairly treated by the system and guess what women are unfairly treated by the system too. You can either be a victim of the system or take responsibility for the situation you put yourself in. Learn from it and never have it happen again. Or since you find it to be so unfair what are you doing about it? I don't see much action besides talking about it on a website.

 

[jurry]

My thoughts as well evan.. For every case of a man getting screwed over we can find one of a woman getting screwed over too, the system is far from perfect. This doesnt make me an apologist or a feminist, it makes me a realist. I dont see anything to conclude that men are being systematically screwed over on a large scale any more than any other group. A DJ embraces the times and adapts, no excuses.

 

[VikingKing]

I am not an apologist for anything. It's pretty simple. You have to take responsibility for yourself no matter what system is in front of you. No matter what situation you find yourself in. It's not the system to blame. It's yourself. You choose which situation to put yourself in. If you find yourself in a bad situation you take care of it. You don't whine about the system. The system is what it is. You can vote or do something about it but some things won't change no matter what you or others say about it. So all you can do is what you can and that's it.



The system is what it is. Whether it is fair or not does not change the fact that you need to take responsibility for the situation you put yourself in. What are you doing to make the system fair instead of talking about it on a website? My guess is nothing. So if you find the system to be unfair why would you put yourself in position to be fvcked over? And if you get fvcked over your going to deal with it. Whining about it does nothing. Just like your boundary. Talking about it does nothing when the truth and reality presents itself.



Like I said the system doesn't make the man. The man decides which position he wants to put himself in. If something goes wrong he needs to take responsibility and take care of it. He decides what women he wants to let into his life and which ones he doesn't. Not all women are the same because not all women are fvcking over their man. Is that so hard to understand?



What system isn't flawed? That doesn't mean that you need to be a victim of it. I'm not seeing a majority of men being hurt by the system. What I'm seeing is some men being unfairly treated by the system and guess what women are unfairly treated by the system too. You can either be a victim of the system or take responsibility for the situation you put yourself in. Learn from it and never have it happen again. Or since you find it to be so unfair what are you doing about it? I don't see much action besides talking about it on a website.

You right evan A man is where he places himself. But most men are raised from childhood to look at women as good, pure, and innocent.

Now if we start teaching male children how women really are, and how the chips are stacked against you if your a male what do you think the result would be? How would society change if at least 80% of men were taught the red pill from a young age, instead of the liberal/ feminist trash they are taught?

Women would be ****ed if we taught male children the truth. They would be wishing that it was 1950 usa again.