There’s no such thing.
The left pity.
Yep, looking down.
There’s no such thing.
The left pity.
Yep, looking down.
You got it.
Then there are the ones who respond to sexy like a bitch in heat.
You know the two people you should call sexy? A stripper and your wife.
Why? It’s their JOB.
This applies to men as well, I find it really disrespectful when people drool over a man and call him sexy. It’s a person, not piece of meat. Is this a porn audition? No.
Life’s too short. I’ve heard those called relationshits. Rude but true.
Higher EQ, maybe listen.
Plenty of this is factually false like calling hook-ups “short term mating” to feel less like a manwhore, when that term refers to producing children, from a brief courtship, then abandonment and nothing else. Hence the mating part. It also assumes a man can understand women when you’d never see this article written the other way around, women are too sensitive to be that obnoxious. However, the physical risk is medical and true. Anyway, the fact it exists shows up a huge problem men used to understand: modern men lack empathy. They’re broken on it, defective in feeling and displaying it. They don’t even care for their country, family, one another or themselves. There’s a general callousness. It doesn’t come from women.
Minor note: Scientific misogyny is actually worse, because it deceives (everyone). Using big words and bluffing the findings won’t make you right. We still don’t live in that world. Anyone saying it’s easy doesn’t understand.
Women don’t really discuss their everyday problems because they are so common.
Either we expect to get disbelieved, told we should adopt male feelings (we’re not gay and that’s actually a good category argument for mansplaining) or the ever-present fear of harm. Not just physical harm but reputation damage (men gossip and it is vindictive), emotional harm from insults because broflake throws a mantrum and can’t handle rejection, those sort of things.
Confidence isn’t what they want, they want to act conceited and have everyone roll out the red carpet for their entitled ass. It doesn’t happen, narcissistic rage does. Do you want to be on the receiving end of that, for the crime of having a nice ass?
If it’s so scary to talk to the opposite sex (no), you wouldn’t do it. Nobody is forcing you. That’s your gender role and your personal expectations, nothing to do with women. Don’t blame us. We don’t want strangers coming up to us, and in my culture it used to be partially illegal and socially deeply frowned upon. Edwardian women used to be able to beat men with umbrellas for insulting our dignity, there was one newspaper clipping, and they’d frequently wear those gigantic hat pins to stab men on the Transport who got too fruity. Self-defence, legal as a gun should be.
The expectation women should think like men and men are objectively correct on the wholly subjective subject of feelings (not to mention another autonomous human being’s, the definition of possessive) is the reason a lot of those dating guru types are forever alone. Not just single but actively repellent. It’s gaslighting, like the friendzone fraud who keep trying to repeat until she gives in: you want me, I’m best for you, you’ll never do better. Well, that’s her decision and considering you only want her body, you’re averse to putting a ring on it and all you wanna do is bad things to it, you are totally wrong on all counts.
Women don’t work like that.
Again, I have to painstakingly explain this every time the subject of women comes up, you cannot ask a man how women think and assume he’s correct, you can’t even do that with a single woman, there’s a range of normal. Anecdotal fallacy, please stop.
Women don’t work like that.
They are not the same.
This is good, this is fine, this is biological.
Yet the idiots claim women are just as lustful as men, if not more (ignore the rarity of male hookers) and cannot be trusted (look at abuse and crime stats, just look).
With exceptional cognitive dissonance, they go on to say women are aliens and need to be treated in various subhuman ways because it isn’t abuse if they secretly like it, according to the abuser?
On a purely intellectual and logical basis, they are full of shit.
That’s the mindset and behaviour of a misogynist (and yes, the sexes reverse).
Simplest explanation? Occam’s Razor?
The men who are bad with women never consider the fact the entire sex is seeing them clearly and they are in fact bad. Bad prospects, bad at being men and bad suitors. We evolved for this, we evolved to spot this and swerve. All that shit you complain about, the coldness to a total stranger, lying about having a boyfriend, fake numbers and names, the flaking, it’s to get enough distance so by the time the rejection kicks in you can’t kick us. This is good and sensible and right, you’re a spoiled entitled brat if you expect random women to just trust you, randomly. Trust takes years to develop. Instead they say whatever’s convenient to their feelings (actually ego, they don’t really have feelings that aren’t self involved), because the probability of getting punched by a man you rejected (it happens) is totally the same as hearing a word you needed to hear a long time ago and will never take for an answer.
If you don’t respect no, you’ll never hear a real Yes.
This is your fault, as instigator and then disrespecting the etiquette involved in trying to chat someone up.
In an era of acid attacks for rejection and shootings for pathetic scum like Elliot, women are right to avoid men until further notice. Nobody is entitled to approval. Nobody is entitled to respect, but in public, there is a line, there is a wall everybody deserves to be respected, the perimeter of personal space.
Women approaching other women in public is weird and even that isn’t sexual. We made it illegal for charity workers to harass us in public so no, Nice Guy act won’t work.
Women are not like porn. Porn stars themselves need to be paid to act like that. Even they aren’t like that. You’d think this is obvious, but no.
They never treat men like dirt by the way, because they know they’d get hit if they talked all that shit.
If women catch onto this intellectually, there’s apparently something wrong with us.
Nope, you all look dumb, and it’s nothing to do with us. Stop acting black and pull your pants up.
They never mention all those workplace deaths are typically hubris.
Better known as vainglory.
Look at the long term mate choice studies.
What do women want? Empathy. (Search terms conscientiousness and agreeableness, yes, ALL women, huge studies).
What do you refuse to develop? Empathy. You have only yourselves to blame and no, a ‘condition’ doesn’t change the facts. You can develop coping mechanisms to be considerate, you just don’t want to, you don’t see the point. Aspergers for example, is about as bad as sociopathy. We don’t have to sign up for that. You are not a child to mind. You need the basics down.
What do people have in scant amounts for you? Empathy. They can sense you don’t give a shit about them so why bother? It’s the golden rule, not that you’re smart enough to see the flipside, making rape jokes and wondering why nobody trusts you don’t spike your drinks.
Update: See this guy?
Don’t be this guy. The one pretending a creepy man is just being ‘nice’.
Why are the dumbest men so cocky? What are you feeding them America?
The one completely missing the point that stalkers can and do rape and kill. A gay man should’ve asked for comparison.
Which causes more damage in society, the errant pen or the stupid penis?
It can also cause aggression.
Oxytocin, huh. Well, logically neurohormones are the reason asking for tolerance for generations has caused backlash.
People aggressing on behalf of others has been widely researched, but Buffone and Poulin say “the idea that empathy can drive aggression absent of provocation or injustice is quite novel.”
Aggressive activists. Nope, never heard of it.
Fun fact: many conditions characterized by lack of empathy e.g. autism, narcissism/histrionic or borderline, will claim to be more empathetic than other people. They have higher personal emotionality and instability, then assume this makes them superior, because obviously, their emotions > everyone else (what you might recognize as low empathy mindset).
You can’t justify violence. No, not even against baby Hitler. You’re still an abuser. It goes to show how violent they are that they’d rather slaughter a baby than teach it (nurture hypothesis) or prevent its conception.
Damage to this?
Bye bye empathy.
It’s a coping tactic, it’s their catharsis.
Punching down, in effect.
“I’m the Real Victim Here“ TM.
They don’t want to learn to connect any other way.
It would be more obvious with physical violence. The parent or teacher who says I don’t care who started it is being unjust. The problem will recur because the instigator is not fingered.