In a bizarre diatribe, Jessica Valenti, The Guardian‘s favorite click-bait columnist, claims that vaguely described “misogyny” is behind young women killing themselves. Stretching the truth and the statistics behind it to the fifth dimension, Valenti ignores the fact that male suicide is higher than female suicide in every country in the world, baring China and a few others.
In the United States, the hegemonic superpower and “patriarchy capital,” men kill themselves 3-10 times more than women [1] [2]. None of this features in Valenti’s poor excuse for an article. Money must be tight in her household at the moment.
Valenti utilizes a deliberately misleading juxtaposition of statistics to make her “point” that women are purportedly under sustained male attack, such as this gem:
The report found that suicides are responsible for half of all violent deaths in men and 71% of violent deaths in women.
Because men in the US are thrice as likely to be murdered as women, and more likely to die in automobile accidents or on the job, the percentage of women who die via suicide as represented against all other “unnatural” female deaths is, of course, going to be higher. But these are irrelevant tidbits to Valenti, which distract from her major premise: women, women, women. It is manifest that Valenti has never taken higher mathematics, let alone basic statistics, at either a high school or college level, or at least she flunked it.
The use of “violent” is employed by Valenti to underscore something else: the “patriarchy” that she wants to attack is committed to violence against women, including suicide. So when a woman kills herself, Valenti is adamant that this is somehow male violence in action against women.
In poorer countries, where most people live in abject poverty, men still kill themselves in higher rates than women. The gender gap is narrower than in the West but Valenti is reticent to admit that maybe, just maybe, never having food on the table, or the otherwise bleak material prospects for life, might be a reason for a woman (or man) to tragically kill themselves in the Third World. But no, it just has to be sexism for Valenti.
Every statistic disproves Valenti’s self-serving and cruel focus
How appropriate considering the topic
The top ten countries in terms of suicide rates, including both genders, are Lithuania, South Korea, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, Japan, Hungary, Latvia, Ukraine and Finland [1] [2]. In every single one of those, the male suicide rate is markedly higher. Amongst this list, Lithuania, the tragic “gold medalist,” also has the highest male-to-female suicide ratio: 13:2. Japan, placed sixth overall, has the lowest gender ratio, which still means men kill themselves at nearly twice the rate of women.
If women are so institutionally oppressed, why do men kill themselves more in every country aside from China and perhaps a handful of others? Even in China, the gender ratio is balanced enough that sizeable numbers of men are still killing themselves relative to women. With 40% more women killing themselves in the world’s most populous nation, this ratio is still much smaller than male-dominated ratios in the vast majority of the world’s nations.
And having around 40% of suicides coming from Chinese men remains a very high watermark, given the so-called patriarchy existing there. Life mustn’t be so great for many Chinese males if they chose to end their lives in close to equal numbers as women.
Why do more men in the “Patriarchy” kill themselves?
Because, in a nutshell, the patriarchy as described by Valenti and her contemporaries simply does not exist. It is a fairytale construct, under which homeless men (men experience homelessness more than women), male suicide victims, male victims of violence and other down-and-out cases band together with the 1% of Wall Street CEOs, politicians, and other elites, and all men in between these classes, to systematically oppress women. It seems that the proverbial garbage collector, raised in a food stamp-using trailer park in the Everglades, has infinitely more privilege than Jessica Valenti.
What’s more is that Valenti is just playing a feminist version of a frame game. If you assume these “superstructures” of patriarchal oppression permeate every aspect of society and that they resist and attempt to sabotage your every move, you can claim misogyny about female suicide, even if men end their own lives, on average, many times more often.
Any unhelpful (read: full-picture) statistics you come across, such as those proving higher rates of male suicide in a system feminists falsely believe is designed to elevate male interests above all others, can be swatted away with a combination of confirmation bias and political dyslexia.
Welcome her unrestrained mouth
Young guys like Everybody Loves Raymond’s Sawyer Sweeten commit suicide in far greater numbers than young women
Just as the one-in-five college “rape” statistic has been blown out of the water, and been avoided since by Barack Obama and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, among others, this female suicide rant by Valenti comes across as what it is: pseudo-sociological posturing. Guardian readers, not known for their red pill or close to common sense outlook, nonetheless pilloried Valenti’s laughable attempts to pass off suicide as a patriarchal conspiracy theory.
The internet allows the Jessica Valentis of the world to both stir up hate and drivel en masse, but additionally enables them to be held accountable. The more words she writes online, the harder and faster her ideology comes undone. We should – and must – welcome the free rein afforded to her writing. As unpleasant as this article was, and the total disrespect and pathological lack of empathy it showed to men who have lost all hope, it provides yet another reference to use against her and those of her persuasion.
Read More: The Guardian Is Enabling Jessica Valenti’s Descent Into Clinical Madness
Even assuming this is true, the benefits of patriarchy would still be worth the tradeoff
The last thing any society should do is “put girls at the center of public policy”
Besides, consider the source: She quotes one Suzanne Petroni, a doctor in “Gender and Social Policy” whose expertise includes “Reproductive Health and Rights, Adolescents, Gender and Population”
i.e. Activist eater wedded to the equality myth. Her work is rendered illegitimate on those grounds alone
I worked in mental health for years and dealt with people with suicide risks and people who eventually committed suicide. From my experience very few ladies came in threatening or exhibiting suicidal tendencies because of sexism. Most were a result of personal relationships with parents, husband or family. You would get the odd incompetent one who was sacked for spending time on Facebook and Instagram and then blamed it on sexism. In a nut shell this is a difficult subject to draw any conclusions on. Even the higher rates of male suicides are not as clear cut as they look because men are more likely to succeed than women in an attempt to take their life. However when looking at suicide attempts (not actual success) from my experience these appear to be equal. One might argue that with women it’s really not attempted suicide but a cry for help and so on. Unless we raise the dead and ask them why they committed suicide making blanket assumptions and then pinning them on gender inequality is a distasteful way of furthering the feminist cause.
Going through Valentini’s articles it appears that her remit is generate that sort of article. I don’t read the Guardian or any newspaper for that matter. They are all full of opinion pieces about subjects that the reporters know nothing about and worse still poorly researched and a bias towards which ever wing the newspaper leans. If I wanted a report on suicide and causes she will be the last person I ask let alone listen to.
I think that some of the women attempting suicide, are doing it for attention.
That is absolutely true. In masters level psychology, the male at risk community are actually called Completors, whereas the female at risk community are called Attemptors. It is widely known that men attempt to commit suicide as means to end their lives, whereas women use it as means to garner more attention.
Some. 😀 Thank you for the use of this word.
How about ” some women”?
What about them? They have enough organisations and people to give them a hug, and tell them it’s alright and blame everyone else. And legislate the hell out of the rest of us.
This is a site and forum for the betterment of men’s lives and concerns in the face of a wide spanning worldwide society that not acting in our best interests. Cry somewhere else.
No, you misinterpreted my comment. I meant not to say all men or women.
The misinterpretation was due to the lack of clarity in your writing
“I BATHE IN MALE TEARS”?
Yeah, any man stupid enough to bang her or (God fucking help them!) date her SHOULD be crying his eyes out, as a matter of fact! I wonder how many day after regret-related false rape accusations she has collected for herself thus far?
Ppl need to stop freaking out over that pic
it’s typical teen girl behavior to taunt people that scare them, don’t give it so much press
Instead of reacting to the taunts, embrace ideological inequality and watch their fear turn fully visible
Absolutely. Take every opportunity to uphold the virtues of inequality and unequal outcomes. And proudly smile and shirk off their ‘-ophobe!” attacks.
Precisely. The guys on this site need to stop whining about “0mg i cant
believe the feministz are saying that about men!” “i bet if it wuz da
other way around der wood be outrage! omgggg cant they see they’re
hypocrites!”
1. They don’t give a shit if they make sense or not,
as a matter of fact when they think there might be an error they’ll
just rationalize it away because they know at best men will just whine about it. They only care about using whatever is at their
disposal to further their agenda.
2. As long as the general
attitude on this site remains a whiny “why can’ they just be logical?” ,
the left will continue to trample everyone as they’ve been doing and
men will continue to whine all day on internet message boards.
Time for an intervention:
Exactly my sentiments, being mad at women for being women is like getting angry at a fish for swimming. I hate to say it but there is a significant amount of female hatred and constant complaining from the commenters here. There’s no point crying over spilled milk….adapt or die
As much as I agree with you on that the hate needs to stop I still feel men need to voice their dissatisfaction. If we do not then 10 years down the line don’t complain when you find that there are laws preventing men from voting and doing certain things. I wouldn’t mind if women just complained but they don’t just complain. They get the laws changed in their favour and the court system gives them free passes whilst we sit there doing nothing saying we shouldn’t be like them. A girlfriend said to me once, “why aren’t you men fighting for what you believe in? Women get what they want cause they fight for it.”
It might more accurate to state that women get what they desire because a considerable number of weak males simply give in to their irrational demands rather than simply stating a single word: No.
A more accurate statement is that a considerable number of weak people give in.
You have cut to the chase with this statement. I applaud you.
Inequality is ideal?
I thought this was a site trying to gain equality for men.
The funny thing is that girls like her like to get really manhandled like a rag doll in the sack and game for anything short of a Dubai porta potty. They project their slut remorse in the form of hating men. That’s your typical feminist right there.
Yeah, in my experience alot of women that hated men were Subs in bed…demanding to be completely dominated
Subs?
Imagine the backlash you’d get if you wore a shirt with
“I bathe in vaginal secretions”?
Who the fuck would want to? Hah.
Also not taken into account is the “other way” a lot of men are killing themselves.
Oh, you need not have to end your life to “kill yourself”.
Men who have given up on society, who will never fill their human potential, who will never have a life.
All because of cunts who removed all motivation to have potential and turned life and love into liabilities and gotcha games.
I think that cuntist… excuse me… typist is running pure deflection. SHE and women like her and their feminist movement is a huge reason behind men killing themselves. Even veterans. Think about it. Veterans are killing themselves every day. But it’s not like we never had war before. Why is this different?
We need only compare the quality of the women and family life then as it is now. Yes, working for evil is no help either, admittedly. But the second world war had a lot of men seeing a lot of horrible shit. You’d think there would have been more suicide, right?
Thing is, the “killing yourself without killing yourself” existence that men are reduced to (hence the gamergate situation as most of these young men have withdrawn into video games and the cuntocrats won’t even leave those guys alone) is an open door to real suicide because when all is said and done, what is there to live for? What is there to fight for? What is there to work hard for? Can you blame them?
And who made it this way? Never stop asking that question.
These people behind it, from the newsroom editor to the typists to the academics to the politicians need to end up on the dock when Nuremburg 2 comes. They did this on purpose and it’s only a matter of time before enough arm twisting of just one of them who wants to plea out of trial yields the messages they sent to each other, their documents, their own notes.
Nuremberg 2 with Doktor Jeep as John C. Woods Jr.!
I pretty much agree but I dont think the blame ends with feminists. I blame the sheister lawyers that have made it impossible for a balanced system in academics where the p.c thought fascists exist and thrive and anyone that thinks otherwise is right up there with Hitler. Its the lawyers that saw a quick buck in protecting someones hurt feelings and then the schools and workplace had to cover their ass legally by embracing p.c dogma and thought patrol fascism. You can pretty much blame lawyers for all the other shit we find ourselves in. Genaral freedoms we used to have 30 years ago are a thing of the past because they saw they could make a lot of money if some idiot hurt themselves not using common sense. They hijacked our legislature and government with armies of lawyer carear lobbyists. They crept their ways into Wall Street making the highway robbery they’ve been doing pretty much immune to due process. Lawyers.
The blame also lands on those who allow these cretins to produce such filth.
Those who can stand and fight that do not.
“Veterans are killing themselves every day. But it’s not like we never had war before. Why is this different?
We need only compare the quality of the women and family life then as it is now.”
It’s sad when you think about it (and compare it) to wars of the past. Soldiers, today, go off to fight in a war (a few tours) to come back to divorce papers, a family broken apart and a wife who has run off with another man. Yes, while the soldier was off fighting for his country, his life, his family, etc…his family was falling apart at home. The difference has to be the commitment now versus back when (say with Vietnam).
Many men went over there on a couple of tours. Vietnam was another long war. Sure, you may have had divorces but not like what we are seeing, today. The men come back and wonder “was it all worth it in the end?”.
The answer (they are finding) is no. The women (were they worth it)…the answer is no. Sad but a reality, today.
I had no idea who da hell Jessica Valenti was so I googled image her name. My God! she is f-ugly. Just another nobody who is barking like a dog.
Thanks for taking a bullet for the team, brother.
What a website!
But you still want to rape her right?
Women are far more sexually predatory than men, but the current perception is only men are. There is a fuking epidemic of woman having sex with children.
Like this shit:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ariz-grand-jury-won-indict-woman-bar-mitzvah-sex-act-article-1.2245618
This is another thing that fucking pisses me off.
Feminists won’t talk about the sheer number of mothers who molest their sons and their daughters.
The so-called gentle, delicate sex is also entirely capable of the most repellent crimes against children they carried in their bodies for nine months.
There are anecdotal reports from psychologists and social workers who see these kids that this number is under reported by the child, because a mother raping her kid is so unnatural, even to a five year old, that they shift the blame off the mother and onto guess who?
Dads or uncles or family friends.
Not because the child has been told to lie, though they may have been, but it increasingly appears as though the real reason is because they’re unable to process the concept that their mothers would hurt them in such a way.
These people need the death penalty, not slaps on the fucking wrist.
In my country, there was a recent case of a single mother forcing her daughters to sell their bodies for nothing more but a few bucks and a few packs of cigarettes. She did so for years, apparently everybody knew, even the social services, but they all kept it under the rug.
A lot of women are deeply sick, and this is yet another way in which they show their mental illness. I’m very glad I had a strong father to offset my mother’s own mental illness.
There was no custody agreement per se when they divorced, but it was made plain to my mother that my father would be taking care of me and my brothers. I consider my father and my grandmother as the people who raised me.
What’s your country?
I’m from Croatia
“But you still want to rape her right?”
?????
Where did you come up with that?
Sarcasm, bro.
All men are potential rapists bro, you should know that.(sarcasm)
Pedophilia is only bad when men do it according to feminists. The worst type of pedophile is a man who has sex with young girls. But a woman who has sex with young girls is a lesbian feminist hero. Just look at how the left treats Lena Dunham verses Josh Duggar.
When a female teacher has sex with teen boys than it’s considered lucky for the boy but when a male teacher has sex with a teen girl it’s rape. This despite the real fact that teens girls are often giant sluts that try to seduce their male teachers and not the other way around.
Thanks, cos’ I didn’t know people thought that any kind of rape is good. No rape and/or molesting is acceptable.
Ms Jessica Valenti is a shameless liar. She is destroying the lives of innocent men and boys of this world, by propagandizing and brainwashing the general public through her corrupt, illogical & derogative internet articles, media, blogs, social media accounts, statistics, and so on.
She has published media resources JUSTIFYING false accusations of rapes, sexual harassments, etc, against innocent men & boys; JUSTIFYING the hatred of ALL men & boys of this world, for just being born male; JUSTIFYING banning of male-only groups and networking resources at colleges & universities, while RETAINING the female-only ones, and so many more misandric, anti-human, anti-male & barbaric stuff, that even liberals, equity feminists & ”sane” general people would be surely horrified & shocked by reading or viewing them (provided that they’ve not been brainwashed by elite media propaganda that much).
I mean, there are also men like Dan Abrams (author of Man Down; founder of several media groups, law firms & internet websites), David Futrelle (founder & owner of We Hunted The Mammoth), Derek Thomson (staff writer at The Atlantic), etc, who think & agree with anti-male women like Ms Jessica Valenti, Ms Lindy West, Ms Hannah Rosin, Ms Sheryl Sandberg, Ms Maureen Dowd, & so on.
I don’t exactly know WHY are these people so hell-bent on destroying the lives & resources of innocent men & boys of this world, most of whom have done NOTHING WRONG.
You friggin’ rocked that post.
because the western education system teaches people they’re entitled to equality outside of legal rights, and worse, confuse that equality with fairness
hence Death to Equality Worldwide
what the shit are you talking about?
Oh, I know why. It’s to intimidate other men into not questioning their political agenda. What you need to realize is that feminism basically works the same way as religion. Religions hate people who ask hard questions. Feminists are trying to engineer a new social meme to replace traditional Western society. Like all meme creators, they design the meme so that the primary beneficiaries are themselves. What feminists ultimately want, is this:
1. A welfare state: Throughout human history, women have never been creators or providers. This role has always fallen on the man. In a socialist society the greatest producers (men) are forced by law to distribute their resources to the lowest producers (women). The ancient Greeks knew how women were, and wrote a comedy called “Women in Parliament” where women took over the government and established a form of communism.
2. Destruction of marriage: In other words, a society where low-status women can gain access to high quality male DNA. In a traditional society, the top men and women form a pair-bond that’s protected by marriage. Their offspring tend to be of the highest quality. Low-quality women are forced to pair-bond with low-quality men, much to the consternation of these ugly women.
The traditional way women have evolved to handle this problem is through cuckoldry, but that often came with some steep punishments when caught. Thus, the ugly feminist benefits most by attacking marriage in general. Ideal to the feminist is a world where she has unrestricted access to a buffet of alpha sperm, which would improve the genetic quality of her children, and thus boost her genes’ chances of survival. Her shit genes are improved by the alpha’s genes. However, her chances of keeping an alpha long-term are non-existent, so she must rely on encouraging the acceptance of promiscuous sex. This is also why feminists are anti-slut-shaming and advocate for “acceptance” of single mothers.
Women can still shamelessly take this reproductive strategy, but the problem has always been finding a provider. After all, no man wants to raise other men’s bastard spawn. Such would be genetic suicide. Thus, why the welfare state is an important pillar of feminism. After she collects high-quality sperm from a variety of quality males, she has the wages of low-quality men garnished and redistributed to her children. Effectively, it’s a form of feudalism where women benefit at the expense of most men. Feminism is basically a genetic survival strategy designed by and for ugly women. Thus why it usually appeals to those types.
Women tend to become conservative AFTER they get married and have children, because they don’t want their husband’s paycheck garnished and given to another woman. However, for young single women, a feminist society is the most beneficial from a reproductive standpoint. The people who lose most in a feminist society is the bottom 80% of men. The people who win most are the top 20% of men, which is probably why there’s such a strong “alpha” movement in the manosphere. If you’re a single man your options in a feminist world are “alpha or extinct.”
The men who support feminism are either brainwashed “useful idiots,” or think by pandering to women it will get them pussy. They’re willing to sell out their entire gender for reproductive opportunities. Feminism only exists because they exist. These “male feminist” enablers are enemy #1.
Great comment
Huh.
addendum:
(1) shit women, or just shit in general, don’t know what high-quality is. that’s their fantasy: that they can fail at the world over, and yet have the discriminating eye to know what good is and what good isn’t. alpha-loosers and alpha-kings look the same to them. that they don’t know -and- think that they do know best is what is consistent with their hubris.
(2) genetic survival, or just survival period? don’t give credit here either; the horrid selfish excessive pride of failures is the necessary think-feels to get them through their day: it is the necessary think-feels for them to survive. but this doesn’t mean they can affect genetic survival, much less even think of any ‘lineage’ terms at all. serving a genetic survival would not be consistent with serving their ‘individualism’ horridness. it is, in fact, the opposite of what they actually do: they consume children, they don’t make kings. how can they, when they not only are not, but by selfishness choice, avert any possibility of being?
feminism is indeed resource survival ‘strategy’ of emotional feel-bestness, which has no point of actual genetic end-game, no point of testable verifiable high-quality, no point period. feminism is only a strategy like the screaming of blind deaf quadriplegics is a strategy: just to eat, nothing more. and only eat for their selfish selves, at the deliberate expense of all of existence, which, despite their think-feels, absolutely includes their own.
no survival, while think-feeling themselves the most survival-est.
Over 80% of suicides are by men worldwide. The media is solely owned by our government which funds feminism. Men are incarcerated for any and everything while the women run free. Remember :”Feminism is theory, lesbianism is practice” & “Feminism, Socialism, and Communism are one in the same, and Socialist/Communist government is the goal of feminism”. To wonder why she is put in position of delayed power is kind of rhetorical. We all know the true reason behind all of these lies. To keep mens desparity as nothingness.
She’s just a miserable human being bro, and her “articles” reek of hatred, misandry, and narcissism. That’s an indication of how unhappy she is deep down. As for those “men” who go as far as spreading hatred for their own gender just for female approval, have some deep seated mommy issues. Maybe their mothers denied them love, and gave them a pat on the head, when they submitted to her will. That’s what they unconsciously seek from other women. They will go out of their way to get female approval, even if it means hating the entire male gender. However, in doing this, they show females that they do not respect themselves. And that’s why women do not find them attractive. They have not evolved to respect weak men, men who do not respect themselves. These men get filtered when women screen the best mating partners. She goes for the alpha male and these men, are reduced to the lower status males, who are just useful idiots to a woman.
It seems more and more like women’s sole biological role is reproduction with alpha males. If they cant get this, they lose it and try so hard to blame it all on men. Women like her are just venting their frustration over their low status in the sexual market. She married a beta and its literally driving her crazy. What kind of man marries a woman that devotes her life to bashing men?
biological? alpha-male? superfluous injection of point into those that have none. don’t blur the lines between your existence and theirs.
women’s sole role is cunt, with any thing they can stick into their cunts, with any thing that can give their shit more free shit, and maybe eventually pop something out of their cunts – for the sole only purpose of giving only them more free validation shit.
that they think of getting their cunts stuffed doesn’t mean they know what alpha actually is, nor more so that they think of babies means they know what reproduction actually is. that they vent frustration, screaming like righteous terrible toddlers, by stuffing both their cunts with anything they can find, is just their sole role carried out in all it’s ugliness. that men give the worst of them anything at all, is stupid.
let them go crazy. let them think-feel biological, let them think-feel alpha-male, let them scream and go cunty-cunt stuffing. but don’t confuse your existence, which seeks point, with their pointless existence, which seeks nothing but stuffing their ugly faces. trade your existence well, less you be that stupid fuck ‘husband’ of this witch.
Gasp.
Wait, you are telling me somebody actually married her? What sort of loser marries women like her? Does he have no self-respect?
FYI, I am an asexual scholarly feminist. I voted down on your comment.
Destroying innocent men & boys? Didn’t you get the memo from the femmies? Anyone with a penis is a potential cis privilieged shitlord. It’s called taking Preventive Action. It’s on page 217 of the Playing The Victim Card manual (edition 2014).
You guys do a pretty good job of playing the victim yourselves.
Hardly. Identification of a situation doesn’t imply obsequiosness to it’s variables.
But it appears the act of formulating something close to analytical thinking is too hard for you based on the trail of empty one liners you’ve consistently mad to several other posters 😀
A true patriarchy is one which the animal kingdom tends to exemplify as a majority standard, aka survival of the fittest. (Commonly attributed to Darwin but actually coined by Spencer)
When adapted to an organism with a propensity for higher thought and consequential discourse, the term itself evolves to include: “survival of the biggest, brightest, strongest”
This is why deep in the darkest reaches of the female hamster brain, their primitive instincts compel them to mate with the biggest (the athletes for good genes) the brightest (the wealthy for good living) and strongest (the Alpha Men for good protection) in order to ensure their litter is part of the apex standard of the society. Subconsciously they seek this, even if consciously they don’t understand why or disagree that they do.
A few decades of counter intuitive corrosive feminist philosophy can only successfully but superficially undo what thousands of years of human anthropological development has helped make the template standard for the human female.
What we are living in now is NOT a patriarchy, but rather a matriarchy.
The society we find ourselves in collectively embodies what a typical female represents: mediocrity, conformism, collectivism.
If the animal kingdom reflected the matriarchy of humans as a majority standard, there would be a lot more retarded and extinct animals, as animals would generally mate only with their same sex, only when the female allowed, and only when the rest of the relevant animal kingdom gave approval.
In the animal kingdom, only the fittest Alpha male gets to mate with the choice female, and usually only after successfully scaring/fighting off the betas. While there are different courtship rituals depending on the animal in question, this is the majority standard. Despite the existence of the matriarchy, this patriarchy standard will always be in effect because it is an immutable standard of life that even the so called human civilization cannot detach its primitive basic instincts from, nor should it endeavor to do so. Males are strong and females nurturing, therefore Men lead and Women follow along with the progeny.
In just such an emasculated society, it is little wonder then why the former architects of society are now reduced to being considered nothing more than beasts of burden.
The farmer has become the farmed, and the farm itself has fallen into ruin. The female ass is in charge of the yoke.
It is even less of a wonder that some males resort to the extreme measure of taking their own lives, as their “purple pill” transition from blue to red cannot do so successfully, due to their inability to understand the reason for the current circumstances of life they find themselves living under. (not in)
Male suicides that involve a female catalyst are examples of males who have lived their lives under the yoke of feminism but are no longer content to remain beta slaves or white knight guards. They may react as females do when angered with a revelation of painful truth: they may lash out violently, against themselves and others. There are examples of this, and more appear every year.
Again, this explains why males kill themselves more than females, at least when females are directly involved. A female will “attempt” to kill herself but the act itself (like so much of their lives) is usually based on a desired sociological result: sympathy from friends/family/society at large. A male who is genuinely depressed to the point of suicide, speaking much to his nature, will likely fulfill his desire to lead his life to an unnatural conclusion.
This would again differ from a supposedly suicidal female, who tends to do no more than follow in her feelings in order to evoke sympathy from others, including Men.
Valenti is a product of the matriarchy, hence her inability to comprehend anything beyond her emo instinctual, estrogen influenced solipsist response system.
She is, to put it mildly, an idiot of cosmic proportions.
Man: cogito ergo sum.
Female: sentio ergo sum tersus
How can I delete my account? I feel pretty bad about cussing at meninists even if it is truly what I believe is wrong, since it is actually more based off of misogyny than feminism is off of misandry. Most feminists are not extremist man-haters and actually would be glad to win not yet won rights for men too.
First of all, if you don’t want to post here then don’t post. Simple, isn’t it?
Second, Your comparative remarks about meninists and feminists with regard to their perspective viewpoints is nothing short of solipsism. Simply put, you see bias in a philosophy (inappropriately labeled, no less) that you disagree with and not in one in which you intentionally subscribe to.
Third, your final remark fails to take into account the true agenda of those calling themselves feminists and those falling under the umbrella of feminism itself.
They don’t want equal rights for Men, they want superior rights for Women, even if some don’t actually “hate” Men. Your point there is fundamentally flawed, as with the rest of the drivel you chose to litter this site with.
The narcissism (and misandry) in your philosophy is well documented in the lunatic ramblings of Naomi Wolf and Gloria Steinem, for instance.
You know what, Daniel? My philosophy does not involve narcissism and misandry and your conclusions are all wrong. Nice try; that’s what I would think if I were you. I really should leave and go vent somewhere else, right? Please reply; I want to see what you think. Then I will leave. My business is done here. The “true agenda” varies for all individual activists. You think you know what I think on this subject but you have it nearly completely wrong. Know that and change your views on my agenda, as it is my own and different from everyone else’s.
(I think this website is drivel.)
DOES meninism involve misogyny? I see, it differs for different meninists and I am sorry for my blunder and this whole website was also like me in that area but reversed.
“my conclusions are all wrong”
Says the person who can supply no evidence to support her solipsist belief:)
You may not consciously believe that you are opposing the rights of Men, but if you were as versed in your philosophy as you think you are, you would already realize that it invariably supports special rights for females which inevitably put them in conflict with the rights of Men, for ex: fabricated abortion rights which nullify the 14th amendment rights of Men.
What question do you want me to reply to? Please post it here.
When you can prove that the fundamental belief (and consequential prevailing action) of feminism is true equality for both sexes, then i will be more receptive to your perspective.
Until then your remarks amount to nothing more than ipse dixit solipsist expectorations.
Meninism is not what ROK supports in its charter. Indeed, we need not claim any colloquial terms in order to intellectually express our beliefs that our rights are being sabotaged by the feminist agenda.
We are therefore not an MRA site, we are simply a collection of alpha Males with differing viewpoints who nonetheless agree on our belief that feminism is to be opposed and exposed as the corrosive anti male philosophy females subscribe to intentionally and subconsciously support.
Why do you always capitalize the word men? Just wondering. I’ve noticed.
One of the points in the definition of meninism is being against feminism.
You should now tell me your definition of meninism. (and the real one)
Could you also pay attention to this comment right here? Please reply to the above question right here. Well, in response to the above.
The second paragraph is also invalid. Do you not yet get that I am not trying to say I am a solipsist?
I am not a solipsist.
Because, indeed, I do acknowledge that there are solipsistic feminists and am trying to prove that I am not one of them.
I define myself as a feminist because I am against motherfucking( I hate to an extreme point ) binary gender roles and stand for equality between men and women, especially where it is a major concern, like places where they practice female circumcision, trafficking, and don’t even allow them to drive or go to school. This does not mean I hate men. I like to think of them as any other person and would not like to think of any of them as being my enemies. I have done some research on what feminism is now, and apparently, most feminists are radical feminists, so I was thinking it would better to redefine myself as a humanist instead, now that feminism is redefined as advocating female supremacy, which I do not support.
If I am still a feminist, then I will clearly identify myself as wanting equality rather than female supremacy.
I have my own set of ideals.
This is what I want you to know now: I have the ideals that:”the fundamental belief (and consequential prevailing action) of feminism is true equality for both sexes”. That is what I am, then.
Wipe that grin off your face before I slap it off.
“:)”
I mean, edit it out.
For the same reason i capitalize the Word “Woman.”
We share a similar belief in that regard but that does not therefore make us exactly the same.
LOl.
Yes of course you’re not. Ipse dixit remarks are always incontrovertible 😀
You may be against it, but your resistance amounts to nothing more than swimming against a maelstrom (if you will pardon the pun) given that the animal kingdom itself exhibits the raw power and ruthless efficiency of a patriarchy. We may be “civilized” animals but our anthropological instincts still remain in us, which is why Men are effective at hunting (as a majority standard) and Women are effecting at nurturing. (as a majority standard)
Tersely put, your belief in “equality” can never truly come about naturally, because males and females are designed differently, behave differently (as a majority standard) and therefore take different means to achieve their ends. Any attempt to do so is Orwellian by effect.
For example: how do you naturally make physical strength equitable among both genders? You can’t, unless you make artificial attempts to do so. Males are (again as a majority standard) stronger than females, so any attempt to make females equal in that regard is ultimately futile, and only serves to lower the quality standard of employment positions which require strength (and the tenacity its tethered to) as a prerequisite.
The inequality of biological differentiation doesn’t simply apply to a physiology either, that is just the most demonstrable example of it.
Men are the architects of civilization, we have helped advance society leaps and bounds because of our imaginations. That is part of our strength. Most of the achievements in science, medicine, agriculture, the arts etc were done by Men. That computer you are using? You can thank Men for creating it for you.
Would it surprise you to know female circumcision actually took place in the US? That doctors routinely would perform the procedure on females, with relatively little complications? This is not the same as genital mutilation done by pedestrian 3rd world standards; this is the US doing it.
Female circumcision cannot therefore be given the same intellectual disdain as genital mutilation. Just wanted to point that out to you.
For the record, i am against slavery of any sort, as well as the barbaric sexual standards of islam, where Women truly are considered slaves. (unlike the perceptions of slavery of the typically coddled American female)
The fundamental flaw in your belief is to believe that equality can be achieved…i’m sorry to say, that it can’t. You can NEVER achieve an equality of ends, only an equality of means. The constitution is an example of an equality of means, which is why it has been such an integral part of our republican society. Technically we already have the equality (of means) you seek, so you can stop calling yourself a feminist. One could argue that the constitution is no longer binding on American law, but that is another matter entirely.
To conclude, you should be opposed to feminism, because the word itself (and even if you disagree) seeks to usurp established biological roles, either by promoting weakness in males or creating special status privilege for females.
You should accept your role as the weaker sex, and be grateful that you do not live in a shariah compliant nation.
That is the intellectual equivalent of a klansman saying that he is not a racist (because he doesn’t want to murder blacks, just make them leave) even if all the other members in his organization are.
Your emo instinctual nature is showing 🙂
Tell me, do you think that wanting equality between the binary genders is the equivalent of discrimination? From the looks of it, it appears you do. I don’t belong to a clan and I don’t mean just literally, I also don’t consider myself as being in a clan. How long will it take you to accept the fact that I have my own set of ideals?
Well, it’s good you disagree with slavery. I acknowledge that equality cannot be achieved, but I would like to be optimistic. You see, I would like for gender roles to be less prominent in a civilized society. I don’t care that males and females differ biologically. I just want people to stop emphasizing the roles because I am a girl who likes to hang out with anyone whom I am fond of, regardless of biological gender and it would make my soul bleed to think that we are separate because what my genitals were when I was born. It’s just so stupid and offensive to many people, especially to the LGBTQIAA community. Biological gender shouldn’t have to matter. I am very grateful I do not live in a shariah compliant nation, but I think that even the best could do better.
How do you think that you know that I am a solipsist? I am capable of doing nice things and helping others and I do it frequently. I believe other people exist, which is why I have a conscience. Solipsism:a theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own modifications and that the self is the only existent thing; also : extreme ego-centrism.
Thanks. Word?
Those instincts are still there, but fuck them. I think that we should try to screw them as much as we can.
Unfortunately, the first paragraph is very true.
Wait, that didn’t answer my question.
You see, the animal kingdom and biological gender is the reason why one of my mottoes is ” Deus est vilius” (Google Translate is not always reliable)aka.:”Fuck you, God”. I’m sorry if I offended you.
bro, just stop talking to her
No, i think it’s a view that lacks the objectivity to understand we already have legal equality under the law: it’s called the constitution.
Any attempt to reinvent the wheel legally speaking only serves to end up breaking the wheel, since so called equality laws have the un/intended consequence of making laws gender selective and therefore, unconstitutional.
“How long will it take you to accept the fact that I have my own set of ideals?”
As long as you call yourself a “feminist’ they are not your ideas. You did not create your own special variant on feminism. You just feel you do.
Gender roles help form the foundation of our society. You still don’t get it. You acknowledge that equality can’t be achieved, but your remark indicates you don’t understand as yet, why.
Acknowledging that gender roles are necessary wouldn’t invalidate your social structure preferences in the least, it would simply mean you understand what your role is and what the roles of Men are.
There are limitations to everything, gender included. I can never give birth but you don’t see me crying over that fact, why can’t you simply accept there are things that your gender bars you from doing effectively or doing at all?
Please don’t bring up the LGBTXYQUDOWNWITHOPPYEAHUKNOWME community. That is a demographic that has no legitimate claim to either ethnicity or race, so their solipsist beliefs that they were “born that way” are of no intellectual consideration whatsoever.
Because you disagree using nothing more persuasive than words. A solipsist is by definition someone who only acknowledges the viewpoint that he or she represents, you have shown this abundantly in your past and current remarks to me.
There are different forms of solipsism, yours is a gender based one. It’s essentially a view that does not allow for the possibility that anything beyond a gender specific viewpoint is legitimate.
To be fair however, your last remark leads me to think that there may be hope for you, since you acknowledge that equality cannot be achieved.
You just need to make yourself understand the WHY of that, in order to keep the wishful thinking you exhibit from sabotaging your intellectual ability to accept things which your feelings find anathematic.
It’s my means of differentiating between the words “female” and “Woman.”
A female is simply a biological female who exhibits nothing more sophisticated than emo-instinctual responses, solipsist perspectives, ipse dixit remarks, etc.
A Woman by contrast is psychologically speaking, an evolved female. Despite her emo-instinctual nature she can nonetheless exhibit higher thinking and the consequential discourse that follows as a matter of standard rather than isolated exception.
This is why i capitalize “Woman.” It’s a quirk that (as a concomitant effect) distinguishes me as a critical thinker as well.
This is also why i am not a misogynist in the most traditional understanding of the word. I don’t consider EVERY female representative of the pedestrian standard i associate with most females, hence the capitalization used to distinguish the evolved ones.
Which category do you think you fall under? I will try not to let the shock of your choice affect me too much;)
You are of course free to disagree with any/all of my remarks, just as i am no less liberated from bothering to care.
You can’t undo what thousands of years have helped to make the template standard for both genders. The effort itself is unwise, since it leads to a further disconnect from non politically correct reality.
For example: you gravitate to Men who represent strength: literally, figuratively, financially, etc. Whatever aesthetic standard you possess to distinguish exactly how, your subconscious will always lead you to a Man who represents this strength, even if consciously you can’t understand why.
Try an experiment: Go on a date with Men whom you don’t find attractive. 5 or so. Afterwards, write down why you don’t find them attractive, no matter how seemingly inconsequential.
Then go out on a date with a Man you do find attractive, and compare notes.
Ask yourself why you are drawn to Men whom you do find attractive? What about them makes them appealing? Is it just the looks, or is it something else?
Remember that “attraction” can be defined as more than just a physical appeal. When it comes to females, this most certainly applies.
When you graduate to a level of understanding that defies your current one, you will understand why this is actually a good thing.
There is no guarantee that you will of course, but if you value the truth over pc bs then you will at least try.
The alternative is to keep feeling what you believe to be true, which would make you a solipsist, as i mentioned earlier.
In either case, it’s of no concern of mine. My goal is to help others usher in a new society once this one has run its proper course, as well as lead manginas back to masculinity. It’s not to hold your hand while you wonder why i hold the particular views that i do.
No offense taken. My belief in God is strong enough to withstand the secular blasphemy that would inevitably be found in an increasingly secular society. I do appreciate your gesture of concern, however.
Incidentally, the remark i live by is “Deus est veritas”
(God is truth)
I think you’re right. This conversation seems to have run its course, and i don’t see much hope in her ability to understand what it is i am actually saying.
What should I call myself then?
And I didn’t sign up for this conversation. You have a lot of good points. I completely understand, but, as you said, I am swimming against a maelstrom. I don’t completely disagree with you. I just want to complain.
Nice.
IKR. There really is no point.
What do I believe is true? Clarify.
I didn’t think it was.
Nice point.
Interesting.
Which regard?
This has nothing to do with what I replied to about the klansman.
When I feel like that, I “turn it off”.
Call yourself a constitutionalist; a defender of the equality of means that it represents.
You responded to my original remark on the animal kingdom.
Since you have sufficiently complained, i suggest we simply agree to disagree on what you disagree with me.
I hope that the rest was of benefit to you.
I’ve already stated what i think you believe in. Anything further would be redundancy on my part. You can reread our past exchanges if you are really interested.
In the end what you believe in is your right, since you define your reality, however accurate or inaccurate.
We both tend to oppose feminism.
I didn’t see it until now.
You are free to interpret your belief in feminism and contiguous adherence to it as you wish.
I am free to interpret it as gender specific solipsism.
Never the twain shall reconcile, invariably.
I think men we are wired with the drive to achieve / build / get sex. Our competitive nature is what propels humans forward.
So when men fail repeatedly it’s harder for them to accept than for women, so men commit suicide in greater numbers.
I think the answer is more simple, men actually have the balls to achieve that which they want, even suicide.
So you think I’m a coward, eh? Women are no less brave than men if gender roles getting hammered into people’s minds hadn’t screwed everything up.
You are aware that I was talking about suicide right? If my half serious claim that men have higher suicide rates due to actually having the guts to kill themselves upsets you that much, you can always prove me wrong. It ain’t that hard, especially if you have a lot of high raise buildings in your living area…
Jessica Valenti is a loon who believes giftwrapping is patriarchal oppression and that forcing women to pay for their own tampons is a sign of sexism.
She’s the poster child for the idea that Women’s Studies is an expensive, worthless degree leading to absolutely nothing of use or value.
Jessica Valenti is a one stupid cunt who deserves to be butchered by a serial killer on the shores of a lonely beach. .
No one deserves that.
I hope that there’s a special place in hell reserved for feminazi cunts like Jessica Valenti who go about blatantly lying and spreading propaganda to the public on the true nature of suicide amongst men and women
I don’t think she should go to HELL. That’s rather extreme.
Valenti’s writing and logic goes wild, on its own tangent. She obviously had no patriarchal guiding influences in her upbringing. Probably a queen bitch mother and uber beta complacent dad. If she had been malled like a fine gold sheet by the hammer of patriarchy, stuffed like a turkey during her young golden virgin years and wifed up, tit feeding into the wee hours like her preceding generations, then you can bet that her wild tangent logic and writing would have manifest better into going on a wild tangent in the kitchen, making wild, interesting and delicious crumpets. I see some of the most fascinating and interesting shaped crumpets stuffed with the most creative and wild delicious fillings (meat, fish, custard) at the Dutch Amish and Mennonite bake sale and market. A well groomed, broken and molded female is a great asset to the community. At her core, Valenti is no different than the fine Amish mamas. She was just steered wrong and succumbed to the pit of wild unkempt cunts. The feminist pit of hell.
Last time I checked, chicks weren’t exactly committing all that much suicide. Or are they pulling the tranny card and just going to start lying through their asses?
ETA: I used the word “start” when I should have used the word “keep”.
Women under 30 years old have massive advantages in life if they look good and are willing to use sex to obtain things. They get treated way better than young men do.
Leftwing news sources need to be entirely boycotted if you want to keep your brain cells. Biggest bunch of liars in the medias.
Doesn’t seem like it.
Just read this yesterday, an interview with David Sedaris about the suicide of his sister Tiffany. Mr. Sedaris seems to blame his mother
strained relationship with Tiffany and the possibility that Tiffany was
bi-polar for her suicide. But it also appears that Tiffany learned in
her teens that she could use her looks (sex) to get what she wanted. She even was involved in prostitution. Maybe after years of riding the carousel and hitting the wall, no one wanted her.
http://www.vice.com/read/remarkable-messes-0000671-v22n6
Her other option would have been to use her “looks” to get a beta husband to love and protect her from herself. having a loving husband (boring to the modern slut) would insulate her from the emotional stress of being an empowered cock carousel rider post wall
“..and the possibility that Tiffany was bi-polar for her suicide. But it also appears that Tiffany learned in her teens that she could use her looks (sex) to get what she wanted.”
I am familiar with a couple of women who were diagnosed as bi-polar and manipulating people with their sexuality was always an issue. In once instance, said woman married a guy and had a son. She went off her meds, decided she was a lesbian, shaved her head and ran off with her gym instructor taking the kid with her. The guy went through several years of dealing with all that before killing himself. Bi-polar women and lesbianism have causality, but I would not expect anyone to reveal that in today’s climate.
Some of those crazy chicks really are crazy.
Valenti does nothing more than attention whore. Women like her do anything for attention and they’ll take it from anyone for that matter.
Divorce is the single largest suicide factor in the western world. While it does not affect women and their suicide rates, divorced men are 2-1/2 to 3 times as likely to kill themselves as the average. Divorced men still only account for perhaps a quarter of suicides, which still puts the rest of the men multiples ahead of the women.
.
The China situation is interesting. About 80% of women will marry before they turn 25 and the national divorce rate is about 2.2% compared to 43% in the USA (however, in big, westernized cities the Chinese divorce rate is more westernized like 29% in Beijing). And suicide rates among rural women – who are generally poor, uneducated and have more social pressures to stay in a marriage – are perhaps 3 times what they are in the cities.
If only we could “patriarchy” Mrs Valenti enough to get her to do the honorable thing.
pretty sure Valenti would find the word ‘honorable’ to be oppressive and patriarchal
Not really. It really doesn’t sound anything like it.
This is really mendacious. There is always talk about “violence against women”. When you point out that men are more often victims of violence, then the issues turns to violence by men (against women). Then you talk about women who kill themselves, and somehow that has to be spun as violence against women by men.. Even when women kill men, they allege battered woman syndrome and blame it on the guy beating on her as the cause (so the guy caused or deserved his own death).
jn
She can suck my superstructure.
when women attempt suicide, it’s normally just a cry for help. men mean business. way back in my high school psych class i remember that stat that women attempt suicide 10x more than men, but men actually kill themselves 10x more than women.
But if you, a competent man, come along and help her git it done right, will she thank you?
Noooooooo!
I wonder, just wonder, if the fact that because they attempt suicide so half-heartedly that shit isn’t really that bad for them? Just a thought…
You disgust me.
yeah well, women can’t even get this one right..
Feminists like Valenti are complete lunatics that are completey out of touch with reality. The West is so Fem centric nowdays an women put on such a pedestal that even calling it a Patriarchy is factually incorrect.
Valentini should top herself. Can’t say the world would miss her!
no, you don’t get it. women kill themselves because of misogyny and men kill themselves because of misogyny. while it is horrible to be hated, it is much more painful to the soul to actually hate these wonderful creatures, thus the male suicide rate is even higher.
So now female suicide is our fault too? I love how she uses male non-suicide deaths to support her (lol) thesis and makes it look like female suicide is a far greater problem. In a sane world, no one would hire this hack. In a sane world the only work this know-nothing misanthrope would get is cleaning floors with a mop, selling pencils from a cup, or on her back. Though in the case of the latter, I’m not sure what she would do with all those pennies.
The study may be true if you are referring to suicide of women in 3rd world hellholes but not in Western countries where everything is fucking fine for women. There is not a single thing for a gal living in the west to complain about. Feminists’ work is done in the West and they ( the Fems) need to go forth like missionaries to places like Africa to help THOSE women.
What do you mean “their work is done?” I guess you haven’t heard about those men spreading their legs on the Subway, have you? Space that’s needed for poor, oppressed females to store their coach purses or their day’s shopping?
Nor how tough it is for a woman to spend 10 hours walking around New York without some filthy black man saying hello to her?
What about those scummy patriarchs who routinely pay liberal arts majoring women only 77c for every dollar a STEM graduating man earns? How unfair is that?
The cheek of you..”their work is done!”.
You have no idea how “oppressed” women still are! Horrible, filthy misogynists like you are the reason why feminism is still needed!
With regards to Valenti’s statistics I am reminded of that old adage, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.”
Fuck this cunt.
I just have a couple of more doubts, and I would be glad if someone could be able to answer them, in brief but clear explanations.
So basically, why do male feminists, alpha males, super-rich & elite males, wealthy & resourceful males, male knights, manginas, etc, support the dirty, illogical & grievously anti-male forms of radical feminism? Don’t they realize that ALL men are going to be victims of feminist discrimination? Don’t the elite men & powerful men realize that their OWN female spouses, relatives or offspring could BETRAY them, in order to steal their genetic resources, wealth, resources, inheritances, properties, assets, credits, and so on?
What if the women & feminists of the future, decide to ”overthrow” the top male elites themselves? We can’t predict what people will become.
What if females of the future decide to STOP giving birth to male children, or what if they decide to STOP educating & empowering their male children & offspring?
What if the discriminatory policies of those ”top male elites” backfire at them themselves? There have been some cases of male billionaires LOSING lots of money & resources to divorces, false allegations, murders, inheritances, etc.
What if their female spouses, female offspring. & female relatives, use the biased laws to LEGALLY ROB them off their HUGE amounts of wealth & resources?
What if their female spouses, friends & relatives ”take away their lives” and leave them dead? What if they DON’T give birth to their male children at all?
What if radical feminists convince ALL women of the world to use ONLY bio-technologies (like sperm banks, stem cells, female sperms, IVF, bone marrows, sperm sorting, male abortions, etc), to have ONLY female children? What if the male population is then GENUINELY REDUCED to ~10% of the total human population?
What if the female population GENUINELY cheat the elites, steal their resources, & then establish a matriarchy themselves?
These things COULD ALSO be happening. Don’t think that radical feminist women would just be happy by being the ”middle class” whiners. There are evil women & men in this world also. But if ALL women are going to be blindly empowered, then things are NOT going to look good for the future of men & boys in this world.
Your questions require a rather comprehensive answer. I’ll give it a shot, but this is only based on my own experience with both the Neo-Masculine movement and people in general.
Firstly, I want to clarify that in my opinion all feminism should be considered radical and anti-male. There is no such thing as a “lite” feminist versus hardcore feminist because its’ core ideology does not allow for belief in the innate differences between men and women. Any ideology that springs from the flawed notion that everyone’s wiring is the same, but especially men and women, should be suspect.
Male feminists and White Knights: The men that I have encountered that actually believe in feminism do so because they truly believe that women are oppressed in spite of evidence to the contrary. Men are honorable creatures, we like fighting for the weak. These men are just blind to any notion that the women they defend and fight for are… not worth it. I’m certain that desire for sex plays a role, these men are taught that sex is earned, and this is how you earn it… eventually… far far into the future when a woman is ready.
Super-rich & elite males, wealthy & resourceful males: I doubt any of these men outright support feminism. If they are businessmen they might support consumerism which is absolutely dominated by women. Of course these men are going to marry and have potential female offspring, why? Because they have the risk tolerance to do so and they might have a few sons too to keep their familial line. Don’t underestimate the desire to father children. Many of them are going to be taken to the cleaners, but that is just the way it is until there are alternatives to procreation.
Alpha Males: Do not contribute to feminism, these men have true and hardcore standards of what they expect from women in sex and relationships, and will ignore those that don’t meet them. If you meant that you don’t understand why there are males who will do PUA style antics, sacrificing their own dignity just to get a slice of pie, well that’s the easiest answer of all… sex feels good, and there is really no substitute.
You ask many, many “what if?” questions. Its’ good to recognize the damage that could happen, but your perspective needs a bit of modification. You only need to ask yourself, “What would I do if…” the answer becomes simple, “If this happened, I would fight it…” This is your strength as a man, you have the ability to logically decipher how you would fight each instance and you can find like minded men to help you.
Rest a little easier. First off, women don’t have the organizational capabilities to pull off most of these, it would require concentrated cooperation and power between many differing agencies… that’s tough. Second, there are more men willing to fight than you believe. You are not alone, you may be in a minority, but it is one based on a powerful, natural ideology, more men will awaken to reality, just wait and you will see.
I like how you say radical feminist, not feminist. 🙂
I doubt that is going to happen.
Ma’am, I DON’T believe that women & girls are weak or inferior at all. In fact, I’ve seen several intelligent & brilliant girls & women (even in math & science fields) throughout my educational careers. In my opinion, some of the most important feminine skills that men & boys should properly develop, are these: memory skills, multitasking skills, verbal communication skills, continuous sitting still & working skills. Human females are as intelligent as human males. No doubt about that. But at the same time, human males CAN also be as intelligent as human females. The problem is that modern radical feminists are indirectly destroying their lives.
I just don’t like it when radical feminists FORCE global governments, international organizations, social groups, political parties, economic groups, etc, to implement discriminatory laws against innocent men & boys of this world (like reservations, quotas, female-only facilities, scholarships, funds, awards, rewards, prizes, etc).
I’m fully aware how intelligent women & girls are. I just want that they should NOT misuse their biological privileges to harm innocent men & boys of this world.
“Hate drivel”. Perfect. I will now use that term to describe any sort of aggressive histrionic narcissistic BS like this.
I never even heard of the word “patriarchy” until I worked with a feminazi two years ago. Nowadays, anytime a woman rants about it, I cut her out of my life. Life is too short for that shit.
Can we just call her a “stupid fuc^ing bi&ch” and leave it at that.
If Jessica Valenti made the comment more women ATTEMPTED suicide every year she would have some credibility with her comments but that could be put down to attention seeking rather than these attempts being a real issue.
My close friend committed suicide when he was very young and this article made me feel sick. Your lame attempt at satire is saturated with contempt and hate. Sickening.
And now you’ve deleted my comment. Seriously, whoever wrote this, you should be fucking ashamed of yourself. You aren’t even human.
Men are just inherently more unstable than women.
Huh. I voted down.FYI.
“Men are just inherently more unstable than women.”
…because single motherhood only unleashes boys into men with the psychological maturity of Norman Bates.
Every time I see (or heaven forbid hear) the word “patriarchy,” I mentally replace it with “Reptoids” to remind myself of the type of mentality I’m dealing with.
The reason “male suicide is higher than female suicide in every country in the world” is because men too are oppressed beyond comprehension by these same patriarchal superstructures.
Typical ungrateful western woman diatribe.
And to the white knights on this comment section, I dedicate this song to you.
Where is this patriarchy to which feminists refer and where can I find it? Sounds like a nice place to live and I would like very much to live in such a society.