Some fools aren’t worth worrying with

Just finished up reading what’s been posted in this thread on AVfM titled “This is Why I Talk to Feminists”: forums.avoiceformen.com/showthread.php?6826-This-is-why-I-talk-to-feminists

(Great article shared by the OP, btw, which I’ll also post up here: http://guardianlv.com/2013/11/kkk-member-walks-up-to-black-musician-in-bar-but-its-not-a-joke-and-what-happens-next-will-astound-you/)

And I see those guys have moved on to berating yet another female member aiming to relate and discuss with them. Personally, I thought “Sally Mainstream” and “Lany” (to view attitudes expressed toward her, particularly from johntheother, see this thread; both women participated in this thread as well) were being very understanding and reasonable, much more so than I’d be if those jokers jumped on my case like that over nothing. There are better ways of getting one’s point across than being a rude, condescending jerk with a hair-trigger for taking shit the wrong way. Bunch of assholes, many of them are. And frankly, that group of individuals, from everything I’ve read on that forum (quite a bit by now), don’t deserve support and recognition, because their main objective IS NOT to support men and improve conditions through advancing greater fairness in the system, but rather is to simply demonize feminists and talk down to women in general.

People on there said I didn’t stick around long, but I didn’t need to. Despite our couple of threads of interacting I was reading other threads and noticed just how incredibly hostile and corrupt many of the men on there behave as. If others wish to affiliate with that sort of thing, knock yourselves out. But me personally — no way. What good comes from that? If you have a personal problem you’re upset about, then talk about THAT, but it needn’t be blown out of proportion and applied to all women categorically, as if all women did you wrong or are mischievously plotting to do so. That’s bullshit, and it’s that same sort of bullshit that made “radical” feminism so toxic to society. Going the other way with it improves nothing.

Though honestly I don’t think most of those guys are concerned about actually improving a thing. They just want to jabber to one another and complain and bellyache and that be it. Okay. I can understand that. I do that here on my own blog. But I don’t label it as part of a women’s rights movement, I call it my personal space for venting and working through issues. It appears that having the same space occupied by those wishing to rage against womankind and those aiming to improve conditions for men is jacking up their program, because a lot of us who give a damn about how men are impacted by society aren’t wanting to support cruel and petty motherfuckers in the same token. See, I learned a long time ago that neither sex is populated by good, upstanding individuals. Hell no. Some men are tyrants and sadists, as are some women, and I’m not here to bolster their jackassery. Fuck them. I know well enough to know that some men are my fucking enemies, point blank, and I don’t want to be affiliated with them or aid them in any way whatsoever. I want to associate with decent men who mean well and are trying to improve their circumstances and uphold justice and fairness. Mere spewing of insults and derogations is the opposite of supporting a worthwhile objective so far as I see it, and I’m not going to bow down and lick anybody else’s boots, literally or figuratively.

We all come through whatever we come through and are healing from it. Men have problems with women, men have problems with men. Women have problems with men, women have problems with women. Such is life. And we can either deal with that or just spin ourselves around perpetually snapping at people who happen to possess similar anatomy to others who did us wrong. Sorry folks, but all women aren’t one way, nor are all men one way, and that’s common fucking sense. Deal with it. All the hating will get people nowhere, at least nowhere good.

But whatever. Doesn’t matter to folks what I think and I don’t expect it to, hence why I post this on my own little corner of the internet.

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Some fools aren’t worth worrying with

  1. Is it possible “Sally Mainstream” and “Lany” may have another agenda on our forum? Have you read some of the other posts by them?

    • Byenia says:

      I have now. Have you?

      Sally Mainstream only commented once in one other thread. Lany jumped into a few more threads and what I’ve read from her sounds reasonable or in the very least not offensive.

  2. I know, Lany got in trouble when she defended Feminism using the party line and aligned with a couple other people who conspicuously joined at the same time including Sally. Sally I’m still up in the air and hope she is genuinely concerned about men and boys issues. She has the intuition to look around before speaking up. Unfortunately we get too many trolls and the guys/gals are predisposed to be cautious. I have read the posts and, as with you I cannot white knight for them because it would not be in their best interest. We’ll see where their character takes them. It will come out in the wash as they say. Sometimes things are not as they appear. Anyway I still watch your blog, not to challenge ore create a problem, unless of course a topic like this comes up that hits on my work, then I’ll respond.

    Nice character work here I might add.

    • Byenia says:

      Ya know, it’s not about “white-knighting,” it’s about standing up for what you believe is right or against what you believe is wrong. For example, Eriu’s sparring, condescending way of addressing any woman who happens into your forum (other than that Diana chick), in this case toward Lany in the “One thing I’ve noticed about human sexuality” thread (among others) — that shit right there isn’t helpful. It’s just bullying behavior that shuts down conversation since it frames it in attack mode. And it’s that sort of mentality expressed on AVfM by numerous members that makes me say fuck conversing with them. Seems pointless to try since someone like Eriu clearly already has her mind made up and isn’t open to any other perspectives, especially if they don’t entirely jibe with her own, which actually appears to be one of the most mean-spirited and narrow-sighted of any attitudes expressed on there. It’s totally stifling, rude, and unproductive. And it’s quite strange coming from a woman speaking about women (that cropped up in mind while listening to GWW too — when she describes women in these ways, is she describing herself as well, and if not, how not?).

      Since you’re interested in character development and all, thought I’d go ahead and mention that. Take care.

      • Well, two of the three including Lany come on the forum to stir the pot and preach Feminist Ideology and propaganda(Patriarchy), then decided to characterize the movement as masculinists(male superiority) albeit in a slick manner, and endorse Feminism then got called out, the third decided to support the notion of the gender wage gap which is a Feminist line and tried some tone policing. Then they all three at different points provided mutual support. I don’t care how nice you pretend to be but to stir up crap which anyone familiar with the MHRM should know would be a problem, they are going to get called out. What you do not characterize here is there were other women calling them out too, new women who do not seem to have the same issues as these three did. I guess my question would be; why would they enter a forum of the nature of AVfM and do that I wonder?

  3. Byenia says:

    @GOM:

    “…come on the forum to stir the pot and preach Feminist Ideology and propaganda(Patriarchy), then decided to characterize the movement as masculinists(male superiority) albeit in a slick manner, and endorse Feminism…” Really? That’s how Lany’s words come across to you? Because I’ve now read at least 6 threads she’s jumped in on, and that’s not what I’m reading from her at all. It is very possible that your bias is skewing your perception there.

    Feel free to post a link to a thread I must have missed that better illustrates your point.

    People disagree on forums even when people are aiming to support the movement in question. That’s just how movements go. Seeing eye-to-eye with one another all the time doesn’t allow for honest critique that can strengthen or undermine one’s position. If it winds up undermined, it probably needed to be undermined, because that’s how we grow. We get to go back to the drawing table and think, read, and learn some more.

    Stating that the focus on hypergamy opens the MRM up to biological arguments cast against men isn’t stirring shit — it’s stating the truth, because yes, that’s what happens in this tit-for-tat “battle of the sexes” game so many are set on playing. Agreeing that a statistic is being misused to imply a falsehood (still focusing on Lany’s comments here, this one in reference to the stat claiming 99% of forcible rapes against women are committed by men) isn’t some feminist tactic to invade your forums and to promote patriarchy. Discussing with others how outsiders who come across the AVfM may be turned away by really nasty, hostile comments, again, is just providing a perspective, and one I’d think AVfM folks might care about since it’s aiming to lure in more members. Not only do some of the comments there turn off women who happen upon them, but other men as well (including a couple guys I personally know). Lots of people don’t wish to be affiliated with that sort of animosity against women, though those who remain members there apparently don’t mind. But what does it hurt to learn how someone else sees you guys when they’re wording it in a respectful, non-antagonistic fashion? In her case it appears as constructive criticism, not an attack on ya’ll, though plenty knee-jerkingly misinterpret what she’s putting forth.

    And I haven’t found the part where Lany is characterizing your movement as a male superiority movement, so that’s another claim I’d need a link for.

    As for your last question, which is basically why do some women come on your forum and not outwardly disagree with commenters? My guess is it probably has a lot more to do with trying to fit in with you guys and wanting to be accepted. Hence why they tend to be quick to jump on other women since then they can demonstrate their pseudo-“loyalty” through being spiteful and condescending toward them, which tends to be approved of by many of the males there.

    What’s with some of those gals in-a-nutshell? They detest and are hyper-competitive toward other women in an effort to gain admiration from men and be tolerated or accepted in the “boys’ club.” Plenty of women out here in society are that way regardless of what groups they do or don’t affiliate with. Some happen to be more tomboyish, but others are just plain cruel bitches with nothing of real value to offer to much of anybody, yet they’ve stumbled upon an act to gain admission into an “in-group.” Some feminists are that way actually, and they use feminism as a platform to berate and chastise other women under the guise of doing it for the sake of the movement, but it’s just a ruse mean bitches play. I’d even go so far as to claim that it’s actually those sorts of bitches that should be watched out for more than any others. Why? Because they don’t and can’t maintain loyalty. That’s true of any thoroughly hateful individual — their irrational hatred is a clear sign of a character defect that runs deep and is often oriented toward destructive tendencies. At least that’s my $.02 assessment.

  4. See my last post dated ^^^^^^December 8, 2013 at 10:45 PM ^^^^^^ and that was my take specifically on Lany’s part as I recall. I think she got in JTOs sights today over making comments on what we should do in the movement which being a new member is interesting, No judgement. Hey How are those mods treating her, have they helped her with her questions and have they asked anyone to stand down? Are things starting to settle or are they getting worse for her. How is her rep points doing? Is she holding her own? It did not go unnoticed that she called out unethica. I did provide her feedback on how one of her posts could be perceived, was that not fair? As for my Bias, I’ll let my interactions with her stand on their own…

    • Byenia says:

      I hadn’t even read of unethika until a few minutes after posting my last comment here. Not up on all she posted, and by now not too interested. The two I came across and read up on were Sally Mainstream and Lany, so those are the only two I could say much on so far, though I do now realize the patriarchy comments you made were in reference to unethika’s posts that I haven’t read yet.

      I’m not up on the AVfM hierarchy enough to know who all are mods or not, though I saw that JTO replied to Lany at one point in there. Have people on there helped her with her questions? A few have, most haven’t. Seems things are about the same for her, though I noticed in some threads she wasn’t given a hard time. No clue about anyone’s rep points since I don’t care to keep up with those. Seems to me she’s holding her own. She’s at least not cursing folks out, as some might be spurred to do in response to some commenters. Didn’t see where she called out unethika yet. As for your feedback, I personally thought you came across kinda snarky myself, to borrow your term. 😉 Just being frank. My call on it is that a lot of folks come across as unwelcoming and one I noticed came out (twice) to suggest one of these women should seek out another forum to interact on. But I realize that’s you guys’ prerogative, hence why I stay in my own sandbox.

      Occasionally I look on AVfM, but I try not to make too regular of a habit of doing so since the forum tends to bum me out. Just not my kind of place, but most forums aren’t. Though, on a sidenote, it is interesting seeing how many gay men are showing up on the site now. I wonder how that might change the dynamic over time.

  5. I forgot to add, there is no problem challenging folks . My only suggestion would be to get to know everyone a little longer than a few days or whatever it has been before say what things should or could be improved. I think it comes across as concern trolling. Given the nature of the sight many are suspicious of this. Again No judgement. Finally, I’ve seen men including myself get banned on Feminist sights for simply identifying a men’s issue let alone make a supporting statement about men’s rights. So I don’t feel too bad. If Lany keeps going the way she is maybe she’ll build some trust, I’m starting to see this with some of the members and she’ll do just fine.

    • Byenia says:

      While I agree that it does help to get to know people a little more by reading more of their posts before forming too much of an opinion, and in fact my own thoughts on certain individuals there have shifted after reading several more of their comments across various thread topics (though not Reyeko — still not a fan of that guy). BUT, just because you get a feel for them doesn’t mean they’ve gotten a feel for you, so still once a female “outsider” pipes up they’re likely to be met with unwelcoming responses. So I wonder how that is to be remedied if the women who join the site do remain quiet while lurking and learning of people’s perspectives. The guys still won’t know them from Adam’s apple, so many will still probably react hostilely regardless. It’s a bit of a conundrum.

      Maybe the answer is for a newbie woman to start documenting excerpts from various members so as to reference these in the future and to demonstrate that she has been tracking the conversations and can point to areas of agreement? I don’t know.

      But I did find Eriu’s posting in the rants section of the forum a few minutes ago (which is what informed me about this woman named unethika) and there again Eriu did a complete strawman work-over on at least Lany’s and Sally Mainstream’s comments. That shit doesn’t help, I’m telling you. It comes across awfully fucking catty, man, and not much else. Bulldoggery of the useless variety. And by her posting that she painted an impression in the minds of those who happened across her post but who haven’t explored what these women actually stated. Though it is on them to gather more information for themselves rather than rely on Eriu’s heavily-distorted misrepresentations.

      The thing is that a lot of folks aren’t going to want to stick around for that sort of nonsense, and why do so? It’s why I leave feminist forums (oh, and the SOTT forums, bunch of weird assholes there) alone as well — why sign up to be given a headache repeatedly? And then to be censored to boot? Nah. But ah well. It’s not a big concern for me. Just saw some posts and felt like responding in my own area. Those gals will do what they wish. I guess I just keep hoping that some of those MRAs will eventually chill out and set aside assumptions long enough to try to grasp where a woman who might not see fully eye-to-eye with them (but who shares some values in common with them too) is coming from.

      • Byenia says:

        For my own records, those on AVfM forum that I generally appreciate reading comments posted by include Francis Roy, comhcinc, Shadow, Prince_Tybalt, Maxx, MrScruffles, Katsuni, Imdefender, Aimee McGee, MrAndryist, mauvebutterfly, Teraus, Terence, PureStorm, and Vance (also, kudos to him for going ahead and taking a stand against Eriu’s unwarranted hostility and dismissiveness toward new female members).

        Those I find a good amount of agreement with on some matters, less so on others, include dmschlom, Kizzume, deanesmay, Shlock, Victor.Zen, and a few others.

        While I read plenty of other commenters, those are whom I’ve gained the most from in terms of insight and ideas on that forum.

  6. reyeko says:

    people jump on anyone they disagree with, it’s happens to male members just as much. It even happens to established members, I’ve gotten into several heated arguments with people myself who are long time members. Characterizing it as “berating yet another female member” is pure and simple dishonesty in the same vein that feminists use to marginalize men by talking about “violence against women” when it’s just as common against men. Plus there’s a few more female members other than diana and eriu who are regular posters.

    Yes, a lot of the members are there just to bitch and vent. It’s valuable whether you think so or not. I think it’s a good place to do it because rather than getting “omg you’re such a piece of shit misogynist asshole”(like your post here) they get things more along the lines of “we get it, here’s some facts”, many people go from borderline misogynist to not at all misogynist by learning the source of issues and that the source is not “womankind” but rather cultural and societal problems.

    I’m also rather tired of seeing the “their main objective IS NOT to support men… but rather is to simply demonize feminists” bullshit. Many issues are directly caused by feminists. Lack of support for male victims of domestic violence is caused by feminists advocacy that it’s primarily a man on woman thing. We would have more support for men without them given Erin Pizzey tried to work on that back in the 70’s and was prevented from doing so by feminists. Child custody issues began with early feminist Caroline Norton and continue with the National Organization for womens continued position of supporting default maternal custody. There are plenty more examples but feminism is directly harmful to men and demonizing it(a.k.a. pointing out the reality of what feminists do) IS supporting men.

    • Byenia says:

      @Reyeko:

      I see the guys getting onto one another on there as well, though oftentimes they tend to show more of a benefit of a doubt toward one another under the assumption that they all happen to be on the same team. Though I see that’s not always the case, especially with new males who come in and are immediately critical of what they see on the forum.

      See, every time someone disagrees with one of you does NOT automatically mean they’re feminists or embracing feminist tactics. Because I’ve noticed how females tend to be treated there who pipe up and express their opinions more boldly early on, that’s still not me trying to paint this in some dishonest fashion, that is just me mentioning what I happen to notice during the times I come back around to read. It’s not all I notice, but I did find these latest challenges on the new females there pretty off-putting. What does it matter? It doesn’t. I’m not a member of you guys’ community, nor am I a member of any other community out here, nor do folks follow or concern themselves with much of what I have to say. So basically I’m over here talking to myself, recording my own thoughts and observations, right or wrong, working through how I feel and think about some of these things. Take it for the grain of salt that it is.

      As for violence being just as common against men in domestic situations…while I do agree that evidence suggests women do hit and push and mistreat their male partners about as frequently if not moreso, when it comes to who inflicts the most damaging amount of violence to their partners, that distinction remains with men, as is borne out by hospital emergency room data. I accept that both sexes do at times show milder forms of violence toward one another, and I pretty well see that as the way it goes, but in terms of serious bodily damage both male and female perpetrators get held responsible when they go that route, though again, which sex is more commonly associated with that? Males, unfortunately, and largely due to their physical brawn advantage. By acknowledging that it’s not meant to minimize harm women can do to their male partners, nor is it meant to trivialize a man who feels he’s being subjected to abuse that he should escape. But if we’re going to get real here, this most definitely matters. As with the topic of rape, there are varying degrees of violence and not all are created equal or are as destructive, even though lesser forms indeed can be very harmful and can push the situation into a worse and more dangerous direction.

      When did I call you or the others misogynists? I don’t typically use that word. It’s become a buzzword. Though, yeah some of them on there have serious hangups when it comes to women and they take issue with all of womankind due to problems they had with one or a handful of women they personally knew. It was frustrating when feminists extrapolated from their personal experiences and applied it categorically to all of mankind, so I call it where I see it running in the other direction as well. I used to, for a spell, be very angry at men in general also, due to my own personal dealings with quite a few of them, but I’ve been forced to grapple over time with my position there and to realize that men aren’t all one and the same.

      Though I’m glad to hear ya’ll indeed aim to direct angry men toward resources for helping move through their pain and frustration. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, nor am I claiming their anger is unwarranted or shouldn’t be expressed. However, I think mixing it in with a wider movement intended to take political action or to impress on wider society in terms of demonstrating where men are done wrong is where it gets sticky and can certainly turn off potential allies as a result. That’s just my take on it, and you guys can certainly do whatever you wish. It’s still a (semi-)free country for however long that lasts.

      Talking about the problems inherent in feminism is one thing, but that’s not all that goes on there, as is clear. Plenty of folks there take their animosity toward feminism out on anybody and everybody who may be considered a feminist, regardless of what positions those women actually take. Furthermore, plenty also make this about women in general, and that’s disconcerting, to be frank. Yes, there are arms of feminism that aim to create an unfair situation between the sexes, that is true. But that is not what all or even probably most women actually support. A lot of these political movements gain enough momentum that they can stay in motion regardless of what any of us might wish instead, and that’s a real problem, and we see this all over the political spectrum and not only where it relates with feminism. I do get that.

      But anyway, this was just my venting post after seeing a few people come down rather rough on the female newbies who I felt were asking reasonable questions and being pretty darn courteous to all of you. Me personally, I’m too fired up to tolerate being berated in the way that’s so common on that forum, hence why I checked out before winding up getting booted. And as for the female posters on there, I have appreciated the inputs posted up by Aimee McGee and noted that in a comment on this particular post. But all of that aside, I guess it just bugs me that so much boils down to reactionary responses, even as I’m prone to it a bit myself (and hence have quarantined myself lol). I’d hate to see an even greater standoff between the sexes that winds up trickling down and impacting every-fucking-body out here, even when we don’t wish to be tread on or divided like that. I personally want to see as many women and men as possible heal some of these wounds and find ways to work together where able, and hopefully that proves to be more than a pipe dream.

      • reyeko says:

        “I personally want to see as many women and men as possible heal some of these wounds and find ways to work together where able, and hopefully that proves to be more than a pipe dream.”
        Here’s the problem with that: Where do men go when they need to heal their wounds? To places like the AVfM forums. What do people say when they vent their emotions? well:
        there are better ways of getting one’s point across than being a rude, condescending jerk
        Bunch of assholes, many of them are.
        frankly, that group of individuals… don’t deserve support and recognition
        they just want to jabber to one another and complain and bellyache
        etc…

        What exactly do you see people applying to all of ‘womankind’?

  7. Byenia says:

    @Reyeko (re comment: December 10, 2013 at 7:04 PM):

    I’m not on there saying any of that you quoted — I’m saying it here in near obscurity. Didn’t tell any of you to come on over and read my words. Feel free to ignore them anytime.

    But reactions like mine are why I suggest there be a separation from the venting of frustrations and the activism arm of your movement. Because it’s mightily uncomfortable go in up against all of that. You don’t seem to understand the position it puts newbies in on there who wind up becoming a magnet for these guys’ frustrations. I’ve often wondered why ya’ll don’t have a private site if you’d prefer to remain undisturbed while venting.

    What do I see you guys applying to all of womankind? The hypergamy claim, the Briffault Law bs, the repeated alluding to us all at heart either being feminists or are somehow benefiting from feminism and therefore are at least passively supporting that movement (in its entirety too, since apparently a woman can’t agree with certain feminist positions without being lumped in as supporting them ALL — that’s the common implication), and the fear of what we all are capable of doing to any one of you is trumped up incessantly (see JtO’s latest “Gun in the Room” article to see more evidence of that). While I recognize people see themselves as speaking in generalities, plenty seem to take them awfully damn seriously to the point of expressing complete distrust of *all* women. And the biggest evidence supporting my assertion is that ANYTIME a woman pipes up and says she’s not this or that way, nearly everybody chimes in with the “NAWALT” retort.

    Not sure how it can get any clearer. But ya’ll will do as you wish.

    • reyeko says:

      Hypergamy is speaking of human nature. It does apply to all women to one degree or another, just as wanting a young attractive partner applies to all men to one degree or another. The labeling of any discussion of negative female traits as ‘anti-woman’ or whatever is bunk.
      Briffaults law is bull and most MRAs don’t agree with it or only agree with it in part. There was debate on the AVfM forums where everyone was agreeing with the position that briffaults law is bunk.
      MRAs constantly state feminism != women. Many women(and men) support feminist ideals which are based on false information and by spreading that false information by supporting these ‘feminist positions’ they’re giving credibility to the hateful rather than the misinformed.
      Women are capable of falsely accusing men of any number of crimes and being violent towards men without fear of punishment. This isn’t ‘trumping’ anything up, this is a statement of legal fact.
      NAWALT is a bullshit argument. There are cultural attitudes, which are attitudes that are common in a culture. This doesn’t mean that every single person in that culture has those attitudes. The fact that some people don’t have certain cultural attitudes doesn’t mean that those attitudes aren’t present.
      It’s mighty uncomfortable to go up against all that? Good. We don’t intend to make anyone comfortable.

      • Byenia says:

        I disagree with how the whole hypergamy argument is framed and see most people tossing it out there willy-nilly as if that’s the whole story. It’s part a larger biological determinism argument being put forth by a number of MRAs and MGTOWs, concocted by cherry-picking evolutionary biology teachings. It’s become a trendy concern, but it doesn’t reflect reality to the extent that many assume. That’s my claim anyway.

        Briffault’s Law bs is posted up repeatedly, especially on YT comment sections where men disagree with something a woman is saying, and the others rarely say anything against it. That’s what I personally witness out and about online. If men consider it bunk, you’d think they’d state that publicly and not only in obscure threads on AVFM, assuming that’s not the impression they wish to see promoted under their “movement.”

        One “feminist position” I was referring to, for example, is a woman’s right to abortion, which I understand is contested among MRAs. Some support the idea, others do not, and regardless of whether we consider those men or women “traditionalists” who don’t, the point remains that when a woman supports a position like that and activism intended to uphold access, this can be treated like a slippery slope as if supporting this aspect of feminism must entail supporting a great deal more and/or siding with any and all tactics used by pro-choice activists. It’s the conflation that winds up being the concern, and it’s commonly framed in that way from what I’ve been reading and watching. Though, again, I grasp that plenty of MRAs themselves are pro-choice. It just seems to be a different matter when a non-MRA woman happens to be so as well or supports any other tenet of feminism.

        It almost comes across as if because the feminist movement has headed in an unacceptable direction that women who support and defend their own rights specific to their sex must automatically be feminists. As a woman, I can’t help but care about issues pertaining to and impacting the sex I belong to, even as I disagree with what the feminist movement has become. But people have a hard time keeping that all separate and seem quick to assume if you’re sympathetic in one area, you’re feminist to the core, period, and that sets women in the position of feeling like they must somehow choose, which is unfair and pretty much guaranteed to keep people divided. We all care about what impacts us or the sex we happen to belong to, and that needn’t relate with embracing an ideology in doing so.

        You assume women are completely free of any consequences, that we can harm men and face absolutely nothing in response. And that’s false. It isn’t a statement of legal fact even though the legal system isn’t entirely fair. There are ground-level consequences too, social consequences, even when it only comes down to the assumption that a woman is doing a man wrong in some way. I know this firsthand. So I struggle to comprehend how folks can paint it so black-and-white, as if it *always* goes one way or the other, or the cops are *always* keen on siding with women even without sufficient evidence or even when evidence suggests the opposite scenario is actually true.

        NAWALT is COMMONLY tossed around, particularly by GWW’s crowd. So, if it’s viewed as bullshit among many MRAs, we out here in the public aren’t seeing much proof of that. Considering these guys are willing to argue over nearly anything, it seems, I’m surprised they aren’t publicly contesting such sweeping accusations as this that have become closely associated with their “movements” if they indeed don’t see it that way.

        It’s mighty uncomfortable because there’s no way to reason with folks on a site like that where some aim to drop the heavy on any female who happens across their “man space.” That’s not the sort of discomfort that’s likely to prove positive or garner support, because folks feel attacked simply for being female rather than for having supported something ya’ll take issue with. There’s the issues, and then there’s the persons, and they aren’t all one and the same. We know this, yet how many acting under the MRA label act as if they do?

        • reyeko says:

          I meant NAWALT is a bullshit argument as in saying something alone the lines of “not all women are like that” is bullshit. Canadians like hockey. NACALT! I don’t even like hockey and I know it’s stupid to spout “well not all Canadians like hockey”
          The fact that sometimes there’s consequences for a false accusation doesn’t change the fact that in MOST(a word you apparently don’t like at all) cases there are no consequences or as most very lenient consequences, for example: http://www.avoiceformalestudents.com/in-academia-false-claims-of-rape-and-harassment-are-now-employed-by-activists-as-tools-of-social-change/
          The rest of it is stuff I rarely see on AVfM but I’m aware it appear in other men’s rights and MGTOW spaces. I don’t go to those places. It’s primarily MGTOWs which trot out briffaults law. As for hypergamy, it is a indisputable fact that there is an epidemic of gold digging whores out there 😛 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY05HQHYvvA
          In all seriousness though hypergamy is an issue of nature of womens mating behaviours, the reason it’s a problem is that it’s cranked up to 11 and supported and encouraged by the skewed divorce system. Some people use it to deride women as inherently devious as a group but all human are inherently devious as a group really also There’s the issues, and then there’s the persons, and they aren’t all one and the same. Focus on the issues rather than the people surrounding them. There’s always assholes on teh intarwebz, can do anything about it but use them as jump offs for discussion points.

  8. Byenia says:

    @Reyeko (re comment: December 11, 2013 at 5:53 PM)

    Ok. You asked what MRAs apply to all of womankind, and I provided examples.

    The problem comes down to when YOU SPECIFICALLY, as an individual, aren’t some sort of way yet have to repeatedly come up against the assertion that that is completely irrelevant since the category of people you belong to have been stereotyped as being a certain way. Though exceptions may be acknowledged in theory, few seem willing to accept individuals as they come.

    In my case, for example, I prefer to date men within my own socioeconomic class of origin. I’ve been exposed to many middle-class men and tried dating a few in the past, but always there was a divide in terms of our cultural backgrounds, interests, and understandings. Them having money didn’t make much of a difference in the end, even when they purchased me gifts and took me out to events. That was nice, and I appreciated it, but it’s not what I want in a partner. So this idea that so much boils down to hypergamy strikes me as not entirely realistic, not for myself, and not necessarily for some of the other women I’ve met either. Plenty of us prefer to seriously date within our own classes rather than angling to “move up” in socioeconomic status. Why? Well, because frankly it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. There indeed is more to life than money once your basic needs are met. But for me to say this aloud in a group like yours is for me likely to be laughed out of the place, I wouldn’t doubt it. Yet I have no proof to offer other than the life I choose to lead. That’s not to say I don’t affiliate with middle-class men, but I have no desire to be in an exclusive relationship with one. Perhaps someday someone will change my mind on that, but that’s where it stands as of now.

    Gold-digging can, to whatever extent, also be attributed to cultural conditions that allow for or encourage it. Just as we have become a highly litigious society in general, some women (and men) aim to prey on individuals they are capable of taking advantage of. Outside of romantic relationships we see this trend expressed in shoddy business practices and in consumers being bent over by major companies that corner a market to where people have few viable options to switch over to. We see this in the televangelists who lie to people regularly on television in an attempt to put “the fear of God” in folks so as to pad their own pockets. We see predatory financial maneuvering all over the place — not only among women due to some biologically-determined drive.

    I don’t mind the word “most” and use it plenty my own self. BUT, I prefer accuracy, and when it comes to topics like this we really can’t say with great certainty how many women are geared in such a way or will remain geared in said way steadily throughout their lives. So assertions of that nature wind up relying heavily on speculation. And that’s fine, so long as we acknowledge it as such and don’t ascribe more certainty to these claims than they deserve.

    As for false allegations, while there may be at this time more lenient legal repercussions to people who falsely accuse others, that doesn’t mean they escape without any social ramifications, yet those are more difficult to assess. I realize that’s beyond the scope of you guys’ concern, and that’s fine, but it’s within the realm of my own concerns as someone who enjoys studying people and social relations.

    Anyway, that’s enough to say on all of that for now.

  9. Byenia, you know I’m a soft touch when it comes to trying to get along. But I have to point out and emphasize in my case that I’ve treaded the life of getting along with a woman for over 25 years now. We may agree to some extent on remaining within our social economic class and tends to be a healthy place (for men at least) but that side steps the fact that this is fluid. Most importantly, women do have the propensity to weigh a mans earning and social economic potential as a factor in their choices. This is popularized in a number of movies, pretty woman comes to mind. Hypergamy is a factor IMO and I’ve seen this in my own marriages, my first wife came from a wealthy family. Her expectations were much different from my current wife of 25 years. The trap she fell into was…I just happened to make good from a low start and my current wife without such expectations reaped the benefits and is much more supportive and grateful. Go figure. I think a quote from my first wive exemplifies this “wealthy people have a different attitude”. Well, she is left behind in this world of people sharing a life and achieving their potential, living alone in her own thoughts and fostering a friendship with me, we do have our daughter after all.

    My point is it is human nature to look over the fence and see greener pastures. We all do this but IMO women tend to do this more in the larger scheme of things.

    • Byenia says:

      Sidestepping that this is fluid? I don’t recall sidestepping here. I’m looking at an issue and examining it in reference to myself and other female family members, friends, and acquaintances I’ve come into contact with. My mother? She was a wanna-be gold-digger, and it caused a lot of problems. My Grandma? She spent more on credit cards than she should, but no; in fact she’d been heavily encouraged by others to divorce and marry someone else. Yet she remained with my Papa for over 50 years until the day he died. My aunt? Much more of a wanna-be gold-digger. My other aunt? Still happily married with her high school sweetheart after about 30 years. My best girlfriend married a Mexican man here on a visa who works like no other, and she stays home to raise their kids and loves him dearly. Other women in the extended family? Most of them remained married to one man throughout their lives, and the two who did divorce and remarry still married hard-laboring men (my great-uncle being an exception who did actually marry up in a later marriage, and was found to be cheating on that woman with a younger woman to boot). My younger cousin? Three babies by 3 different daddies, finally settled down with and married the 3rd (for however long that lasts). Step-side of the family? All except my (now ex-)stepdad remain married to their partners for the long haul, and all married within their socioeconomic class. That’s a rather small sampling, I give it that, but these are common people from working-class/small town/rural farming origins.

      Does a propensity exist to assess men in terms of earning potential? Sure. But so far as individual drive to be geared in actually heading down that path, especially going so far as to trade in one partner for another based solely on their higher earnings? Plenty of marriages and relationships can be contrasted against that being the case. Because there is a little thing called love that people like to leave out of these discussions.

      Sometimes I wonder if some of the social phenomena under observation here doesn’t have a great deal to do with particular generations, namely the baby-boomers, because they seem a lot more geared toward that whole status concern than most of those who came before and even many of those they bore. But then again, I’m on the tail-end/cusp of Generation X and it’s yet to be seen what Generation Y and the Millennials will wind up settling on as their priorities and values (observed aggregately).

      I also wonder how class of origin factors in, since it seems those intent on joining or rising within the middle-class are far more geared toward these sorts of financial and status preoccupations. But clearly plenty of folks don’t place money and socioeconomic status as as high of a concern. Perhaps because they care less or because they feel it is less attainable, but again and again I hear people speak about their shared cultures and values. And this seems to boil back down, at least for some folks, to “in-group” loyalty (e.g., common upbringings and experiences they relate over). And it doesn’t surprise me at all that classes of people might tend to approach this sort of thing a bit differently. Middle-class folks appear to me to place a much greater premium on worrying with what others in their class think of them in terms of their material accumulation, and this sparks more of a competitive mindset.

      But then again, look at our culture. Look at what’s impressed on us. Take note of all the porn (and the various extreme fetishes therein) and enticements and their popularity, plus how the internet has eased and opened up communication channels in an unprecedented way, allowing us to engage with others anywhere in the world while sitting right in our pajamas at home. See the movies, the games, the advertisements designed to play up on people’s psychologies. Take in the music and the directions the Arts have taken. And realize though we live in unprecedented times, humans who came directly before us spanning back thousands of years lived within civilizations and cultures that impacted them even more intimately due to how much more directly tied into their communities most of them had no choice but to be in.

      In simple terms, it’s awfully damn hard to tease away biological factors from social and cultural factors, because they’re intricately bound together. Kinda like the whole nature/nurture debate — it’s a tangled web that can’t ever be entirely untangled, especially when it comes to grasping at what all came prior to modern times. We can speculate. We can draw conclusions based on what little evidence we can uncover, but still, some of it will remain a mystery. People don’t want to hear that, but I’m pretty certain it’s the truth. That’s not saying these topics aren’t interesting though. Just that biology in and of itself doesn’t deserve all or even the majority of the weight set squarely on it.

      GOM, you like to remind folks frequently how long you’ve been married. I’ve noticed that’s a theme with you. But how many of us haven’t been dealing with members of the opposite sex the entire time we’ve been alive? lol Perhaps not always successfully, but nevertheless the other sex is unavoidable. It comes across as sounding like you’re claiming veteran status for having dealt with a woman for 25 years, plus one terminated marriage prior to that. Okay. I’m not being disrespectful, it just strikes me as a little funny is all. And what you said about your first wife having higher expectations because she came from a wealthy class goes along with what I’m seeing — never said women don’t tend to be less interested in “dating down” economically-speaking. Then again, there are those who chase ghetto thugs. And times are changing along with economic demands…

      It will be interesting to see what lay in store.

      Btw, “Pretty Woman” was a stupid, unrealistic flick.

Leave a Reply