The War on Men and Boys: your evidence is requested

Pockets? You mean wealth or convenience? Women can have pockets. US wealth: I've already linked, in 2015, they gained control of a majority of 52%. That was from a business mag. that told us to only expect that amount to grow. By, I think, 2018, they hit 60%. That can include things like, while a rich man lives, his wealth is counted as both his and his wife's. Women outlive their husbands by about 10 years. During that 10 years, the wealth is all hers. But it also includes that, for a variety of reasons, young women actually out earn their male counterparts. And they shape the market and its demands. They have typically done 85% of the spending in our nation.

Gender power generally? A woman's prime power years are between 15-27. They can use their sexuality and fertility to get men to do things for them that can last a lifetime. ( I am uninformed regarding sexual dynamics between Lesbians so I cannot address power dynamics in their relationships). I saw a British talk show with Milo Yiannopoulos among many others asking if UK law and society had become anti male. A very large trans woman stated much what you have written. My own thoughts are, this large (not fat: big. like, I wouldn't want to fight her) had surrendered male power (we are not completely powerless) But in her transition, she had not obtained female power. She did not become sexually alluring to men. (I have seen biological men that present as women and they can at a minimum, be sexually alluring to straight men.) So, she did not gain that power and incorrectly assumes no woman has it while only being aware of what she had lost.

Guess when we have a problem, we need to shut up rather than discuss and be political and, y'know, vote. To paraphrase Warren Farrell, women cannot hear what men do not say.

Great analogy and we do look at it differently.

I think Black people in the US have a right to call it that but I disagree with the way they are handling the issue. It's like the term, "The floggings will continue until moral improves." Or like the US bombing countries until they like us. Might want to try different tactics than preaching counter hatred and pushing for Communism while having white people kneel and wash their feet.

I refer to it as a war because it isn't willy nilly happening. It is something that is thought about and directed, much like a war, against men, largely pushed for by Feminists and their allies. And from some of the replies I'm getting in this thread, at a minimum, the issue needs a lot more airing. People are ignorant of what they are ignorant of.

And yes, there is counter hate and ignorance among the PUAs, Incels, MGTWO and generic MRAs. I think that can be counter productive. Stating that Feminism is cancer could be counter productive.

 

DUPE

 

You’ve never had a serious feminist discussion before. No one who has had a serious conversation on what it means to be a woman would dismiss pockets so brazenly, at least assuming you’re a person raised in the west. Like I don’t think you get why pockets are so serious. Not to say anything about how you treat female sexuality as a threat to masculinity. Are you even looking at this through a feminist lens, or are you forced to look at this through some male “rational” mindset?

 

I'm looking at this as someone that doesn't know what you mean by pockets. Please explain.

Came up with this... reviewing: https://www.mic.com/articles/133948/the-weird-complicated-sexist-history-of-pockets

 

No you’re really not for more ways then one.

Fashion designers make pockets for female clothes smaller than male clothes, or they might not have them at all. My best dress does not have pockets in them, but I bet your best suit does. This creates a security dilemma for women who need a purse to carry stuff around. It’s easier to pick a purse vs a pocket.

 

This is like Naomi Wolfe blaming men for women's fashion choices. The article I linked had 2 points:
1) Historically, men were much more powerful politically, economically and socially than women and can be blamed for women's lack of pockets.
Response: That your grandfather may have abused my grandmother gives you no rights against me, a man, today. Where are we today?
2) Women today, much as you state, for reasons of fashion, have pocket books rather than pockets.
Response: Women have enough power to make their own fashion choices today and they do, often to their detriment. But that is 100% on them.
Incidentally, you can carry a heck of a lot with such pocket books, while men were brutally shamed for wearing fanny packs to the point, good luck finding many straight men using them anymore. I'm sure they're not gone but can we agree it isn't something men typically carry? That they would be shamed for doing so? EDIT: They are out there. I know I have friends that would demand my "man card" were I to use one.

 

So your argument is women are allowed to make financial decisions for themselves? And that’s alright and not a source of discrimination anymore? Because women are allowed to wear clothing that still signals their feminity.
...
Why are there male and female sections for clothes in stores?

 

Given that women control the market place, making 85% of purchases, I would posit that we have male and female sections in stores because women, with the power of the purse, want it that way.

 

Nope. Try again.

 

Please write what your position is. Writing, "nope" is not an argument. Mine is based upon women making 85% of the purchases having cause and effect. What is it you are trying to state?

 

Except that there have been separate men's and women's clothing sections since forever. And to be honest, seems a strange thing for you to focus on.

 

Oh I know it’s not an argument. Because my argument is the same as it’s been. You don’t get the basics and you want to discuss higher level ideas. You are not looking at this via a gendered lens.

Companies decided what is feminine to market towards women. To be feminine is to wear our clothes, to be a good women is to wear our outfits. You have the causal relationship reversed. These in turn reinforce the ideas of masculinity and feminity. It’s why the outfits are separated by gender in stores, to make it easier to market towards women and what they “want”. In turn this makes men and women view each other as an other. If your clothes are on one side of the store, why go to the other section, save for a few exemptions? Think about how awkward it is to be on the others side of the store without permission to be there. These become sacred spaces in which to practice ones femininity and masculinity through the confines of what is demeaned masculine and feminine by the store.

 

These are relatively new concepts because the department store doesn’t start to exist until the late 1800s.

 

Sorry, I didn't expect anyone to take my exaggeration for effect literally. It's not like I was suggesting there were men's and women's section during the Spanish Inquisition.
My point is that men's and women's section have been around for a long time.

 

I did not: Kranes56 asked me why I thought they exist that way.

Companies do try to tell us what we want and need but they also market to what women want as they have the power of the purse. It is women, not men, that shape that market.
Example; Playboy did not tell men to want voluptuous women. We already do, so the bunnies had wide baby making hips and round assets. It was women's fashion magazines that had Twiggy. Sure, Kate Moss made a splash but she posed nude and men do like that. She just isn't ideal up against, say, Ann Margaret. I am advised that women like these super skinny women as the photographers find skinny bodies easier to hang fashion clothes upon. I do not buy that. Do you?

As to who would be more skittish in another department, I'd think women more likely to be alarmed by male presence in their private spaces. (or amused and ask if he is shopping for a woman.)

 

You remember when you brought up how women use their sexuality as a source of power? Yeah that’s because someone told you that’s how women are allowed to act and what kind of women is appropriate to have sex with. You can look at this through race where it’s a bit clearer. Nonwhite women are viewed as exotic and conquerable by white men. More importantly this sets the standard for what women must look like in order to be considered sexy. Women use their sexuality as a weapon? Male gaze says what sexy is and women must comply with this in order to be able to wield sexuality as a tool. We know that women’s and men’s sexuality is treated differently. This is how it happens.

And good job! You nailed it. Men aren’t allowed to go into female spaces, likewise women can’t do the same for male spaces. Now then, how are male and female clothes marketed? Look at sport clothes. When was the last time you saw a football commercial with women as the players?

 

Oh I know. I won’t lie when I say the intended audience wasn’t for you, it was for Gorfias.

 

I am not convinced any of those degrees in gender/ethnic studies are worth the paper they are written on. America's academic cathedral has been demolished with regards to liberal arts. They are now actively attacking STEM with required critical theory course work... gotta brainwash everybody I guess. And people wonder why Chinese universities are now surpassing American universities...... our cathedral is murdering itself. Do you think China is wasting time teaching its engineering students about social justice?

Tsinghua University in China is officially the top tech university in the world and it's subject ranking ANNIHILATES the subject ranking of M.I.T (100 vs 92). In addition, it has three times the enrollment of MIT.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/articles/subject-rankings-methodology
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/engineering

Universities have become a hostile environment for white men and an especially hostile environment for people who aren't interested in group think. It wasn't like that when I went to school. My nephew is an engineering student at UW-Madison and he has noted that the campus is very much against free-thinking.... he has to suppress and hide his conservative leaning. There was a time in America where college campuses were the best place in the world for the exchange of ideas; where all ideas were put under scrutiny and had to be defended...... that time is in America's past.

The fall of the American academic cathedral has mirrored the rise of the Chinese academic cathedral. This is why China is taking the lead in more and more bleeding edge technology and research. The amount of breakthroughs coming from China are staggering.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-china-technology/

 

Gotcha

 

Sorry for any confusion.

 

I think you are putting the cart before the horse. I promise you, corporations have all sorts of testing methodologies seeking out what women want as they are the ones that spend the money. Sure, a corporation will tell you you must buy this new medicine to deal with "restless leg syndrome", telling you that you need a thing. They're trying to sell something where there in reality, is an absence of need and/or desire. But it is women trying and testing fashion and the "look" of things. Selling someone what they already want seems a heck of a lot more profitable then trying to sell them something else.

One chicken and egg question for which I think it is some of both: Do women simply like to preen and doing so attracts a mate, or do women preen so that they CAN catch a mate. Either way, in doing so, in a social evolutionary way, they improve their chances of reproduction. I'd think it some of both. In attracting men, they gain power. A socialized man becomes a "hero" (originally meaning one who is of service) to a wife. A good thing to have around. An un-socialized man is by definition someone acting in a way society does not want and can be a total jerk.

Race and preening are interesting. There are Asian cultures where women wear "white face" in order to be alluring. There are white people that tan to appear darker.

I'd think women can be in the men's section and no one cares. She has the monetary power. She does the spending. A man in that section would presume she is shopping for something she will allow her males to wear.

EDIT: This brings me to something I think important. Men must fight for their financial autonomy. Joint income tax filing should end. Individual only. Give men a more vested interest in their finances. Direct deposits should go to an account in one person's name only. The man and wife can later look at the monthly bills and share them accordingly. As it is now, men are in a terrible place where they can be financially exploited by a woman.

 

School and University to day tend to be female dominated from top to bottom outside of hard sciences and many are overtly hostile to men especially white men. Why chase some hard ass womyns studies major when you have a hand and all the internet porn you could ever want.

 

As long as pern is still legal. They keep finding reasons to, for instance, shut down sex doll brothels. (They claim the dolls are not being cleaned well enough, necessitating shutting them down for health reasons.) I think it is illegal in South Korea, where fertility rates are collapsing. Japan, privates must be blurred. Even in Manga!!!! Some MRAs, and more particularly the MGTOW believe that is because the powers that be want to keep men on the plantation and pern and dolls offer an alternative. Dunno where we are with ectogenysis. Last I checked, they may not take a test past 2 weeks of gestation, buy Law! Ectogenysis would give men an alternative to women for reproduction and I'm sure many Feminists hate that. But it would also empower them to focus on themselves personally and professionally, so there should be some attraction to women in having this thing be an affordable reality.

 

Nope. This is the field and this is how it works. This me quoting literature. Now mind you It is the case that people recreate the system through their actions. But that’s after the playing board is set. You don’t roll dice and move forward in a game without deciding what system to play by first.

 

I'd be careful reading that , "literature". I understand it is written by ideologues with an agenda and should be ignored. It's like quoting tobacco lobby studies finding that cigarettes are great for your health.