# "How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women"



## DownByTheRiver

I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking. 









How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women


Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?




eand.co


----------



## Evinrude58

The article in summation is total, 100% nonsense. Most times there’s at least some truth written into one of these feminist articles that make a normal person stop to wonder if there may be more. This one was just royal malarkey at its finest with not a shred of truth. And let me add—- this was not written by a man in any sense of the word. If anything, men are being demonized, feminized, and whimpified every day by this kind of garbage thinking.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Evinrude58 said:


> The article in summation is total, 100% nonsense. Most times there’s at least some truth written into one of these feminist articles that make a normal person stop to wonder if there may be more. This one was just royal malarkey at its finest with not a shred of truth. And let me add—- this was not written by a man in any sense of the word. If anything, men are being demonized, feminized, and whimpified every day by this kind of garbage thinking.


I think you just proved his point. Probably should have read further.


----------



## BeyondRepair007

I actually think the opposite of this article is happening and men are being taught to never actually be men or have man-thoughts. Because someone somewhere will be offended and think you’re trying to discriminate against them or harass them or who knows what.

People who look for every reason to hate the opposite sex will always find plenty of reasons. Bad people are everywhere, in both sexes.

I did like this line though:
”The internet makes everything faster, harder, dumber, and meaner.”
🤣


----------



## farsidejunky

DownByTheRiver said:


> I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women
> 
> 
> Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eand.co


I kept waiting for the balance to enter the article based on your statements about not dismissing based on title and being more well thought out than it appears.

But instead, it simply dove deeper into the same toxic rabbit hole in which it began, rather than finding some semblance of sanity in the madness of toxic feminity...or modern feminism, as it were. 

Do you honestly see the world this way, DBTR? I am not asking this maliciously, but rather out of genuine curiosity. 

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## lifeistooshort

I've seen articles like this before. I'm sure there is a subset of entitled douchenags who imagine they're owed and are pissed off when they don't get it, but this has always been the case. The internet gives them airtime.

I doubt most men think like this. If they did we'd see a lot more violence then we do.

I've had the pleasure of knowing many, many men in my life in some capacity be it work/social settings/ friends husbands/men I've dated/whatever and I can't think of any like this. I suppose you could argue that they kept it to themselves but people have a way of telegraphing who they are. Besides, most of these men had women in their lives.

I have 2 sons and my bf has 3 brothers and I don't see this from any of them. Even my father, who tended to be a little sexist in his gender role thinking (born in 1944) thought any guy who laid hands on a woman should have the **** knocked out of them.

I do think many men struggle to understand what's expected of them with some of the blurring of traditional gender roles and I can understand that. But most aren't abusing women. The loser douchebags have always existed and will always exist.


----------



## Evinrude58

That was my upbringing: a man who lays hands on a woman was not fit for hanging.
I was guilty of saying some awful things to my ex wife early in our marriage when we had an argument. I’m ashamed of it. Wouldn’t want anyone I knew to hear them.
I have never ever considered a woman’s body as my property, and even if I might have childishly pouted when she rarely rejected me for sex, I never even once considered myself entitled. I was simply wanting her and upset I didn’t get my way. Most family men I know are paying the bills, cooking the food, taking out the trash, washing clothes and dishes….. treat their wives like queens. 

I was taught that my wife should be kept safe, provided for, and her ideas and feelings respected. Therefore she drove the newest cars, she got whatever she needed even if I had to work extra—as most men do. 

There’s not been an social pressure to make the “patriarchy” worse…..


----------



## Emerging Buddhist

I read it three times... then I read his other articles.

Abandon all hope ye who enter his writings, he thrives on being divisive... I couldn't find a meaningful connection in any of his words.

All entrenchment, no enlightenment.


----------



## TexasMom1216

lifeistooshort said:


> I've seen articles like this before. I'm sure there is a subset of entitled douchenags who imagine they're owed and are pissed off when they don't get it, but this has always been the case. The internet gives them airtime.
> 
> I doubt most men think like this. If they did we'd see a lot more violence then we do.
> 
> I've had the pleasure of knowing many, many men in my life in some capacity be it work/social settings/ friends husbands/men I've dated/whatever and I can't think of any like this. I suppose you could argue that they kept it to themselves but people have a way of telegraphing who they are. Besides, most of these men had women in their lives.
> 
> I have 2 sons and my bf has 3 brothers and I don't see this from any of them. Even my father, who tended to be a little sexist in his gender role thinking (born in 1944) thought any guy who laid hands on a woman should have the **** knocked out of them.
> 
> I do think many men struggle to understand what's expected of them with some of the blurring of traditional gender roles and I can understand that. But most aren't abusing women. The loser douchebags have always existed and will always exist.


One of the big problems with the internet, that I think is really the meaning of the article, is that the fringes are amplified and given more weight than they actually have. I’ve read what they say about women on Reddit and the other incel sites. They say things like “all women have a gang rape fantasy” and “rape is natural because it triggers orgasm.” Horrible things about women. Those are (I desperately hope and hope they stay) fringe voices, just like the lunatics who want all men to pay reparations or be submissives or whatever lunacy the feminist left is after. That fringe ideas are normalized is a huge problem for everyone.


----------



## ConanHub

DownByTheRiver said:


> I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women
> 
> 
> Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eand.co


Just based on the title, I would agree to an extent. I didn't read the article but I expressed concern over a growing trend in "manosphere" type videos on YouTube. I call them bitter bachelor videos because they come against radical feminism but in a very negative way toward all women and I do believe the trend is inspiring hate and disdain for women instead of positively encouraging men.


----------



## DudeInProgress

No, the Internet is not teaching men to hate women. That’s ridiculous.
All men are actually taught about hating and oppressing women from a very early age. It’s passed down from our fathers/uncles/older brothers, etc.

It’s a very detailed and complicated plan, probably too complex to explain here. Obviously the point is to hate, denigrate and oppress women, because, that’s what we do.
It’s all very organized and the Internet is just one reinforcing facet of it. It’s been built into all of our institutions, that was the whole point of them really. The patriarchy don’t you know.

I could post the guidebook (The Manifesto) we get as boys, but we’re not supposed to do that publicly.
Oh wait, we’re not supposed to talk about it either. I probably shouldn’t have mentioned any of this, never mind. Ugh, it’s too hot today.


----------



## ConanHub

DownByTheRiver said:


> I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women
> 
> 
> Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eand.co


Good gravy!!!!

This guy is a first rate moron and disconnected from reality!!!!

I'll stick with my premise that there is a growing group of bitter men but this guy isn't a good or reliable resource.


----------



## jorgegene

I have a lot of mistrust in the internet. I think it often does damage and distort impressionable minds.
No doubt there are some men who have bought into 'entitlement' and learned to hate women.
All I can say from my experience in growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, I saw a bit of everything.
Some of the stuff today is mild compared to back then, and I saw it all.
And yeah, I went through a period of sexual frustration and even gave up on dating for a while, but never in my foggiest thoughts did I ever hate women. Not even close. And I've been happily married to the same one now for 9 years. I'm a late bloomer.


----------



## ConanHub

jorgegene said:


> I have a lot of mistrust in the internet. I think it often does damage and distort impressionable minds.
> No doubt there are some men who have bought into 'entitlement' and learned to hate women.
> All I can say from my experience in growing up in the 1960s and 1970s, I saw a bit of everything.
> Some of the stuff today is mild compared to back then, and I saw it all.
> And yeah, I went through a period of sexual frustration and even gave up on dating for a while, but never in my foggiest thoughts did I ever hate women. Not even close. And I've been happily married to the same one now for 9 years. I'm a late bloomer.


I had way more sex and offers for sex than I wanted and I did go through a period of looking down on women. It was in my teens.

Pretty interesting inversion eh?


----------



## RandomDude

Wow, what a load of sh-t.


----------



## minimalME

I can't access it. 😭


----------



## ccpowerslave

I am on the Internet all the time and I have to say I respect women and am generally deferential to them in daily life when appropriate. I also have proper manners, I walk on the outside of the sidewalk, open car doors, etc… 

Sometimes kids don’t even know correct manners. Went out with wife and FIL yesterday and our waitress could see I was in charge so she asks me about ordering stuff and I ask my wife what she’d like to drink.

Basically I treat women with respect.

On the other hand, with my wife I mean she’s my wife. So yesterday when she was like blah I am tired I’m going to change into some comfy pants. I was like hey are you going to put on some sexy ass panties with that? Her: um… no.

I cry inside.


----------



## ConanHub

minimalME said:


> I can't access it. 😭


It was puerile at best.


----------



## RandomDude

ccpowerslave said:


> I am on the Internet all the time and I have to say I respect women and am generally deferential to them in daily life when appropriate. I also have proper manners, I walk on the outside of the sidewalk, open car doors, etc…
> 
> Sometimes kids don’t even know correct manners. Went out with wife and FIL yesterday and our waitress could see I was in charge so she asks me about ordering stuff and I ask my wife what she’d like to drink.
> 
> Basically I treat women with respect.
> 
> On the other hand, with my wife I mean she’s my wife. So yesterday when she was like blah I am tired I’m going to change into some comfy pants. I was like hey are you going to put on some sexy ass panties with that? Her: um… no.
> 
> I cry inside.


I have no bias one way or another with men or women. Respect is not automatically given for me. It is earned. It is commanded. I roll my eyes at BOTH men and women on an individual basis.

The article posts this:
_As a boy, he enters a society where he’s taught, over and over again, in no uncertain terms, that he is entitled to everything. Money, power, status, and sex. In other words, he is entitled to women’s bodies._

I wasn't taught that at all, not my ethnic or national culture teaches me that. WTF?! 

But do you know what IS taught? Reverse this with radical feminism, BLM or whatever crazy leftist extremist nutjob movement you have out there, *people are taught they are entitled to everything because of someone to blame*. It's because of white people our lives are sh-t, because of men our lives are sh-t. It's pathetic and despicable. I learnt very early on in my own childhood the world owes me sh-t. It's our choice whether to be bitter bottom feeders or to make something of ourselves.


----------



## Numb26

Yeah, this "man" is full of sh*t. The while article reads like click bait for men hating feminists


----------



## ccpowerslave

RandomDude said:


> It's our choice whether to be bitter bottom feeders or to make something of ourselves.


Yes, of course. I mean I strive to be a world destroyer (sorry @heartsbeating).


----------



## RandomDude

ccpowerslave said:


> Yes, of course. I mean I drive to be a world destroyer (sorry @heartsbeating).


Hahaha 

And I strive to be a crusher of competition! 👊🍻


----------



## TexasMom1216

minimalME said:


> I can't access it. 😭


It basically outlines the Redpill/MGTOW/NMMNG philosophy and says that it’s being brought into the mainstream. That extreme, left-wing, 3rd wave feminism (about which you and I agree) is being sold as “all women” (imagine🙄) and that the internet is why men hate women now. It’s not super well written and I do feel like the author was trying to please a feminist editor, but I still think his points about normalizing the fringes is useful. There’s an assumption that these edge-of-reality views are more widely held than they truly are. The article would have been more powerful and more credible if the title was “How the Internet is Teaching Men and Women to Hate Each Other” and included examples from both sides.


----------



## minimalME

Thank you, @TexasMom1216. 🙂


----------



## ConanHub

RandomDude said:


> Hahaha
> 
> And I strive to be a crusher of competition! 👊🍻


LoL! I try my best to be left alone and leave others alone but I inevitably end up leading and that requires some crushing.

I regret Adam leaving the garden.😉😎


----------



## farsidejunky

Here you go, @minimalME.

_“Sexual anguish.” Have you felt it? I have. I’m going to guess that every human being who’s ever lived has. So I was shocked — but not surprised — to see the NYT justifying the mass murder in Atlanta with that idea and phrase. You know how it goes by now: a man kills women, and excuse after excuse is trotted out to justify the violence. He was a good guy! He was just confused, upset, suffering, hurt. He was in “sexual anguish.”

Hey. I spent my teenage years in sexual anguish, and I bet you did, too. How many mass murders did you commit? That’s what I thought.

What’s happening here is something different. It feels like patriarchy has entered a whole new chapter. Men are being taught to hate women — yes, hate — in a new way. Let’s call it “hyper patriarchy.” The internet makes everything faster, harder, dumber, and meaner. And that’s what it’s doing to patriarchy, too.

Let me explain, if it’s not already obvious, as it probably is to many of you. How does the average guy grow up?

As a boy, he enters a society where he’s taught, over and over again, in no uncertain terms, that he is entitled to everything. Money, power, status, and sex. In other words, he is entitled to women’s bodies. We’re not speaking of things like basic human rights, which belong to all — men are taught from the day they’re born, more or less, that everything else in society is to be their property. They have dominion over the rest, from land to money to womens’ bodies, which they are to acquire, in an endless contest of masculinity, where the man who has the most of all these things “wins,” is the “alpha male,” and the rest are to be subordinate to him.

And to win this game of status over one’s fellow men, men are taught one more crucial lesson: it’s OK to explode in violence and rage if their expectations of entitlement of power over everything and everyone else aren’t met. Fast enough, well enough, hard enough. All this we call “masculinity.”

How are men taught this thing called “masculinity”? The more apt question is: how aren’t they? It’s inculcated into them in movies, books, ads. In cultural scenario after scenario where being a “real” man is being rich, powerful, dominant, acquisitive, and materialistic. Christian Grey was so sexy — he was a billionaire who’d tie you up! Be tied up if you want to be tied up — but does having a billionaire abuse you really add to the thrill? Maybe you see my point. The superhero movies, the video games, education itself. All these things have become flashpoints in a “culture war” precisely because that is how little boys are taught to be “real men,” and being a real man means, above all, being entitled to dominion over bodies, and using violence if your expectations aren’t met.

Some of those bodies, historically, have been Black and brown — as in slavery, as in war. Some of them have been, and still are, “animals” — real men are killers, don’t you know. Some of those bodies have been those of the earth and the land and the oceans and the rivers. And of course many of those bodies have been “female.”

What proves the lie of masculinity? To a “real man,” men, too, can be female, conflated with feminine, and female men deserve as much abuse and harassment as women do. So the preferred insult among “real men” — in fraternities or sports clubs or so on, at least in America — is usually some kind of homophobic or misogynistic slur, to refer to the feminized body, which, to the “real man,” deserves abuse and scorn, because it is not masculine, meaning it doesn’t hold the entitlement of power over bodies, but rejects it, and is therefore a “b*tch,” or a “p*ssy,” or some other kind of misogynistic slur.

With me so far? That’s all abstract, but I really want you to understand the theory of masculinity, why it’s so hurtful — because you’re not going to to understand hyper-patriarchy unless you do.

So there’s a little boy, on the way to being a “man.” He hits puberty. He goes and begins to look for what we might call “sexual partners” — I think that’s a poor way to put it. The boy becoming a man is seeking intimacy and relationship and closeness and warmth. Yes, these things are expressed with our bodies — but the body is a means to those ends.

By now, though, maybe our little boy has internalised the values of masculinity. He’s already spent too much time on an internet, watching TV, playing video games, which teach him that “real men” dominate and abuse and harass. They take power. They aren’t interested in consent — and intimacy is something for “b*tches.” Being a real man is just about having power over bodies.

So he goes out and tries to do what he knows. He approaches girls by “negging” them. Insulting them, harassing them, demeaning them. He doesn’t understand the fine line between the charm of flirtation’s mild and humorous challenges — and outright scorn and contempt.

What do women do? They walk away, rolling their eyes. At least most of them do. After all, women, too are taught masculinity — that being “desired” is being abused and harassed and dominated. But to many of them, at least by now, it doesn’t feel right. The cultural value feels at odd with the emotional experience. It doesn’t feel much like love when a man is telling you how ugly and stupid you are — no matter how much our dumb culture tries to beat it into women. So women walk away from men like this, more and more.

The only men who can really win this game are predators. The ones who are the most violent and hateful of all. Maybe they end up with a few dates, or even girlfriends — of the kinds who have internalised masculinity too, internalised their own misogyny, and hate themselves as women, think that being loved and desired and wanted is being treated with contempt and scorn and rage.

So now our little boy is seeing something happening that he can’t quite understand, grasp, grapple with. Women — who are increasingly liberated — aren’t interested in his nonsense, these toxic values of masculinity he keeps trying to wield over them like cudgels. They aren’t interested in dating him because he’s a gigantic assh*le.

And yet he looks around, and he sees that there are assh*les that seem to win the “mating game”, the contest for “hot women” that patriarchy makes masculinity. He doesn’t understand that these assh*les aren’t having real relationships, that the poor women trapped in them are being emotionally if not physically abused, that they won’t provide him with the intimacy and warmth he’s really looking for. Because the assh*les are the loudest of all, shouting about how “hot” their “women” are, our little boy feels a sense of despair and rage.

He must not be a man.

What is he? Well, what does masculinity say is not a man? A woman. Our little boy begins to think of himself as feminized — the worst thing of all to be in a patriarchy, a second caste, a commodity, a “b*tch”, a [insert homophobic slur], and so on. If he’s not a real man, then he must be weak, and being weak is being feminized. Our little boy might not think all this consciously, but he is certainly thinking it unconsciously. How do we know? Because of what happens next.

Beginning to see himself as feminized — the one thing that’s not acceptable for a real man — our little boy feels a rising panic. He has to act. So what does he do? Of course, he goes on the internet. And there he’s taught to double down. On masculinity. He’s taught that the problem is that he’s not being enough of an assh*le. That to get women to desire him, he has to be even more scornful, contemptuous, abusive, toxic, hurtful.

He has to be even more of a real man.

He now has a resolution to his problem — he can’t “get girls,” which means he’s not enough of a “real man,” so the solution is to be even more of one. Which, in practice, amounts to doubling down on being a douchebag. Note, though, what’s actually going on: women who are increasingly liberated are walking away from him, because he is a violent, stupid moron. There’s nothing interesting or cool or funny or charming about him. There’s just this anger and rage which he’s been taught is the key to female desire. Somehow, though, it doesn’t seem to be working.

This bizarre, backwards process — men being taught they have to be assh*les to “get the girl,” it not working, because increasingly liberated women walk away, so men, drawing the wrong lesson entirely, taught do so by the internet, double down, and conclude they’re not douchebag enough yet — goes on and on throughout boyhood becoming manhood now. You can see it literally everywhere if you look.

How does the internet teach men to double down on toxic masculinity — instead of give it up? Well, that happens because boys who don’t have much experience with women, whose only experience of women is through p*rn and social media, get together on forums, which are now the stuff of legend, the most toxic places on the internet. And it’s the blind leading the blind. Together, they fall off a cliff of male violence. They draw the only conclusion that masculinity allows them to draw. “You’re not getting girls because you’re not enough of a massive douchebag yet! You’ve got to be even more of one!!”

And that is how men are being radicalised to hate women online. Because pretty soon, this process results in real hate. Spend enough time with other men who can’t get a date because they’re douchebags — but think the problem is that they’re not abusive and violent enough yet to really be “real men” — and soon enough a vicious cycle takes hold. Women are “sl*ts,” numbers on a scale of 1 to 10, and your only status and power and worth as a man comes from how many “10s” you’ve “scored.”

Yes, teenage boys have done that since time immemorial — but not in the way the internet imagines. Most teenagers have pretended to do all that. The number of teenage boys who’ve actually gone out there and had massive utopian sex with a supermodel is probably about the size of my shoes. But on the forums where boys reinforce other boys’ imaginary beliefs, they really believe and imagine that they’re entitled to “10s,” all the time, and if they don’t “get them,” they’re not worthy of masculinity, they’re feminized, they’re not real men.

See the point? Human relationships have been commodified — reduced to numbers. The whole goal of them — intimacy, warmth, closeness — has been denuded and lost. Women have been dehumanized — and so have the boys who believe this nonsense, because they spend their boyhoods and manhoods desperately believing they’re not “real men,” and that’s the problem, the reason they’re so alone, whereas the truth is that they’re just not very good or interesting or thoughtful people.

How far can this vicious cycle go? It can go all the way to the bitter end. Right down to making mass murderers of men who consider themselves “losers” because they’re not “bagging 10s” every night. That’s what “incels” in Toronto and New Zealand did, after all. And that’s what appears to have played a pretty serious part in provoking the Atlanta attacks too.

Boys are being radicalised to hate women. They are being taught that’s what being a real man is. Because if female desire isn’t coming your way, it must because you’re not violent, brutal, and abusive enough — since we know that’s what women have always really wanted since time immemorial.

So says masculinity.

That’s how a mass murderer is born.

All of that’s “sexual anguish,” I guess. But nobody should imagine that it justifies or legitimises mass murder. The point I’m trying to make is this.

Patriarchy is entering a new chapter thanks to the internet. Yes, masculinity has always taught men to subjugate women, and if they can’t they themselves are feminine, and aren’t real men. But on the internet, now, that is happening at light speed, with no checks or balances or safeguards or guardrails. Sad guys who have no experience with women repeat the myth to each other over and over again to the point that it metastasises in the brain and causes a kind of meltdown of rage, hate, and violence, to the point of mass murder.

Patriarchy in this way rules out the possibility of warm and loving and close relationships for men, too. It takes away the chance of intimacy. It reduces them to things who are seeking power over bodies, and justifying it with the myth that such bodies desire violence in the first place, because that is what being female really is: needing to be subjugated. Who wants to date someone like that? The answer, these days, is: less and less women, who walk away from these sad-dork-bros rolling their eyes.

But the biggest victims of patriarchy are, of course, still women. They have to wade through a sea of entitled dorks flaunting their douchebaggery just to find a date, and yes, that always been true, but has it been this true? They’re reduced to using apps created by men which reduce relationships to quantitative “hook-ups” just to try to have relationships. And they have to risk the threat of male violence, still, at every turn, which is justified and legitimated by legions of sad guys, who go on repeating the myth to one another that what women really want is the world’s biggest a-hole, not a real person with a mind and soul they can relate to.

You’re going to ask me how to fix this right about now. The truth is: I don’t know. But what I do know is that nobody should have to grow up like this. The internet is poisoning our societies in so many ways. It’s battering away at democracy, turning people’s minds to fascist mush. It’s stealing childhood, gluing kids to screens, instead of engaging them with art, books, living things, creativity. And hyper-masculinity — sad men who consider themselves losers banding together to repeat the myth that women really want violence and subjugation, and they’re not “getting girls” because they’re not predatory and abusive enough — seems to be even worse than the toxic masculinity which preceded it. These are the cultural problems of our age — and they’re big ones.

Fix them? First we have to begin understanding that they really exist. But what else does so much male violence against women, so constantly, really tell us?

Umair
March 2021_

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## oldshirt

I haven't even got to the article yet. 

Just the fact that it is validating the word "Patriarchy" in the subtitle is a dead-give away that it is feminist propaganda meant to inflame rather than inform or enlighten. 

Now on to the article to see if any of the content proves me wrong in my initial assumption.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Lol.. I didn’t make it through.

I was at the gym last week and a dude had a shirt from Over the Top. I was like bro!!! However my favorite movie from that era was Cobra. I was like man the match stick in the mouth, he had the best action poses. Everyone agreed. Stallone Cobra.

This guy with the shirt was golden gloves. He knows, Stallone Cobra.

If I remember right that was 1986. We’re like yeah dude he had the best poses and such.


----------



## LATERILUS79

Oh my God.

I took your word for it, DBTR. I read the article. The actual article was SOOOOOO much worse than the title.


This poor "man" that wrote this article. He thinks it is going to get him laid. He is so sadly mistaken.


Articles like this is what perpetuates the feminist victim mentality. It attempts to teach little girls that they are always victims and there's no way out because all men are bad and will keep them down. What an utter load of horse crap. I'm tired of feminists teaching girls that they are victims. How ridiculously insulting. I'll teach my daughter she isn't a victim. She is smart. She is strong. She can think for herself. She has agency. She can make her own decisions. She can only be held down by someone if she allows it. She'll grow up with common sense because I'll teach it to her. She'll know how to protect herself from the bad people of the world (both bad men and women). 

I couldn't stop laughing when I got to the part that men are taught at a young age that they are entitled to everything. 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 

WOW.

Not even close. I was taught at a young age that I am entitled to NOTHING. Everything I have will have will only come to me because I work for it. Period. 

Time for feminism to look at itself in the mirror. What an amazing projection. It isn't men that are taught at a young age that they are entitled to everything. It is feminists teaching little girls that they are the ones that are entitled to everything. 


Whatever. As long as the bulk of the leftists and feminists stay on the coasts, I'm good with it. Please please please do not come to the central US. Pretty please? You know the coasts are so much better than here!😁


----------



## LATERILUS79

lifeistooshort said:


> I've seen articles like this before. I'm sure there is a subset of entitled douchenags who imagine they're owed and are pissed off when they don't get it, but this has always been the case. The internet gives them airtime.
> 
> I doubt most men think like this. If they did we'd see a lot more violence then we do.
> 
> I've had the pleasure of knowing many, many men in my life in some capacity be it work/social settings/ friends husbands/men I've dated/whatever and I can't think of any like this. I suppose you could argue that they kept it to themselves but people have a way of telegraphing who they are. Besides, most of these men had women in their lives.
> 
> I have 2 sons and my bf has 3 brothers and I don't see this from any of them. Even my father, who tended to be a little sexist in his gender role thinking (born in 1944) thought any guy who laid hands on a woman should have the **** knocked out of them.
> 
> I do think many men struggle to understand what's expected of them with some of the blurring of traditional gender roles and I can understand that. But most aren't abusing women. The loser douchebags have always existed and will always exist.


Great post, Lifeistooshort...... but I'm stealing "douchenags".

Sorry, not sorry. 🤣


----------



## ccpowerslave

You know on Stallone Cobra you could probably take the match out of his mouth and use his stubble to light it.

That is a good template for a young man right there if you ask me.


----------



## ConanHub

The author isn't educated at all or apparently capable of the most basic research.

I'm sure he's never heard of, or even interested in, the female guards of Nazi concentration camps.


----------



## ccpowerslave

LATERILUS79 said:


> Time for feminism to look at itself in the mirror. What an amazing projection. It isn't men that are taught at a young age that they are entitled to everything. It is feminists teaching little girls that they are the ones that are entitled to everything.


Lol… I remember when I was in high school Desert Storm kicked off. My mom was crapping her pants that we would get drafted to go and I had just gone to the post office to register.

She was like, “boo hoo you can go to Canada”. I’m like um… don’t you know who we are? We don’t go to Canada we do what we are told. Her, “no boo hoo”. Sorry no boo hoo.

Now is that just for men? I used to think so. But I have met active duty women coming back. One was my friend’s daughter.

She described being told to dig a hole and grab her rifle because their position at an airway in Africa would probably be attacked.

The mind is the same, the body is different.


----------



## minimalME

Thank you, @farsidejunky! 🤗


----------



## lifeistooshort

LATERILUS79 said:


> Great post, Lifeistooshort...... but I'm stealing "douchenags".
> 
> Sorry, not sorry. 🤣


Ha ha....that was a happy accident!

You have my blessing 😀


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> The author isn't educated at all or apparently capable of the most basic research.
> 
> I'm sure he's never heard of, or even interested in, the female guards of Nazi concentration camps.


I'm thinking the author of this crap isn't really a man but a feminist suck up.


----------



## oldshirt

oldshirt said:


> I haven't even got to the article yet.
> 
> Just the fact that it is validating the word "Patriarchy" in the subtitle is a dead-give away that it is feminist propaganda meant to inflame rather than inform or enlighten.
> 
> Now on to the article to see if any of the content proves me wrong in my initial assumption.


OMG I was dead wrong. I don't think I can even call this feminist propaganda as it has no real 
feminist agenda - it is pure misandry and man bashing. 

Feminism is about supporting and promoting female issues and topics. this did not have any of that at all. It was strictly the demonization of men. 

Content like this portrays men as either dangerous monsters out to harm the world; or as defective females that are poisoned by their own Y chromosome. 

Does the internet give a platform for the ill-intended and those who wish to promote hate and divisiveness? Yes. And this article and it's author are glowing examples. 

Other examples that promote hate and vitriole such as the KKK, the Neo Nazis, Aryan Nations and other hate groups. 

This is not feminism people and I was wrong in my initial assessment in my first post. This is misandry and hate. 

I do not believe most bona fide mainstream feminists will endorse this article.


----------



## Numb26

oldshirt said:


> OMG I was dead wrong. I don't think I can even call this feminist propaganda as it has no real
> feminist agenda - it is pure misandry and man bashing.
> 
> Feminism is about supporting and promoting female issues and topics. this did not have any of that at all. It was strictly the demonization of men.
> 
> Content like this portrays men as either dangerous monsters out to harm the world; or as defective females that are poisoned by their own Y chromosome.
> 
> Does the internet give a platform for the ill-intended and those who wish to promote hate and divisiveness? Yes. And this article and it's author are glowing examples.
> 
> Other examples that promote hate and vitriole such as the KKK, the Neo Nazis, Aryan Nations and other hate groups.
> 
> This is not feminism people and I was wrong in my initial assessment in my first post. This is misandry and hate.
> 
> I do not believe most bona fide mainstream feminists will endorse this article.


Honestly the author seems to be one those losers that thinks he can get laid by some feminist by bashing other men.


----------



## AVR1962

The article has some good points that I feel tunneled down the wrong hole and spoken as the only way to see it. I do feel men are brought up to be the winner, the best, the strongest. They do quest for sex. Some do want relationships, or at least think they do, while others do not. I don't see that all men have a mind set to use and abuse women so it that sense this strikes me as a woman (author) who is more butter towards the male race than reality itself. All that being said I do feel some males get lost in the process of finding their top spot and many of these males feel inferior and not wanted by females. If they feel rejected, unwanted many do turn to other means and sometimes that gets real twisted. I don't like how the author refers to these types as serial killers, however, I think that all the males who have committed some kind of heinous act of violence and be linked back to self-worth and rejection, not all by women. Of those who do make the connection to women my question would be what kind of relationship did they have with their mother. Lastly, the internet has brought us good and bad. Relationships have dissolved in so many ways and the internet with it's twisted articles advising both men and women, the free sex given and all the hook-ups sites, porn and it's unrealistic views of sex and women in generally have ruined the potential for anything real and lasting. There is always something more waiting out there.


----------



## oldshirt

The irony that I see here is the assertion is that the internet is promoting hatred towards women, but the writer is using the internet platform to promote hatred against men.


----------



## oldshirt

Numb26 said:


> Honestly the author seems to be one those losers that thinks he can get laid by some feminist by bashing other men.


Make no mistakes, there are men that hate other men and are just as misandrous as some women. 

He could be doing this as attempt to endear himself to feminists,,,, but as I said above, I do not believe many mainstream feminists will endorse the article. 

Another explanation is he is just a wimpy guy who got swirlies and Indian Snake bites and stuffed in the lockers by the jocks in school and then has felt marginalized and pushed out by stronger men in adult life and hasn't been able to get a woman because of what he sees as the "Chads" and "Alpha Males" as getting all the girls. 

There's also a chance he may be gay. In order to be that angry at someone, you kind of have to want something from them deeply that you aren't getting. I can't remember her name now but there was a lesbian comedianne that would say in her stand up routine that lesbians don't dislike men and that they don't have any problem with men because they do not have to put up with men's crap. In order to have that much vitriol towards men, he may want to rub up against them but the gay guys don't like him either. 

And finally and most simple explanation is that he is just crap writer and so have to produce something extreme and gratuitously inflammatory in order to even be noticed.


----------



## Evinrude58

oldshirt said:


> *And finally and most simple explanation is that he is just crap writer and so have to produce something extreme and gratuitously inflammatory in order to even be noticed.*


That’s my view as well. This person just wanted to be known for SOMETHING, even if it’s shoveling bull manure.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Anyone, and I mean anyone who finds merit in this drivel of an article has fully bought into the virtue of being a victim and every victim narrative needs an abuser (boogeyman) and a vector (in this case it's the internet).

The virtue of victimhood is BS. Once we stop exalting victims, far fewer people will virtue signal that they are indeed part of a victim group and articles like this will be laughed off for the detritus that it is.

Let's make strong people, personal virtue and individual success virtuous again and shame those who identify with "victim groups" as an excuse for their own shortcomings, bad choices or as an attempt to signal "virtue".


----------



## Deejo

Well ... someone had the girlfriend they thought they had, but didn't really; stolen out from under them by a Chad.

There is this new thing. I see it on the internet. I see on social media. It has a singular purpose. It is not intended to inform, instruct, illuminate or disseminate. It is intended to make you consume. Watch, listen, yearn, hope, rage, cry ... whatever. Clickbait headlines. Social media 'stories' that tell absolutely no story whatsoever. They drone on and tease with multiple parts, compelling you to consume more, so that you can get to the story, or the point. Except there isn't one. Or worse they portray a particular narrative, and then convey something completely contradictory to that narrative. Their only goal being to tickle your limbic system, light you up like a Christmas Tree, post, share, and make their mental and emotional manipulation exercise go viral.

This article is that same thing.

He simply amalgamates a number of sound bytes and talking points that quite literally ANYONE could scrape in less than 10 minutes online. Especially given that online algorithms will continue to feed you content from EXACTLY whatever rabbit hole you want to run down.

He smashes together bait hook topics like patriarchy, sexism, toxic-masculinity, dating, violence.

He could quite literally use the same mechanism to write the exact same article and simply flip the genders.

This dude literally says nothing. Right until the very end. There he makes THE point. It is simple and succinct. And importantly? We ALL already know it. And we just don't care.

Here, watch, I'll demonstrate.


----------



## heartsbeating

DownByTheRiver said:


> I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women
> 
> 
> Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eand.co


I read the opening... and then read most of the news article being referred to. Okay, that gave me context. Continued reading the next few sentences and did not feel his position was related whatsoever to the article being linked to. I did not read his view as thought-provoking, well considered, or a savvy juxtaposition. Admittedly I did a bit of skim-reading when I noticed grammatical errors and wondered where his piece was going. I'm not going to commence breaking down why I thought this was lazy as it's just pointless.


----------



## heartsbeating

Deejo said:


> This dude literally says nothing. Right until the very end. There he makes THE point. It is simple and succinct. And importantly? We ALL already know it. And we just don't care.


I don't think he made a particularly simple and succinct point at all. If anything, it was a lazy wrap-up.



Deejo said:


> Here, watch, I'll demonstrate.


 nice one.


----------



## heartsbeating

ccpowerslave said:


> Yes, of course. I mean I strive to be a world destroyer (sorry @heartsbeating).





RandomDude said:


> Hahaha
> 
> And I strive to be a crusher of competition! 👊🍻


Aww, of course you are.


----------



## Deejo

heartsbeating said:


> I don't think he made a particularly simple and succinct point at all. If anything, it was a lazy wrap-up.
> 
> 
> nice one.


Only thing that was correct is that the inherent design of how the internet operates is reductive, and corrosive influence.

And, thank you. Expect you to buy a t-shirt, or coffee mug.


----------



## sokillme

This reads like one of those so called "champions" of women we later find out later was assaulting them.


----------



## TXTrini

This article was laughable, I barely got through it. All the while, I pictured the author being stuffed in lockers and pantsed in front of people (which is terrible, not condoning it). Im just painting a picture of a weenie who feels the need to pander to women for brownie points. Then I looked at his profile picture, yep... then his list of articles 🙄 

Sure some men are pathetic and others are assholes, some women are too. What's new?


----------



## Wolfman1968

TexasMom1216 said:


> It basically outlines the Redpill/MGTOW/NMMNG philosophy and says that it’s being brought into the mainstream. That extreme, left-wing, 3rd wave feminism (about which you and I agree) is being sold as “all women” (imagine🙄) and that the internet is why men hate women now. It’s not super well written and I do feel like the author was trying to please a feminist editor, but I still think his points about normalizing the fringes is useful. There’s an assumption that these edge-of-reality views are more widely held than they truly are. The article would have been more powerful and more credible if the title was “How the Internet is Teaching Men and Women to Hate Each Other” and included examples from both sides.


Well, I think you're partly right. But I think the misandrist feminists are actually much more widespread and in more positions of authority than the RedPill/MGTOW crowd is.
Just think for a minute. There are plenty of instances any of us can think of where radical feminists are in charge in positions of Academia and Government, who make no bones about their anti-male positions (eg, the Boston College feminist professor who refused to let men in her class, or the British feminist activist/journalist/academician who advocated putting men in "camps", let alone the more mundane everyday misandry which is widespread). On the other hand, the RedPill crowd still seems confined to blogging from their mom's basements and the occasional mass shooting spree. They just aren't given the authority/positions of power/social currency that the radical feminists are given. 
So maybe the article should have been "How is the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women, and How the Internet, Academia, Government and Mainstream Media are Teaching Women to Hate Men."


----------



## TexasMom1216

Wolfman1968 said:


> Well, I think you're partly right. But I think the misandrist feminists are actually much more widespread and in more positions of authority than the RedPill/MGTOW crowd is.
> Just think for a minute. There are plenty of instances any of us can think of where radical feminists are in charge in positions of Academia and Government, who make no bones about their anti-male positions (eg, the Boston College feminist professor who refused to let men in her class, or the British feminist activist/journalist/academician who advocated putting men in "camps", let alone the more mundane everyday misandry which is widespread). On the other hand, the RedPill crowd still seems confined to blogging from their mom's basements and the occasional mass shooting spree. They just aren't given the authority/positions of power/social currency that the radical feminists are given.
> So maybe the article should have been "How is the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women, and How the Internet, Academia, Government and Mainstream Media are Teaching Women to Hate Men."


Wow, you make really good points here. We do see, especially in the current administration, the insane level of man-hating going on and you cannot go to a college campus without being inundated with man-hating garbage from all sides. The crazy 4th wave feminists are the ones redefining "rape" to mean "the sex was bad" or "he wasn't cute enough" while ignoring actual violence against women taking place in other parts of the world. That highlights that they aren't sincere in wanting to help women, they just want power. And we know the left wants to destroy the family, we saw it in "Life of Julia" where a woman was basically a child of the government. So your point that radical feminism is more widespread than the MGTOW/PUA/NMMNG crowd is very true, I didn't think of it from that perspective. They're both insidious, and neither deserves a platform.


----------



## Julie's Husband

The author is more than a bit over the top, but he did present some real facts. The fact is that much of the social media gives a platform for mean people.

My wife came from a social strata in Australia where men ARE dominant. Their word is law. She says it can feel comfortable as the woman feels protected and cared for, not needing to make decisions. She had problems with my very egalitarian attitude and saw it as being indecisive. Not a "mover and a shaker".

I was not raised to be dominant as he describes. I was taught to respect women. I was a nerd and turned it into a personal Don Quixote type quest to protect women's virtue. Including from me. 

However the concept of pursuing the status of being "man enough" or masculine is true and I have a real issue with it.

I have problems relating to many men as there is the expectation of male bonding (fist bump, "hey, bro, how about them Red Sox). I really don't care to bond and have zero interest in sports. I stopped seeing a male psychologist because he didn't seem to be able to understand that I would not conform to the masculine image.

I see the quest to be "man enough" as causing men to be less than they could as strong independent individuals.

Treatments for prostate cancer commonly affect men's sexual function, they feel like measure up to the image of masculinity, assume their SOs will no longer want them and pull apart from the relationship.

Some men have multiple orgasms; there is no PE or struggling to put off orgasm, making sex very anxiety free. I suspect that trying to live up to the social model of masculinity causes some multi orgasmic men to feel failure after a "PE" and not be aware of themselves.


----------



## RandomDude

Julie's Husband said:


> My wife came from a social strata in Australia where men ARE dominant. Their word is law. She says it can feel comfortable as the woman feels protected and cared for, not needing to make decisions. She had problems with my very egalitarian attitude and saw it as being indecisive. Not a "mover and a shaker".


Social strata? What? Dominant? 
Hahaha about as dominant as a carton of piss mate!








But I do agree that men ARE expected to be decisive, that's expected everywhere though no?


----------



## In Absentia

Well, the life of a young boy doesn't start with the Internet. If you've been brought up with good values, it's very likely that you will understand what behaviours are ok and what behaviours are toxic. In the real world and on the Internet. So, I don't buy it.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Let's give the guy credit. He managed to accomplish what seldom happens here on TAM......we're all united in thinking he's a loser and full of crap 😀

How often does this happen?


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

DownByTheRiver said:


> I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women
> 
> 
> Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eand.co


A flaky post hoping to garner some internet time by jumping on popular rhetoric. Kind of old tired topic.


----------



## Laurentium

> But what else does *so much* male violence against women, so constantly, really tell us?


So is there more male violence against women than there used to be, say 50 years ago, or 100? Or is it on a gradually decreasing slope?


----------



## TexasMom1216

Laurentium said:


> So is there more male violence against women than there used to be, say 50 years ago, or 100? Or is it on a gradually decreasing slope?


IMHO, neither. I think it's about the same. Politics aside, human nature doesn't change. Women are now allowed to report violence against them, whereas 50-100 years ago it was a "private matter," so we hear about it more than we used to. The left amplifies violence by changing the definition (I mean, words are now "violence") but instances of real abuse are very probably about the same as they've always been. I utterly reject the idea that the internet has increased violence against women at all. Men who hit and rape are men who hit and rape. That has never and will never change.


----------



## Julie's Husband

RandomDude said:


> Social strata? What? Dominant?
> Hahaha about as dominant as a carton of piss mate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I do agree that men ARE expected to be decisive, that's expected everywhere though no?


Yes, dominant. 

Decisiveness expected everywhere? Is that a dominant trait? Well whoever is doing the expecting can continue expecting. Personally, I'm all about egalitarianism. I do not make big decisions without my wife being on board. Well, I DID have to make a spur of the moment decision to have $3000 worth of work done because she was not available for concurrence. She thought that was pretty hot.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Laurentium said:


> So is there more male violence against women than there used to be, say 50 years ago, or 100? Or is it on a gradually decreasing slope?


There's more, because there are more people. Percentage wise I couldn't say without consulting oracle Google.


----------



## TBT

Right from the start, he presents this as dogma-

*As a boy, he enters a society where he’s taught, over and over again, in no uncertain terms, that he is entitled to everything.* Money, power, status, and sex. In other words, he is entitled to _women’s bodies_. We’re not speaking of things like basic human rights, which belong to all — men are taught from the day they’re born, more or less, that everything else in society is to be _their property_. They have dominion over the rest, from land to money to womens’ bodies, which they are to acquire, in an endless contest of masculinity, where the man who has the most of all these things “wins,” is the “alpha male,” and the rest are to be subordinate to him. 

I missed all the classes! He needs to get a grip.


----------



## Laurentium

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> There's more, because there are more people. Percentage wise I couldn't say without consulting oracle Google.


I meant percentage wise. My feeling is there's less. For a man to hit his wife used to be accepted.


----------



## TXTrini

RandomDude said:


> Social strata? What? Dominant?
> Hahaha about as dominant as a carton of piss mate!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I do agree that men ARE expected to be decisive, that's expected everywhere though no?


It depends... For me, it annoys me when a man likes to make decisions for me but is decisively uninformed. So if he's deliberate and thoughtful about it, then yes it's attractive, otherwise nope!.


----------



## TXTrini

TBT said:


> Right from the start, he presents this as dogma-
> 
> *As a boy, he enters a society where he’s taught, over and over again, in no uncertain terms, that he is entitled to everything.* Money, power, status, and sex. In other words, he is entitled to _women’s bodies_. We’re not speaking of things like basic human rights, which belong to all — men are taught from the day they’re born, more or less, that everything else in society is to be _their property_. They have dominion over the rest, from land to money to womens’ bodies, which they are to acquire, in an endless contest of masculinity, where the man who has the most of all these things “wins,” is the “alpha male,” and the rest are to be subordinate to him.
> 
> I missed all the classes! He needs to get a grip.


Maybe he grew up that way. I'm not sure which country he's from (or his parents), but he appears to be of Middle Eastern ethnicity.


----------



## TBT

TXTrini said:


> Maybe he grew up that way. I'm not sure which country he's from (or his parents), but he appears to be of Middle Eastern ethnicity.


My understanding is that he's a British economist of Pakastani descent. He studied here in Canada and London. He may have grown up that way, but in my opinion he's worldly and intelligent enough to know that opinions about anything are just that, opinions. He presented what I posted above as factual, when it's really just his opinion.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Laurentium said:


> I meant percentage wise. My feeling is there's less. For a man to hit his wife used to be accepted.


I'd hope less.


----------



## TXTrini

TBT said:


> My understanding is that he's a British economist of Pakastani descent. He studied here in Canada and London. He may have grown up that way, but in my opinion he's worldly and intelligent enough to know that opinions about anything are just that, opinions. He presented what I posted above as factual, when it's really just his opinion.


It's his opinion alright.

You'd be surprised how much pressure there is, even in multigenerational transplants, they still have different ideas of what's normal passed on and enforced. I'm speaking as someone whose ancestors were mostly from India and grew up in a very Westernized society far removed from that culture. Many of the men in my family still have very old-fashioned, outdated ideas of women and I encountered a worsening attitude amongst my peers. It's the major reason why I chose to marry outside of my culture.


----------



## DownButNotOut

Laurentium said:


> I meant percentage wise. My feeling is there's less. For a man to hit his wife used to be accepted.


I prefer the hard data.

About a quarter of heterosexual relationships between 18-28 contain domestic violence.

In about half those cases the violence is reciprocal. Meaning both partners are violent with each other.
In the rest of those cases, the woman is the perpetrator of violence 70% of the time.









Domestic violence is most commonly reciprocal | The Psychiatrist | Cambridge Core


Domestic violence is most commonly reciprocal - Volume 35 Issue 1




www.cambridge.org


----------



## TexasMom1216

Laurentium said:


> I meant percentage wise. My feeling is there's less. For a man to hit his wife used to be accepted.


It still is. The difference is women can support themselves and leave.


----------



## RandomDude

TXTrini said:


> Maybe he grew up that way. I'm not sure which country he's from (or his parents), but he appears to be of Middle Eastern ethnicity.





TBT said:


> My understanding is that he's a British economist of Pakastani descent. He studied here in Canada and London. He may have grown up that way, but in my opinion he's worldly and intelligent enough to know that opinions about anything are just that, opinions. He presented what I posted above as factual, when it's really just his opinion.


Well, that explains a lot.

No offence intended of course  but it is what it is.


----------



## Enigma32

lifeistooshort said:


> Let's give the guy credit. He managed to accomplish what seldom happens here on TAM......*we're all united in thinking he's a loser* and full of crap 😀
> 
> How often does this happen?


Not everyone...


----------



## Laurentium

DownButNotOut said:


> I prefer the hard data.


Me too. Thanks for the link. Are you aware of any data about the direction of change?


----------



## Bcause

DownByTheRiver said:


> I hope you won't dismiss this article on title alone. It's a lot more well thought out than it looks on its face. And it's written by a man. I think there's a lot of truth in it and that it is thought-provoking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the Internet is Teaching Men to Hate Women
> 
> 
> Are We Writing a Whole New Ugly Chapter in the History of Patriarchy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> eand.co


Very good article. I could go on forever but can’t. My marriage turning point can be put on my spreadsheet. It was about 6 months before I first googled “trump made my husband mean.” Not to get political, but there are so many people mirroring his disdain and unbelievable disrespect to women. You’d be surprised how many stories are out there.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

damn womenz


----------



## Numb26

Bcause said:


> Very good article. I could go on forever but can’t. My marriage turning point can be put on my spreadsheet. It was about 6 months before I first googled “trump made my husband mean.” Not to get political, but there are so many people mirroring his disdain and unbelievable disrespect to women. You’d be surprised how many stories are out there.


This is what Stage 4 TDS looks like. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


----------



## Dictum Veritas

I have a wife, 2 daughters and my mom lives with us. There is no way for me to hate women without hating everyone around me. I would state the inverse is true. In a way I hate men who try to sexualize themselves to me. There is no attraction to a man in me in that way. I have no sexual use for another man.

If a woman starts showing more male than female characteristics, then my brain files her under male, but not quite. I have no need to be buddies with a feminized male and I have no sexual or other desire for a masculine female.

There is no hate there. It's simple indifference. The internet is doing one thing. it's teaching women that the traditional female role is weak and subserviently and that the traditional male role is toxic. Take those lessons to heart at your own peril, because they are blatantly false and designed to destroy the nuclear family.

I could not be pummeled or brow-beat into something, but I've been known to have taken some of the best and worst decisions of my life based on the whisper of a woman I cared for. I think in a way that makes a feminine woman just as strong as I am if not deceptively stronger, but a woman who tries to brow beat me into a direction has no chance to do so.

We all have to play to our natural strengths or by opposing nature suffer the consequences of disharmony and destruction.


----------



## Bcause

Numb26 said:


> This is what Stage 4 TDS looks like. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


Please explain


----------



## LATERILUS79

Bcause said:


> Please explain


He is saying that you suffer from Trump derangement syndrome and since it is stage 4, there is no possibility of a cure.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Bcause said:


> Very good article. I could go on forever but can’t. My marriage turning point can be put on my spreadsheet. It was about 6 months before I first googled “trump made my husband mean.” Not to get political, but there are so many people mirroring his disdain and unbelievable disrespect to women. You’d be surprised how many stories are out there.


Stop drinking the koolaid. Your life will be so much better.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Stop drinking the koolaid. Your life will be so much better.


Yeah...I don't get all these people who think Trump is some kind of mystical God figure who has the power to create misogyny, racism, greed, and all other distasteful things in the world.

If one's hb became mean he was likely always mean and you're now seeing the real him. Trump doesn't have that kind of power.

Or maybe you just don't like his view of the world and thay automatically makes him mean. That seems to be common. 

The cult of Trump and TDS sufferers are cut from the same cloth with this view of Trump as some all powerful being.


----------



## TexasMom1216

The internet gives a voice to people they didn’t have before. The internet isn’t changing any opinions or making anyone any different, they’re just given a megaphone.

The nonsense about Trump is just stupid.


----------



## Bcause

LATERILUS79 said:


> He is saying that you suffer from Trump derangement syndrome and since it is stage 4, there is no possibility of a cure.


Thank you never heard of that. I will read up on it more but must say that is why I said not political. You m talking about the man not the policies.


----------



## Bcause

lifeistooshort said:


> Yeah...I don't get all these people who think Trump is some kind of mystical God figure who has the power to create misogyny, racism, greed, and all other distasteful things in the world.
> 
> If one's hb became mean he was likely always mean and you're now seeing the real him. Trump doesn't have that kind of power.
> 
> Or maybe you just don't like his view of the world and thay automatically makes him mean. That seems to be common.
> 
> The cult of Trump and TDS sufferers are cut from the same cloth with this view of Trump as some all powerful being.


----------



## Bcause

I’m really not into talking politics,


----------



## lifeistooshort

Bcause said:


> He’s not a god he’s a narcissist of the greatest degree. He’s not a cult, that would Qanon which is actually what my stbx is into.


Sure he's a narcissist......so are lots of people.

He just doesn't have the kind of power to create monsters that those in the anti Trump cult imagine he does. The anti cult is every bit as deranged as qanon.

Those of us not bound to hysterics see him as a pain in the ass that will eventually be gone. That's it.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Bcause said:


> Very good article. I could go on forever but can’t. My marriage turning point can be put on my spreadsheet. It was about 6 months before I first googled “trump made my husband mean.” Not to get political, but there are so many people mirroring his disdain and unbelievable disrespect to women. You’d be surprised how many stories are out there.


I'm afraid disrespect for women was already widespread before Trump came along and was cavalier about it.


----------



## Julie's Husband

Bcause said:


> Very good article. I could go on forever but can’t. My marriage turning point can be put on my spreadsheet. It was about 6 months before I first googled “trump made my husband mean.” Not to get political, but there are so many people mirroring his disdain and unbelievable disrespect to women. You’d be surprised how many stories are out there.


Stories are stories.


----------



## Laurentium

lifeistooshort said:


> Yeah...I don't get all these people who think Trump is some kind of mystical God figure who has the power to create misogyny, racism, greed, and all other distasteful things in the world.


Indeed, people here said the same things about Margaret Thatcher. Before she came along, apparently, we all lived in a paradise where nobody was unkind or greedy.


----------

