Are incredible men just average women?

[CARDOZZO]

14 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Spiral Dynamics is only a theory

Sure, it is. I was making a point. SD is a pointer to describe levels of cognitive development.

[Elliott]

3 minutes ago, CARDOZZO said:

Sure, it is. I was making a point. SD is a pointer to describe levels of cognitive development.

Which would point to "Green" dismantling the patriarchy.

[Ulax]

@Lila9 I get what you're saying in your longer post.

But why not accept there are toxic views in the feminist movement too, or toxic sub-groups. "Incredible men are just average women" seems clearly one of these to me. It is not so black or white as men are right and women are wrong or vice-versa. 

 

[CARDOZZO]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Which would point to "Green" dismantling the patriarchy.

Nah. 2nd Tier is more balanced, especially yellow. 

[Lila9]

2 hours ago, EternalForest said:

 

Actually, I've been told by most of the girls I've been in long distance/online relationships with and the many in-person male friends in my life that I'm very emotionally sensitive for a man. I'm very emotional and on top of that I'm an INFP or INTP. In theory, I should get along better with women (if they are supposed to be more emotionally advanced) but in practice I do not.

Regarding the incel and red pill, you should ask yourself why those exist instead of framing everyone who even uses "rhetoric" adjacent to them. Leo himself says in several of his videos that these movements, including MGTOW make a lot of good points that get drowned out by the actions of a few terrible men who use the same ideological label.

Men in power are irrelavent to me. I don't benefit from any of their profits or social status. Just because Queen Elizabeth was one of the most powerful women in the world doesn't mean that 90% of women weren't oppressed during her time in power.

By getting along with women, do you mean romantically?

What about platonic relationships with women?

Do incels and red pillers exist because of women? What can women do now to make them not exist?

Men in power influence younger men and dictate masculinity. Young men admire men in power and look up to them, even if they misleading them, which is mostly the case.

 

[CARDOZZO]

36 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

Do incels and red pillers exist because of women?

They are resentful because they can't get women's attention and sex.

 It is what it is, if you want to become someone that barely have a chance with woman, you gotta bring something to the table. 

Work on yourself, go to the gym, develop inner game, etc.

They expect woman to love them for who they are. This is maternal love not romantic love. Intimate relationships are transactional at some level. 

Edited Wednesday at 08:07 PM by CARDOZZO

[Ulax]

6 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

Do incels and red pillers exist because of women? What can women do now to make them not exist?

Women do hold many positions of power in various societies. They can use those positions of power to affect the factors that lead to men becoming incels and red pillers. For example, Australian women were part of passing the Australian social media ban, and I'd argue social media access is a factor in under 16s becoming incels or red pillers.

[Elliott]

18 minutes ago, CARDOZZO said:

Nah. 2nd Tier is more balanced, especially yellow. 

Its a central thing to green

 

"Orange (Achievement): Values meritocracy, competition, and success; can use patriarchal structures for personal gain but also challenges them with logic, seeing value in ability over gender.

Green (Egalitarian/Communitarian): Actively fights patriarchy through social justice, empathy, and inclusion; focuses on equality, though can sometimes get stuck in "us vs. them" dynamics against oppressors. "

Edited Wednesday at 08:09 PM by Elliott

[Lila9]

1 hour ago, Schizophonia said:

The problem for me is that you're completely idealistic; that is to say you're essentializing collective subjects.

There are certainly biological differences between Black and White people, but if it had been the Malians who initiated the Industrial Revolution, and if women were more muscular than men in that agrarian then industrialized world that demands greater physical strength, preferably not being pregnant and greater empathy for children, then Black people would also have lost their religion, they would have become capitalist and imperialist, and there would be a "matriarchy" with men who criticize it for the same reasons.

So I am not anti-feminist or against anti-racism per se, but if as I believe since I come from Marxism, it is the material question, the distribution of wealth, that essentially influences collective subjects and their relationships with each other; then this framework for interpretation is useless and will tend to create hostility; since it suggests that it is the fault of men, of white people or whatever if something happens, because of their essence or because of what is "contained in them" for "some reason".

 

All humans from all races are still very genetically close.

They are more similar than different. Even if there are some genetic differences, they are small and irrelevant and do not mean that one race is superior to another. We can accept the differences of each group of people without categorizing them into some artificial hierarchy of power.

We can accept the biological differences between men and women without discriminating against each other.

Yes, I am probably idealistic and I expect too much from society, but I think that this is possible in the future.

Regarding the distribution of material resources, it is not a problem, because there is no scarcity.

 

[CARDOZZO]

28 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Its a central thing to green

 

"Orange (Achievement): Values meritocracy, competition, and success; can use patriarchal structures for personal gain but also challenges them with logic, seeing value in ability over gender.

Green (Egalitarian/Communitarian): Actively fights patriarchy through social justice, empathy, and inclusion; focuses on equality, though can sometimes get stuck in "us vs. them" dynamics against oppressors. "

Stage green ultimately lacks wise strenght. 

You gotta build complex systems to allocate novel perspectives and values. Stage yellow can spot friction on dynamic complex systems.

[Ulax]

Dang, Lila won't talk to me.

*cries in Spanish*

[Elliott]

2 minutes ago, CARDOZZO said:

Stage green ultimately lacks wise strenght. 

You gotta build complex systems to allocate novel perspectives and values. Stage yellow can spot friction on dynamic complex systems.

If a society is green, which is what spiral dynamics is about, not individuals, they have no one to fight upward against, they run society.

Edited Wednesday at 08:13 PM by Elliott

[CARDOZZO]

Here in Brazil, there is a a bill that is scheduled for a vote to equalize misogyny and racism. Brazillian red pillers are angry. They will ban all brazillian red pill content from the internet. You can't talk badly about women anymore, if you do, you are fuck*d.

[Lila9]

@CARDOZZO 

I don’t know about cyborgs, so I will not talk about it. My intuition says that this is just a distraction from the real issue, but again, I need to study this more.

And yes, I am aware that what I am talking about is something that is more advanced and will not happen soon.

 

[Elliott]

This is the sentiment I think she's talking about

 

 

Vs materialistic culture(patriarchy)

[Lila9]

36 minutes ago, Ulax said:

@Lila9 I get what you're saying in your longer post.

But why not accept there are toxic views in the feminist movement too, or toxic sub-groups. "Incredible men are just average women" seems clearly one of these to me. It is not so black or white as men are right and women are wrong or vice-versa. 

 

I actually do accept that there is toxicity among feminists; I certainly don’t deny it.

There is a worldwide increase in narcissism, and it doesn’t skip women who are identified as feminists.

 

Narcissistic women tend to justify their immoral and dysfunctional behavior in their relationships, workplaces, and motherhood with feminist arguments, while they actually have no compassion or real concern about women’s and feminist issues, and only use them when it serves them. This, of course, hurts the legitimacy of the fight for women’s rights, because when anti-feminists want to discredit feminism, they use those narcissistic feminist women as the example. They never refer to feminist literature, for example, or to real feminist discussions.

 

But I also think that many things feminist women say are misunderstood and taken out of context.

For example, let’s take the sentence, “incredible men are just average women.”

This can be easily seen as misandry or female supremacy, because it implies that men are inherently broken in comparison to women.

 

But what if it was taken out of context?

I believe that the original discussion is about men being praised and seen as exceptional for doing standard things that women do without being praised as exceptional. For example, emotional labor and caretaking, parenthood, and house labor. Women are expected to do these things, and no one sees them as doing something special or exceptional, while men are praised for it.

But again, this is my assumption, because I don’t know the source of this claim.

 

[Elliott]

19 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

 

I believe that the original discussion is about men being praised and seen as exceptional for doing standard things that women do without being praised as exceptional. For example, emotional labor and caretaking, parenthood, and house labor. Women are expected to do these things, and no one sees them as doing something special or exceptional, while men are praised for it.

But again, this is my assumption, because I don’t know the source of this claim.

 

*while both the man and woman work full time jobs

If a man cleans around the house, and communicates, he's considered incredible. All of this is expected of average women.

These guys are coming from Redpill "man need 6 figures and be ceo", that's not what feminists are talking about, that's patriarchy. Guys are considered incredible with a normal job, cleaning, and communicating.

Edited Wednesday at 09:03 PM by Elliott

[Ulax]

23 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

I actually do accept that there is toxicity among feminists; I certainly don’t deny it.

There is a worldwide increase in narcissism, and it doesn’t skip women who are identified as feminists.

 

Narcissistic women tend to justify their immoral and dysfunctional behavior in their relationships, workplaces, and motherhood with feminist arguments, while they actually have no compassion or real concern about women’s and feminist issues, and only use them when it serves them. This, of course, hurts the legitimacy of the fight for women’s rights, because when anti-feminists want to discredit feminism, they use those narcissistic feminist women as the example. They never refer to feminist literature, for example, or to real feminist discussions.

 

But I also think that many things feminist women say are misunderstood and taken out of context.

For example, let’s take the sentence, “incredible men are just average women.”

This can be easily seen as misandry or female supremacy, because it implies that men are inherently broken in comparison to women.

 

But what if it was taken out of context?

I believe that the original discussion is about men being praised and seen as exceptional for doing standard things that women do without being praised as exceptional. For example, emotional labor and caretaking, parenthood, and house labor. Women are expected to do these things, and no one sees them as doing something special or exceptional, while men are praised for it.

But again, this is my assumption, because I don’t know the source of this claim.

 

*Stops crying in Spanish*

I see. You make fair points.

That makes sense what you said about the possible origin.

Edited Wednesday at 09:07 PM by Ulax

[Lila9]

36 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Women do hold many positions of power in various societies. They can use those positions of power to affect the factors that lead to men becoming incels and red pillers. For example, Australian women were part of passing the Australian social media ban, and I'd argue social media access is a factor in under 16s becoming incels or red pillers.

Many times, especially in more conservative countries, the women who hold power in society tend to be the ones who internalize masculine and patriarchal values.
They see themselves almost like men with different genitalia.

They are emotionally detached from their femininity, womanhood, and other women. They even may see themselves as superior to other women, not all of them, but I believe this is a large portion. They usually don’t try to shake the boat.

 

There are women in positions of power who intend to shake the boat, but there are not enough of them. They are still expected to conform in order to hold these positions, depending on the country.

 

I agree that restricting social media access under 16 is a great move in Australia! Australia is a developed country with almost 50% of women in the government, which gives women more power to make decisions, but countries like Australia are the exception rather than the rule.

 

[Lila9]

54 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Dang, Lila won't talk to me.

*cries in Spanish*

Hahaha