To think there’s a real crisis in men being able to express how they truly feel about life and society?

I actually think women can be misandrists and the concept isn't enmeshed with systemic power - like say the patriarchy.

It's Atwood. Gender woo needs a whole new thread! But yes, relevant, because when some men felt unseen and marginalised, they decided the best way to achieve that was take over women's spaces.

Bit like "white people can't experience racism " you keep drinking that kool aid. I expect it'll all go really well for society, this fashionable victimhood and division.

Really, I thought that was Greer? And to think, Atwood goes headlong into gender woo and throws women under the bus to mollycoddle men.

Because it goes back generations. If you go back a few decades, all our elite and aristocratic were of course white: their children are then white. And so on. Wealth often travels in families and down generations. Hence.

If you think it's a piece of pie to earn your own wealth and status from scratch as opposed to inheriting and being born into the right family you're very much mistaken. It isn't just the wealth itself, it's all that goes with it: associates and connections being the main one.

People are clearly blind too: there are many black and brown successful business owners and elites . Do we ask why all the sheikh's aren't white ? Of course not, you wouldn't expect them to be. We're just ridiculously self defeating In the UK : and in the end it'll destroy us. A lot of people have guzzled the kool aid.

On the note of women, I've already answered that. Maybe less women choose business and politics as a career ? Women generally have children: this will put a gap in their CV. We can all sing the song of "oh but men can stay at home and look after the new born baby whilst mum goes off to be the next CEO" but that isn't what I'd practical in most families. Sometimes, traditional roles are needed. Else children are harmed. I wouldn't want to have a mother or be one , that puts my career ahead of the fundamental years of being a parent. Someone has to stay at home for a bit : and it is usually the mother. It's all madness this current time !

If that's all incels we're saying, well, it's not 'kind' but it's at least a position of neutrality. Not giving a shit about something simply means it's not a cause you care about or want to actively support. Incels go so much further though, don't they? At best trying to obstruct women trying to gain rights, at worst advocating for our rape and murder. You have seen nothing on this thread that looks remotely like that, so the comparison to incels is false, and simply a means to make women look bad.

I think I believe this now. There is no such thing as misandry.

As Atwood said- paraphrased- women laugh at men. Men kill women.

There’s no such thing as misandry. Women have never oppressed men on the basis of their sex - they’ve never held the power to be able to do so

Except that women don't commit the bulk of violent offences! Women calling out male violence are not incels.

OP claims that male loneliness is the problem that no one wants to confront. I believe quite strongly that male violence is the problem that no one wants to confront.

This doesn't mean, as some posters claim, that all men are bad. They aren't.
But enough are that life for women across the world is difficult. And as a pp said, loneliness is not unique to men.

The ONLY reason OP is raising this question is because some of those lonely men are raping and killing. The lonely women are doing nothing criminal

Says the man comparing women saying "if men feel a type of way they can put support in place for themselves rather than relying on women" to incels who routinely discuss us as body parts and trade hints and tips on the best ways to rape, hurt and kill us.

"In my experience of what can only be a tiny proportion of all men I've not seen this issue therefore it never happens and anyone who says it does is lying, mistaken or misinformed."

I think I mentioned incels first. I've seen incel rhetoric along the lines of "women don't know how good they've got it so I don't give a shit if they feel hard done by." It struck me how similar that was to some of the opinions expressed in this thread about men.

Those are some very interesting points. I certainly noticed how differently I was often viewed as a single father compared to my single mother friends.

Yes, of course the white men in the top positions are typically also wealthy, and wealth contributes to advantage. However, unlike race and sex which are inate and can't be changed or influenced, wealth is a societal construct that can be earned, taken or given, and is not only a contributor to privilege but a result of it. So when looking at wealth inequality we need to go deeper and ask why the white men in the top positions are also the wealthiest.

I'm not a statistician either, but given the UK is around 80% white, with males being 49% of the population, I'd expect to see a cabinet where 40% of the members were white men.

You’re quite right: any form of so called positive discrimination has very limited impact on mitigating the impact of widespread bias against people from marginalised groups. Overall the UK job market is not slanted against white British males and any attempt to claim so is absurd.

On average, 24% of applicants of white British origin received a positive response from employers, compared with 15% of minority ethnic applicants applying with identical CVs and cover letters. All of the minority applications clearly stated that they were either British-born or had arrived in the country by the age of six and had obtained all their education and training in Britain.
Minority ethnic applicants, including white minorities, had to send 60% more applications to get a positive response from an employer than a white person of British origin. While applicants originating from western Europe and the US were treated almost as well as the majority group, people of Pakistani origin had to make 70% more applications. The figures were even higher for those of Nigerian, Middle Eastern and north African (MENA) origin, at 80% and 90% respectively. (from the linked article)

One of the most startling points to me was that even a White American or (white) Western European non-British person has far better chances than a Black /Asian British or born/raised person in seeking work.

A friend of mine was sat on a train on her way to meet me incidentally. She said two men in business suits were sitting in front of her talking about the interview process. They were guffawing about the fact they were going to hire the less able white man over the black man who had performed better at interview and was more qualified because “of course”. They made very clear it was a racial bias thing and nothing to do with personality/ability/interview competence. She was someone who had been a bit doubtful about how prevalent racism was but seeing that gave her a shock and made her rethink everything.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/17/minority-ethnic-britons-face-shocking-job-discrimination

There was an English teacher on LBC the other day discussing the English Literature curriculum saying how much of it had to be altered to please boys. Very few texts with female leads as boys wouldn't engage with the lesson and would act out otherwise and how one whole-book reading for studying and discussion purposes is now a thing of the past as (I know its a problem with both sexes) disproportionally way more boys simply refuse to read whole books anymore and so only short text excerpts can now be used.

I think you need to look at common sense. If a country is say 96% white, it doesn't take a statistician to calculate most of your senior members of the cabinet are going to be white. You can analyse and dissect things (as Is the modern way ) all you like : but what I've said stands.

I used the word disproportionately. You need to rethink your argument with that in mind.

Re. online dating - Yes! A lot of men - irrespective of their own looks, age and size - get angry even at the idea of a fat and/or over 35 woman existing online. Even if they have a bunch of kids you lose points for being a single mother too. And this attitude seems to be worse with the older men . Plenty of women 50 + say they barely get any interactions as so many men their age are trying to date at least 10-15 years younger.

Men can also be abusive to slim conventionally attractive young women on dating apps for slightly different reasons too.
Mainly because that’s the women they want and they get angry if the woman has standards they don’t meet.

Across the board they’re often lewd and disgusting to a range of women whether they find them attractive or not. I’m starting to think it’s a power play because surely they can’t think this will get them a date?

When women are rejected they turn inwards and wonder how can they improve their appearance , their lives, their online profiles. There was a thread last week about a late 30s woman with a skin condition who really struggled with Online dating and getting men to reply to her let alone date her. She was so dejected and sad. She’d never been touched sexually in her life.

While many men who get rejected are far more likely than women to send abusive messages on dating apps or leave hateful misogynistic messages on social media or start angry podcasts .

In my first week of OD a guy asked me to add him to WhatsApp and sent his number in his second message which is crazy. I had said thanks for the compliments (he had said nice things) but I didn’t share my number with men without getting to know them a bit more. He flipped out and said no wonder I was online dating as I had a terrible attitude and that’s why someone as attractive as me was still single blah blah and I would never find a man etc as looks will fade but I’m still going to be awful etc 🙄

I just blocked him and didn’t reply but I was quite shaken up by the vitriol in his rant. No wonder so many can’t get dates or even replies to messages. And it’s not all to do with looks or money as the red pillers will have you believe.

Thankfully majority of my bad OD stories stop at online interactions as I’ve only ever met 3 men in person from OD (and they ended up being decent tbf) and it’s because I vet the heck out of them. Seriously, it often takes a maximum of 2 weeks for them to show themselves up. Most times the mask slips within a few messages!

A guy had on his profile “ready for a relationship” as did I. By the third or fourth message he said he would show me around this new city, if I would show him my “nooks and crannies”. I even naively asked him to clarify just in case he meant something else and what he said next confirmed yeah he was being disgusting. Had to unmatch immediately.

It’s also laughable that he thought it would entice me lol. I’m happy to explore a new city myself so why would I agree to sleep with a man I’ve just met online who has barely said two words to me and open myself up to STDs/unwanted pregnancy and the risk of aggressive pornified sex with a stranger just to get a personal tour? Like really what’s in it for me as a woman who clearly stated I was looking for a relationship? I suspect because they conceal their intentions they think women do too - so maybe they assume I too was just after sex 🤦🏽‍♀️

It’s almost like they refuse to understand most women are not like (many of) them in their animalistic quest for sex. He didn’t even offer to wine and dine me ffs. It’s like they want escorts they don’t have to pay for. Cheap misogynists!

And another issue is many of the men online are not single . I have a theory that the ones that are the most vile are also more likely to be married/partnered and probably hate their wives.

A significant amount of them are complaining about not getting dates but ignoring the tiny issue that they are not even single and are on there to cheat on their partners 😆😆 you really couldn’t make it up.

An older survey showed almost 50% of tinder users are not single, which is WILD ! I mean sure that could include women as well, but really I can’t see many women in relationships voluntarily going on Tinder - even a lot of single women don’t want to be on 😂

Too many men don’t want to change.
Society and culture have been in their favour since records began, men wrote the narrative of history after all.

They don’t want the backbreaking, thankless, endless, unpaid caring roles needed in a caring society.

Women have made much more progress in becoming equal in terms of financial independence and men’s reaction? Well look at the mess now, extreme porn, and utter dislike and contempt rather than thinking of an alternative.

When was the last time you know a man who read a book that is character led, even a book by a female author?

They, on the whole, don’t fucking try.

So fuck women trying to solve it, they still have plenty to continually preserve now because fucking men are trying to strip away rights over women left right and centre now in the western world because that’s more optimal than them evolving into something better.

So men can go screw themselves.

I'm so fed up of people saying that.

The study that statistic was based off used the sexuality of the women at the time they responded.

If you look deeper into it over 70% of the women who are lesbians or bisexual had only suffered male violence in relationships they had before they were in relationships with women.

It's still based off male violence. Nice try though.

She's very infantalising.

A lot of the issues you raise are not solely about the war of the sexes, but about economics and thereby politics. Of course, an awful lot of the war of the sexes is e
ntirely about that. And that is in the hands of men. It’s men that tend to like right wing politics based on might is right. That’s connected to their being the dominant and domineering species. If they have not yet figured out even now that most people, including men, do not tend to live well under ‘might is right’ economics, what can women do to mend their stupidity? They control violence as part of the state. Women were written out of control in the modern state 400 years ago.

Always men expect this and expect that and get angry at the nearest female when they are cut out by the political economics they support, instead of taking responsibility or blaming other men. Go look in any of Britains abandoned towns op. Who’s running the drugs trades and the armed gangs? For that matter who runs Parliament? Who will always run Parliament, no matter how many ‘ooh look there’s some women there’? Who creates the social rules?

@FluentLilacPombear

Do you know how many lesbians murdered their partners last year? Zero.

Do you know how many women were murdered in heterosexual relationships by their male partners? 140.

Misandry is a women’s anger against their oppressors. Misogyny is a hatred again women and a leading cause of death for women globally.

They are not the same. They are not comparable. Men do not, nor ever have, had to navigate life with fear from displays of misandry.

Men are not the logical unemotional ones. They simply channel all their spite, rage, jealousy, embarrassment, sadness, shame and frustration into anger and attack everyone around them including themselves.

They literally build entire online communities, podcasts and demigods around their displays of hate and misogyny.

Women pointing their shit out is incomparable.