Why do some men say this explained below)?

Question

some women deserve to be insulted or humiliated really badly because they are really bad people

they gave an example like this
if a woman makes fun of a man who is disabled
she deserve harsh insults
if she behaves like a bitch
she deserves harsh insults

like i don't understand this really well

Answer 1

AmandaYVR | 301 opinions shared on Girl's Behavior topic.

Guru

This isn't really a discussion about what is justified (that's retaliation, karma, 'an eye for an eye', 'two wrongs don't make a right' type of stuff. That stuff happens, but it doesn't make it right, ethically.)
It's about motivation. What is the motivation of a person (in this case, guys) who justify being able to say or do things to a woman that are insulting, humiliating, hostile, and at the far end in extreme cases... violent?

Maybe the girl did terrible things (it certainly happens.) Being "a bitch" is too vague for me to comment on, and too open to interpretation of what that is, and what the response should be. But maybe...
The guy is angry.
The guy feels rejected.
The guy is bitter and in a state of self-pity, which then advanced into hostility.
He feels rejected, tossed aside, unneeded, unwanted. And because he is not embraced, he forcefully pushes back, against the one (s) who reject. But why do they reject him? Because he is not desirable. Because there are many, many better men in the world who surpass him, and make better partners, friends, lovers, etc. etc.
No one (outside of a family or work context, etc.) is forced to socialize with others. There is no rule, no Eye of Sauron, that enforces individuals to fraternize with people who treat them badly, or who aren't good or nice people. We are all compared, measured up, and relative to others.
Now, there's a difference between being a nasty person to others, and ignoring others. But I'm focusing on the latter, because the former is not proven here, and I want to introduce the more convoluted motivation - rejection (in part, because there is so much talk about incels nowadays.) If a girl doesn't give a guy a time of day, it's really her prerogative. As is his. But because males have to do most of the approaching (it's very unfortunate - I have written about this imbalance often), they are more likely to feel rejection than females do. And this can turn inward, or outward. If they do not have an understanding of why, and the ability to objectively analyze each situation with fresh eyes, they become stunted, stop growing emotionally, and can sometimes turn this to rage - rage against what they feel is the opposition. This is unhealthy, reductionist, and quite often, unnecessary.

AmandaYVR

1 mo
The problem is that for many people (but more commonly with men), it is an automatic (or decided upon) tactic to reply to a criticism with an antagonism. It's quite effective much of the time, so no wonder so many employ it. To do something else, takes restraint, takes an intellectual and/or mental understanding of the ramifications of impulsive behaviour. I am not a violent person. At all. But I *could* go get a weapon and bash violent men over the head, in the stomach, or wherever, with that weapon. Despite what many men think, everyone who does not commit violent, or retaliatory acts, is choosing not to. There is such as thing as 'temporary insanity.' And bipolar disorder, etc. etc. etc. But there are also 'crimes of passion' (one of the most common violent acts between couples) - but in the lead-up to that moment of retribution, there is conscious thought. And therein lies the crux of it all - most people do have control most of the time. But many are choosing not to exert it. I mean this in violent crime, and in seemingly innocuous micro-aggressions on social media or in online gaming, for instance (both extremely common.)

If a pink writes something online, on social media, sometimes a blue account counters her (others words/interpretations: attacks, antagonizes, insults, threatens, etc. - it depends; they are all slight variants); and occasionally a different blue account will publicly agree with the pink (whatever statement she made), and stand in solidarity with her (maybe sometimes aka defend her.) Now blue #1 gets pissed. So he goes on the offence. He calls blue #2 a 'white knight' and the pink the 'snowflake' - all in an attempt to keep the pressure and focus off of him, and twist and manipulate the optics of it, so that he comes out the 'innocent' 'victor.' It's all a manipulation.
AmandaYVR

1 mo
She stated an opinion (and I'm obviously talking about a non-provocative/non-controversial topic), and a guy who disagreed with her (also a matter of opinion) aggresed upon her, and anyone else who may have happened to agree. It's a divide and conquer tactic. A predator animal isolates the young and weak prey, away from the pack, and he has a much better chance of killing it.

To address your example again...
Females vote more in favour of equal human rights.
Females vote to include minorities in their political decisions.
Females support social programs more.
Females hold service sector jobs more.
The statistics do not support a high rate of females "making fun of a man who is disabled." I'm not saying it never happens, but statistically, it's questionable to be occurring at any statistically-relevant rate.

Females have lower physical strength and higher vulnerability, and psychological preference for avoidance of conflict (aka avoidant) Females are not all-good, all-saintly, all-moral. What do females do? They reject men. They criticize their men (see how I am writing that in the personal sense, not in the abstract sense.) But they are mostly indirect in their communication, and they consciously choose passive-aggression over overt-aggression. It is part preference, and part survival instinct.

And that begs the question - is the real reason that a man would attempt to justify harassment or insulting of females, what they claim to be as the reason? And for that we must assess every situation as unique and judge all parties involved impartially. But make no mistake, there are prejudices and biases and bigotry all around us. And those people rarely admit that they are factoring in, at play, in influencing their behaviour.

Answer 2

AmandaYVR

The problem is that for many people (but more commonly with men), it is an automatic (or decided upon) tactic to reply to a criticism with an antagonism. It's quite effective much of the time, so no wonder so many employ it. To do something else, takes restraint, takes an intellectual and/or mental understanding of the ramifications of impulsive behaviour. I am not a violent person. At all. But I *could* go get a weapon and bash violent men over the head, in the stomach, or wherever, with that weapon. Despite what many men think, everyone who does not commit violent, or retaliatory acts, is choosing not to. There is such as thing as 'temporary insanity.' And bipolar disorder, etc. etc. etc. But there are also 'crimes of passion' (one of the most common violent acts between couples) - but in the lead-up to that moment of retribution, there is conscious thought. And therein lies the crux of it all - most people do have control most of the time. But many are choosing not to exert it. I mean this in violent crime, and in seemingly innocuous micro-aggressions on social media or in online gaming, for instance (both extremely common.)

If a pink writes something online, on social media, sometimes a blue account counters her (others words/interpretations: attacks, antagonizes, insults, threatens, etc. - it depends; they are all slight variants); and occasionally a different blue account will publicly agree with the pink (whatever statement she made), and stand in solidarity with her (maybe sometimes aka defend her.) Now blue #1 gets pissed. So he goes on the offence. He calls blue #2 a 'white knight' and the pink the 'snowflake' - all in an attempt to keep the pressure and focus off of him, and twist and manipulate the optics of it, so that he comes out the 'innocent' 'victor.' It's all a manipulation.

Answer 3

AmandaYVR

She stated an opinion (and I'm obviously talking about a non-provocative/non-controversial topic), and a guy who disagreed with her (also a matter of opinion) aggresed upon her, and anyone else who may have happened to agree. It's a divide and conquer tactic. A predator animal isolates the young and weak prey, away from the pack, and he has a much better chance of killing it.

To address your example again...
Females vote more in favour of equal human rights.
Females vote to include minorities in their political decisions.
Females support social programs more.
Females hold service sector jobs more.
The statistics do not support a high rate of females "making fun of a man who is disabled." I'm not saying it never happens, but statistically, it's questionable to be occurring at any statistically-relevant rate.

Females have lower physical strength and higher vulnerability, and psychological preference for avoidance of conflict (aka avoidant) Females are not all-good, all-saintly, all-moral. What do females do? They reject men. They criticize their men (see how I am writing that in the personal sense, not in the abstract sense.) But they are mostly indirect in their communication, and they consciously choose passive-aggression over overt-aggression. It is part preference, and part survival instinct.

And that begs the question - is the real reason that a man would attempt to justify harassment or insulting of females, what they claim to be as the reason? And for that we must assess every situation as unique and judge all parties involved impartially. But make no mistake, there are prejudices and biases and bigotry all around us. And those people rarely admit that they are factoring in, at play, in influencing their behaviour.

Answer 4

MrOracle | 660 opinions shared on Girl's Behavior topic.

Master

Two wrongs don't make a right. I get that people get upset when other people behave poorly, but that's no reason to lower your own dignity. You should certainly stand up for what is right, but you can do that without stooping to their level.

Answer 5

jshm2 | 54 opinions shared on Girl's Behavior topic.

Xper 7

They are probably incels, or have been in bad relationships, but think "everyone" is like that simply due to their own small experience.

Just pat them on the head and smile, before walking on.

Answer 6

OlderAndWiser | 1.5K opinions shared on Girl's Behavior topic.

Master

I don't know why those attitudes would be tied to gender. Guys who act like bitches are okay?

Answer 7

Anonymous

Everyone has alternative ego that's who take seriously and some don't, better ignore move forward there is lot to do good in world rather insulting each other.

Justanetherguy

1 mo
the topic here is not rather walk away or insult
i was asking about another thing
Opinion Owner

1 mo
I get that I'm just specifying that it really doesn't matter what she or world says , eventually they are gonna talk, no stopping that.

Answer 8

Justanetherguy

the topic here is not rather walk away or insult
i was asking about another thing

Answer 9

Opinion Owner

I get that I'm just specifying that it really doesn't matter what she or world says , eventually they are gonna talk, no stopping that.

Answer 10

JosyJosy | 1.2K opinions shared on Girl's Behavior topic.

Master

You reap what you sow

Answer 11

honestmind

Xper 4

You don't understand karma?

Why do some men say this explained below)?

AI Bot Choice

Most Helpful Guys

What Girls & Guys Said

Related myTakes