Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
Topics (22) All
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
68Opinion
Wow good work! The pen is indeed mightier than the sword!
I wonder what point he was trying to communicate when he wrote/said those things because it certainly didn't elicit the response he expected or wanted.
I'm not going to argue against your positions: they are well thought out, cogent, and researched.
I am concerned that you are painting with a broad brush. However, saying "But not all of us do that!!!" sounds whiny, weak, and sycophantic.
I promise you, I am not.
As I said, "Other Men, Take Note: This is not directed towards you, the vast majority of good, decent, sane, level-headed, reasonable, and sometimes great men of the world, and of G@G. Nowhere in this will you see "all men..." or make any such broad-based generalizations or dismissive caricatures that demean all men. I assure you, I have the ability to distinguish between good and bad, and many people in between. However, there are some men, certain men, who act consistently and unnecessarily hostile, angry, aggressive, antagonistic, and who threaten or wish acts of violence like rape upon us, and it is them that this is about:"
Great take! That type of behavior and thinking is inexcusable and will not be tolerated.
It's the creeps that make it bad for the rest of the male population.
Indeed. You should let them know that.
Last night I listened to a podcast with a group of self-proclaimed incels and mgtows. God, what a bunch of whiners. Perhaps a mytake on that to follow some day. I'm up about to 'here' [raises hand to middle of head], with the self-pity parties.
I’m sorry but many of these aggressive “masculine” behaviors is what many women secretly find attractive. There are early signs these guys are dangerous but many women want to jump head first into the dark pit thinking they “will change them”’.
That’s not my problem if you make such asinine decisions.
I agree with that.
I don't take responsibility for those women either.
There are many things I read on GAG that make me shake my head and are very disappointing.
If only these types of people would efficiently find each other, and leave the rest of us out of it.
The problem is many of these women get this bitter attitude towards all men afterwards. Then they will screw over an innocent guy as a way of “scoring a point for their team”. Its fucked up. Just because someone screwed you over in the past doesn’t mean you get to screw someone else over to “even it out”
While most of these women were chasing these violent assholes they were likely passing up or friendzoning “nice guys”. Like it’s better to be abused because it’s “exciting” vs being “bored” with someone who treats you well.
I realize not all women are that dumb but an unacceptably high percentage of them are. They need to be called out and I have no sympathy for them.
I will always stand up against REAL violence against women but you better give me the whole picture. I believe at least 50% of these incidents are avoidable if it wasn’t for asinine female dating decisions. Being abusive isn’t a sign of being a real man.
There is no universal gender based association with hostility or violence. There are no genetic markers specific too attacking woman, and I have yet too hear of a guy who has been violent or disrespectful towards females who wasn't seriously damaged by criminal child abuse upbringing. Anyone who associates Charles Manson with a normal male should be isolated and heavily sedated for their own safety.
"There is no universal gender based association with hostility or violence."
"There are no genetic markers specific too attacking woman, and I have yet too hear of a guy who has been violent or disrespectful towards females who wasn't seriously damaged by criminal child abuse upbringing."
Just because you don't know of them doesn't mean they don't exist.
Sorry, but you're wrong on both counts.
Nobody thinks Manson is a "normal male."
Safety and freedom are mutually exclusive.
Freedom is necessary to best gather resources (the male driver to appeal to women)
Safety is necessary to successfully raise young.
Men and women cannot satisfy both evolution and equality. Men are pretty good at self-sufficient survival so we don't much care which one you pick (we'll be fine either way) but get together as a gender and pick one because we are getting pretty angry waiting around for you to figure out something this simple and obvious.
Everyone has freedom, so everyone can gather resources.
If your country is not at war and you are in a developed country chances are you are safe.
Everyone can be self sufficient as long as they get a decent job.
So what is your point?
I wouldn't say I am free. I don't get to choose what happens to most of my earnings. That is taken from me by the state to ensure the safety of those less capable.
If we are free we can't guarantee everyone will have a job and be self sufficient "financially safe". In order to ensure everyone is self sufficient we have to either take their freedom to choose their job or take others freedom to choose how much they pay for anything.
That's not the point though. The point was those gender norms exist to keep the group wanting to be free free and the group wanting to be safe safe. There is no point fighting to break down those norms to be free and then complaining that it's not safe.
No you don't get a choice in what you earn because if everyone could chose that, money would have no value.
Of course we are all free inside a certain system. But that system exists instead of anarchy which would be way worse.
Still your power in your life and the choices you can make are substantial.
But to be free does not mean to not be safe.
Choosing what you will work for is not choosing what you earn (others are free to not hire you if you price yourself out of the free market).
Worse for whom? (Let's put it this way men built society to keep women happy not for themselves)
Maybe depends on who you are. The more capable you are the less power you have in life choices (proportional to that capability at least).
Yes it does. So much so that letting children have freedom these days is a crime because it is so not safe.
Like you said you can chose your job. You can't chose what you earn, but if you chose to work as a doctor you will make more than as a cashier.
Are you crazy? You really think the only reason we don't live in anarchy is to make women happy? Did you runned away from a mental institution?
That is the other way around. The more capable you are the more you can do and decide on your life.
I have as much freedom as any other person. And I don't feel unsafe at all.
Depends on supply and demand. If everyone chose to learn first aid the value of doctors would tank.
If you are competent the state takes more from you than you take from it (limiting your individual power). If you aren't competent you take more from the state than you put in (artificially inflating your personal agency).
Feeling safe and being safe are not the same.
They will still get paid more then a cashier.
If you are competent you can be at a better position in life. If you are good and competent there will always be a spot for you.
Tell me what dangers I am under.
I don't know enough about your life to list specific dangers. Asset forfeiture is one that grinds my gears. Unemployment is a fair risk.
With current events maybe drafting depending where you live.
Life will always have risks. But that does not mean I am not free.
Evil people will always exist; you have to fight them off everyday. Life is a battlefield. If you want to live, you will, if not, you won't.
That's for dang sure
I have found that the more masculine I become, the more hostile I am to women. How dare they try to have sex with me without being coerced? I wish I was a fat feminist like Harvey Weinstein or other small hats so I could be less hostile towards women, but alas.
I just can't understand a man that would say such a horrible thing.. He must be a small pathetic little thing. Good take though i disagree with you on some of it.
It says you're 47, So the young lady quote that sent you into a tizzy is highly suspect. Even more disturbing is the likelihood you made it up, which is further reinforced by your depraved ramblings that are more consistent with such a sick mind. However, all is well because I know enough women who will gladly cook, clean, mate, raise kids, and work with me. Your time is spent and your rotten attitude spent it for you. Violence has more connected with soy boy incels and other male feminist, then men who actually bring home the bacon. Your delusion about men won't fly here and enough women don't buy your garbage. The violence towards women only erupted with the removal of nuclear families, not the formation. It's quite the sign when an embittered 47 year old girl is the one to tell us how awful men are. You're obviously rotting in your own bitterness.
All that "young lady" comment shows is that he was attempting to be condescending, and that he may or may not have noticed my age. You know why he did it. It was like talking to a child who deserves a spanking. If you don't see that, you might be even dumber than him.
What I wrote was the farthest thing from "depraved ramblings." It is extremely rare that any user writes a mytake here that is so thoroughly referenced/cited. You claiming this is a classic misogynistic cliche to portray women as emotional, out of control, and illogical. And I'm onto you.
You go ahead and personally attack me for my age. I've already lived two of your lifetimes and I wouldn't give up my knowledge for your ignorance for any prize or amount of money.
"Violence has more connected with soy boy incels and other male feminist, then men who actually bring home the bacon."
Prove it. Make a citation.
"Your delusion about men won't fly here and enough women don't buy your garbage."
You have 2 followers. I have 5,359, and everyone has free will, so your claim is what is garbage.
"It's quite the sign when an embittered 47 year old girl is the one to tell us how awful men are. You're obviously rotting in your own bitterness."
Also an ignorant conclusion.
I spent 10 years dating, enjoyed meeting many interesting men and having relationships with them, and I am married to one for 20 years still going strong. So you're wrong again.
Here's What I Like About Men ↗
Good luck with your life, kid. You're going to need it.
I agree with you, but can we stop the needless shaming of people who play video games and/or live with their parents? Neither video games nor living with your parents make you a sexist piece of shit/rape apologist.
I used that phrase because it is well known and often used to succinctly describe a person who has low drive, few life skills, and internet addiction. But you are right that not all people who live in a basement, nor all people who play video games, are losers or that guy. So I removed it from the mytake.
Thanks, I just don't think that is a good stereotype to continue, some people like that do exist but the majority of gamers and people who live with parents are pretty average people. The stereotype has some truth, I just think it can be used to generalize people in a very negative way.
The masculine gender role has 0 to do with abuse. this is a common mistake made by women who attribute aggression to masculinity.
Masculinity is about channeling that aggression against evil things and problems
Masculinity is about Duty. Duty to ones woman, children, family, and God.
Some guy sent you a nasty message so masculinity is a problem.
Also your disclaimer about this not being targeted towards good men is because it does target good men. Because what good is a man if he isn't masculine?
Almost no men follow a rigid masculine gender role, thats why we have so many social issues to begin with. If this man's father disciplined him to respect his mother, like a masculine man would, he would not send nasty messages to any women.
Masculinity is a force for Good. But the morals need to be there to use it effectively. Men have been demoralized.
Oh, are you a professional working in the field of psychology or sociology or neuroscience? No?
"Some guy sent you a nasty message so masculinity is a problem."
That's insulting and I reject your premise.
"Because what good is a man if he isn't masculine?"
Those are your words, not mine.
"Almost no men follow a rigid masculine gender role"
Untrue.
You're saying things you believe, carelessly trying to invalidate multiple studies going back more than 30 years. AKA you're talking out of your ass.
What you said does not invalidate decades of research that male hostility has been linked to self-imposed rigid adherence to *certain* masculinities (notice how I never claimed ALL MASCULINITY IS BAD.) This + stress + feelings of weakNess and inferiority lead to hostility which can lead to violence against women.
I can invalidate all those studies because humans have had 6000 years of patriarchy which allowed for the creation of civilization
Those psychologists and sociologists have added little to human development over the last 100 years
Their purpose was to demoralize western civilization and they succeeded.
So dont act smug because you can use Google to find studies that prove your point. Those studies were taken 50-70 years after psychology became mainstream and began affecting masculinity and femininity. That's why I reject it.
The experts should speak for themselves. Also it doesn't make you intelligent to just quote me and say "your words not mine" no shit
Also you failed to define what rigid masculinity actually is
What is the role? How was that role defined in each study?
Rigid adherence: a persistent, stubborn dogged devotion and attachment to a belief which may or may not be true.
A hegemonic masculine adherence to 'Toughness.'
Toughness evidenced a statistically significant positive total effect.
Toughness norm reflects the expectation that men are emotionally and physically tough and willing to be aggressive.
e. g., “A good motto for a man would be ‘When the going gets tough, the tough get going’”
As for the rest of your claims, I'm done with you. It's not worth my time.
Just by putting religious propaganda in it, you have lost the argument. GOOD DAY, SIR.
Did you suggest something along the lines of defunding the police or something?
I can see his point but the way he put it was extreme. Some people don't realise that society needs police until they personally need them. Defunding isn't the answer because the police are usually pretty useless when it comes to actually serving and protecting the community.
No, I didn't. Please see my comments below to JackBlue.
Who ever said that to you is horrible. I would never wish that on someone. That's no man, that's a coward.
The guys that have 'toxic masculinity' and traits associated with this concept (ie dominance, aggression, stoicism, recklessness, arrogance, emotional unavailability, etc), those are the ones that are seen as more attractive to women.
Men adhere to their gender roles because that's largely what women want. Men that don't adhere to gender roles will just be seen as weak and inferior by other women and not be seen as attractive as the other men that are fulfilling their gender roles.
That is only true of some women, not all women. It's far too much a generalization.
Well its enough women to make it worth mentioning. A large amount of women want men that fulfill their gender roles and men that have 'toxic masculinity'. So whats the incentive not to have toxic masculinity if it gives men an advantage when dating?
Again, smaller percentage. Not the majority.
That's like if I said that the majority of guys were like the guy who wrote this rape thing to me. This mytake is not about "all guys" but as you phrased, it is "enough to make it worth mentioning." I agree with that. But as far as one behaviour influencing another - yes they are perhaps connected, but we need to recognize both these types as being ONE type and not all. (I wish these types would all just find each other, hook up, and leave the rest of us out of it. But it doesn't work like that, unfortunately.)
I'm not smashing them all together - generalizing to that degree, despite what some angry men are commenting here. I'm extricating a certain archetype, specifically (because that's what my research uncovered - this "strict adherence to a certain type of masculine gender role' + feelings of insecurity and inferiority. Which is specific, and a subset, of a more generalized 'macho' male.
Successful relationship or friendship between opposite sexes is result of cooperation, never of competition between genders. However current post modernism doctrine tends to drive wedges in any aspect of life with stereotypes than to explain how to sift successfully chaff from the wheat. This is regrettable in my opinion.
you'll come to find that guys who talk like this have no idea what a pussy feels like
Haha. Thanks, that made me chuckle.
Have fun with your Fleshlights, eh boys? And better start saving up the $5-10K for the sex doll. I might even start them off with their first penny and a piggy bank. On second thought... nah.
Yeah they can just steal a few bucks when mom leaves her purse out... being they still live with her
They do have a very good idea of what a pussy feels like, all their fucking lives they had one between tip of their noses and their chin. You know a lot of those sick animals would just as well enjoy fucking a whole troop of 7 yr old boy scouts than they enjoy eating. I found out that we had a real sicko 3 houses down, couple years ago. I have 3 little brothers, and God would see me beat him half to death if they were touched.. im so sorry he talked to you that way
I wouldn’t even waste keystrokes on these trolls. They’re trying to get under your skin. In the future don’t oblige them by responding, ignoring them makes them implode.
I don't think complete avoidance is the answer to all this. Sometimes things need to be addressed.
Other times... yes, not worth it. Depends on the comments, the person, their history, etc.
Why do you think this is a gendered thing? Because it's what you see more? That's would actually make it more of an anecdotal experience but in reality many men also experienced this kind of stuff to from women. But the only thing is that, women's issues are often adressed compared to men that is where it seems like it happens to women more. Oh sure i do agree there are a lot of men who blames women for everything but that doesn't make the title of your mytake different because you're basically blaming men as well.
I would not call this anecdotal so much as easily observable and identifiable online.
There is no doubt that men are much more hostile towards women online (to be fair, they are also more interactive in general, so also more openly flattering at times.)
Because of my observations and experience this past year on GAG, and that I received last week such a heinous and unwarranted threat/comment, I began researching male hostility towards women, and these studies are what came up. It is ONE aspect, one root. It does not encompass all sources, all reasons. But it has been studied for over 30 years, and there are multiple results confirming this, so I wrote about the gender role adherence specifically. My observations, and experience, online, are not unique. I am just one of the few women to write about it here. (If any, I've never read a mytake about any of this.)
This is not to say that women are not also sometimes hostile towards men. Of course that's also true. But anyone who is objective, and observant, and has any interest to pay attention to stats, numbers, demographics, patterns, behaviour, etc. can easily see that most violence is perpetrated by men, and that pinks typically avoid conflict (this is save for some outlier very bold ones online.)
I've done polls about how each gender feels about the other, and the males are also more negative in their views. (One poll I did showed a female 72% positive feelings towards men, while men were 67% positive towards women, so that is only a relatively small difference there, but if you read comments written, the aggression really comes out.)
I know many men are mad. Deciphering that hornet's nest is a huge, huge job, and while I think about it, almost daily, I'm not prepared to write about it. I don't want that kind of attention and anger to deal with, as I know what some of the men will do with it. It's not at all productive or worth my time to be fielding pure hate.
If you want to talk about blame - I'm not blaming men for everything. Not even close. I'm talking about this issue, specifically. I defend and help men often. People should always look at context, but many people online don't want to take the time to do that. They get triggered, get defensive, and immediately react in anger. They do this without objectivity, or taking the time to carefully interpret what is being said, or has been said by that person in the past. My title is accurate, I stand by it. It does not imply anything more than what it states. I choose my words thoughtfully and precisely.
I agree that girls do blame men for a lot of things, for a lot of the problems in relationships and dating. Absolutely true. I've also written about how women's expectation are higher than men's. I might write a mytake about that some day. However, blame is not the same thing as hostility and outright aggression and threats. Those cross over into something much more menacing and disruptive to what social media is meant to be about - socializing, connecting, sharing, learning about others.
Pinks are 56% of the user base on GAG. Most people think it is much lower, lower than the male users. That is untrue. Pinks ask many questions, but their engagement on commenting is a fraction. There are thousands of questions here that have only a couple or handful of pink comments. Why do you think they can't get girls to answer more, comment more, open up more? Why do they seem reserved? Girls are seldom attacking guys online (don't let a handful of very active users fool you into thinking it's more.) Openness and directness are just not how the female temperament works.
(In person, in relationships, one-on-one, that's another story. Behaviour is different around people they know vs. strangers. But I am talking about strangers, virtually.) I'm absolutely certain, after analyzing this for a year, that one of the reasons is the male hostility, and girls' avoidance of conflict. So this is all interconnected. That's why it matters to me. If too many guys exhibit this hostile and aggressive behaviour, there's going to be (there is) very negative repercussions. The good guys online are being negatively affected by this too. Negativity is very, very toxic and contagious.
I could be like many other pinks, and just ignore, delete, and block. But what does that solve? Absolutely nothing in the long run. Ostracization is not a long term solution. Then you have Joaquin Phoenix's The Joker (I wrote about that too.) I am trying to illuminate something here, to try and instill some amount of awareness, and, yes, hopefully change. I don't hate men. I love men. But I am not going to be abused by a select bunch of men acting like terrorists, saying whatever they please to whomever they please whenever they please.
Why do I think it's gendered? Because men commit most violent acts in society. And their behaviour online is very different than women's. Am I blaming men for all problems? No, not at all.
It actually is if you're talking about your experiences but i'm pretty sure that there are many girls who experience that too who shares their anecdotal experiences. I also doubt that one because i've also seen women been hostile to men online. Just like posting their men hating speeches on twitter and more. So you can speak for yourself but you cannot blame masculinity for it otherwise you're just being a hypocrite. You're basically blaming men and hostile to them in a speech form. You're at exactly saying it but it only seems like you are just blaming masculinity that has nothing to do with this. So if a woman does the same, she's being masculine? Because as far as we know being masculine has something to do with being a gentleman respecting anyone and he breaks those rules, he wouldn't be considered a real man. You know what else is also studied? Society being hardwired to actually be more sympathetic towards women than men. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_are_wonderful_effect that speeches like this often gets tolerated and not being called a womansplainer, like men being accused of a harasser online even if he is innocent framed by someone who believes he is harassing her online and i can say i experience that myself and i'm not the only man who has experienced that.
Also talk about experiments when women actually demonstrates violence in public vs vice versa you can see people not standing up for men being beaten up because everyone assumes he did something to deserve it because of the "masculine" trait women don't have. https://youtu.be/m4hrHUo70nY Action speaks louder than words by the way you can say you're not blaming men but you're saying you're blaming masculinity. So what difference will it make if an angry man is blaming femininity while you are blaming masculinity?
But after all when society believes in woman's anecdotes it wouldn't become an anecdote because we will address it. It's just like when one talks about it everyone starts talking about it. but in cases like this for men, we just don't because we just don't see it as a big deal or no one just cares because we can just block anyone who do that and we know they are just trolls. So it's basically like if a woman does it she is just a troll but if a man does it he's crossing the line. Picture this you are in a crowd and just one guy whispered to you saying all women are horrible. Then after that you throw your long speech in front of the crowd saying men are horrible then contradict things later at the end saying not all of them just because of that one person who said that to you. When actually you're just talking about the loud minority and is that fair? Talk about equality when we also know that feminist are the loud minority of women. We don't generalize women because of what feminists do.
"many men also experienced this kind of stuff to from women."
More women are harassed in the way that she described than men. It's not even comparable. That is a fact not something you can argue against.
Why do you keep saying it's a "fact" thinking it will automatically make you true? You can say it could be a fact but you cannot say it is actually a fact. What are you entire world's satellite? But even if it's a fact (which is not exactly proven) i wouldn't give anyone excuse to generalize the whole group just because of what they experience. Also because they're women, they didn't experience what men also faced too. It's actually easy for anyone to be bias and one-sided because they don't see from each other's perspectives but in my case i'm saying its equal. Could be true or could be false but you're the one making assumptions here.
Also because you don't see the whole internet, here's a theory just what if that happens to men a lot more but most of the time, men just don't care and block that troll instead of taking it by heart virtue signalling?
I can't take anything you're saying seriously now, Aiko. You just refuse to acknowledge verifiable facts.
I would be willing to have a civil discussion with you if you weren't so obstinate in trying to refute basic facts. Your arguments have lost credibility.
You cannot simply say "no" and put all of the onus on other people, when you yourself choose not to cite evidence. (And I mean complete, with context, not cherry-picked single sentences not verified.)
I am not going to put the effort into refuting all of your 'facts' with evidence. But here, I'll do one, just to prove my point:
"A quick glance at the statistics seems to tell the whole story: Men commit more acts of violence than women. The U. S. Department of Justice sponsored a National Crime Victimization Study in 2007. This evaluation found that 75.6% of all offenders were male and only 20.1 percent were female. In the remaining cases, the victim wasn't able to identify the gender of the offender. According to these results, men commit violent crimes more than 3x as often as women [source: U. S. Department of Justice https://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus0702.pdf]
Even taking into account the possibility that many crimes in which a woman commits violence go unreported, such a disparity can't be dismissed. It would take scores of unreported violent acts to even up the numbers. But why is there a gender gap when it comes to violence? Are men hardwired to be violent?
The subject is the matter of much debate among sociologists and psychologists. Theories attempt to explain the difference between men and women. Some suggest that men are genetically disposed to be aggressive. This view fits into the evolutionary psychology school of thought -- in prehistoric times, men had to be able to protect women to ensure the survival of the species. As a result, men developed aggressive behaviors that have been passed down through thousands of years to modern times.
Not everyone buys into the evolutionary psychology view of the world. Some sociologists suggest that the gap may have more to do with a lack of social equality between the sexes. This argument states that the percentages of violent crime committed by men and women would be nearly equal if social status were also equal. But this theory suggests rates of violent crime committed by women should increase over time. According to Darrell Steffensmeier and Emilie Allan, the arrest rate for women accused of committing homicide actually dropped from 1975 to 1990 [source: Steffensmeier and Allan]. But the reason for that drop isn't that women are committing fewer violent crimes. It's that men are committing more violent acts in comparison.
Dozens of experts in various disciplines are still trying to determine the root causes of violence among men and women. There may be some motivators that are specific to one gender. Or it could turn out that men and women both experience the same general feelings of aggression but culture and society have shaped our behaviors, leading to more men committing violent acts than women. But in the end, the numbers tell the story: Men are more violent."
And, Aiko, look at any question, look at any 100 questions on GAG, and blue accounts are answering in always far higher numbers than pinks. Pinks are absent on many questions, particularly provocative (and I don't mean sexually provocative - I mean in the true, proper sense of the word) and controversial and 'heated' topics. And pink anonymous use has skyrocketed. Why? Well that's complicated, isn't it, but in part because they ARE AVOIDING CONFLICT. Unlike men, for whom many, 'debate' and 'free speech' are inalienable rights, something that they enjoy, think "is important"... and because they use aggression to intimidate, insult, and antagonize pinks. This is absolutely verifiable. But as I said, I am not going to paste in hundreds of examples here. It's not worth my time. But I could. I could very, very easily provide evidence of this.
Male Video Game Losers Are More Likely To Harass Women Online
www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/.../...ine_n_7847554.html
You don't really have to take me seriously but it's either you take it or leave it. Nobody actually has to take your might take seriously as well but is still in fact your time to justify your way of generalizing people just like to the analogy of basically what you're trying to do. Now you're thinking i'm making hate speeches right now? Those blue accounts those are just answers so what about answering your questions or making responses to your my takes? Are we not supposed to and be like you're pink follow accounts? Yes guys use aggressions to intimidate but on the other hand women use their victim card to intimidate. Both of them have their own different fallacies to use to intimidate each other. If you don't take me seriously because you think i am being offensive here then i am not like you making hasty generalization nor using any ad hominem to argue.
Also like what mister thisismyopinion is doing just a moment ago, misconstruing what i said changing the information talking to someone about me. That's a common thing women do to ruin men's reputation. Again this isn't just a one-sided situation. If anyone actually addresses men side, i know there would also be comments like what i'm doing with your not supposed to take seriously but take it however you want.
Or folders mail loser gamers your trying to say i can also give you factors why it happens. Because of your whole intimidate mansplaining notion, it has become so acceptable for anyone to bash on men that were not allowed to defend ourselves anymore. https://youtu. be/y1C2arhyJqI and of course there are always people who are still in denial about those stuff. What actually started. But i am not justifying those gamer losers not just giving your reasons why it happens. PS. I don't generalize women to be like those feminists and i don't blame it on femininity i'm just simply here to address.
https://youtu.be/y1C2arhyJqI link is broken
What I said about you was true.
@ThisIsMyOpinion Yeah right. Even if things about you were true, I know gas lighting is just a cheap move.
"gas lighting"?
And i thought i have a bad grammar. you don't even know what gaslighting is.
And you do.
I don't know what a word means, but you mess up sentence construction.
Or it's no one's fault you just think i messed up with a sentence construction. There are grammar checkers available for you and that's not my problem
You did it many many times. And I can easily go to our other conversation and put here many examples. Do you want me to?
Then just like how you did it so many times, i bother checking on it with a grammar checker. Sure you can make up examples
I can too
Because I can too. And don't complain if i do
I bet you can find some mistakes on my part. No question. Still not nearly as much as you do.
I never once had people here telling me that they could not understand what I was saying due to poor sentence construction. I have seen at least two other people besides me saying it to you.
@ThisIsMyOpinion Neither can you. Also I never also heard from anyone complain about my grammar other than you and your biased "friends". Not everything has to be spoken
You are lying. Rebecca, with who we are talking with on the other question, already did it more than once and know it. Why are you lying?
@ThisIsMyOpinion Ok Im "lying" sure. But what are you getting at anyways?
@ThisIsMyOpinion Obvious quotation mark right there
You are lying. You just said this:
"Also I never also heard from anyone complain about my grammar other than you"
When, in another question where we are talking, Rebecca called you out on your grammar more than once. So you are not "lying", you are lying!
@ThisIsMyOpinion Yeah say that all you want. Again what are you getting at anyways lol
@Aiko_E_Lara I pitty you. I really do. You just got caught lying and you can't admit to it.
You tried to discredit me for not knowing what something meant. My point is, you are in no position to say that when you do much worse on that regard.
@ThisIsMyOpinion Same reason you can't do it either. It's just that no one is making it a big deal unlike you.
I didn't started this. You did. And then made me the huge favor of lying. Something that I am about to use...
@ThisIsMyOpinion Yeah cool story. I'm gonna start being sarcastic at this point. But even if I did lie, what's gonna happen? You gonna be the next millionaire?
@Aiko_E_Lara thanks for admitting it.
*Mic drop*
@ThisIsMyOpinion For your sake lol. And sure anyone would believe because i wasn't even genuine about it
@ThisIsMyOpinion What actually constitutes harassment is a spectrum that varies depending on the person and can include some pretty ridiculous nonsense. If everything little thing is harassment, then yes women do get harassed more. See, for men it's not the end of the world. In fact, if it's anything men get miffed about it's the double standard between men and women. When a woman gets harassed, it's a tragedy. When men get harassed, it's Tuesday.