Stop Emasculating Men, Then Wondering Where All The Good Men Went
BY: GREG ELLIS
Women Are Human Too — With Human Flaws
As Macrocreeps will communicate inadvertently through their misanthropic/misogynist propaganda cosplaying as a hobby: women are goddesses apparently, allegedly.
Can do no wrong, above us greasy mere mortals known as men that are here to serve. According to society, women's shit don't stink.
Women are held accountable legally, but in public discourse, rarely. Politically? Academically? Culturally? Gets even messier.
"Equality" is a red herring, if you're not held accountable, you're coddled. A coddled is a liability, not an equality. But equality is fetishized more than accountability & merit when accountability equally is being an equal.
Paradoxically the west wants & advocates what is pushes away.
As a society, we buy into an unspoken and pervasive bias in favor of women: as the fairer sex, they must be inherently more righteous and loving than men. Which is why things get feminized & Ai will admit that the academic sphere adheres to female lens approaches as the masculine are inversely perceived as negative.
Yet we are all human, and capable of being slaves to base passions. Just as men’s, women’s passions can manifest in destructive and ugly ways.
Every toxic manifestation men can do women can do, this is also why toxic masculinity is also a gaslight. Socialized behavior of men doesn't explain why women do it to, so is it a boys are taught to be toxic?
Or is academia trying to make what is a neutral human fault a male problem? Thus giving women yet another false sense of security?
Well this isn't a modern phenomena, bias toward women is in our DNA, they bear the babies. So we associate women with children and babies, it's why we treat women with the same tolerance & lack of accountability we spare for children (culturally & socially), humans don't treat women like children consciously but the double standard is infantilizing.
The western worlds "First woman to (do something a man did already)" fetish does the same infantilism effect. Notice how those headlines rarely share what exactly she did or earned that was so special, you usually have to read the article to find out what she did or if she was useful vs the primary importance being fetishizing her sex in the position. What she actually accomplished, if anything, beyond the position was irrelevant to the headline. And girls are taught to think that treatment of them is normal, a constant inferiority complex.
And others claim women being more emotionally attuned means they can't make sound rational decisions, all lies.
The problem is society has progressed but it hasn't "advanced", this is why standards get lowered, gender roles & norms get uprooted. It's not advancement, the rigidity is what made the empire you suckle off of. Where do you think you can go by getting rid of what got you here in the first place?
Not every tradition is worth upholding (ex. Aztec human sacrifice ) but some traditions you can objectively attribute to prosperity (ex. Nuclear family but this time + upgraded with some egalitarian values vs destroying the trad unit and replacing it with egalitarianism, which is not sustainable)
- progression just means you moved in a direction, it doesn't mean it's the right direction.
Advancement is to go in a better vector than previously, to advance is to evolve.
Civilization hasn't evolved, we infantilize women then wonder why some women act weird, or get burnt out when they have no support system because feminism taught them hyper-independence was strength which is more like toxic masculinity than what we're told is toxic masculinity.
we wonder where Karens come from, why young Women are so entitled yet so useless in a utility sense of a relationship. And anything that requires too much of them is the relationship failing them or men being a burden, when she is the weak link that can't perform without reward.
Because raising a child is an asymmetrical duty, a child can't reciprocate. If you're caving inward because you have a scoreboard & according to you, your partner isn't 50/50 on everything. You're not built for cohabitation happiness.
Your era groomed you to be alone forever.
We're raising them to be passive bystanders in their own lives and encourage them to be bosses and produce absolutely nothing.
The same energy we exert to keep men in check we need to exercise it to keep women in check as well.
Because infantilizing women ,giving them trophies for being "the first women to-" [insert thing a man has already done] is just treating women like actual children. Everytime I bring it up to Ai, the Ai concedes every single time. Not because I'm looking for a cosign, I want to be wrong, but this objectively is condescending & women get pounded with this constantly.
Their accomplishments matter less than what are in a position, a token, which is fetishization. Figurehead energy.
They're winners for playing, not actually doing anything worthy of praise. The fact that Valentina Tereshkova contributed to aerosol layer studies within the atmosphere with her observations, atmospheric composition took strides because she paid attention during her space mission but that matters less than her being the first woman in space-- she wasn't the first to a solo space mission, she wasn't the first person in space & she was a woman. She was the first woman in space after men did it first; thus technically proved it was safe for women to do it too whenever one would do it.
And the "first women to" implies we're impressed that she did the bare minimum men did, which implies a contrary attitude that she couldn't do it? And if it isn't that deep, why is that constantly the narrative as if we're still in the 1930s?
When will women doing anything not be worth news, when they're not the first to do it in the first place.
It makes women like Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna's feats look minute despite them being advancers of their field, because the default is women are praised every other week for doing essentially nothing but joining an activity. You rob the exceptional women the shine they deserve & by proxy you make a woman's achievement in the eyes of men look like they never earn it.
The bias isn't the entire issue. It's the hypocrisy, by trying to empower women, you make empowerment meaningless.
Recognizing this doesn’t negate the plight women have endured in a historically male-dominated world, but it being male dominated is why we're not in caves. We can't use "historical" as an excuse forever, it's why you'll remain stuck in suspension.
You want progress while keep the past in your pocket as emotional black mail.
It simply suggests women hold no monopoly on virtue as a bizarre form of social karma.
Women’s ascendance past centuries-old barriers is remarkable and praiseworthy, but it's not impressive when the women who actually took the risk are in rest & their more privileged successor are trying to hijack their struggle as their own when there's less risk. But they talk as if they're one opinion from assassination.Almost all the men I know look with pride and amazement at the mothers and daughters in their lives, and understand the “Me Too” movement is a long-overdue reckoning for bad men. But why must success for one sex automatically include derision for the other?
The laudable, original objective of the feminist movement urging us to better our traditional manhood has warped into an assault on everything masculine. It strips away empathy for boys, who must navigate a world that assumes the worst of them because they're not woman enough, which falsely presumes womanhood or more women is the answer society needs, the numbers show that is not the case. You need men, the world is male dominated because men have the drive to carry the world, it's why men get blamed for everything.You blame the authority, not the help. Women aren't held accountable but men are blamed (even if it's women's fault) because male-driven systems is why you have advanced society.
A womans word alone can send you to jail and if she lied well oh well, you lost years of your life and her identity will be protected.
Remember, women are oppressed in first world countries.
And don't you dare tell a woman she looks nice today that's considered violence.
See we drive men and women apart, we don't challenge articles that are doing nothing but inflating the problem, then wonder why society is going down the crapper.
It's a real mystery.
Ostracizing Masculinity
Men kill themselves higher rate than women. They also make up the vast majority of combat deaths; more than 97 percent of American military fatalities in Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom were men.
And nobody cares because men suffering is beneath our notice, it's normalized into the culture. So normalized there's a fetish that specializes in emasculating & dehumanizing men to the furthest extent possible as an inferior derivative of the human species and painting women as omnipotent & superior, even actual goddesses.
(overcompensating much?)
Male suffering is all part of the plan baby, it's how you bring a country down to it's knees. Better believe it.
And if it's coincidence, that's even worse.
- The quick ascendence of this concept to cultural gospel is reflected by how common the phrase has become.
- Although The New York Times has since removed its calculator for word frequency in its coverage, screenshots posted to Twitter suggest the term “toxic masculinity” was basically nonexistent in the media until recently. Though a man did coin the term in the 80s
- After that, its prevalence appears on the graph as a slope verging on vertical.
The same is true for related terms like “patriarchy” and “male privilege.” A Google search for the term “toxic masculinity” yields more than 7.5 million results. - Start scrolling, and you’ll see articles like The New York Times’ “The Boys Are Not All Right,” Scientific American’s “How to Fight Toxic Masculinity,” and The Atlantic’s “Toxic Masculinity and the Brokenness of Boyhood” — which appears to have been stealth-edited with the new title, “The Miseducation of the American Boy.”
“Toxic Masculinity and the Brokenness of Boyhood”
Brokenness of Boyhood, listen to that language, the insinuation of inherit defection. I can just taste the venom through my screen. Holy shit.
Imagine it: "The Brokeness of Girlhood"
Now mind you, the inherent toxicity of women manipulating people, their propensity to be passive aggressive, jealous, vindictive, violent, slapping people, & turn people against each other, plot murders, warp a situation by feigning weakness or using tears to turn a situation- which actually makes them smarter predators & leagues more dangerous than men.
Which is why female PDF's I'd argue are not minorities, you just don't catch them.
Feigning weakness are things girls learn subliminally as children to both navigate males & also to just influence the behavior of their parents and then authorities to the best of one's ability. It's a survival technique to navigate communities & even please people. It's women can be convincingly two faced.
- A woman manipulating someone isn't inherently malicious, sometimes women use it for for someone's benefit even at her own expense. They did it at work, as mothers, etc.
- It even happens in classrooms or parties. Women are not stupid and it's a natural instinct of women , but it's actually very dangerous.
The entire point of GONE GIRL is to show how effective a woman can be if she really wanted to mess someone up without putting her hands on anyone.
See the problem is we've made it so "toxicity" is only defined by what men normally do wrong, not by women's standards too.
So that way when it's time for women to take accountability, it's never time, because there's always an excuse or a phantom patriarchy to blame.
The “toxic masculinity” narrative deepened further in 2019, when the American Psychological Association, for the first time in its history, developed official guidelines for working with men and boys. The document is discouraging, calling for recognition of “the impact of power, privilege, and sexism on the development of boys and men” and casting what it considers “traditional” male behavior as inherently problematic.
When men showing emotions has always been a thing, the problem is they don't express them like women, & we attribute that to negative affects later in life & not the fact that society actively neglects boys & men.
That's the point. That's how you destroy what makes a Country a threat. Masculinity.
North Korea is not shaking in their boots because we have Sensitivity Classes or because THE VIEW has an opinion, hell, this is only an argument if pretend women never start fights, or are stoic, repressed their emotions or cause trouble.
I repeat, men being stoic is toxic, Ai even makes this mistake. But women are enabled to be stoic, to be independent, to do everything, to have everything. Why is toxic masculinity only a good thing when women are told that's the modern woman?
When people say if women ruled the world-
Harnessing electricity would've been postponed, don't kid yourselves. We might be a more cultured world but a less evolved one, civilization wouldn't be anywhere near the internet or sewer systems.
With women on top, it'd likely be more fair, and that's a big if. But our advancement ?Technology? Say bye bye to your vibrators kiddos.
All in all, America is very effeminate, that's partly why it's failing. Partly, more nuanced marriages isn't why American is collapsing, feeling they had to destroy masculinity to install egalitarianism was the mistake.
Where Is the Empathy For Men?
Ignored, Americans have an inclusive, sensitive, tolerant society (Gemini A.I will tell you this bullshit)-- Unless Men or White people are involved in the conversation.
It’s debated whether certain masculine behaviors are born of dubious socialization or are the function of natural, hormone-driven biological traits. Meanwhile, many of the people shouting about toxic men also inexplicably claim there are no differences between the sexes.
Which one is it?
The idea that men can only redeem their fundamental brokenness by acting more like women is not limited to the gated community of elite academia. It permeates the nation’s mainstream reading lists, even therapy's rigid feminized models of care.
Just one example from late 2019 was the book “For the Love of Men” by Liz Plank. On the very first page, we are told toxic masculinity is more dangerous than nuclear war, followed by chapter after chapter of dodgy research in which toxic masculinity is essentially defined as any behavior Plank doesn’t like.
there's legitimate criticisms on women's part, men do commit majority of violent crimes but they also build the cities in full, bridges, die doing it too- are men going to get articles on mass press that fact ? No.
Men are the majority of violent crime perps by 80%+, and 80%+ of men are not violent criminals & sexual violators. In fact they're more so 85-90%+ the reason why your national power grids are still online. Wil feminism admit that while complaining about child labor wage gaps? Nope. Will Academia give men their due respect for doing what women (in all fairness) choose not to help contribute to because they reasonably don't want to? Which is fine, but don't present this specific "toxic masculinity" bullshit doesn't apply to women, then frame the term as if it's male issue when it's not.
Then IGNORE the burdens men shoulder almost exclusively over 80/% while women cruise on their backs and girls aren't encouraged to be self-aware that they are indeed, not the main characters, not perfect, not the solution to everyone's social contentions but part of the solution.
The narrative is brutally, intentionally backwards. How do i know it's on purpose? Who the fuck lies like this on accident, when they're supposed to be the "experts".
#MenAreTrash looks better on a T-Shirt, meanwhile they're out right now building your goddam malls
First world societies need masculinity when matriarchy fails civilization and then in peacetime men need to closely emulate or turn into women or else they're problematic.
When patriarchy is the foundation & matriarchy fits under it, the two (like capitialism & socialism), like meritocracy & equity, like men and women. The two can exist together but cannot, YOU CAN NOT remove the masculine after it's done doing the hard labor, move in the feminine as the upgrade then expect the feminine to be both the feminine & Neo masculine.
Then when things eventually collapse on the feminine watch, women are blamed when they can't be men. When the average women isn't asking for men to go away, women simply want a seat at the table & a voice to speak, and a toolbox to contribute.
Masculinity doesn't have to go away or be redefined in the image of women for that to happen.
That's exactly how it does and doesn't work.
Where is the empathy for men? The question doesn’t require us to disregard women’s historical suffering, but it also warrants that women today are objeectively not the women from 1758.
It's okay to admit women have unequivocally better now, challenges still exist, but women in first world countries are not victims. We can't use "historically" as a shield to get what we want by force, that's being a WEAK-LINK.
Rather, history simply acknowledges that in modernity most men are neither predators nor abusers, and asks the same empathy and sympathy for men that our feminist society demands for women.
"Modern" doesn't have to mean regression, failure, decline, & "mistake" but that's exactly what happened.
"-and asks the same empathy and sympathy for men that our feminist society demands for women."
keywords: "asks" vs "demands"
So we're asking people to exercise equality between men and women......fancy that. Which begs the question, if equality is what we're begging for, what is it people have been dealing with if not a gyno-egalitarianism state? Which is becoming more matriarchal in sensibility despite how many men are still in power. You'd be surprised how many elites & their cabals dabble in goddess worship, matriarchy, what do you think the Statue of Liberty is? A Sun Goddess, that's not Christian. That's paganism.
Better ask somebody.
Anyways, equality is what our foremother's wanted in the first place but their daughters inherited a hybrid of privilege and Platinum First Class Protected Status, damn near ranking above the elders and children.
