Toxic masculinity

[Ranger]

The is no collection agency that goes out and chastises her until she relents to your position.

Since when do women give a fuk what you think about who they suk and fuk?

You talked to her. You kisses her. You fukked her. You fell in love with her. You made hundreds of decisions. Yet...she didn’t stay in love with you or you were part of a con because you feel so much and thus you think it’s all her fault because your precious little heart got broke.
Sorry, but she is going with what she feels. It’s not her that doesn’t get it. It’s the man who doesn’t get it.
This entire world is about fukking and survival resources when it comes to men and women.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

You don’t think it’s never happened to me? Since when to women prescribe to a man’s moral code?

For breeding? Yes. Biologically. Putting your sperm under competition with another man’s is somehow new?

“A woman respects and admires a gentleman but she sleeps with cods.”
Louis L'Amour

What are you going to do? Beat her until she accepts you’re the greatest most amazing man in her experience? Do you really think that you are that magnificent to her that just by default, just because you’re her boyfriend or husband?

Who do you think you are? God? You just say it must be this way and somehow the most successful breeding strategy in the history of this planet is wrong and you should be protected and coddled with the utmost care?

Ok. Let’s say you’re right. Outline your plan to bring her to submission and penance and thus make you feel that you are vindicated.

They would cheat on GOD. As they have in the bible. The ***** leads strong men to their slaughter like lambs. The best men have been destroyed by women. Can we cry about it? No. We better recognize whats good for us and whats bad.

 

[Ranger]

They would cheat on GOD. As they have in the bible. The ***** leads strong men to their slaughter like lambs. The best men have been destroyed by women. Can we cry about it? No. We better recognize whats good for us and whats bad.

That was a huge jump. Only lambs get slaughtered.
I don’t understand that position. That concept would never even be formed in my mind.

I decide what’s good for me. A woman doesn’t get to decide that. Why would a man let himself be led by a woman, much less to slaughter?

There are issues here. There is a huge conflict between the way you think with they way things are. The way you were raised or in your philosophical/religious beliefs.

This means that one or both is a lie. So are your philosophical/religious beliefs true or is this world of observable reality true? They both can’t be true.
One or both are a lie.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

That was a huge jump. Only lambs get slaughtered.
I don’t understand that position. That concept would never even be formed in my mind.

I decide what’s good for me. A woman doesn’t get to decide that. Why would a man let himself be led by a woman, much less to slaughter?

There are issues here. There is a huge conflict between the way you think with they way things are. The way you were raised or in your philosophical/religious beliefs.

This means that one or both is a lie. So are your philosophical/religious beliefs true or is this world of observable reality true? They both can’t be true.
One or both are a lie.

Eve cheated on god and her husband when the snake persuaded her to consume from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

 

[Ranger]

Even cheated on god and her husband when the snake persuaded her to consume from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

I haven't observed that so I don’t have an opinion and it really has no relevance to me.

 

[Ranger]

So is that why you’re here? To persecute women because she tricked Adam into eating from the tree of life and obtaining the knowledge of good an evil?

 

[mrgoodstuff]

So is that why you’re here? To persecute women because she tricked Adam into eating from the tree of life and obtaining the knowledge of good an evil?

That "story" was just to describe female nature. Men can make what they will of it. I think we all need to makw better choices in the character of women we deal with. Train our sons and grandsons the same. Im done complaining about them.

 

[Ranger]

That "story" was just to describe female nature. Men can make what they will of it. I think we all need to makw better choices in the character of women we deal with. Train our sons and grandsons the same. Im done complaining about them.

I understand. It’s not likely he will make better choices when he’s still acting like he has no real power. He will spend the rest of his days right here.

 

[Ranger]

That "story" was just to describe female nature. Men can make what they will of it. I think we all need to makw better choices in the character of women we deal with. Train our sons and grandsons the same. Im done complaining about them.

I am not training my son to make better choices with women’s charachter. What does that even mean. Who says her charachter isn’t correct for survival in a particular situation?

I just don’t get the “charachter” part. I’ve really tried to see it. Who dictates what’s charachter and what isn’t? If you live or die effects no woman anywhere on the planet except those who love you in your family.
Only a man has integrity, honor, creativity etc at the depth required for understanding. did somebody tell you to apply the charachteristics of men to women?
Who would do such a thing?

 

[mrgoodstuff]

I am not training my son to make better choices with women’s charachter. What does that even mean. Who says her charachter isn’t correct for survival in a particular situation?

I just don’t get the “charachter” part. I’ve really tried to see it. Who dictates what’s charachter and what isn’t? If you live or die effects no woman anywhere on the planet except those who love you in your family.
Only a man has integrity, honor, creativity etc at the depth required for understanding. did somebody tell you to apply the charachteristics of men to women?
Who would do such a thing?

There are still choices. There are 16 main personality types. Im going to bed.

 

[glass half full]

I like how he turns the question into telling a story about his cute granddaughter playing toddler games and entertains everyone with that story for quite a while. Then when the chick asks him how that has anything to do with toxic masculinity he's basically like: "Oh that doesn't really exist, you can't even define it."
He could've said that straight away haha.

He's no dummy. He knows this drives toxic women nuts.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

The only real buttress towards all these is focusing on you.

Working and adding on traits that makes you greater as time passes.

And then passing it on to other men as a form of mentorship.

Focusing on women and their "toxicity" does nothing to assist you towards being greater then before. It's a sure fire way of making a man sink further in a quagmire of his own making.

Focusing on their toxicity is victim think. Eject any albatross from your circle

 

[Mazer]

My response to any Feminist is always, Don’t tell me how women should be treated, I have a mother and sister and I know exactly how they should be treated, they usually shutup after that.

 

[alanferrara]

This is my response:

 

[Fruitbat]

I do.

Tell that to the victims of US and European foreign policy.

Murder is not exclusively a socialist endeavour. Look at the millions killed in Vietnam. Mostly in the defence of capitalism. The country was 90% or thereabouts behind Ho Chi Minh. The US backed a corrupt war lord in the south and stuck it’s nose in where it shouldn’t have been and killed millions of people, in the pursuit of the destruction of socialism. So, with respect, I think your views are the same views which legitimised and funded that war, and ironically were,
in that conflict, responsible for murder more than socialism was.

Not being a socialist, and generally being in opposition to socialism, it feels strange to be defending it. It is certainly number one, two and three in terms of murder. I don’t think you can equate it directly to murder though. A hell of a lot of people are killed in the defence of western values.

 

[backseatjuan]

 

[Alvafe]

Tell that to the victims of US and European foreign policy.

Murder is not exclusively a socialist endeavour. Look at the millions killed in Vietnam. Mostly in the defence of capitalism. The country was 90% or thereabouts behind Ho Chi Minh. The US backed a corrupt war lord in the south and stuck it’s nose in where it shouldn’t have been and killed millions of people, in the pursuit of the destruction of socialism. So, with respect, I think your views are the same views which legitimised and funded that war, and ironically were,
in that conflict, responsible for murder more than socialism was.

Not being a socialist, and generally being in opposition to socialism, it feels strange to be defending it. It is certainly number one, two and three in terms of murder. I don’t think you can equate it directly to murder though. A hell of a lot of people are killed in the defence of western values.

vietnam war killed millions? hey I agree vietnam was a dumb war who make US look even more dumb, but the damage done on water sources on vietnam really damned the country, but saying vietnam killed more then socialism..... venezuela is kinda there to tell you

 

[Fruitbat]

vietnam war killed millions? hey I agree vietnam was a dumb war who make US look even more dumb, but the damage done on water sources on vietnam really damned the country, but saying vietnam killed more then socialism..... venezuela is kinda there to tell you

Yes, I agree. Socialist governance has delivered worse results than anything else. However, take a look at US and European foreign policy in the last 200 years. The US has been bombing and subjugating countries for decades. An opponent of free market economics could point to that quite validly and demonstrate how corporate greed is killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

What were the Iraq and Afghanistan wars about? Freedom? Don’t make me laugh.

On the other hand, the Bosnian intervention saved a lot of lives. Some credit has to be given there.

The point I was making is you can’t equate someone with left wing views as being complicit in murder. They are misguided. In many ways, some elements of socialist policy has added to the strength of western democracy. Indeed, conscription to the army is a completely statist concept and a true libertarian would not consider that. The law in the US also does not appear in any way geared towards personal freedoms. Perhaps more so with speech, but look at how big the prison population is, and how brutal the conditions are.

No socialist countries have had foreign policy even remotely as aggressive as the US. Not even the Soviet Union. You have to hand it to them, they are much better at respecting other nations but extremely good at murdering their own.

 

[Fruitbat]

Capitalism is not the cause of foreign wars.

Politicians available for sale is what caused it, along with our fiat monetary system where we have to borrow ever more money to avoid depression.

Putting on the socialist hat:

“Yes, but it’s the unintentional consequences of capitalism”

Does socialism actually prescribe murder or is it an unintended consequence?

Socialists always say “aha, that’s not REAL socialism”

Perhaps we are saying “aha, it’s not REAL capitalism”

Just playing devils advocate. As far as I am concerned the system is largely irrelevant. Human greed always exists. It’s just a capitalist system has slightly better checks and balances to control it

 

[Alvafe]

Putting on the socialist hat:

“Yes, but it’s the unintentional consequences of capitalism”

Does socialism actually prescribe murder or is it an unintended consequence?

Socialists always say “aha, that’s not REAL socialism”

Perhaps we are saying “aha, it’s not REAL capitalism”

Just playing devils advocate. As far as I am concerned the system is largely irrelevant. Human greed always exists. It’s just a capitalist system has slightly better checks and balances to control it

since most socialism try to curb freedom and ignore human nature, in a utopian thinking, yes, the problem with socialism is if you think it in a cold logical way it do make sense its a moral way to help these in need, these sory souls who have nothing to eat and have nothing, but then you are ignoring they own responsability for that, why certain places are the way they are? why most countrys are at war? why would someone put effort in something when the reward would be the same as no effort?

people say greed is bad, but that is a way to motivate people, why someone would go after a painfull thing if not for his gain? capitalisma never sold the moral way, capitalism works better because it let you try to get a reward for your effort, socialism says you need to mind yourself obey the goverment and work, but then socialism makes thing go stale because no one will say something or inprove something, since he will not be rewarded