Red Pill Documentary

[Wyote]

@James although this wage gap sub conversation is a bit off topic, I think it's important to see the different viewpoints and perspectives and the idea of the wage gap is at the crux of a lot of things. @invisible is correct I think in his assessment of their being legitimate alternative perspectives, which is why navigating to solutions is a bit difficult. Ultimately, I believe it resides in inclusion, as has been stated in various ways already.

 

[Wyote]

PS - @James you are horrible

 

[James]

PS - @James you are horrible

Just "keeping it real" dude.

Watch those feminist's come after me, just for telling the truth.

 

[invisible]

Weird how I found it

I Googled the phrase, it appeared in an article by Andrew Chamberlain that is published at a couple of sites - Huffington Post and a blog called Glassdoor.

 

[Wyote]

Glassdoor

Ok, so you didn't link to the Glassdoor article?? *legit confused now*

 

[Wyote]

Ok, so you didn't link to the Glassdoor article?? *legit confused now*

Also Glassdoor is a hiring agency website where the data came from. At least that's what I gathered originally before being entirely confounded.

 

[invisible]

Ok, so you didn't link to the Glassdoor article?? *legit confused now*

Thanks, I see what you mean! I did not read all of the linked articles in the articles I linked to. Just the articles I posted. Sorry about that!

@James although this wage gap sub conversation is a bit off topic, I think it's important to see the different viewpoints and perspectives and the idea of the wage gap is at the crux of a lot of things. @invisible is correct I think in his assessment of their being legitimate alternative perspectives, which is why navigating to solutions is a bit difficult. Ultimately, I believe it resides in inclusion, as has been stated in various ways already.

Thanks for acknowledging that there is another valid perspective on this, really appreciate it!

 

[Wyote]

Thanks, I see what you mean! I did not read all of the linked articles in the articles I linked to. Just the articles I posted. Sorry about that!

Oh ok cool. We cool.
I was about to give up on the world.

_(┐「ε : )_

 

[Wyote]

Thanks for acknowledging that there is another valid perspective on this, really appreciate it!

Often times I don't say everything that I think because it's not really possible and I try to learn instead of just saying everything outright. On the one hand I agree with your thoughts and sentiments but on the other I feel like there are different ways of looking at it and approaching it and I think through our conversation, for myself at least, I understand and can empathize with both sides a bit better as a result.

 

[invisible]

@invisible @Wyote @Reason With Logic Filling

I consider you all friends. My biggest concern with this thread, was that whilst I have no doubt the intention was to raise legitimate issues. It can amplify division.

Maybe I get paranoid, but who most benefits from division ? I think that's at least worth thinking about. In the same way I think some want to subvert feminism.

It won't work. Because in reality, people care about each other.

Thanks for your friendly message. I am comfortable with disagreement and I am comfortable expressing and defending my own ideas about things. I strive to acknowledge that others may have a valid point of disagreement and that these different perspectives are valuable. I'm sorry to have taken the thread further off-topic.

Regarding division, I am aware that in the scholarly establishment it is common to talk about feminism as a plurality, "feminisms". This is to acknowledge that feminists are a various group of individuals and groups who do not agree on everything and to ensure the productivity in variety of theory and opinion. So I think that this establishment would not talk about just one feminism, or the possibility of subverting some "true" feminism, I think they would acknowledge that there are others doing valid work in the field whose work they disagree with. Probably, they would strenuously argue about what they disagree on...

I think one response to "who benefits from division", is to question the other side of it, "who benefits from erasing signs of division?" In a politically charged situation, it is the group that possesses the balance of power that benefits from silencing division. I only mention this because I notice that some people in this sort of position of power sometimes accuse others who are trying to express difference of deliberately creating division. In the case of an oppressed group of people, this functions to "keep them in their place". (You James are clearly NOT doing anything like that here. I'm just talking about division.)

There are a lot of people working to create division in this world, but it doesn't have to be a bad thing. For example, language revival efforts - Aboriginal Languages, Welsh and Gaelic languages... this is genuine division, but it's not inherently destructive at all. I think there is some linguistic idea out there that all of this diversity is inherently creative. So in this analysis, it is humanity that benefits from division.

As you can probably tell, it's not my personal quest in life to resolve division, I'm more interested in articulating and hearing differences. In my mind, it is possible that powerful divisions can coexist with mutual respect. However I definitely respect the wishes of others to work towards resolving differences or find points of common interest and understanding.

Hope this is not all too jumbled up... I shall now bow out of this discussion if that is OK, to allow it to proceed on topic... also I want to get on with enjoying a stress free time of much needed chilling out on my annual leave... Cheers

 

[James]

Hope this is not all too jumbled up... I shall now bow out of this discussion if that is OK, to allow it to proceed on topic... also I want to get on with enjoying a stress free time of much needed chilling out on my annual leave... Cheers

It's not at all jumbled up. You are comfortable with complex issues. Its present in all you write.

In a very simplistic way, all I meant, is that I'm very wary of those (not you or anyone on the forum) who seek to foster all kinds of division. Just to preserve a status quo, that they believe benefits them.

I'm always interested in hearing every side of debate.

*I hope you enjoy your leave. That's what I most wanted to say.

 

[Reason]

Which is what irks me about MRAs. Men who recognize the disadvantages in the system should actually work together with women toward a more egalitarian society.

Well it's funny you should suggest that because:

Are you fucking kidding me with all this MRA stuff?

Before you even saw the doc and before most of the facts in this thread were even presented.

This is why division exists, because there is open hostility to the very idea of activism to benefit men or even questioning of feminist philosophy. I don't want to fight with anyone, partially because it's not a satisfying feeling and partially because i'm actually quite lazy. However I cannot bridge a gap with a segment of society that can't even come to terms with the basic facts of this conversation and are, in fact, hostile to these kinds of conversations taking place at all. There is a clear pattern in the media, if you criticize men- even if you exaggerate greatly and demonize them extensively- nobody minds. If you question women or feminism in the slightest your opinion is invalid and you have no right to question because your gender has historically oppressed women.

How are men supposed to react to this? When their value to society is questioned, when they are not allowed to talk about their own issues, when men are not allowed to question feminism or women's rights and privileges in any way, and when the concept of misandry is a joke to feminists? On that note, I could if i wanted to, flood this thread with screenshots of feminist tweets that read "Cis normative male scum should just die" there are several of those floating around. So misandry isn't real... these women are just asking me to die because i'm a man, that's not sexist.

@James this conversation has dealt entirely with ideas and statistics and the like- if anyone is going become more entrenched in their beliefs because of what is said here then there isn't an issue with the conversation but with the individual.

 

[the]

Well it's funny you should suggest that because:


Before you even saw the doc and before most of the facts in this thread were even presented.

This is why division exists, because there is open hostility to the very idea of activism to benefit men or even questioning of feminist philosophy. I don't want to fight with anyone, partially because it's not a satisfying feeling and partially because i'm actually quite lazy. However I cannot bridge a gap with a segment of society that can't even come to terms with the basic facts of this conversation and are, in fact, hostile to these kinds of conversations taking place at all. There is a clear pattern in the media, if you criticize men- even if you exaggerate greatly and demonize them extensively- nobody minds. If you question women or feminism in the slightest your opinion is invalid and you have no right to question because your gender has historically oppressed women.

How are men supposed to react to this? When their value to society is questioned, when they are not allowed to talk about their own issues, when men are not allowed to question feminism or women's rights and privileges in any way, and when the concept of misandry is a joke to feminists? On that note, I could if i wanted to, flood this thread with screenshots of feminist tweets that read "Cis normative male scum should just die" there are several of those floating around. So misandry isn't real... these women are just asking me to die because i'm a man, that's not sexist.

@James this conversation has dealt entirely with ideas and statistics and the like- if anyone is going become more entrenched in their beliefs because of what is said here then there isn't an issue with the conversation but with the individual.

Well said.

 

[James]

conversation has dealt entirely with ideas and statistics and the like- if anyone is going become more entrenched in their beliefs because of what is said here then there isn't an issue with the conversation but with the individual.

Ok, well as you've quoted @acd I think I should say the following.

1) I think she's a very fair minded person, and I think she's been personally treated very badly, by a previous partner.

2) In the first quote she's asking for an egalitarian society. I'm 100% behind that.

3) Sometime before you had joined there was a member who posted a lot, about his separation from his violent wife. I don't think anyone on the forum was more supportive to him, than she was.

Ultimately feminism is women uniting to change an unfair system. Not women v men. I'm interested to see how this thread develops.

 

[Reason]

Ok, well as you've quoted @acd I think I should say the following.

1) I think she's a very fair minded person, and I think she's been personally treated very badly, by a previous partner.

2) In the first quote she's asking for an egalitarian society. I'm 100% behind that.

3) Sometime before you had joined there was a member who posted a lot, about his separation from his violent wife. I don't think anyone on the forum was more supportive to him, than she was.

Ultimately feminism is women uniting to change an unfair system. Not women v men. I'm interested to see how this thread develops.

I think you've missed that the point of my quoting her is to show that the default position of most people on this subject is unbridled contempt of MRAs, and that in the case of feminists it is usually much more hostile than that making the notion of "teaming up" with feminists laughable. Wasn't meant as a personal attack against @acd I actually like her just fine.

 

[James]

I think you've missed that the point of my quoting her is to show that the default position of most people on this subject is unbridled contempt of MRAs, and that in the case of feminists it is usually much more hostile than that making the notion of "teaming up" with feminists laughable. Wasn't meant as a personal attack against @acd I actually like her just fine.

I did get that part. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. I understand what you mean. That even trying to talk about men's situation is almost "taboo".

 

[the]

James your posts have been pretty "out there" recently in this thread. Are you doing ok?

Like what does second half of bullet points one have to do with anything? Doesn't seem like something you should share.

 

[James]

James your posts have been pretty "out there" recently in this thread. Are you doing ok?

I'm fine. But thanks for asking.

Edit. To answer that, I'd say they were public posts on a public web forum. So they'd already been shared. I never named the member.

 

[acd]

Well it's funny you should suggest that because:


Before you even saw the doc and before most of the facts in this thread were even presented.

This is why division exists, because there is open hostility to the very idea of activism to benefit men or even questioning of feminist philosophy. I don't want to fight with anyone, partially because it's not a satisfying feeling and partially because i'm actually quite lazy. However I cannot bridge a gap with a segment of society that can't even come to terms with the basic facts of this conversation and are, in fact, hostile to these kinds of conversations taking place at all. There is a clear pattern in the media, if you criticize men- even if you exaggerate greatly and demonize them extensively- nobody minds. If you question women or feminism in the slightest your opinion is invalid and you have no right to question because your gender has historically oppressed women.

How are men supposed to react to this? When their value to society is questioned, when they are not allowed to talk about their own issues, when men are not allowed to question feminism or women's rights and privileges in any way, and when the concept of misandry is a joke to feminists? On that note, I could if i wanted to, flood this thread with screenshots of feminist tweets that read "Cis normative male scum should just die" there are several of those floating around. So misandry isn't real... these women are just asking me to die because i'm a man, that's not sexist.

@James this conversation has dealt entirely with ideas and statistics and the like- if anyone is going become more entrenched in their beliefs because of what is said here then there isn't an issue with the conversation but with the individual.

I'm not questioning men's value in society. I don't feel that men have any less value or deserve less than women. I'm questioning the MRA movement. Which I don't really think concerns itself with equality. It's a backlash against the women's movement. Women making strides has shed light on the very ways the system actually fails some men.
I think men's rights activists are in the same league as those feminazi trolls. Hard to take them seriously.

Why don't you go out and work with at risk and disadvantaged people and see first hand how the world actually works? Because there's much more than what is in your documentary and other YouTube vids and troll screenshots from around the net. If you are so worried about men and gender inequality, what are you actually doing about it besides watching documentaries that already confirm your position of victimhood and how privileged you think women are? Why don't you try volunteering at a crisis shelter? We had very few men volunteer or apply to work at ours, but the ones who did made a big difference!

 

[Reason]

James your posts have been pretty "out there" recently in this thread. Are you doing ok?

Like what does second half of bullet points one have to do with anything? Doesn't seem like something you should share.

He's trying to keep those of us participating in this thread from going completely off the rails and being hurtful. He's just doing his job.