• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Believe all Women is a right wing trap.

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
22,309
43,373
1,610
Straya
Separate power axis. Women likewise have a responsibility to not ruin men's reputation and livelihood over petty personal reasons.
I think they’re intertwined, not entirely separate. If a woman is in the company of men who she knows will jump to her defense, then she instigates a fight, she bears at least partial responsibility for what happens. She is essentially wielding them as a weapon, and it’s an abuse of her social benefits.
 

mickaus

Gold Member
May 30, 2019
66
58
290
Maybe right wing Republicans should, for the sake of bipartisanship, launch a campaign of never believe women. Right wing groups will lose their trap but progressives will never be trapped again. This action could be the first step of mending the current political climate and make US politics a safer and more understanding institution.
 

Dargor

Member
Sep 5, 2013
1,968
848
560
Maybe right wing Republicans should, for the sake of bipartisanship, launch a campaign of never believe women. Right wing groups will lose their trap but progressives will never be trapped again. This action could be the first step of mending the current political climate and make US politics a safer and more understanding institution.
Nah, not enough lunatics on the right for such a nonsensical move to get enough traction.

Probably could get a a believe due process going though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: onewingedhoneybee

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
4,429
4,704
620
If you are a woman and u start shit with a male u need to first follow the following rules

1) Be sure u are protected by other males that come to your rescue
2) Have family that people know about that will make them think twice about fighting back because it could come way later back towards them far worse.
3) Make sure the male knows about point 1 and 2.

If these requirements are not met. U better keep walking as female. Because u will never win it.
 
Last edited:

Plague Doctor

Member
Mar 23, 2015
2,390
2,367
640
So I reread this NYT article...

Is the author stating that the exact term "Believe All Women" was originally a hyperbolic right wing criticism BUT then the left wing press and activists rolled with it as gospel.... cause they are dumb and took the bait for the past 2 years?

That's.... that's not better than the original narrative that believe all women was in its inception a left wing movement. Actually that might be worse and suggest the left wing press and activists are just lemmings without self reflection and unknowingly push false narratives.

This opens up a can of worms. How many other things does the Left push that was originally a troll criticism that they got baited into? According to the New York Times, the activists in the press and twitter are gullible to fall for it. Which other causes are delusions based on hyperbole?

Man, what the fuck is going on with the modern left?
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
22,309
43,373
1,610
Straya
So I reread this NYT article...

Is the author stating that exact term "Believe All Women" was originally a hyperbolic right wing criticism BUT then the left wing press and activists rolled with it as gospel.... cause they are dumb and took the bait for the past 2 years?

That's.... that's not better than the original narrative that believe all women was in its inception a left wing movement. Actually that might be worse and suggest the left wing press and activists are just lemmings without self reflection and unknowingly push false narratives.

This opens up a can of worms. How many other things does the Left push that was originally a troll criticism that they got baited into? According to the New York Times, the activists in the press and twitter are gullible to fall for it. Which other causes are delusions based on hyperbole?

Man, what the fuck is going on with the modern left?
👌🏻
 

Airola

Member
Jun 25, 2015
4,364
3,218
475
Finland
Mine was a great analogy. Both the shoot em in the legs and pin her down arguments make so many assumptions about the situation that don't hold true in anywhere close to 100% of the time. Size of the attacker, size of the defender, timing, and so on.
Here's Matt carefully calculating human behavior and world's realities to come to the conclusion that punching a woman is the way to go:

 

ClanOfNone

Member
Nov 24, 2018
970
1,069
380
As a single dad raising two daughters my mantra has been the same one I was raised with, "Don't hit women."
I have also told the girls that there are plenty of men out there that will have no problem punching you in the face if you hit them first, don't expect your gender to be some magic shield.
This was like a ten second clip, we have zero knowledge of what happened before or after here. Maybe the girl is a piece of shit bully that has been pushing his buttons for weeks. Maybe the guy is a piece of shit bully that was doing the same. I dunno, but I'm not gonna judge either one of them without knowing what lead up to the confrontation.
I don't think anyone here is advocating for beating women. Are there circumstances where I would strike a woman? I'm sure there probably are, but I've survived 43 years on this planet without doing so, and hope to maintain that streak for the remainder of my time here.
 

Cato

China delenda est
Oct 27, 2017
4,147
6,196
690
Moore Park Beach
So I reread this NYT article...
.
Is the author stating that the exact term "Believe All Women" was originally a hyperbolic right wing criticism BUT then the left wing press and activists rolled with it as gospel.... cause they are dumb and took the bait for the past 2 years?

That's.... that's not better than the original narrative that believe all women was in its inception a left wing movement. Actually that might be worse and suggest the left wing press and activists are just lemmings without self reflection and unknowingly push false narratives.

This opens up a can of worms. How many other things does the Left push that was originally a troll criticism that they got baited into? According to the New York Times, the activists in the press and twitter are gullible to fall for it. Which other causes are delusions based on hyperbole?

Man, what the fuck is going on with the modern left?
Not criticizing you but this just makes my brain hurt.
Jesus.
Recall Inc. I will pay whatever it costs. Just send me back to 1984. Please add butterflies. I like butterflies.
When can I come in for the procedure?
 

Steve.1981

Member
Oct 6, 2015
2,019
769
575
On the topic of the OP... Good god what a bunch of dishonest, sneaky fuckers these lot are. Trying to completely rewrite recent history, that we can all remember fine because it just happened, simply because their guy is now the one facing accusations. Despicable. If you genuinely believe in something, believe in it no matter where it takes you.

Said it before & I'll say it again. Been a leftie all my life, but the modern woke brigade who've taken over can get fucked. They're doing serious damage.

On the topic of Tesseract Tesseract burning like fire throughout this thread... Well said my man. Well said. I was raised the same way. Where I'm from, it's passed down from father to son. In all but the most extreme circumstances, men do not hit women.

My father's generation were taught this by my grandfather's generation & so on, back through history. & you better believe that these were not little whipped bitches either. These were & are, hard working class men.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
They are correct, kinda.

There are people on the right wing who are turning the years of "believe women" against the Left and rubbing their faces in it. Yes, folks in the "right wing" have accurately identified an oozing, painful weakness of the Left and are easily able to trap naive dogma-parrots (the sort that watch CNN and repeat what they hear on Facebook and gaming forums) with simple questions and with memes. They are trapping them by confronting them with their own ideological catchphrases (metoo, believe all women, all men are rapists, etc) and asking them to apply their own standard to their political candidates.

So yes, some ideologues are being trapped by right-wingers, but the article intentionally glosses over the fact that they're being trapped by their own past rationale. Instead of getting angry and blaming The Alt Right boogeymen, they should be embarrassed and should be scrambling to put a covering over the obvious weakness.

The rest of the world knows this isn't a "right wing trap". Even many of their former Allies (lol) are turning against them and pointing out the damage. Some of these men and women were awakened to the nonsense by getting caught in the ideological crossfire within the Left's "big tent" community.

But because the ideologues on the Left believe they are on The Right Side of History™ and can do no wrong, they don't grasp the significance of these developments. You could no more convince a fresh convert that God is fake nor a fresh revolutionary that the status quo is a-okay.
 

Super Mario

Mario Mario
Nov 12, 2016
2,293
3,143
560
Wow, 6 pages in no time at all. I'm sure this thread is full of new arguments, and opinions that were influenced
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cybrwzrd

kittoo

Cretinously credulous
Apr 11, 2007
2,965
433
1,430
32
“Self-defence is a bitch move” is one hell of a take lmao
Lol seriously. Guy has gone to deep end. I don't appreciate someone hitting me, even if a woman. If you aren't ready for the retaliation, don't do it. Of course I am not going to kill someone for punching me and that's part of proportional retaliation, but I will punch if punched.
A lot of women do it because they think there will be no retaliation. So violence against men gets shrugged off. Why? Everyone should be afraid of hurting others. Just because men are more powerful they should get beaten? What kind of logic is that? If I do retaliate against a woman, sure the hurt ratio might be 50:100 in my favor, but if I don't it's 100:0 in her favor! How is that fair?
I am not dumb enough to hit the mountain cause I know I will get fucked up, similarly woman should have that fear too.
 
Last edited:

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
22,309
43,373
1,610
Straya
Lol seriously. Guy has gone to deep end. I don't appreciate someone hitting me, even if a woman. If you aren't ready for the retaliation, don't do it. Of course I am not going to kill someone for punching me and that's part of proportional retaliation, but I will punch if punched.
A lot of women do it because they think there will be no retaliation. So violence against men gets shrugged off. Why? Everyone should be afraid of hurting others. Just because men are more powerful they should get beaten? What kind of logic is that? If I do retaliate against a woman, sure the hurt ratio might be 50:100 in my favor, but if I don't it's 100:0 in her favor! How is that fair?
I am not dumb enough to hit the mountain cause I know I will get fucked up, similarly woman should have that fear too.
Seriously.

I’m down with “never hit a woman” if it comes with a reciprocal “don’t provoke a man”. Allowing it to be a one way street is asking for trouble.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
Seriously.

I’m down with “never hit a woman” if it comes with a reciprocal “don’t provoke a man”. Allowing it to be a one way street is asking for trouble.
You're Both Sides™ing two different things.

Don't grab a dog by the ears is wise advice, but the dog who bites still gets put down. The moral / social burden on the provoker and the provoked are not equal nor should they be. As a licensed cyberbully, you know the value of trolling, provocation, inciting a person to hopefully reveal their true motives, etc. You have explained at length your beliefs on how this is a beneficial function to any social organism. If the person you are trolling "snaps" and makes a fool of themselves, equal blame/laughter isn't aimed at the cyberbully for "provoking", it's aimed at the person who got triggered.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Airola

matt404au

Cyberbully
Apr 25, 2009
22,309
43,373
1,610
Straya
You're Both Sides™ing two different things.

Don't grab a dog by the ears is wise advice, but the dog who bites still gets put down. The moral / social burden on the provoker and the provoked are not equal nor should they be. As a licensed cyberbully, you know that the value of trolling, provocation, inciting a person to hopefully reveal their true motives. If the person you are trolling "snaps" and makes a fool of themselves, equal blame/laughter isn't aimed at the cyberbully for "provoking", it's aimed at the person who got triggered.
yo Dodunpanky miss me with that needling shit, you ain’t gonna hit my weak spot by turning Both Sides against me. This isn’t Both Sides anyway.

I’m not talking about legal repercussions, which would be the human equivalent of putting the dog down. I’m talking about social expectations. We’ve undone a lot of the traditional social structures and gender roles that prevented these kinds of things from happening in the first place and are now scrabbling around for a cure. We’ve spent decades simultaneously teaching women that they’re equal to men but also to expect different treatment, so of course they’re going to feel emboldened. “Never hit a woman” only works as part of the greater social custom of chivalry, which itself only works when women respect men and adopt the traditional demure womanly role. You don’t get to have your cake and eat it too. Then there are the biological aspects which I touched on earlier, i.e. that through evolution and sexual selection men have been conditioned to protect women, so women need to understand this power and not provoke men knowing full well that others around her will jump to her aid and provide the physicality that she cannot.
 

monegames

Member
Sep 26, 2014
2,976
3,188
615
You're Both Sides™ing two different things.

Don't grab a dog by the ears is wise advice, but the dog who bites still gets put down. The moral / social burden on the provoker and the provoked are not equal nor should they be. As a licensed cyberbully, you know the value of trolling, provocation, inciting a person to hopefully reveal their true motives, etc. You have explained at length your beliefs on how this is a beneficial function to any social organism. If the person you are trolling "snaps" and makes a fool of themselves, equal blame/laughter isn't aimed at the cyberbully for "provoking", it's aimed at the person who got triggered.
The dog shouldn't get put down in a situation like that, unless the attack was extreme. If I stupidly grab a dog by the ears and get a bite on the hand, I don't expect the dog to be put down. Nor do I expect any repercussions to happen at all. If the dog causes me to need medical services higher than a couple stitches, something should be done. Similarly men responding disproportionately should be jailed. Provoking someone with physical violence is no where near provoking with words.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
yo Dodunpanky miss me with that needling shit, you ain’t gonna hit my weak spot by turning Both Sides against me. This isn’t Both Sides anyway.

I’m not talking about legal repercussions, which would be the human equivalent of putting the dog down. I’m talking about social expectations. We’ve undone a lot of the traditional social structures and gender roles that prevented these kinds of things from happening in the first place and are now scrabbling around for a cure. We’ve spent decades simultaneously teaching women that they’re equal to men but also to expect different treatment, so of course they’re going to feel emboldened. “Never hit a woman” only works as part of the greater social custom of chivalry, which itself only works when women respect men and adopt the traditional demure womanly role. You don’t get to have your cake and eat it too. Then there are the biological aspects which I touched on earlier, i.e. that through evolution and sexual selection men have been conditioned to protect women, so women need to understand this power and not provoke men knowing full well that others around her will jump to her aid and provide the physicality that she cannot.
The legal implications of man vs woman are shit and I am not referring to that. I'm talking about social expecations, gender roles, structures, etc too.

I do not see it as a one way street. There are negative social ramifications for taking advantage of the rule "men shouldn't hit women". Perhaps the repercussions aren't as harsh as you think they should be (debatable and worthy of being considered). But it's not a one way street.

I do agree that a woman hitting a man, a man hitting a woman, "never hit a woman", and your proposed "never provoke a man" are all standing on unequal footing. This dynamic exists within a complex social structure.

Provokers cannot provoke for "free". At a certain point, they lose credibility and/or the tactic reveals that they are weak, forced to resort to subversion to get what they desire. Provokers do not tend to command authority. They serve an important role, but they are not necessarily playing a benevolent "leader from below", either. They are guilty when they take their provocation too far.

The provoked are expected to tolerate some amount of provocation. Otherwise you're thin-skinned. You're "triggered". You're a "snowflake". And depending on the sort of provocation, showing patience / stoicism in the face of it can be a sign to the rest of society that you are Strong, that you have Character, etc. The provoked are rewarded by society when they stick to principles and don't give in to cheap bullying. When the provoked give in to their boiling anger and lash back, they show they don't have as much "power" as they projected. The ancient animal pack-mentality puts Alphas at the top and puts un-equal expectations upon them.

It is the hierarchical nature of society in animals and in humans. Rules for those with power MUST be different (and unfair) compared to the rules for those without power. This is common sense. A person with lots of influence and potential for damage to those nearby should have stricter rules placed upon them compared to a lazy do-nothing who will never influence anything for anyone.

If we are going to argue based on social / biological norms, then we must include the provoker / provoked dynamic that I mention above.

The evolutionary roles you describe require a set of behaviors from both the males and the females, and I agree with overall expectatios placed on the shoulders of both genders to propagate it from generation to generation (a.k.a culture). But in the meanwhile -- in our current "fallen state" of society -- the route to restore that idealistic balance isn't for men to move away from the expected behaviors of men in your ideal scenario. In order for men to be protectors and for women to be nurturers, you don't want the men to become less protective in response to the women becoming less nurturing. Yes, fundamentally I agree there is a see-saw here between the genders, a balance that has been upset, and I agree there are negative consequences.

That does not justify the mindset of "fine, I'll show you what equality between the sexes really means" *cracks knuckles*

It only validates the faulty reasoning that the sexes are equal in the first place. In your efforts to prove that the sexes have strengths and weaknesses that must be respected, you are sardonically resorting to "genders are equal" to jab it in their eye.

Dogs and humans are not equal. Men are the dogs in your example while women are the humans. Is that how you see men?
Not in the least. I'm using a phrase to explain the underlying moral principle.

Grabbing a dog by the ears isn't wise and you are liable to get bit. Provoking someone who is stronger than you -- man or woman -- is not wise and you are liable to get hit. Some leeway is granted to the person who got provoked, within limits. This truism exists on its own and is generally considered sound advice. The proverb isn't intended to make excuses for the dog, it's intended to warn the foolish person.

However, if someone crosses a line with their justified retaliation, there is punishment waiting for them, too. This doesn't just apply to a man hitting a woman but to a king cruelly punishing his subjects for crimes or a woman "freezing out" her spouse for some transgression. Society operates between two extremes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Airola

Zog

Member
Oct 24, 2017
3,553
2,198
415
It only validates the faulty reasoning that the sexes are equal in the first place.
It's funny how this only comes when it benefits women. When it doesn't benefit women then it's sexist to say women are weaker than men.
 

Virex

formerly Virex
Jan 26, 2018
3,767
8,635
820
South Africa

StormCell

Member
Dec 11, 2018
1,245
1,207
420
the thing with something like this, and it's probably the environment i grew up in

i'd take the slap, laugh, walk it off, or pin her to the floor until she gassed and relented

retaliatory damage v. women has always been a bitch move to me, those kinds of guys get stockton slapped in my stomping ground

das me tho, far be it from me to judge acute stress responses
Restraining a woman in an altercation is a felony in most blue states. Don't do it. Just grin, hold eye contact, and slowly walk away proudly.
 

Nymphae

Gold Member
Jun 3, 2013
11,253
14,920
970
Canada
There's a video I can't find right now of 3 girls giving a beatdown to one girl on the ground, and this guy runs in from off camera and just obliterates all 3 of them. On one level, it's always super satisfying to see some bullies get their due and to see someone help another person out like that, on the other, he fucking goes to town on them. Restraint is necessary. He immediately gets swarmed by some orbiters IIRC but class was already over for the ladies.
 

Whitesnake

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,332
7,169
650
There are negative social ramifications for taking advantage of the rule "men shouldn't hit women". Perhaps the repercussions aren't as harsh as you think they should be (debatable and worthy of being considered). But it's not a one way street.

Like what?

Everyone could see what was going on, and everyone ignored it. And in fact one person, instead of saying anything at all, decided to film it.

I have absolutely no doubt there would’ve been zero repercussions for her slapping the dude. And I don’t think think that’s right.

Just as a man bitten by a dog is justified in kicking the dog away, a man who is hit is justified in hitting back.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zog
Nov 29, 2016
1,899
877
430
Man, what the fuck is going on with the modern left?
They are in the process of imploding. Seriously, this just goes to show that these political mantras are ridiculous and only rubes of the highest order treat them as gospel.

Believe All Women was always a brainless statement and it shouldn't surprise anybody that its come back to bite them in the ass.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
Like what?

Everyone could see what was going on, and everyone ignored it, and in fact person, instead of saying anything at all, decided to film it.

I have absolutely no doubt there would’ve been zero repercussions for her slapping the dude. And I don’t think think that’s right.

Just as a man bitten by a dog is justified in kicking the dog away, a man who is hit is justified in hitting back.
Why must there be in-kind repercussions for her slapping the dude? If it's serious, he can pursue the law. If he wishes to laugh it off, he isn't going to be considered a coward for it. A woman can gain a particular reputation which closes her off to a certain range of marriage partners. Someone who uses violence to attack someone while hiding behind social norms (a provoker) isn't going to be embraced with open arms in all company.

I'm not denying the "unfairness" of the current social contradiction on men slapping women vs women slapping men. But I'm not understanding the sort of course-corrections being offered in the thread, either.

In what way does retaliation or comeuppance restore the biologically-guided gender roles between men and women? In what way does a man hitting a woman as if she was a peer (another man) help to reaffirm that men and women have distinct biological, psychological, and social norms?

The argument is like how a few of our resident ideologues cheer "Yes! Trump should win because he will keep making his side look so awful". Cut off your nose to spite your face. If equality is gained in this realm and men can now hit women without the repercussions, in what manner does this alleviate the underlying problem?

I'm happy to be convinced, but so far I've seen nothing but "the (social) system is broken so let's tear it all down". Sounds awfully familiar. :pie_thinking:
 
Last edited:

Zog

Member
Oct 24, 2017
3,553
2,198
415
In what way does retaliation or comeuppance restore the biologically-guided gender roles between men and women?
Is that your plan, to put the shit back in the horse? Won't happen but the only way there is a chance of it happening is to apply equality properly. Equality includes the good and the bad.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
Is that your plan, to put the shit back in the horse? Won't happen but the only way there is a chance of it happening is to apply equality properly. Equality includes the good and the bad.
The modern concept of "equality" is fundamentally flawed. Why would I want to apply it "properly"? Why would you want to apply it "properly"? Isn't it going to lead to more artificial equalizations and exceptions to the rules like we're seeing today?

I'm not trying to put the shit back in the horse. I am asking for specifics on how we get back to your desired "men and women taking social cues from biological norms" which will supposedly correct this underlying problem of believing all women and women slapping men without repercussions and so forth.

That's it,

I'm asking for details and keep getting met with empty "oh, so you're saying men are dogs" and "oh, so we're just gonna rewind time and the problems all go away".
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DeepEnigma

Zog

Member
Oct 24, 2017
3,553
2,198
415
I'm asking for details and keep getting met with empty "oh, so you're saying men are dogs" and "oh, so we're just gonna rewind time and the problems all go away".
Details about what? I treat men and women equally. I don't lift things for women just because they are women and I won't refuse to lift things for men just because they are men. I don't talk down to women and I don't talk down to men either. I would hit a woman who hit me if the situation came up just like I would for a man and so on... I oppose double standards.

I think that letting women hit men with impunity will lead to more women hitting men.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
22,794
48,813
1,335
USA
dunpachi.com
Details about what? I treat men and women equally. I don't lift things for women just because they are women and I won't refuse to lift things for men just because they are men. I don't talk down to women and I don't talk down to men either. I would hit a woman who hit me if the situation came up just like I would for a man and so on... I oppose double standards.

I think that letting women hit men with impunity will lead to more women hitting men.
Who is "letting" women do this and how do you propose it is stopped? Makes it sound like men are literally dying on the streets from all the slaps? I wholeheartedly agree that a local community full of weak men and woman slap their men around "with impunity" is a symptom of a deeply broken relationship between the genders.

Is this broken relationship corrected by letting the men slap the woman back, which will result in a bunch of disproportionately-injured women because men are biologically stronger than women (on average)? Or to zoom it out a bit more, if we are in this pickle because of misguided beliefs about "equality", how exactly do you intend to fix it by "doing more equality, and harder this time"? Isn't the source of this problem a widespread belief that women areequal to men in physical matters (movies and shows with female warrior wish fulfillment passed off as reality)? If a woman is suffering under the belief that she is a man's equal in a physical contest and slaps him without fear, does the man slapping her back correct the belief?

Just wanna know what the end-game is and how many slaps it takes to get to the center of the gender socialization artifice.
 
Mar 14, 2018
411
573
350
Separate power axis. Women likewise have a responsibility to not ruin men's reputation and livelihood over petty personal reasons.
you can argue they *should* have that responsibility. But evidently, they don't. There's no repercussions if they do
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Zog

Zog

Member
Oct 24, 2017
3,553
2,198
415
Who is "letting" women do this and how do you propose it is stopped?
People who think men should just laugh it off. Men can either hit back or report the assault to the authorities.

Makes it sound like men are literally dying on the streets from all the slaps?
Why is it that you think that men should literally be dying before they respond to violence against them? Don't you see the bias here?
Just wanna know what the end-game is and how many slaps it takes to get to the center of the gender socialization artifice.
No double standards. What would you like to see in the end?
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Sakura Doritos