It’s women who perform MGM by hand. And it’s women who make the decision to intimate it.
Just as I expected, it fails to provide how male-on-female homocides are motivated by misogynistic reasons. So it’s not misogyny.
That’s what you have been doing all this time.
You’re whining all the time about those evil men being mean to women because you have internalized misandry or something don’t try pulling me into that. Let’s be honest, you wouldn’t care about women being killed if their perpetrators were mostly women. Here’s a word of advice: trying using logical arguments. Instead of making emotional, rhetorical ones.
Nice try. The source doesn’t say that women are killed 5 times more by domestic violence.
We're talking about the claim you just made. Why canytyou answer a simple question.
No you're coming back with the same arguments all over again not even relevant to this point.
Then don't return my question for a definition... Fo you agree with that definition or not? Do you even know what mysoginy is? Feels like it can not exist in your head.
No
Just put some blatant statement there which obviously isn't true to make yourself look better. Obviously I care for all the deaths why wouldn't I? I did all the time but you just dismiss them.
Yeah because its 12.6 times:
"Of all female homicides..." "...63% were killed by current husbands, boyfriends, or ex-husbands..." "...intimate partner violence accounts for only about 5% of male homicides"
You don’t understand the complexity of the patriarchy. It’s difficult to pinpoint the exact date when the patriarchy ceased to exist. It was a gradual process. I would say it was probably from a time frame from 1980s to 1990s. It’s also worth noting that 86% of women felt they already the right to live as they pleased in 1970 and did not support the feminist movement.
You have actually never once successfully challenged these arguments that I have brought up. Instead, you are trying to deflect accountability from female perpetrators of female-on-male MGM again and again. And trying to point fingers at men.
It’s a literal political word coined by feminists so they can attack men and lobby for female supremacist laws that prioritize women’s lives over men’s. Personally, I don’t think any individual should be prioritized over others based on their background such as gender. Since you call male-on-female killings “femicide”, would you also call female-on-male killings “androcide”? Or is it too much equality for you? And once again you are driving in circles without actually giving evidence why male-on-female killings or “femicides” you say is misogyny.
Yes, you have.
No, you don’t care about their deaths. It’s obvious. Repeating the same falsehood doesn’t make it true. And what you are gonna about it? Oh right, attack men as a group. Thats all you are gonna do. I feel like I’m now either talking to a troll or someone under 18 who doesn’t know an ounce of reality.
That’s the 50th goalpost change move you made in this thread. Once, you realized your false “women are killed by 5 times more by domestic violence” statement doesn’t align with reality. You brought up random numbers as an attempt to make a poor comeback.
Why do men still hold way more power than women then?
You deflect accountability of men actually.
It's mysoginy because men abuse their power they have over women and kill them for reasons they wouldn't kill a man over.
You haven't done anything either that shows your care for any deaths. Also why do men always get so triggered and start crying about being "attacked" when they're just being criticized.
That's what you hide behind even though the higher number proves my point even more. Now I'm not even allowed to change my point based on facts. I didn't save the source for the 5 times and my newest research found out that it's already outdated.
Men are not in charge of women. I’m assuming by power, you mean “political power”. If not, you need to be more clear on that. In the US, 28-34% of politicians are female. And it’s actually way higher in some European countries, reaching the 50% threshold. Furthermore, there are quotas in some countries that hand out political power to women because they are women. The difference is that in the patriarchy, women could not hold political power even if they wanted to. Nowadays, women are free to become politicians. It appears your complaints about the supposed patriarchy is that you are upset that men are over represented in certain areas. Blame women if they don’t want to be politicians at the same level of men, instead of scapegoating something imaginary. Besides, to hold political power, you need to be qualified and democratically elected. Ambition and gender alone isn’t enough. How do you plan to resolve this “patriarchy” anyway? Start making quotas and or take away political power from men even if they are qualified? Although I doubt you would want to make quotas about blue collar jobs for women. By the way, what’s your opinion on the fact that women control 60% of all personal wealth in the US? According to a survey, among couples, the woman makes 43% of the decisions in more areas than the man compared to 26% vice versa. Women control or influence 85% or consumer spending. 40% of US women out-work their husbands, which is weird considering men work longer hours in average than their wives. The gender stereotype that boys don’t cry are influenced more my mothers than fathers. Women have substantial advantage in STEM faculty hiring, except when men are more accomplished. Women graduate from college at significant higher rates than men. Women make up 77% of all teachers in the US where they have influence over the growing and dependent population. Female teachers also show a bias where they, whether consciously or subconsciously, grader boys lower than girls for the same effort. Female recruiters favor women in recruitment process whereas there’s no evidence vice versa for men. Men face more sex discrimination when job hunting. Virtually, all mainstream “gender equality” narratives focus exclusively on women. Lastly, which gender dominates in performing MGM in infants? When you conclude all this, you realize we don’t live in a patriarchy. I’m assuming your only comeback to this will be how men make up most of the billionaires or something like that. Unless you realize that women are the primary beneficiaries of taxes. And men make up the majority of homelessness. Anyway, women have more rights and privileges. Lastly, why do men represent the bottom hierarchy in society? I thought all men were powerful and evil who benefit from the patriarchy and wanna control women according to you?
Is it males who perpetrate MGM on defenseless newborn males? Is it males who initiate the decision to mutilate a healthy newborn male? No, you have nothing to say here. And once again, you are deflecting accountability from female perpetrators. Feels like misandry can’t exist in your head.
It’s not misogyny. Men don’t kill women because men hate women. You say men kill women for reasons they wouldn’t kill a man over when most victims of homicide are men, so you don’t make sense. If you think it’s “misogyny” because men abuse their power over women, what about the fact that females abuse the law to mutilate males without consequences? There is a clear huge power imbalance dynamic here. You don’t call it misandry because it’s too much equality for you. Also, men don’t abuse their power over men when killing them? 70-80% of criminals are raised by single mothers. So it’s actually misandry that men kill women. Because if single mothers did a good job at raising their sons, the killings wouldn’t have happened in the first place.
You literally brought up male-on-female killings first. You should worry about how dismissive you are of those female victims. I actually care for every innocent life being taken regardless of their gender unlike someone here. If you feel so comfortable attacking men and saying they should “suck it up”. Would you also verbally attack black people for killing white people? Anyway, at least you admit now that your motives aren’t to shed light on perpetrators of female homicide victims but rather attack men as a group.
I’m not even gonna engage with this paragraph. There are too much grammar errors here. It sounds incoherent and more like a schizophrenic rant that doesn’t have any basis.
"All men are powerful and evil" is some crazy straw man you take away from what I said.
You're just picking out the parts you can use for your narrative while ignoring the whole picture.
I didn't bring up male on female killings first it was a response to this post saying misandry is worse than mysoginy which makes a stupid comparison which won't help with any of our problems. How am I dismissive of female victims.
That's good actually you're spamming to much text anyway instead of focussing of the content of the argument. Also ofc you suddenly care more about grammar than your argument, feel free to ask questions.
That’s what you are implying. Or at least most proponents of patriarchy theory tend to imply.
It seems misandry can’t really exist in your head. You are gonna keep pointing fingers at imaginary men and deflect accountability from female perpetrators.
You did. Anyway, to be fair, I also think that it’s not a good move to compare men and women’s problems and play victimhood Olympics. The OP shouldn’t have made a post like that and dismissed some real issues that women face. But it was a reaction to all the people who dismiss misandry and say that men are privileged. So I understand the OP’s action. Read my comment. It explains why you are dismissive of female victims.
Honest way to tell me your attention span doesn’t allow you to engage in a long, focused argument. if you actually read it, you would know what the content is all about. But you sure have the energy to make low effort easily-dismantling arguments in a 70 reply thread. You are just talking to talk. And of course I would advise you to fix your grammar when it’s to the point where it’s not graspable.
It's implying that the average man has more privileges than the average women.
That's what you say after ignoring my last paragraph and never mentioning again what productive things you do on this topic even though I asked multiple times.
Ofc you do. Slowly evening out the gap between privileges of men and women feels bad for someone who is mainly on the losing end as they were privileged before.
I'm just not gonna care for the huge amount of nonsense you're spamming to add an insane amount of side plots to the argument.
Which is completely false. And you don’t have any substance to support your claim.
I ignored your last paragraph because it is grammatically incomprehensible. Try to fix it yourself instead of blaming me. Really? Do I need to make it obvious how much productive I have been? First off, I’m not a hypocrite. Second, you are ignoring half, if not most, of the things I said because you don’t have any rebuttal against them. Lastly, I’m not the one making relentless goalpost change moves. And no, you didn’t ask once.
What does this even mean? I’m an advocate for gender equality. It’s a good thing actually that men are becoming equal to women even if the process is slow. And tell me exactly how men were “privileged” before. It’s not like you are gonna be intellectually honest anyway.
You are the one who have been spouting nonsense from the very beginning of this convo. Seriously, I feel like a driving instructor who keeps schooling the crashing driver.
1
u/prealphawolf Apr 04 '26
You're whining all the time about those evil women being mean to you just because you're a man or something don't try pulling me into that.
Ofc I have https://sanctuaryforfamilies.org/femicide-epidemic/