Incel

[hell2bwith76]

Ok part 2.

1. I didn't link the fall of marriage to directly to feminism, but to the rise in media provocation that it was old fashioned and women should have the same "apparent" freedoms as men do but without the actual equalisers (there's a point for you to play with ).

Added to that
"These liberalisations of divorce law, combined with changing attitudes and expectations of marriage, and the greater economic independence of women, all contributed to a rise in the number of divorces from 50,000 per year in 1971 to 150,000 a decade later. More recently the number of divorces has fallen steadily, although this may be more to do with the fact that fewer people are getting married in the first place, rather than a trend toward matrimonial bliss. Today, there are just two marriages for every divorce each year."
Quote from www.parliament.uk report "Divorce since 1900"

Note the "greater economic independence of women" is directly linked to feminisms drive for equality.

2. I agree with a lot of what you say, however, this trend hasn't appeared overnight, it has been in plain view for well over a decade.

‘The attainment of White British pupils is polarised by social class to a greater extent than any other ethnic groups. White British pupils from managerial and professional homes are one of the highest attaining groups, while White British pupils from working class homes are the lowest attaining groups’

‘White British students on average – boys and girls – are more likely than other ethnic groups to persist in low achievement [although] boys outnumber girls as low achievers by three to two. Nearly half of all low achievers are White British males.’

Quoted from Strand 2008.

Labours male members fault ?
Labours education ministers, 2001-2007
Estelle Morris.
Charles Clark
Ruth Kelly
Alan Johnson.

Then Labour had Ed Balls until 2010.. point there for that asshat lmao

Hardly "The Men's" fault when nearly half of the education ministers were women.

3. I never stated these were problems caused by women, they were caused by the changing nature of relationships between men, women, the community and the state.
I'll move on and say more about it in 4.

4. Okay, going to quote you on this and have some fun with it.

"Hang on, if we baked the cake, we should be able to eat it. This is a misogynistic comment if ever I read one. So, to be treated as an equal- to have equal pay, have rights over our own bodies and land, rights to vote and have a say in who runs our country/town, etc, rights to walk the street without fear of being attacked, be able to chose who we sleep with and how many people we sleep with- these rights, should they only be available to men then?
That’s the problem. Men viewing woman as a completely different species and not as humans. You think rights to a free life is a cake. That can only come from a gender that didn’t have to fight for his right be viewed as a human being.

That’s outright male privilege."

Your just throwing all the babies out with the bath water.

You want equal pay, take equal risk.
I don't have to dig up stats on workplace deaths do I?

Rights over your own bodies and land, you have them already, under law.

Right to vote, yep, got that to, in fact as the majority, you have more power to sway both politics and the market than men do.

Right to walk without fear, we all have that right, the fact we aren't comfortable doing it is societal not legal.
I don't know anyone who isn't cautious when alone in the dark, even us men who have to investigate all the bumps in the night

Choose who and how many people you can sleep with, again, you have that right.
To be judged on it however, is a very different question.

Now the real crux of the point, your last sentence in that statement.
So do you not think there are societal pressures on men to behave a certain way?
There are limits to what men can and cannot do.
Women have one major advantage that can never be taken away from them, it is socially unacceptable to be violent to them.
Which basically means men have no argument to however much of an asshole a women wants to be.
We have to grin and bear it.

The playing field is not equal, if my mate gets on my nerves I can slap him up the side of the head, he learns.

Which is playing into your 4th point and conclusion

What do women actually want from men?
Is it a partner, a provider, a lover, a casual lay, a friend, a good man, a bad boy, someone to love them, someone to change or is it subjective?
When women actually make up their mind what they want from men apart from "Not That" then perhaps we can have a real discussion on what is or is not equality

That question is what makes an Incel, it's a question that baffles academics and politicians.

I know I didn't examine in detail a lot of what you said for part 3 and 4, but the whole "Viewing women as a lesser species" kinda put me off.
For thousands of years men and women have co-operated against the harshest environments to form civilisations and societies which we in the west have equalised to the best of our abilities given the differences between our genders.

If you have any doubts about that, go visit Afghanistan right now.

I must admit that was good reading ,i had to read it all well penned .

 

[CrazyCatLady]

Ok part 2.

1. I didn't link the fall of marriage to directly to feminism, but to the rise in media provocation that it was old fashioned and women should have the same "apparent" freedoms as men do but without the actual equalisers (there's a point for you to play with ).

Added to that
"These liberalisations of divorce law, combined with changing attitudes and expectations of marriage, and the greater economic independence of women, all contributed to a rise in the number of divorces from 50,000 per year in 1971 to 150,000 a decade later. More recently the number of divorces has fallen steadily, although this may be more to do with the fact that fewer people are getting married in the first place, rather than a trend toward matrimonial bliss. Today, there are just two marriages for every divorce each year."
Quote from www.parliament.uk report "Divorce since 1900"

Note the "greater economic independence of women" is directly linked to feminisms drive for equality.

2. I agree with a lot of what you say, however, this trend hasn't appeared overnight, it has been in plain view for well over a decade.

‘The attainment of White British pupils is polarised by social class to a greater extent than any other ethnic groups. White British pupils from managerial and professional homes are one of the highest attaining groups, while White British pupils from working class homes are the lowest attaining groups’

‘White British students on average – boys and girls – are more likely than other ethnic groups to persist in low achievement [although] boys outnumber girls as low achievers by three to two. Nearly half of all low achievers are White British males.’

Quoted from Strand 2008.

Labours male members fault ?
Labours education ministers, 2001-2007
Estelle Morris.
Charles Clark
Ruth Kelly
Alan Johnson.

Then Labour had Ed Balls until 2010.. point there for that asshat lmao

Hardly "The Men's" fault when nearly half of the education ministers were women.

3. I never stated these were problems caused by women, they were caused by the changing nature of relationships between men, women, the community and the state.
I'll move on and say more about it in 4.

4. Okay, going to quote you on this and have some fun with it.

"Hang on, if we baked the cake, we should be able to eat it. This is a misogynistic comment if ever I read one. So, to be treated as an equal- to have equal pay, have rights over our own bodies and land, rights to vote and have a say in who runs our country/town, etc, rights to walk the street without fear of being attacked, be able to chose who we sleep with and how many people we sleep with- these rights, should they only be available to men then?
That’s the problem. Men viewing woman as a completely different species and not as humans. You think rights to a free life is a cake. That can only come from a gender that didn’t have to fight for his right be viewed as a human being.

That’s outright male privilege."

Your just throwing all the babies out with the bath water.

You want equal pay, take equal risk.
I don't have to dig up stats on workplace deaths do I?

Rights over your own bodies and land, you have them already, under law.

Right to vote, yep, got that to, in fact as the majority, you have more power to sway both politics and the market than men do.

Right to walk without fear, we all have that right, the fact we aren't comfortable doing it is societal not legal.
I don't know anyone who isn't cautious when alone in the dark, even us men who have to investigate all the bumps in the night

Choose who and how many people you can sleep with, again, you have that right.
To be judged on it however, is a very different question.

Now the real crux of the point, your last sentence in that statement.
So do you not think there are societal pressures on men to behave a certain way?
There are limits to what men can and cannot do.
Women have one major advantage that can never be taken away from them, it is socially unacceptable to be violent to them.
Which basically means men have no argument to however much of an asshole a women wants to be.
We have to grin and bear it.

The playing field is not equal, if my mate gets on my nerves I can slap him up the side of the head, he learns.

Which is playing into your 4th point and conclusion

What do women actually want from men?
Is it a partner, a provider, a lover, a casual lay, a friend, a good man, a bad boy, someone to love them, someone to change or is it subjective?
When women actually make up their mind what they want from men apart from "Not That" then perhaps we can have a real discussion on what is or is not equality

That question is what makes an Incel, it's a question that baffles academics and politicians.

I know I didn't examine in detail a lot of what you said for part 3 and 4, but the whole "Viewing women as a lesser species" kinda put me off.
For thousands of years men and women have co-operated against the harshest environments to form civilisations and societies which we in the west have equalised to the best of our abilities given the differences between our genders.

If you have any doubts about that, go visit Afghanistan right now.

Love it! Thanks Moriarty
Will plough through this later- I haven't had enough caffeine yet.

 

[CrazyCatLady]

You want equal pay, take equal risk.
I don't have to dig up stats on workplace deaths do I?


No you don't, you can actually stick said stats where the sun don't shine as far as I'm concerned, simply because you don't take into consideration that less women are hired to do said jobs you speak of, not through their own choice, I hasten to say, so obviously, more men will die in a certain field, than women, so your point is invalid.

Good point.

 

[CrazyCatLady]

Damn Crazy, there's a lot to unpack there.

Great post

Ok, first point about Male suicide and lethality.
You kind of throw the conversation to murder suicide with the inclusion of stats for filicide.
In many cases when Fathers kill there own children it is due to forced separation, usually court ordered in divorce proceedings.
Counter to that, when women do commit filicide, it's often if the children are going to be removed, usually by the state and again court ordered.
So, indirectly, I could point to a later part when the court system has an actual casualty rate for both sides, sometimes mothers aren't actually fit to care for the children the court orders they take care of, the father would be a better parent.
That needs much more research though.

2nd Point, court system.
Ok your off on a tangent about single parenthood, yes the stats show that male single parents tend to have higher achieving kids, but....
Women who are single parents tend to get flak from society as a whole, whereas men who are single parents have a lot of latitude.
This springs from the "Maternal Instinct" idea where women are more naturally inclined to be care-givers.
Most studies I have read show women to be more emotion/compassion focused with children, where as men tend to more intellect/realism focused.
The difference is small, but it shows in grades and academic achievement, however the long term effects socially are not known.
Perhaps a more compassionate upbringing brings benefits to mental health and relationship stability in later life.
I don't know.
As for "maybe the male is getting a taste of his own medicine" I'm afraid I can only say that's an emotional/ideological reaction, probably not in the best interest of children.
No offence intended


3rd point.
Ok, this one is hard to quantify.
We have no suicide statistics for 2020-21, by design, the government has categorically refused to release them.
We also know that the unemployment figures are cooked, due to anyone they can sign up for a course, even if its how to re-write your CV is taken off the actual unemployment stats, add to this the massive rise in people with mental health problems which place them on the sick, so not counted.
Your point that "we had lower employment/higher unemployment in 2010, than we did at the start or during the pandemic in the labour market" does not take into account that
1. It was before and during.
2. Furlough payments were made for a long time hence keeping people employed.

Your statement "Men with a healthy mindset will simply go out and get another job or failing that, look at how he can adapt or learn other roles." has a few problems.
Most of those who lost their jobs were in the lower income bracket, which tends to have people in it that would have difficulty re-training.
Yes, that's harsh, but an economic fact.

4th point.
"Are you saying that the media are responsible for the concept that monogamy has been pushed out by feminism (effectively, promoting promiscuity"
Yes
Not lightly though, read the article from an ex Cosmopolitan journalist who was instructed to link feminism to sexual freedom.
Cant post links here so look up Sue Ellen Browder for reference.
Also try finding the Cosmopolitan_Hunsberger.pdf report.
As for contraception, yes that was a major part of sexual freedom, but the major driver of women's freedom was the tampon.

Anyway, Im drunk and flagging, can I answer the rest tomorrow lol

1st Point-
The reason why I went to the murder-suicide topic was because it seemed your first two points were related and my point was that men use more force because they are making more of a statement with their suicide, especially when they do it after the negative outcome of a court case or they see that a potential court case will not go in their favour. They do it out of punishment- hence, the violence usually involved.

Common denominators in filicide- financial issues, separation or custody disputes. However, there is also another reoccurring characteristic in the prior relationship- domestic violence and/or coercive control (over a third of cases had previous DV and the majority of cases had some form of dominant behaviour/coercive control as a factor).
And as your first point stated- men usually use lethal force. Their suicides are usually more violent- messy- so they are more likely to work. Women tend to think about things before they choose to die, like who will find them and how they will look when they’re found. Being found after an overdose (which is one of the least likely ways to succeed) is less likely to cause psychological damage to the person finding them than slitting their wrists.
There is also the pain element. Men want to punish themselves as well as others, so the pain level is important. The more pain, the more punishment- validation of their own disturbed view that they deserve to die. With women, it’s a means to an end, so less pain and less mess is the best (most of the time- there are exceptions in all cases!). They believe they deserve to die, but rather out of uselessness, not anger.

The court subject is a peripheral issue and while I agree that courts can be biased towards the mother, the cause of anyone committing suicide should not be placed at the foot of the courts. Why would a court intentionally separate a father from his child- what reason do they have for that? You say it’s ‘forced separation’, but most often than not, it’s a contact plan and the father wants flexibility- he doesn’t want to do what the court has set out. Why, if the father is a safe person to be around and the children are attached to him, what good reason does any court have to separate a parent and child? Furthermore, whether he is a part of the mother’s life or not, his contact would be support for her (i.e. time for herself, shared school pick-up’s, ect).

Courts work with evidence- not emotions- and they are handed that evidence via other agencies (police, social services, housing). It is not a case of Mother Vs Father in the court room- there is a whole operation that goes on to get to that point and beyond. Nevertheless, what does happen is that Mother is often given much more support than father from the system, and a bigger threshold for what is seen as positive or negative parenting. That’s where the bias lies.

2nd Point-
I went on to single-parents, because of the court bias link. Ultimately, one would be a single parent afterwards or both would be parenting singularly and I was relating the psychological impact of that in a comparison between genders as an argument to the bias.

Personal experience, as a single-mother, yes- we do get flak, but we’re used to it. It’s better now than it was in my mother’s or grandmother’s day (both single mothers for a while) and men do get more sympathy. I noticed this when I dated a single-dad. Another difference- we are seen as sexually loose, whereas a single-dad- he’s seen as a victim of a nasty, useless woman. It’s not fair or right, and it was an irk of mine. We are also often seen as the ones that cause the absent father to stay away from their children, whereas single-fathers again, are not seen to be responsible for wanting to keep the absent mothers away. We are also expected to handle everything on our own- work, be a full-time parent, etc. But single-dads- every woman within a 5-mile radius wants to play housekeeper and Mummy to their kid. The root of these attitudes comes down to societal stereotypes of women. Is Feminism to blame? Perhaps. Whereas we were once just expected to keep house, we wanted to do what men do and ended up doing everything.

I certainly won’t dispute your studies, but I will throw a guess that most of them were done many years ago and there won’t be much adaptation for the recent couple of generations. I also wonder if any of them have taken LGBT parents into consideration. Reason being is I believe this is changing and the world around us is going to be very different in the years to come in regards to gender differences in parenting. Evolutionary and biological psych may tell us the reasons for the differences, but we are no longer defined by our evolutionary traits nor restricted by biology.

My comment was based on the history, rather than an emotional reaction. I honestly believe that whatever parent is the best parent should be the primary one, but no child should be denied the right to have contact with the other parent. The absence of one parent has an immeasurable effect on the child; their psychological wellbeing and their identity formation. However, it can be argued that way. For eons, men owned their children and the mothers had no rights. We had to put up with it or shut up, until we began to revolt. Yet when the tables are turned, men start violently taking it out on themselves and others. And not just any others, but the children they profess to love and not want to be separated from.

 

[Moriarty]

1st Point-
sh** went over 10k again.. had to cut.. but your last post

Just going to address the first point for this one, have company coming later lol

Seeing as your serious about discussing this, which is great, let's set some ground points if that's OK
Major depression is obviously a key point in suicide of any kind, so can we agree on some stats and/or pre-suppositions ?
That :-
1. Women tend to have a higher rate of reported Major Depression than men roughly 5% vs 2% across cultures.
2. Women seek mental health assistance at a much higher rate, roughly 30-40% higher again across cultures.
3. Women take anti-depressants roughly twice as often as men.
4. Attempted suicides are roughly gender biased as 1 to 1.2, as in women attempt suicide 20% more often than men.

That's really rough data from memory, so feel free to pull me about them, but can we agree that women suffer more from depression, seek help more often and accept that help more often than men?

Okay, so :-
"The reason why I went to the murder-suicide topic was because it seemed your first two points were related and my point was that men use more force because they are making more of a statement with their suicide, especially when they do it after the negative outcome of a court case or they see that a potential court case will not go in their favour. They do it out of punishment- hence, the violence usually involved."

My original first 2 separate points were :-

"Men usually use lethal force when attempting suicide, women tend not to hence it fails."
And
"Then we have a family courts system which is detrimental to men."

In your above post you also say :-
"Men use more force because they are making more of a statement with their suicide"
And
"The court subject is a peripheral issue and while I agree that courts can be biased towards the mother, the cause of anyone committing suicide should not be placed at the foot of the courts."

Then we are in agreement on those 2 points which you used to form the argument above.
Although I disagree with both the suggestion men are making a statement with suicide and the courts have no blame to be attributed.

Have you looked at Thomas Joiner's work on the interpersonal theory of suicide ?
According to his studies there are 3 common psychological attributes to suicide in general.
Roughly, they are a sense of being alone, or at least not belonging in whatever situation they live, a sense of being a perceived burden and actually not being afraid to die.

The same feelings are commonly professed by those who wish for voluntary euthanasia.

As prime motivators for suicide I think they are pretty good in most cases as it's across cultures and age groups.

So, now those are out of the way, lets get to your points .

"financial issues, separation or custody disputes"
"domestic violence and/or coercive control"

All these are factors in depression, suicide and filicide, but why do they matter and to whom?
Financial issues are a major part of male depression as he see's himself not as a provider, but a burden.
For women it is less pronounced as the state does provide many benefits for single mothers, hence sometimes it's better for the family if the man isn't there at all.
Again adding to the male psychological need to be a provider failing.
I will caveat the above point, I have no problem with single mums who are that way through no fault of their own.

Separation is a new ball game, if your talking about separation from a spouse, that's debatable as the stereotypes all wrong, but if people doubt that many men suffer because they are separated from their children then they need to read up a hell of a lot more.

Domestic violence is roughly 50/50 as is coercion in hetero sexual relationships, gay and lesbian relationships seem to have the highest rate of domestic violence.

"Women tend to think about things before they choose to die, like who will find them and how they will look when they’re found"

Most women commit suicide in the home, men tend to take it to a place were emergency services will find them, or they wont be found at all.
There are many exceptions to this and the data may well be biased culture wide because in many countries women are not allowed to leave the home un-escorted.

"Men want to punish themselves as well as others, so the pain level is important. The more pain, the more punishment- validation of their own disturbed view that they deserve to die. With women, it’s a means to an end, so less pain and less mess is the best (most of the time- there are exceptions in all cases!). They believe they deserve to die, but rather out of uselessness, not anger."

There is no evidence that men commit suicide due to anger, that belief is a trope to make men appear as unapproachable and angry.
Mainly any suicide attempt is due to a call for help, depression, ideology, impulsiveness or simply a desire to die.

" You say it’s ‘forced separation’, but most often than not, it’s a contact plan and the father wants flexibility- he doesn’t want to do what the court has set out. Why, if the father is a safe person to be around and the children are attached to him, what good reason does any court have to separate a parent and child? Furthermore, whether he is a part of the mother’s life or not, his contact would be support for her (i.e. time for herself, shared school pick-up’s, ect)."

That's a blatant disregard of facts.

One of the easiest ways for a women to punish a man is to limit his access.
It happens more often than most folks realise and is always stereotypically placed as the man wants nothing to do with his kids.

No I'm not a father, nor am I an MRA, but I have 2 mates who have had their access restricted to their kids simply because it's not convenient for the mother.

"Courts work with evidence- not emotions- and they are handed that evidence via other agencies (police, social services, housing). It is not a case of Mother Vs Father in the court room- there is a whole operation that goes on to get to that point and beyond. Nevertheless, what does happen is that Mother is often given much more support than father from the system, and a bigger threshold for what is seen as positive or negative parenting. That’s where the bias lies."

As you say yourself, the Mother is given more support.

Lets be honest.
"If your wife has custody of the children, she is granted the responsibility for their everyday upbringing and she has the final say in any decision-making."

That's the law

In conclusion, then, given all the above, does it in any way answer the question why men are 4 times more likely to commit suicide.
Does it answer the question that men commit filicide more than women.
When men do commit filicide it's in a large degree to step children.
It's a great debate, but I fear we wont see eye to eye due to ideology and bias.

Edit*
"For eons, men owned their children and the mothers had no rights. We had to put up with it or shut up, until we began to revolt. Yet when the tables are turned, men start violently taking it out on themselves and others. And not just any others, but the children they profess to love and not want to be separated from."

I find this part of your argument, which I wasn't going to comment on originally, but beer got the better of me, particularly galling.

Are you actually saying that men started committing suicide because women got the freedoms they deserved, as a protest?
But also they also started killing their own children due to it?

You do know that filicide was more prevalent in history as it is today as invading forces tended to enslave those they conquered.

That was one of the major causes of the slave trade in Africa, the tribes conquered each other and took the men as slaves and the women as either concubines or slaves to sell on.

Many mothers at that time would rather kill their children humanly than have the warring tribes deal with them as they had no value.

Are you comparing our modern civilisations to that?

Edit*

 

[CrazyCatLady]

@Moriarty

Thank you
I hadn't completely answered your first post- I kept going back to it and then got sidetracked. My apologies.
I've got a head-banging week this week at work, so a lot of my interaction on here will probably be sarcasm or my sad sense of humour. But I aim to give you a worthy answer by the end of the week/ Saturday.

It's good to have a debate without it getting nasty or someone getting ass-y, because someone doesn't agree. That's not what I debate for and I don't always fully believe in what I say; sometimes I'll throw something in, just to pull more from the debate and in the process, I learn.
That's why I need some time to reply. I want to read on what you've said and see what agreement or opposition I can give.

Anyway, bear with me....

 

[Moriarty]

@Moriarty

Thank you
I hadn't completely answered your first post- I kept going back to it and then got sidetracked. My apologies.
I've got a head-banging week this week at work, so a lot of my interaction on here will probably be sarcasm or my sad sense of humour. But I aim to give you a worthy answer by the end of the week/ Saturday.

It's good to have a debate without it getting nasty or someone getting ass-y, because someone doesn't agree. That's not what I debate for and I don't always fully believe in what I say; sometimes I'll throw something in, just to pull more from the debate and in the process, I learn.
That's why I need some time to reply. I want to read on what you've said and see what agreement or opposition I can give.

Anyway, bear with me....

No worries.

It's fun to play with ideas, sorry I pre-emtied your full answer, was boucing ideas around in my head and had to write them down as I was thinking, my bad.

You do make some great points, I look forward to the rest of your views

 

[CrazyCatLady]

No worries.

It's fun to play with ideas, sorry I pre-emtied your full answer, was boucing ideas around in my head and had to write them down as I was thinking, my bad.

You do make some great points, I look forward to the rest of your views

I have to apologise for only getting back to your posts.

Probably tmi, but meh! I got promoted a couple of weeks ago and now I know why they chose me....because I'm the only sad cow that would work the 50 hours a week to get everything done on time. Lol

Going through it all now- what I said and what you responded, and if I was to cover everything, this thread would be overtaken completely with my essays, so I will find a way to sum stuff up, but I confess- I have a lot of difficulty doing that

 

[CrazyCatLady]

I started by going through and highlighting what I was going to challenge you on, but then found that it was pointless. In another thread somewhere, I recall someone referring to you as a Social Psychologist and am not sure if that is your actual profession or referring to how you write. Nevertheless, I’m going to take a stab that social psychology features in your professional role, so you’re well-rehearsed at digging up research that supports your theory. Thus, what you’ve said here may be facts, but you have only pulled up those that support your argument.

I absolutely won’t dispute your argument on depression, because that’s not part of the challenge here and I can’t dispute it. However, a very real fact is that women still are oppressed, deprived of rights, regarded as less than human and viewed as sexual objects and we have endured that treatment by men for as long as anyone alive can recall and any one who lived before us could have recalled. Men have controlled the world and now your gender is finally losing it, you feel it’s justified in turning violent on those you blame for that loss. Yet I’ll state it again- you are blaming the wrong gender and I stand by this.

I wrote a uni paper about 13 years ago titled Why Men Don’t Cry. It was a review of the media and how they showed or reported on men dealing with emotions. I addressed news articles, TV, adverts, etc and how they portrayed men’s emotions and how they dealt with them. How they were conditioned into a masculine stereotype by language- terms such as ‘Man up’, ‘Be a man about it’ and ‘Stop being a pu33y’. As a Social Psych, you’ll know this- language has a lot to answer for- what we hear has a direct route to what we believe, especially in our formative years. Yet let’s stop and think about exactly who created the stereotypes- who creates the media rhetoric and image of the male that we have all grown up with. Do you think that’s women? You might dig up a random female media CEO from somewhere, but I’m laying my money on the media being controlled by men.

The conditioning of men, the stereotypes that you claim are wrong were created by men. You created that overtly masculine image for yourselves- you were the ones in control.
But once again- just as women are blamed for rape and sexual assault, domestic violence and single-parenthood, we are now also blamed for the rise of the Incel, because we dared to want to be treated as an equals.
Keep throwing numbers and pulling up research to support your argument, but what I’ve stated above is undeniable and I don’t need to write a university paper for that view to be validated or proved. Life does that for me.

Now I’ll address a few comments-

I will caveat the above point, I have no problem with single mums who are that way through no fault of their own.

In your moral judgement, what is the criteria for ‘no fault of their own’? And what position are you in to judge by that? By all accounts, you are a man and bias towards the male perspective, so any reason that is against the male will be instantly dismissed by you, without you actually knowing the facts of the situation. And in fact, you make a statement in your post that evidences you think like that and I’ll come to that more later.

Separation is a new ball game, if your talking about separation from a spouse, that's debatable as the stereotypes all wrong, but if people doubt that many men suffer because they are separated from their children then they need to read up a hell of a lot more.

Nobody doubts that men suffer and you refer to people- other men too? So not all women. You complain about stereotypes, but women didn’t create those. We’ve already covered that.
We already agree- there are bad mother’s out there, but there is also a hell of a lot of bad fathers and a lot of absent ones too. If being away from your children is so painful, then why don’t more fight to see their children?
Now, I’m going to go back to your point about the courts and the legal system being bias towards the mother, because you will no doubt go back to that answer. But I’d be interested to know if you have ever sat in a family court, gone through the paperwork and evidence for a case, talked with the solicitors involved, etc, etc, because if you haven’t, what are you basing your opinions on? Tales from your mates? Secondary research? As a Social Psych, you should know both are shaky ground.

Lets be honest.
"If your wife has custody of the children, she is granted the responsibility for their everyday upbringing and she has the final say in any decision-making."
That's the law

Actually, that’s not the law. You state that I disregard facts, when I didn’t, but you copy and paste something from somewhere and state it’s the law! Pmsl
It doesn’t matter who has custody, if both parents have PR (Parental Responsibility), they are both responsible for the every day upbringing and decision making. THAT’S the law! The father can dispute anything he wants to- lay down any decision he wants to, if he has PR AND EXERCISES THAT PR, he has that right- no matter what mother says. If there is a parental dispute, then either one can bring it through private proceedings and that’s where contracts come into play. Exercising that PR means having an active role in the child’s life- having regular contact and a financial obligation to that child.
We’ll start with a fact that you won’t like- most Judges are men and it’s the Judge that rules on the final contact and residency order, so we can rule out gender bias being a factor in why a man would come out worse in court. So, apart from your secondary research and word of mouth accounts, where is your proof that the courts favour the mother in court disputes?
Believe me, the mother getting her way in court is not as common as you seem to believe it is.

Social Psych might be your area, but child protection and family law is what I work in now and just this week, I have been involved in two private law proceedings in regard to residency orders and contact. Both where parents have been rallying against one another and in neither did mother get what she wanted. And by the way, while I deal with a number of cases each week, these two private law cases were the only private ones going through this week and the outcomes were not unusual.
A part of what I do is search for fathers, because if a father has PR, but he’s not on the scene and Social Services want to go into proceedings with mother; by law father has to be notified and given the opportunity to be assessed to parent, if he wishes. That is the law.
Do you know how often they don’t want to be assessed? How often we have fathers who deny the relationship with that child and ignore the fate of him/her, even when the mother is not involved? Most of the time, but that doesn’t fit your sob story, so you will miss out that it’s easier for a man to deny a child than it is for a woman- no matter how painful you claim the separation is.

 

[CrazyCatLady]

No I'm not a father, nor am I an MRA, but I have 2 mates who have had their access restricted to their kids simply because it's not convenient for the mother.

What you have is one side to a story. Luckily, the courts have more than that and that’s why they can be entrusted to make a decision. So, if the father’s- your friends, albeit- get the arrangement that suits them and it’s inconvenient for the mother, that would be fair in your eyes?
In nearly all cases, it is a battle of wills and egos of the parents and the last people they are thinking of is the children. But of course, the ego of a friend will not be in your summation of the ‘facts’- I wonder, is it even an extraneous variable in your theory of injustice?

And wait, hang on- didn’t you accuse me of having an emotional reaction in a post? Yet everything you have said has been an emotional reaction, because I dared to impart responsibility for the Incel on himself and you being a man cannot see that.
And please- accuse me of being bias, as I’m a woman; however, while I have imparted some understanding of how the female can be responsible, you have imparted none on how the male is in some way responsible for himself.

Are you actually saying that men started committing suicide because women got the freedoms they deserved, as a protest?
But also they also started killing their own children due to it?

No, I didn’t say they started committing suicide because of it- men have been committing suicide since before feminism- I’m not that thick!! But I am saying the increase in male suicide could be related to that. Obviously not a conscious ‘protest’, but in relation to the incel, it cannot be ruled out as a factor.
You stated mental health website reasons and figures for suicide, etc, but have you ever been there? Sat with the ultimate decision in your hands, knowing how it will affect those you leave behind. All the worthlessness that you feel goes away, because you have control. For once, in however long you have been living in that hell- you have control. Shed your social psychology hat and look at the psychodynamics of suicide and look at the method an individual chooses. It can be a protest; it can be a punishment and it can be a relief. If you are of the belief that individuals do not use it in that way, you do not know every side that suicide has to offer.


There is no evidence that men commit suicide due to anger, that belief is a trope to make men appear as unapproachable and angry.

I didn’t say there was, but I was directing you to analyse the ways in which men commit suicide. You stated that they were more likely to commit suicide by a violent method- violence requires a large degree of anger. See my comments above about the psychodynamics of the method of the suicide, rather than a catch all ‘There’s no evidence, so it can’t be true’. Perhaps make a judgement yourself from reading individual stories of people being in that position- what kind of person chooses a violent method over a more peaceful method; what their stream of thoughts were there prior to the act, especially if they’ve attempted several times via different methods. Read- visit suicide sites and forums, and see the anger and protest yourself.

That belief that men appear unapproachable and angry is perpetuated by unapproachable, angry men. Stereotypes don’t appear from nowhere. Rightfully, they shouldn’t be trusted to make a decision, but they are often not a million miles away from the truth. If there is that stereotype, I wonder who perpetuated it…mmmmm

Mainly any suicide attempt is due to a call for help, depression, ideology, impulsiveness or simply a desire to die.

Depression and a desire to die are pretty much the same thing. If you have a desire to die, you have lost the will to live and that’s a form of depression. The word says it all. However, yes, I know before I get more stats, depression can encompass so much more, but one thing is agreed by whatever research you want to throw up, it CAN (not is) be caused by maladaptive thought schemas and lack of coping skills. Cry for help- again, mental health issues and lack of coping skills.
Impulsiveness is not a valid reason- there is a trigger to impulsiveness; a disorganised personality disorder, mental health issues, drug/alcohol use, an emotional event. It’s not a cause on it’s own.
But the other one- ideology. Now we go back to the incel.

Now, haven’t you been saying the rise of the Incel and the increase of male suicide is due to their loss of masculinity? Their loss of power and rights? But that loss of power and rights is due to women empowering themselves? And I beg the question, why should a woman getting equal rights; saying no to be a victim of the male and empowering herself be a cause for a man to turn towards the incel ideology?
There has to be something fundamentally wrong with his model of a women’s worth, prior to seeking out that ideology. Now is when we get every hard done by male jumping out of the woodwork to slag off his ex and how she broke his heart- because there’s always a woman involved. It won’t be that he couldn’t move on; couldn’t compromise or couldn’t take no for an answer. It will be because of ‘Her’- whoever ‘she’ is.

Men do not seem to take responsibility for themselves and your post did an excellent job of proving that and that is my point. Maybe it’s time the male population did.

Stop blaming women for rape; stop blaming us for the court process being unfair and stop blaming us for everything else and take some damn responsibility for causing the mess yourselves.

 

[hell2bwith76]

Whew !!! that is some reading ! Now i have a huge headache
My opinion from a total laymans perspective is that the "womens lib " movement may be asking for "equality"to men in rights but in reality they actually want ,not to be just equal but to be identical ! Hence ,as a simple example ,the need for modern woman to use bad language in everyday life. Gone are the female females to be replaced by male females ! geeeeeez !

 

[casiquaire]

so basically what youre saying is that you are horrified at the notion of what i call a "geezer bird"...........calls everyone "mate", drinks pints, watches rugby and football in the boozer and wears a cap on a sunday for the special occasion, smokes rollies, wants equality but on her own terms and when it suits her and also, swears like a trooper and can deliver a punch better than most blokes.

 

[hell2bwith76]

so basically what youre saying is that you are horrified at the notion of what i call a "geezer bird"...........calls everyone "mate", drinks pints, watches rugby and football in the boozer and wears a cap on a sunday for the special occasion, smokes rollies, wants equality but on her own terms and when it suits her and also, swears like a trooper and can deliver a punch better than most blokes.

In a nutshell YES .Once women become men they will have no further need for Biological males ate all. Egg implants will give them the child which seems to be one of their natural instincts still not affected by womens lib. I won`t be around to see it thank fk .

 

[casiquaire]

In a nutshell YES .Once women become men they will have no further need for Biological males ate all. Egg implants will give them the child which seems to be one of their natural instincts still not affected by womens lib. I won`t be around to see it thank fk .

Youve seen this change over the years, based on your life experiences, since the rise of womens lib in around the 1960s until now, do you think that it has just been a natural evolution over the years or has there been specific events over the years either politically or technologically that you think has affected this, whether in the past or even recently?

 

[hell2bwith76]

Youve seen this change over the years, based on your life experiences, since the rise of womens lib in around the 1960s until now, do you think that it has just been a natural evolution over the years or has there been specific events over the years either politically or technologically that you think has affected this, whether in the past or even recently?

Germaine Geere started it off and incited the women of the world to burn their bras ?? what sort of a protest is that ?
Men could decide to renew their wooden clubs as a defence !

 

[CrazyCatLady]

Germaine Geere started it off and incited the women of the world to burn their bras ?? what sort of a protest is that ?
Men could decide to renew their wooden clubs as a defence !

Germaine Greer- not Geere (lol) is not who you think she is. Read a little about her. She's not a feminist- that's a fallacy. She hates women just as much as misogynists do.

 

[casiquaire]

Germaine Greer- not Geere (lol) is not who you think she is. Read a little about her. She's not a feminist- that's a fallacy. She hates women just as much as misogynists do.

i never trusted Germaine Gruyere, she always came across a bit too cheesy for me

 

[CrazyCatLady]

Whew !!! that is some reading ! Now i have a huge headache
My opinion from a total laymans perspective is that the "womens lib " movement may be asking for "equality"to men in rights but in reality they actually want ,not to be just equal but to be identical ! Hence ,as a simple example ,the need for modern woman to use bad language in everyday life. Gone are the female females to be replaced by male females ! geeeeeez !

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you believe that there should be a set of behavioural rules, dependent on whether you have a penis or not? Is that right? What a load of dogs hairy orbs!
We don't want to be identical- we want to be equal. There should have been no need for 'women's lib'- we're all human and should have had the same rights from year dot, yet the breed of humans that bore penis's believed that those without were sub-human and needed controlling.
And unfortunately, that view doesn't seem to change with evolution and the acquirement of knowledge.

 

[hell2bwith76]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but you believe that there should be a set of behavioural rules, dependent on whether you have a penis or not? Is that right? What a load of dogs hairy orbs!
We don't want to be identical- we want to be equal. There should have been no need for 'women's lib'- we're all human and should have had the same rights from year dot, yet the breed of humans that bore penis's believed that those without were sub-human and needed controlling.
And unfortunately, that view doesn't seem to change with evolution and the acquirement of knowledge.

Sorry to disagree with you but any man like me does not regard women as a sub-species ( only in jocular form !) I went on strike years ago to get women equal pay in the factory we worked at. The women never went on strike though ! they stayed in work and carried on earning while the blokes lost pay in support of equality for women.
I believe that women ,in the main ,ARE different to men and should not be bullied by extremists into thinking that in order to be "equals" they need to act /talk/etc like men do.Also most men are influenced by their Mums and if they end up disrespectful of women then ...who`s to blame ?.
Now ,go back to your kennel like a good little lady

 

[Bad_Influence]

Sorry to disagree with you but any man like me does not regard women as a sub-species ( only in jocular form !) I went on strike years ago to get women equal pay in the factory we worked at. The women never went on strike though ! they stayed in work and carried on earning while the blokes lost pay in support of equality for women.
I believe that women ,in the main ,ARE different to men and should not be bullied by extremists into thinking that in order to be "equals" they need to act /talk/etc like men do.Also most men are influenced by their Mums and if they end up disrespectful of women then ...who`s to blame ?.
Now ,go back to your kennel like a good little lady