Thread 41358368

misandry

>>41358368 (OP)
Doesn't exist
Now go back to r9k

>>41358368 (OP)
If we all work hard enough we can make it real

>>41358368 (OP)
>misandry
It is a phenomenon that can only exist among women, so for this reason it is rhizomatic, undefinable and dissonant.
For this reason, for all intents and purposes, to men misandry is as if it doesn't exist.
Same for magic, emotions and society.

Check emergence theory to understand it.

>>41358368 (OP)
what is the can doing to achieve this?

>>41358509
It does exist!

>>41360139
>It is a phenomenon that can only exist among women
wat

>>41358509
Homophobia is measurably misandrist, though. And so is transphobia(remember they think trans women are men, hence misandry, while they leave trans men alone for the most part). Also, so is that we mutilate baby's penises like it's not a barbaric reminder that men aren't sexually sacred like women get to be. And lets not forget the divorce laws favoring women, the women are wonderful effect existing, and the programs put in place by our government to put women into college, when they already dominate that space.
>>41358368 (OP)

>>41364624
trans women ARE men
your belief that you are women is rooted in the idea that men are evil and you have transcended that sinful predatory nature through chemical castration

>>41364652
>trans women ARE men
>your belief that you are women is rooted in the idea that men are evil and you have transcended that sinful predatory nature through chemical castration
I'm not a tranny. I was just saying because it's unclear why transphobia against trans women would still be misandry if they are women.

Either way, the belief that men are evil is rooted in the idea that men and women are real. Gender is fake, much like how race is fake and eugenics are what's real. Trans women are a boon to destroying misandry when they aren't hateful feminists and when they are actually just, other than their gender situation, normal people.

>>41358656
this is my life’s work o7

>>41364723
>im not a tranny I just defend their ideology

>>41364652
based

>>41358368 (OP)
Fuck off moid go back to r9k

>>41367892
I belong here.

>>41367384
>im not a tranny I just defend their ideology
Yes. After thinnking about it, their ideology is the most convincing to me.

Transgenderism, rehitorically, is a very powerful agent against feminism and explains much of my incel beliefs pretty well. Take height, for example. If gender roles weren't an invention, then height would be objectively indicitive of one's quality as a man since it's what women want from men. Height would be part of inherently what makes you a real man. Meanwhile, height is associated with heart problems, back problems, and shorter lifespans. Historically, we were shorter, and for good reason. It's the equivalent of a peacock's tail, an evolutionary quality developed purely for reproductive purposes that harms the species as a whole.

Were I to accept the absurd notion that gender is any more than a social construct, like race, then the hate speech toward men by feminists, the claims of natural selection by feminists, the generally abusive way we treat men in our society, would all be justified thanks to "male nature."

>>41367930
trannies promote feminism, they worship women

>>41360139
No, I learned to hate my own kind too.
Whether it was through me being too polite and getting treated with contempt or if it was vicious psyopping by all the women I was raised by.
Or just modern society/media/news, even back a few decades, informing me of the monstrosity of men (but eerily, never women)

>>41362995
So, first of all learn the difference between the phenomenon and the noumenon.
Society knows one phenomenon of Male, while males have two phenomena of Male: the societal phenomenon of Male, and a phenomenon of Male that only males, through introspection, can know.
For this reason, males are closer to the truth (i.e. the noumenon of Male) than society. In other words, women have only the knowledge of the social phenomenon of Male.
Women (and therefore, societal)'s understanding of the phenomenon of Male often times conflicts with the introspective phenomenon of Male.
Since male introspection cannot be known by society, society cannot understand the introspective phenomenon of Male.

Misandry is a social phenomenon, so it is based exclusively on the social phenomenon of Male.
A male can only lie, and say he is a misandrist, by parroting the women's misandrist arguments, but they will always be false, since he knows more (and different things) about men than what society (i.e. women) know about men. But a misandrist hatred will always be less true than an introspective hatred of the phenomenon of Male.
Can women understand the struggles of an incel? No, since only the incel can understand how he hates himself.
>inb4 what about empathy
To a certain point it might work, but, just like society itself, it exists only among women, and for this reason, as I said earlier, it is undefinable, rhizomatic and dissonant.
>Inb4 what about femcels? Can men understand them?
Probably not.

Small digression: if you look at trannies, their understanding of woman is social.
They don't have the introspective phenomenon of Female, which only women have.

The gap in understanding the opposite gender is unfillable. Women shall never be men. Men shall never be women.
Not even for a brief moment in their minds.

>>41367930
>Transgenderism, rehitorically, is a very powerful agent against feminism and explains much of my incel beliefs pretty well.
>The incel that posts on /lit/ rage bait about smut is a tranny apologist.
Hillarious if true.

>>41368170
It's true, but what's hilarious about it? We all know that chuds hating trannies was forced in the first place and many of them end up cracking their eggs. Tranny and Chud are two sides of the same coin, broken toys left abandoned to the island of misfits and defectives, whether either admits it or not. As I see it, we're stuck in the same circus, face the same problems, and think the same things and from the same places. The differences are tribalistic and artificial, the same enemies with different masks in order to pit us against one another.
Gender dysphoria is not unlike the black pill with how incels envy women constantly and complain about their insufficient dick sizes and heights and looks and how cruel other people are about it and how hopeless the situation is, thanks to how foids and real life basedjacks and chads behave.
>>41368008
By their nature, trannies destroy the illusion of inherent gender differences, and as such, by taking on feminist roles and pushing away terfs are actually gradually fixing feminism to be less misandrist, even if they themselves accomplish that with blatent misandry. In the long term, even the worst of them are a boon no matter how much they piss me off.

women are evil

>>41369996
As are men, but women are no longer punished for it.

>>41370044
men are way less evil

>>41358368 (OP)
90%, no, 99% of the misandrists here are men who want to be women.

should be more common

>>41370047
by what metric

>>41370061
99% of the people here are men who want to be women.

>>41371287
icky

>>41370061
does the misandry motivate the desire to change sex?

>>41358368 (OP)
i wish it was real and i support eugenics with the intention of lowering the male birth rate

>>41368123
what the fuck is “the social phenomenon of male” u r not plato lil bro

>>41370044
>>41370047
you are both fucking retards

>>41371792
my misandry came after that

>>41371904
>my misandry came after that
what would it mean if it preceded it?

>>41371994
literally nothing desu. misandry is just not real so there’s nothing to escape by transitioning. other boys always made me feel uncomfortable desu and i was like mildly critical of them but like my extreme misandry is just a reaction to all the shit i’ve experienced only after living as a girl

>>41372386
>misandry is just not real
draft women

>>41371904
>what the fuck is “the social phenomenon of male” u r not plato lil bro
Kant*
It's in the pic.

>>41360139
so only women can do magic?

>>41372398
no

>>41372451
i’m not reading all that

>>41372609
women deserve the experience of dying in war

>>41372618
if they want to

and if a man is stupid enough to not just dodge a draft he should have the right to also.

i support draft dodging

The only thing I want to discuss is how much the jannies suck leaving shit off topic posts like this up all day. What the fuck am I paying you nothing for?

>>41372665
it shouldn't be a choice

>>41372533
Magic?
It is as if it doesn't exist.

What is magic, anyway? I only hear contradicting definitions. Is it anything supernatural? How can something be supernatural in nature? If something happens in nature then it is natural, however unexplainable it may seem at first.

>>41372781
explain why people are left or right handed

>>41372975
magic

>>41372781
some things are difficult to define, and that's okay, and contradicting definitions are the plague with so many words anyways. the english language meets its limit incredibly harshly when it comes to abstract thought, you could say the same thing abt nature, which is much less of a useful or meaningful word imo

>It is as if it doesn't exist.
so no? or so women are capable of magic?

>>41373468
I feel like magic is either tricks for entertainment, or in a broader sense intentional spiritually projected externally.

>>41372451
Can't expect comprehension from a choleric bigot.

>>41372781
if you want to get technical that way then the concept of a contrast to natural cannot exist since nothing can come about outside of nature since we are immersed totally in it. Or one step further, to define anything is to suggest there is consensus on the nature of anything which is not only impossible to prove but untrue. To you a bird song is pleasant, to an insect it's the call of death. So which is it? There is no consensus, all you can agree on is that something is, and even that you cannot prove definitively.

>>41372975
More development in the psychomotor brain region in one brain lobe rather than the other.
Why?
>>41373468
>so no? or so women are capable of magic?
I'd say women are the ones who understand magic trully. And because of that they are more involved in it. Astrology isn't really a thing many men are interested in.
Agrippa was shitting on it so hard he lost his job (which was funded by a woman, obviously).
>or so women are capable of magic?
Can you do something that is, but doesn't exist? Can you talk about society, even if you can't prove its out there? Yes, obviously you can.
>>41373643
These are two completely different things, that obviously originated from different things. To make a linguistics analogy, it would be like a cognate. Not the same thing.
>>41374010
Hamevin yavin, anon.
>>41374044
>There is no consensus, all you can agree on is that something is, and even that you cannot prove definitively.
But can you begin to define it? Can you get closer to the truth?
In some cases, you can't even do that.
Take Mary's Room, for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_argument
If you leave Mary in a room to learn everything about, let's say, dwarf fortress, will she be able to play it afterwards? Yes.
If you leave Mary in a room to learn everything about astrology, will she be able to confidently say "omg he is such a Virgo"?
There is so much contradiction in it that you can only "feel" it.
There is so much contradiction in society that you can't properly interract with it even if you'd read all the self-help and the sociological and biological non-fiction books out there.
And it's not even about experiencing it that is the problem. Even an autistic person experiences society every day, but he is not any closer to understanding it. Experience is just a different type of knowledge.
But somehow we all know what society is, for some reason it is out there, but at the same time it doesn't exist enough to come closer to the truth by studying it.

>>41375813
>More development in the psychomotor brain region in one brain lobe rather than the other.
that's not specific enough

>>41376223
Nta but what do you believe is the cause then?
Their explanation is sufficient.
t. 'Spiritual'

>>41376404
>but what do you believe is the cause then?
I'm saying we don't fully understand the process yet so anyone claiming to know exactly what is going on is lying, but, at the same time, it's a clearly observable phenomenon, so it's reasonable to speculate there is SOME specific genetic cause even if the exact cause isn't yet understood

>>41376422
Fair point. I thought you were hand waving observable phenomenon and empirical research as 'insufficient' or straight up delusion while other 'spiritual' people give even worse explanations like 'magic or the spirit' and when pressed for a definition of 'magic' or 'spirit', its usually contradictory.

But you dont seem to be doing so.

>>41368123
noone has "introspective phenomenon" to make claims like that on someone else

>>41376456
If trans people believe irrational thinking is harmful, they should apply that belief to their own thought patterns.

>>41376465
Hes a kantian, dont worry about him.

>>41376466
What?
Has nothing to do with my point.

>>41376477
you seemed to be staking a claim against basing ones beliefs solely in spirituality or magic

>>41376485
Yes and if one solely basis eberything on a materialistic framework. Its just that 'spiritual' people tend to have worse explanations, despite me personally adopting a neoplatonic framework. I dont handwave empirical knowledge and process entirely like some 'mystics' do.

>>41364652
literally me

im pure now, no more dirty thoughts

>>41376516
>I dont handwave empirical knowledge
but that's my point
trannies DO handwave empirical knowledge
they claim things like "passing" trans people where there's supposedly zero observable evidence of people's birth sex, but trannies cling to these beliefs spiritually, not based on firm proof

trannies only think "irrational beliefs are bad" applies to others, not their own beliefs about gender

>>41376470
it's hilarious when people try to "disprove" an idea using the tools derived from the same idea

>>41376537
Sure, but saying this on the tranny board will invite derision.

>>41376540
It happens often. Lol

>>41376553
??

>>41376586
Nta but you said the quiet part out loud.

>>41376422
>genetic cause
When it comes to behaviours, genetics increase the chance of the environment being more (or less) effective.
You might even argue that everything in a living being has a "genetic cause".
That said...
>>41376223
... The cause for this brain structure is the environment where the human being grows up interacting with a specific genetic code.
Since this is pretty much implied in all biology, I didn't think you needed me to say it.
I still don't get what this has to do with magic.
>>41376465
>noone has "introspective phenomenon" to make claims like that on someone else
>like that
Like what?
>>41376470
I'm a Steinerian. Kant's philosophy is just more famous, and you can use it with Steiner too.

>>41376664
>philosophy
epistemology* for the perfectionists out there.

>>41375813
>But can you begin to define it? Can you get closer to the truth? etc.
that's my point, if we go down that route the discussion ends with "we can't know". But we can argue based on some concessions, we may not know the full nature of the universe, but we can observe its consistencies within a margin of error. When you make dirt wet it turns into mud, we can work with that, and that's what most knowledge is built on, a pragmatic result rather than infallible knowledge of its nature.

>>41358368 (OP)
would trannies not throw massive hissy fits if your favorite brand of hrt or dilators did a collab with someone like jesse singal or jk rowling?

>>41376664
>Steinerian
A worthy opponent. Our debate will be legendary!
t. Platonist

>>41376721
Jk, I dont know much about Steiner, but he does seem interesting but I cant make commentary on what I do not know.

>>41376707
>we can't know
But we can get closer to the truth. We can get closer to the Noumenon. By studying, experimenting, reasoning the phenomena we are getting closer to the truth.
My point is that when it comes to magic, society, etc. there is no way to get closer to the truth.
"We can't know right now" is true for everything.
"We will know more" is not true for magic.
It is only true for physics, science and whatnot.
In the case of magic you will not have scientific progress.
Economists still fail to this day to make reliable predictions of the future, because they don't understand society. Their theories haven't improved. They all fail.
Medicine on the other hand have improved. In medicine, we can define each phenomenon with a progressively better and better definition. Mortality is steadily going down, computers are getting more powerful by the day, hell, even the trannies wouldn't exist if it wasn't because of science.
On the other hand, what about magic? What did it achieve in all these years? What the fuck was it even supposed to achieve?
It is as if it doesn't exist, as if it has never existed in the first place.
Do you get what I'm saying?
>>41376737
Neither do I know much about Plato kek.

>>41376664
>Like what?
you can't invalidate other people's internal experiences if you don't count social experiences as a valid basis for such evaluation

>>41358368 (OP)
I support womens rights and wrongs

>>41376955
>you can't invalidate other people's internal experiences if you don't count social experiences as a valid basis for such evaluation
First of all, I am not invalidating interal experiences. I am invalidating social experiences.
The only experiences we can judge are the social experiences (because they are "out there", so to speak), and they are always inferior to internal experiences, because social experiences are less complete than internal experiences.

I agree that, at the end of the day, we can't know if we live in a simulation or not. If people around us are real or not.
The only conscious being might as well just be me, but that's enough to say that my internal experience is more than any social experience.
When I am talking to you, are you sentient, are you real? I don't know, the only basis of my analysis of the world is me and only me.
But if you are real, you might as well follow the logical conclusion that your consciousness also holds knowledge that other people will never have. Your feelings are yours and yours alone. Others see you, but they are not aware of them. They only know of what you show them.

>>41360139
>emotions and society
The deepest poets are male
The foundation of society is male

>>41377273
>The deepest poets are male
You don't read poetry.
>The foundation of society is male
Kek.

>>41377273
>The foundation of society is male
yup

>>41377006
women only have wrongs

it’s wrong