I was tormented by nasty little girls in school , years later i read about another little boy who like myself had Aspergers syndrome and he was also being tormented by nasty little girls, Next day in school the little sluts heard that the little boy had commited suicide due to their bullying and they were in tears when they realised what they had done. I hope they suffer a conscience for the rest of their worthless lives.
Sorry to hear of your getting mobbed. That's a bitch. Have to agree with Hiccup that their tears were likely for attention rather than actual concern or caring. They might also be due to their loss of status if people remembered their mistreatment.
Somewhat similar to your experience, a boy in grade 8 was digging a tunnel in the ravine in his backyard. The tunnel collapsed and buried him alive. He was socially awkward and ostracized at school. His parents set up a bursary award in his memory. When that was announced by the principal over the P.A., all the so-called cool girls laughed. I learned a lot about girls that day.
Excellent points about relational aggression. Many people wrongly think about DV as "that one-time incident", but you have to look at the whole relationship to see what's really been happening. Maybe the one-time thing happened 10 times...or maybe it's a reaction to being the victim 10 times.
"Meanwhile, emotional flooding, volatility, or verbal escalation—more often expressed by women—are framed as authenticity, trauma responses, or justified expressions of pain."
I'm not sure if an edit left out a line before the next paragraph, but the above behaviors are definitely NOT equally valid regulation styles to the male style mentioned previously, the above is blatant LACK of emotional regulation.
Which, frankly, is also what worries me about quite a lot of the throughline in this article. The framing in much of this seems to suggest that the missing accountability is a matter for government and HR, yet is likewise clear that both of those are historically weaponized by women against men. Giving them a remit to investigate and punish very subjective and difficult to prove/disprove offenses like relational aggression strikes me as handing even more weapons to precisely the people who have proven least worthy of trust wielding them.
I'd very much like women to be held to the same standard of adult behavior as men, but this seems to drift into the authoritarian invasiveness of policy like the school teacher who attempted to ban her students from having "best friends" and actively assigned "friendships" to her students to attempt creating "friendship equity" by not allowing any student to have more friends than any other. That's what it looks like when an authority attempts to address "social isolation" and "coalition formation" as a matter of formal policy: literal rationing and artificial distribution of "relationships".
There's an inherent tension between trying to move the system away from "the accusation is the evidence" back to "objective facts over subjective feelings" and also trying to make the system officially recognize forms of aggression that are overwhelmingly operative through subjective feelings, like alienation and negative reframing of memories and reputation. Some of these are legitimate social norm enforcement tools, like bullies becoming socially isolated as a natural consequence of their own antisocial behavior.
This seems to be one of those cases where the diagnosis of the problem is clear, but the "what it would look like to fix it" really isn't clear. The majority of HR workers (and increasingly lawyers and judges also) are women. Any proposed solution that gives them MORE power to interpret ambiguous social interactions as actionable offenses seems more likely to harm than help men on average.
I think we are saying the same thing. That sentence was saying that her emotional flooding was "framed" as being authentic, not that it was in any way a good regulation.
Women/girls will NEVER be held accountable for anything (at least by the State). Females are followers/sheep that are incapable of critical thinking...therefore, they are reliable pawns of the State, always willing to follow propaganda that will further destroy western civilization. If the State held them accountable (no more privileges and handouts), they would risk losing their pets.
Now I don't know how "the algorithms" work. But of late I've had a series of Women find attractive pieces pop up. By coincidence one just before I read this. And its "10 things" followed much the same pattern as all the others. Basically being steady, rational and calming, reliable and ambitious and active. In short all versions of the supposed "toxic" masculinity identified by daft psychologists. In each of the "10" or "20" "things" there will be something about these stoical qualities making the woman feel "safe" or "secure". In short the what women find attractive are in fact the " traditional" expectations of males in our societies (by which I mean UK USA ). Now the importance of this is of course that in fact for most children their early socialisation is predominantly by females, mothers, child care, teachers. Increasingly so. So it it likely that its the influence of women, and their expectations that have a huge influence on children of both sexes. Not "the patriarchy".
In England equal accountability would result in six times as many women in prison as currently, and the reintroduction of the girls equivalent of borstal.
LOUD RAUCOUS APPLAUSE
More moral clarity below if you wish to take the bull by its horns.
J.P. At his best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3368WAl0qM
I was tormented by nasty little girls in school , years later i read about another little boy who like myself had Aspergers syndrome and he was also being tormented by nasty little girls, Next day in school the little sluts heard that the little boy had commited suicide due to their bullying and they were in tears when they realised what they had done. I hope they suffer a conscience for the rest of their worthless lives.
Sorry to hear of your getting mobbed. That's a bitch. Have to agree with Hiccup that their tears were likely for attention rather than actual concern or caring. They might also be due to their loss of status if people remembered their mistreatment.
Not likely. They didn't care about the boy...their tears were only for attention.
"Look at me...I'm grieving."
Somewhat similar to your experience, a boy in grade 8 was digging a tunnel in the ravine in his backyard. The tunnel collapsed and buried him alive. He was socially awkward and ostracized at school. His parents set up a bursary award in his memory. When that was announced by the principal over the P.A., all the so-called cool girls laughed. I learned a lot about girls that day.
Excellent points about relational aggression. Many people wrongly think about DV as "that one-time incident", but you have to look at the whole relationship to see what's really been happening. Maybe the one-time thing happened 10 times...or maybe it's a reaction to being the victim 10 times.
Thanks Father X. Always good to see you.
Yes. Presumably "lived experience" is only valid for certain groups.
"Meanwhile, emotional flooding, volatility, or verbal escalation—more often expressed by women—are framed as authenticity, trauma responses, or justified expressions of pain."
I'm not sure if an edit left out a line before the next paragraph, but the above behaviors are definitely NOT equally valid regulation styles to the male style mentioned previously, the above is blatant LACK of emotional regulation.
Which, frankly, is also what worries me about quite a lot of the throughline in this article. The framing in much of this seems to suggest that the missing accountability is a matter for government and HR, yet is likewise clear that both of those are historically weaponized by women against men. Giving them a remit to investigate and punish very subjective and difficult to prove/disprove offenses like relational aggression strikes me as handing even more weapons to precisely the people who have proven least worthy of trust wielding them.
I'd very much like women to be held to the same standard of adult behavior as men, but this seems to drift into the authoritarian invasiveness of policy like the school teacher who attempted to ban her students from having "best friends" and actively assigned "friendships" to her students to attempt creating "friendship equity" by not allowing any student to have more friends than any other. That's what it looks like when an authority attempts to address "social isolation" and "coalition formation" as a matter of formal policy: literal rationing and artificial distribution of "relationships".
There's an inherent tension between trying to move the system away from "the accusation is the evidence" back to "objective facts over subjective feelings" and also trying to make the system officially recognize forms of aggression that are overwhelmingly operative through subjective feelings, like alienation and negative reframing of memories and reputation. Some of these are legitimate social norm enforcement tools, like bullies becoming socially isolated as a natural consequence of their own antisocial behavior.
This seems to be one of those cases where the diagnosis of the problem is clear, but the "what it would look like to fix it" really isn't clear. The majority of HR workers (and increasingly lawyers and judges also) are women. Any proposed solution that gives them MORE power to interpret ambiguous social interactions as actionable offenses seems more likely to harm than help men on average.
I think we are saying the same thing. That sentence was saying that her emotional flooding was "framed" as being authentic, not that it was in any way a good regulation.
Ah, therapeutic validation of manipulative emoting forcing the man to be responsible for regulating her emotional state as well as his own? Gotcha.
Women/girls will NEVER be held accountable for anything (at least by the State). Females are followers/sheep that are incapable of critical thinking...therefore, they are reliable pawns of the State, always willing to follow propaganda that will further destroy western civilization. If the State held them accountable (no more privileges and handouts), they would risk losing their pets.
“Does Gynocentrism Masquerade as Justice?”
No. Gynocentrism masquerades as misandrist superiority which in turn commits injustices with impunity.
Now I don't know how "the algorithms" work. But of late I've had a series of Women find attractive pieces pop up. By coincidence one just before I read this. And its "10 things" followed much the same pattern as all the others. Basically being steady, rational and calming, reliable and ambitious and active. In short all versions of the supposed "toxic" masculinity identified by daft psychologists. In each of the "10" or "20" "things" there will be something about these stoical qualities making the woman feel "safe" or "secure". In short the what women find attractive are in fact the " traditional" expectations of males in our societies (by which I mean UK USA ). Now the importance of this is of course that in fact for most children their early socialisation is predominantly by females, mothers, child care, teachers. Increasingly so. So it it likely that its the influence of women, and their expectations that have a huge influence on children of both sexes. Not "the patriarchy".
Very well said. Men are Good...Women are rewarded for NOT being good. This is a big societal problem overall!
63% Decrease in jail sentences for men, an EQUAL increase in jail sentences for women!
There is a HUGE BIAS IN FAVOUR OF WOMEN in courts
Men receive sentences in criminal cases that are 63% higher than women for the same crimes
Prof. Starr's research shows large unexplained gender disparities in federal criminal cases
https://repository.law.umich.edu/law_econ_current/57/
Thanks Tom. Often shared thoughts.
In England equal accountability would result in six times as many women in prison as currently, and the reintroduction of the girls equivalent of borstal.
Brilliant article. Thank you Tom. Men Are Good.