Quote from Udoli Pixie

Joining to see men's approach on dating, relationships, and marriage. For a paper on whether human interaction is more replaceable for heterosexual men or women.

So you've just joined us to facilitate a paper you have due? Using us like whores eh.

Could you tell us which course you are on?

Anyway, welcome to the forum.

It quite sucks because I wanted to prove that male & female interaction was meaningless and replaceable. However all I got from the women's side was that 'I could survive being alone' and from the men "all women can offer is sex". Either way it proves that men & women were not meant to interact in any way other than procreation. Even if that interaction is only replaceable to one gender.

Good grief, who schooled you in the art of preconception before the observable facts? Have a few preconceived ideas by all means but make sure you filter it via reality first.

Welcome... I am going to be real with you. Men and women are not replaceable, no matter how bad the relationship between men and women has become. That is just a fact of life. I wouldn't mind screwing a robo sex doll or whatever the hell you call them, but it will never beat the real thing. I prefer my women in the flesh. Many men have learned to live without women because they have no choice. Look at how bad things have gotten for men. It is an act of self-preservation for many men, because of the misandry present in todays society, and the women who propagate the misandry by abusing and taking advantage of men. The same thing goes for mangina pussybuggers who try to act like nice guys or tough guys in order to take advantage of unsuspecting women. When feminism is completely flushed down the toilet, hopefully the gap that has come between men and women will finally close, but for now men have to focus on fighting for their rights, reclaiming their freedom, and spreading the word about the evils of feminism.

Quote from Udoli Pixie

Joining to see men's approach on dating, relationships, and marriage. For a paper on whether human interaction is more replaceable for heterosexual men or women.

I.E. for women can a career, money, adoption, and surrogates replace a life partner. My input thus far says no.
I.E. for men can nurses, prostitutes, friends, hobbies, adoption, and surrogates replace a life partner. My input thus far says yes.

My goodness! This has to be one of the most quacked up theories I've heard of.

Starting a theory based so far from reality is going to lead you to some strange bias, even as you approach the truth.

For someone who proposes androgyny on another post, you also seem to be having some trouble realising both how similar the genders are, and recognising the real biological differences.

If you started asking yourself whether EITHER GENDER can replace a life parter with ANY combination of "career, money, adoption, surrogates, nurses, prostitutes, friends, hobbies", at least your result is less likely to be skewed by pre-investigative assumptions.

Quote from Udoli Pixie

My paper topic was brought up on the fact that I believe the interaction of men and women is harmful to society.

If the interaction between men and women was harmful, it would have never even existed as nature doesn't tend to uphold counterproductive systems. Have you though about that?

It quite sucks because I wanted to prove that male & female interaction was meaningless and replaceable. However all I got from the women's side was that 'I could survive being alone' and from the men "all women can offer is sex". Either way it proves that men & women were not meant to interact in any way other than procreation. Even if that interaction is only replaceable to one gender.

Most men can take care of themselves and endure discomfort which is good because we are often forced to it. I most of us probably could stay alive without women, but it does not mean we want a life without women. I like women and life is much more pleasant with them being around.

I don't support your theory.

My course is Sociology. But I have the same psychology professor.

So honestly the first part is the sociology of relationships then the psychology of men and women.

And yes this is a preconceived notion our papers is about proving the notion or providing proof that it exists in a majority.

This preconceived notion comes from my scientific belief that men and women were meant to have both fertile reproductives of both genders and be able to procreate with each other and

The harmful nature I'm talking about is misandry and misogyny. It's odd how there are so few forums that are antimisandry AND anti-misogyny. The fact the men are pro-male and women are pro-female further shows that human beings can adapt & accept to environmental changes but at best tolerate differences in other.

Odd now that I found some sample of men not finding women replaceable I hope I could find a few women who find men replaceable.

As for the men who don't find women replaceable what is the deciding factor?

Of course none of my findings here could be be in the official sample since that would mean doing my survey but it will provide offsets.

I won't be checking this till next Thursday if any replies. It's Friday night.

I promote androgyny since masculinity & femininity limit women & men.

In society masculinity does not permit men to be victims or have emotions.
It is hard to accept a man as a victim of abuse or rape.
A man who understands his emotions is labeled as being in touch with his feminine side proving the emotions are a feminine trait.

Femininity does not permit women to be strong in any other way except as a mother or wife.
A wife can be a strong partner who divides the work equally & pulls her financial weight & a mother can be strong enough to support her children on her own.
But a women in the workforce has to be masculine to be strong she can be as graceful, polite, pretty etc as femininity dictates but she must display confidence, leadership at work and that is reserved for men.
It's this femininity that brushes off female pedophiles, hephebophiles, abusers, and rapists. As society has this notion that violence is something only men perputate. It's an innate instinct in all human beings only women never have to take responsibility because we are emotional.

Then again we live in a society where people are no longer held accountable for their actions.

This preconceived notion comes from my scientific belief that men and women were meant to have both fertile reproductives of both genders and be able to procreate with each other and

So you are saying that men and women were meant to be hermaphrodites? ....????

The harmful nature I'm talking about is misandry and misogyny. It's odd how there are so few forums that are antimisandry AND anti-misogyny.

Actually they are many forums that are anti-misandric and anti-misogynous simultaneously. They are called MRA sites. MRA meaning Mens Rights Activists/Advocates, and we are all aligned with the Mens Rights Movement. The MRM advocates equal rights for both men and women who suffer under the tyranny of their governments that propagate Marxist feminism, even when one of the core purposes of the MRM is to combat misandry in society and the mainsteam media.

The fact the men are pro-male and women are pro-female further shows that human beings can adapt & accept to environmental changes but at best tolerate differences in other.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Odd now that I found some sample of men not finding women replaceable I hope I could find a few women who find men replaceable.

Um... Yeah... Men are not replaceable, the day men fall, is the day civilization falls as well. Men keep society on it's feet, and I doubt women are replaceable either. The women that think they find men replaceable, are lesbians, and even those relationships never last. Their lives are nothing but train wrecks without a man present. They try to compensate by acting like men.

As for the men who don't find women replaceable what is the deciding factor?

They have to learn to deal with it, and come to terms that worshipping pussy gets them nowhere. It only slows their creative process. Given the way most women act nowadays, in terms of negativity and promiscuity, most women are vastly overated, and they aren't worth any mans time.

Of course none of my findings here could be be in the official sample since that would mean doing my survey but it will provide offsets.

Quit trying to sound like a genious, and do more research. By the way you type, you seem like you are trying too hard to sound intelligent.

* Dead thread*

I kind of forgot about this thread since I used my paper was done with input from studies and my own interviews.
I changed the basis for human interaction with the opposite gender is more replaceable for which gender.Turns out theoretically the female gender is more capable of replacing the opposite gender.

Quote from Redpill

So you are saying that men and women were meant to be hermaphrodites? ....????

Studies on human evolution shown that there was some evidence that humans beings least developed origins were like fishes that could be both genders fertile hermaphrodite.

Quote from Redpill

Actually they are many forums that are anti-misandric and anti-misogynous simultaneously. They are called MRA sites. MRA meaning Mens Rights Activists/Advocates, and we are all aligned with the Mens Rights Movement. The MRM advocates equal rights for both men and women who suffer under the tyranny of their governments that propagate Marxist feminism, even when one of the core purposes of the MRM is to combat misandry in society and the mainsteam media.

When I was doing research for this paper. I could not find these many forums I found a few forums that were anti-misandry & anti-misogyny compared to the forums dedicated separately.

Quote from Redpill

What the fuck are you talking about?

That was me explaining it in the simplest terms that I could. If you couldn't understand that oh well.

Quote from Redpill

Um... Yeah... Men are not replaceable, the day men fall, is the day civilization falls as well. Men keep society on it's feet, and I doubt women are replaceable either. The women that think they find men replaceable, are lesbians, and even those relationships never last. Their lives are nothing but train wrecks without a man present. They try to compensate by acting like men.

The civilization truly wouldn't fall if men were gone unless mens inventions/contributions were also gone. Though considering how many women understand the technology those inventions could just simply be recreated. Civilization has already been pretty much built with not much to expand on evident by the lack of truly useful innovative inventions.

As for those lesbian relationship never lasting....they are now studies on genders choosing a gay lifestyle. Apparently women are more committed and plenty of those relationships do last.

Quote from Redpill

They have to learn to deal with it, and come to terms that worshipping pussy gets them nowhere. It only slows their creative process. Given the way most women act nowadays, in terms of negativity and promiscuity, most women are vastly overated, and they aren't worth any mans time.

Odd how y

Odd how you think men who don't find women replaceable are worshippinig p*ssy. I can already guess you don't have the same negative view of women who don't find men replaceable?

Considering how your view on women who find men replaceable as being compensating lesbians with failing relationships one would think you'd have a negative view on men who found women replaceable and a positive one on the men who didn't find women replaceable.

So apparently women who find men replaceable = negative & men who don't find women replaceable = negative.

I was already expecting a bias since most antimisanry and mra forums have the notion that's oaky for men to think women are replaceable but women can't do the same for men. The best the view I've gotten on these mra/anti-misandry sites were like yours doubting women are replaceable. Though the reaction to women stating they doubt men were replaceable was pretty much your compensating lesbian view.

Quote from Redpill

Quit trying to sound like a genious, and do more research. By the way you type, you seem like you are trying too hard to sound intelligent.

Not trying to sound like a genius not genious. Though I am one however my typing to me is like a first grader since I'm breezing aka writing in the simplest terms. Though it's not surprising you get the impression it's too intelligent a lot of people do considering what is first grader writing to me is like a graduate college level textbook for some.

You know what is actually harmfull to society? Ignorant humans with petty ideas/claims and an abundance of hubris such as you (pixie) have displayed.

You do not back your condescending attitude up and that makes you an arrogant snob. Myself, I can safely say so for you can't look down on me and be justified at the same time.

You confirm my general view of people whom study and/or practice social studies. People with an inflated sense of self-worth whom amount to nothing (in the sense of being usefull to society).

Quote from Udoli Pixie

Studies on human evolution shown that there was some evidence that humans beings least developed origins were like fishes that could be both genders fertile hermaphrodite.

Be sensible. If you're going back as far as talking about when/if humans developed from fish, you are not talking about human evolution at all. You're not even talking about mammalian evolution. You are talking about evolution of vertebrates, perhaps. There is so little evidence of evolution from fish that anything in that area is pure speculation (there's not even a clear trail from hominid to homo sapien). There is so little evidence of the biological structure of creatures of billions of years ago, that anything in that area is pure speculation, also.

Quote from Udoli Pixie

So apparently women who find men replaceable = negative & men who don't find women replaceable = negative.

Yet another example of basing a conclusion on pure assumption and speculation.

Quote from Udoli Pixie

I was already expecting a bias ...

Well, what do you know, an admission of a flaw. Anyone looking into something with an expectation of the outcome is likely to find that outcome because they've already told their mind to look for the proof of it.

The worst of it is, you probably like to think of yourself as a scholar. However, you show that you are nothing of the sort.

Quote from Udoli Pixie

The civilization truly wouldn't fall if men were gone unless mens inventions/contributions were also gone.

If men are gone it's essentially the same thing.

In this hypothetical feminist utopia you describe, I don't think you grasp the enormity of physical work necessary just to keep basic infrastructures maintained. Who will also undertake repairs and update mechanisms? Creativity and innovation requires a stable and functioning society in order to flourish and become new inventions. If you naively think a man-free world will consist of merely pushing a few buttons and summoning helpful robots, you are seriously deluded.

The reality is, this hypothetical future will more resemble a post-apocalyptic nightmare, and after you've eaten the last of the tinned food, and drunk the last of the bottled water, with lighting and heat slowly dimming, machinery grinding to a halt, a sinking realization will descend upon you as to the gravity of your deteriorating circumstances. Civilization won't just die, but you'll plummet rapidly back to the stone-age at far quicker speed than it took coming in the opposite direction.

Though considering how many women understand the technology those inventions could just simply be recreated.

There's nothing 'simple' about it. Don't forget you first have to master extracting materials from thousands of feet beneath the earth, then process them correctly and to then undertake thousands of similar laborious and time consuming processes - before even considering 'recreating' anything in a manufacturing environment. Therefore, given the number of women who grasp the workings of such technologies are so few, and the geographical expanse of populations, it wouldn't be practical even if some of those women could transfer theory into practice. Fantasy vs reality.

Civilization has already been pretty much built with not much to expand on evident by the lack of truly useful innovative inventions.

Not much to expand on? Any civilization by definition is an evolving one and constantly changing in order to survive. I'm sure some regressive twits back in medieval times told themselves there's nothing much more to improve on, in so far as inventions are concerned, so we might as well just put our feet up from here on in. Evolutionary suicide!

Personally, I believe nature and/or god intended men and women to be complimentary and not combatants, unlike feminism which has this divisive fixation with pitting men and women against one another with destructive hypothetical premises about a world without men.

Let's remove the strongest, biggest, and fastest humans (males) from a country - let's say the U.S. Ya know, the people who think in terms of geometry instead of words. And let us allow the women to live on their own for... mmm let's say a decade.

Holla @ me when ya'll wimynfolk have paradise running smooth. Or when you're shitting on the streets like 5 centuries ago. I'll be interested in writing about how well society functions without us stinkin it up

ROFLMAO...You haven't proven anything, my friend. Jump to pre-conceived conclusions much?

It quite sucks because I wanted to prove that male & female interaction was meaningless and replaceable. However all I got from the women's side was that 'I could survive being alone' and from the men "all women can offer is sex". Either way it proves that men & women were not meant to interact in any way other than procreation. Even if that interaction is only replaceable to one gender.

Meaningless and replaceable.?

But very dull.

Quote from KellyMac

ROFLMAO...You haven't proven anything, my friend. Jump to pre-conceived conclusions much?

Is that directed at me?

I type like a sarcastic asshole, but in reality I'm completely objective. I want to see a modern country without any males (and sealed borders with no threat of foreign invasion - but free trade, including sperm imports (XX chromosome only, of course)) for at least a decade. If it rises to utopia, well, we males should be kept out of positions of power and responsibility, for we FAIL. That's what that female MP was saying, and lo, she's a prophet.

However, if it goes to the shits, then she needs to stfu. I'm unbiased, I'd be among the first of men to admit we fucking suck and the feminists are goddesses if this feminist utopia is realized, and among the first males to bash these feminazis for failing should society revert to the middle ages because ya'll couldn't agree on a successful method to maintain this vast nation.