Terxpahseyton
Nobody
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,759
I readily admit, I ax an grind with the term.
I do not deny it any merit. Men can be condensing to women. Men can play alpha. But maybe also, Men may play alpha not because he is a sexist, but because being a dick is part of its job because you effed up. Because that is how men may deal with such situations under serious conditions. Such as business. It can, I suppose be one, however it is not inherently a sexist phenomena. But a male social phenomena. Serious male mass missions were exclusive either hunting, or war. In either case: Killing. They were soldiers. Soldier up. Studies also show that successful women learn to adopt male gestures. Such as grapping your shoulder as a sign of dominance. Women don't do that to each other. That is not they style. They got different social operations going on, but men do absolutely causally among the powerful. Successful females tend to, as well.
So in effect, while I understand the sentiment, I find this weapon to be entirely inadequate in its reach und spread, relative to its merit.
There is no way to have this term be used and have a net productive benefit. Essentially it just tries to feminize men. But on principle while this may have a net productive benefit, in a given case, in this case, it just randomly shuts males up females didn't like. This is madness, I tell you! Well not quite. It is method.
Modern feminism is just so funny, because its nature supports just the stereotypes it tries to disown.


It really has become a sort of comedy show for me. It is like watching a man getting dominated by his nagging housewife, sit-com style.
I do not deny it any merit. Men can be condensing to women. Men can play alpha. But maybe also, Men may play alpha not because he is a sexist, but because being a dick is part of its job because you effed up. Because that is how men may deal with such situations under serious conditions. Such as business. It can, I suppose be one, however it is not inherently a sexist phenomena. But a male social phenomena. Serious male mass missions were exclusive either hunting, or war. In either case: Killing. They were soldiers. Soldier up. Studies also show that successful women learn to adopt male gestures. Such as grapping your shoulder as a sign of dominance. Women don't do that to each other. That is not they style. They got different social operations going on, but men do absolutely causally among the powerful. Successful females tend to, as well.
So in effect, while I understand the sentiment, I find this weapon to be entirely inadequate in its reach und spread, relative to its merit.
There is no way to have this term be used and have a net productive benefit. Essentially it just tries to feminize men. But on principle while this may have a net productive benefit, in a given case, in this case, it just randomly shuts males up females didn't like. This is madness, I tell you! Well not quite. It is method.

Modern feminism is just so funny, because its nature supports just the stereotypes it tries to disown.



It really has become a sort of comedy show for me. It is like watching a man getting dominated by his nagging housewife, sit-com style.