are we the bad guys?

so here's a story about how 2 men killed a woman. well one of the men is still a boy actually. but weird isn't it? why is it always men killing women and not the other way around? why do men rape women and not the other way around? i’ve never raped and killed a woman. does that mean i am less of a man than men who do so? if testosterone causes psychosis, is that a bad thing?

maybe the media is biased. maybe women really do rape and kill men all the time, but it never gets reported, because of a gigantic conspiracy. maybe the reason practically everyone in prison is male is a gigantic conspiracy against men, to put them into prison and keep women out. but i don’t think that’s the case. i think it’s pretty clear what is going on here.

men want sex. we want to have sex with women. but men are also too embarrassed to ask women out very often, unless they are the sort of men who don’t have any trouble with that. but the sort of men who do not have any trouble with asking women out are the sort who have a very low opinion of women so they don’t think they are losing much of anything worthwhile if they get turned down. men who have a high opinion of women, like me, are often too shy to ask them out, because we actually think women matter and it bothers us that things might not go the way we want them to.

in either case, most men have a tendency to view women as sex objects, either as idols of perfection, such as supermodels and the like, or as worthless whores, which is how guys who are “playas” tend to view their numerous sex partners. there doesn't seem to be much in between. and in either case, our testosterone drives us to have very irrational viewpoints regarding women. but is it really just testosterone?

no... the media and the culture all promote this same viewpoint. the phenomenon is a self-reinforcing cycle. competition between men over a limited number of attractive women makes men hostile towards one another. this hostility is often displayed overtly, in fistfights and the like. but a lot of men are also quite hostile towards women. the reason is quite simple.

if a woman is pretty, a man normally assumes that she is way out of his league. still, men are nice to pretty women most of the time, because a man's feelings are hurt much more easily by a beautiful woman than by anyone else, so men are careful not to provoke beautiful women into hurting their feelings. but many men never talk about their feelings or open up; instead they usually keep everything locked up inside.

and what are the reasons some men might become hostile towards women? number 1, for turning us down. number 2, for requiring so much nice behavior from us, when we don't feel so nice inside. number 3, because men are expected in our culture to pursue women, and not the other way around, and a lot of men resent this fact, and resent the fact that women don't come after them all the time. it’s just not fair, we think. but are things really any better for women than they are for men? regardless of the facts, a lot of men really do think so, and the ones that get the angriest about these various supposed grievances end up committing horrible crimes.

but what is life really like if someone is a woman? as a man, i really have no idea. i mean, there have been times when women actually talked to me about it, but it was boring and i tuned it out. but women still seem so mysterious to me. it’s very weird. but this is all because of our culture and the media. there is a lot of sexism everywhere and our notions of gender norms are brainwashed into us by everyone around us, starting on the day we are born. in fact, this very blog post could be misinterpreted as sexist, when really it is just a commentary on the current sad state of affairs on the roles of both genders, which could very well be different from what it was like in the past or will be like in the future.

i know many girls and women apparently seem to be obsessed with their personal appearance. it is quite strange really, this obsession of theirs, but they look so nice. well, some of them, at least. not all women look nice. but the ones that do, really do. but why? what is the point of looking nice? all this effort put into looking nice shows that those women who are obsessed with their personal appearance have very little understanding of men.

now, remember what most men want? sex with women, right? but most men aren't too particular about which women they are willing to do it with. oh they say they are, but that is just bullshit, because if a guy flat out told people that he would have sex with anyone, he would be ridiculed. men might use physical appearance as the main basis to decide whom they pursue, but as for when a woman goes after a man, things work totally differently. practically any guy, if a woman flat out asked him for sex, would say yes, to practically any woman that would do this to him. it seems to me like there are only 4 possible reasons why he wouldn’t. number 1, he could be gay, or a eunuch, or something other than your average heterosexual. gay guys are a whole different story than regular guys, but rest assured they are just as messed up in the head as everyone else, if not more so, because of all the unjustified discrimination they have to put up with. number 2, the guy could have a relationship with someone else that is committed, and be so either so loyal or just so worried about that that he isn't willing to risk sex with anyone else (he could be worried about being found out or worried about feeling guilty). number 3, he could have erectile dysfunction, and be ashamed about it and worried she'd find out, or he could have stds, in which case he doesn’t want to pass them on. number 4, she could be too ugly or too old or have stds or be related to him or be underage or be some other kind of special case. if none of those 4 conditions are met, virtually any man would definitely say yes. which is probably what would happen the vast majority of the time.

women, on the other hand... they seem to be more selective than men. i don’t really know why, but it pisses me off, just like it pisses off other men. even so, we also get pissed off when women are not selective enough, and they settle for guys who aren’t good enough instead of choosing us, because we know we are better than those other guys they are with. in any event, we men will usually find some reason to be really pissed off, and then try to act like we aren't pissed off about anything. this is just our nature, to get pissed off by things, whether or not they make sense to get pissed off about. some men express their anger and frustration with abusive behavior towards others, while more responsible men find ways to calm down and keep their anger inside, without taking it out on other people. some men might just be disappointed or saddened, rather than angry. but usually when recovering from sadness or disappointment, people go through a stage of anger anyway.

but there are actually more women than men in this country, and it stands to reason that women should be less selective than men. so maybe they really are, and maybe the women who are very selective are a statistical aberration. but what of it? it does not really matter, if the ratio is close enough to 1:1. what really matters is that most women really are heterosexual, and they really do, for some strange reason, like men. i don’t understand it, it seems quite silly, but for some reason they actually like us. quite bizarre, if you ask me, because i don’t see why anyone would possibly like a guy; i dislike all males, including myself and every other person of my own gender. but, it’s a good thing that they like us. what is not a good thing is, most women’s whole approach towards guys who come on to them. women seem to instinctively want to reject everything, just reject, reject, reject. they seem to always be waiting for some sort of mystical knight in shining armor who will be very different from all the other men, and they will love him. now, some women have obviously learned not to reject everything, and they have learned to become sluts, and then they become the object of ridicule, because society is sexist and doesn’t show some people the respect that everyone deserves. i don’t really understand why we like to put down women who are very promiscuous, because i think it is much better for women to be promiscuous than to remain celibate, is it not? society does not condemn men who are very promiscuous, but for some reason if a woman is, everyone wants to insult her, as if there is something wrong with women being promiscuous but nothing wrong with men being promiscuous. i, for one, think there is nothing wrong with anyone being promiscuous, and it makes a lot of sense from a darwinian perspective, because you want to have as many offspring as possible to pass on your genes. we should stop passing judgement on people just because their lifestyles seem immoral to those of us who are closed-minded bigots.

anyway, it seems that modern society has very rigid gender roles and we need to break out of them in order to function better. but i reject “feminism” for no other reason than for its name. how can it claim to be about equality, when the very word is the suffix -ism applied to the root "feminine"? feminine is a very woman-oriented word, and does not say anything about men. that word ignores men’s existence entirely. why are there channels on tv for women, or tv news segments about women’s health, but no channels for men or information on men’s specific health needs? why is breast cancer mentioned in public so much more often than prostate or testicular cancer? and why was it such a big deal when a woman who was a cold-blooded killer on death row was put to death? was she in any way less guilty than a male murderer? why does society show such indifference to all the men killed in combat, and instead focus on a few women like jessica lynch and sensationalize their stories? why is it so important in the news when a woman goes missing, but nobody cares if a man goes missing? remember on the titanic, women got to live and men died. but all most feminists care about is helping women, at men’s expense. so, i reject any so-called “feminism”, since much of it is just the rantings and ravings of embittered lesbians who hate men in general. those among the feminists who hate men have probably had very bad personal experiences of being abused by men, or seen it done to other women, but they do not realize that their prejudice makes them into bigots too, since they take the actions of a few individuals and use it to generalize about everyone of an entire gender. i realize that there is also a lot of feminism that is good, and really does promote equality, but feminists seem to turn a blind eye to those among them who are female chauvanist pigs. i embrace what people usually define feminism as, though. i embrace the idea of equality and breaking free from our roles and all of that. and i do think we need to be accepting of people who have different sexual orientations, although i do stress that those other orientations are maladaptive from the standpoint of darwinian evolution. to be adaptive in a darwinian setting, someone has to be able to produce offspring with other people who are adaptive, and the offspring will likewise be adaptive because of the genetics. homosexuality is maladaptive in darwinian terms because there is no way for homosexuals to produce offspring with each other naturally, so they cannot pass on their genetic material to future generations. the only way a homosexual can have offspring is by having sex with someone they don’t enjoy it with, and that can't go on for too many generations before someone calls it quits, and that ends the whole homosexual bloodline (if we assume homosexuality is genetic in origin). if homosexuality is not genetic in origin, however, then it makes no sense to consider heterosexuals and homosexuals (as well as bisexuals, asexuals, and transsexuals) as born that way. and since most people agree homosexuals are born that way, it stands to reason that it is probably genetic in origin, especially since researchers were able to find a gene in fruit flies that makes male fruit flies with that gene be homosexuals 100% of the time. if it were caused by the environment instead of genetics, then people would be able to easily be taught to switch from one sexual orientation to the other, but that simply does not work, as the massive failures of the groups set up to convert homosexuals into heterosexuals has shown us.

although perhaps homosexuality really is an adaptive gene to have in darwinian terms. come to think of it, homosexual men seem a lot more comfortable expressing themselves freely around women than regular men. perhaps homosexuality is a working strategy at getting people of the opposite sex to have sex with you: if you don’t really want to do it and aren’t really interested, that makes it a whole lot easier than if you have an almost uncontrollable urge to do it! and homosexual men have probably been using this strategy for millennia! like recently in the news isaac mizrahi, a gay fashion designer, felt up the boob of scarlett johansson, a buxom young actress. perhaps most gay people are not 100% gay, and this is the secret to how they pass on their genes. i can see how being gay can really work as a way to get women. the only problem is, the women will have to convince the men to suppress their gayness, and find what shreds of heterosexual urges they might have repressed deep down inside. i know historically primitive societies like the ancient jews knew about gayness and made it punishable by death (just read the old testament), which i think actually helped gay people reproduce, since it forced them to live their lives out as if they were heterosexual, and have children, and all that (most of them were probably too afraid of being put to death to do any differently). if we become more accepting of gays, perhaps eventually they will cease to exist, once we are no longer demanding they live straight lifestyles. why would this happen? if you assume darwinian evolution is still taking place and homosexuality is genetic in origin (which both make perfect sense), it is a logical conclusion to draw. in each generation, fewer and fewer homosexuals would reproduce with the opposite sex, and eventually the gene that causes it would become so rare as to be statistically insignificant. but i for one am glad there so many gay men out there: it puts the odds in my favor for getting straight women! whenever i see a gay man, i should thank him, for doing his part to skew the odds in my favor.

anyway, back to men and women. men tend to be the aggressive ones that commit most of the crimes, it seems. and psychologically, i really do think a lot of the basis for it is from sex, or rather the lack thereof. i think most problems in human society are caused as a result of lack of sex, and if we had more sex it could solve many of our problems. lack of sex is what drove that man to get that woman to come to his home and then tie her up with his nephew's help and then rape and kill her. if he had been having sweet lovin’ all along, none of that would have ever happened. has anyone noticed that terrorists all seem to be young men who never get laid? maybe some sex would get them to stop being terrorists. for people like osama bin laden, it would take more sex, than for his young followers. it would probably take 73 virgins. because 72 is what he thinks awaits him in muslim heaven. 73 would be one more, and tip the balance in favor of not being a terrorist anymore. as for problems women suffer that men don’t have to deal with, a lot of them would all go away if women just did 2 things: 1) stop worrying about their looks because it doesn’t matter as much as they think. 2) only vote for other women, and only work for companies run by women. and if you can’t find someone to vote for or somewhere to work, run for office, or start your own company. pretty soon every politician in office and every ceo would be a woman. oh, and i should probably add a 3rd, to tell women how to solve the problem of men who rape and kill them: 3) have consensual sex with the men that nobody else does it with. that keeps them from becoming too deranged in their isolation. and if they are a loony, throw them into an asylum. problem solved.

as for men’s problems, there is just 1 (weird how men have less problems to solve?): 1) stop worrying and just find someone to have sex with already! (of course this only applies to men who have this problem, and plenty of men already have enough sex.) that’s all there is to it; it isn’t really all that complicated to do. well ok, maybe i should add another. 2) don’t do stupid things. number 2 covers a whole lot of things for men that don’t apply to women. since women aren’t the ones who usually do stupid things. reckless, crazy things, the type that men tend to do a lot more than women. don’t do them. it’s not right, and it won’t help improve our public image, which is bad enough already. the image of men is so bad, we probably have lower public approval ratings than blacks or muslims do in this country. blacks because of the disproportionate percentage of criminals who are black, muslims because of the disproportionate percentage of terrorists who are muslim, and the overwhelming majority of all those criminals and terrorists are... wait a minute... men? that is where feminists need to help instead of being part of the problem. help by showing equal amounts of care and compassion for people of both genders and their particular circumstances, rather than picking one side over the other. because most feminists have picked the side that matches the word that they define improperly (“an effort to bring equality and justice to men and women, for the benefit of all concerned”) which is their name. a more accurate definition of most feminism would be “an effort to help women by hurting men, in what is perceived to be a zero-sum game”. and that will never work, because most men, and probably most women too, would wholeheartedly reject such a sexist approach to this issue. and there is no way i would ever support a movement with a name like “feminism”. you might as well ask me to support islamism even though i am not a muslim! good day sir/madam! you can define one gender as good and the other as evil, but that is just pure nonsense, since really we are all the same inside. well, not entirely the same, since certain internal organs are different (prostate, uterus, etc.). anyway, most things are all the same inside. we just don’t know exactly which ones they are quite yet (mitochondrial dna? a vas deferens between men and women?). but, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. there are known knowns, and known unknowns, and unknown knowns, and unknown unknowns. see... there's an old saying in tennessee... i know it's in texas, probably in tennessee... that says, fool me once, shame on... shame on you... fool me... you can't get fooled again.