Illegal Man

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

It has come to my attention that it is illegal to be a man or male in general.

Women are allowed to do, basically, whatever they want. Women can even rape, steal, and kill, without too much penalty. Most of the time in murder cases, women get accused as “accomplices” or they get manslaughter, not murder 1 charges. This is because females are the privileged specie. Men and women are different species. Because gender is a larger divide of biology than specie. A male human has more in common with a male dog, than a male human has in common with a female human. Specie begins with gender, not type.

Gender is most important
Then race
Then specie.

A male dog has more in common with a male beetle, than either has in common with a female raccoon. This is real science, fact, and you can’t argue with facts, so don’t even try. Just accept and trust what I say at face value, don’t ever, ever doubt me. How dare you even try?

2

Your post is an absurd set of claims minus any substantiation. It would appear as though you have feelings of sexism that are so emotional that you are unable to reason them out into any kind of articulate position. This kind of stuff should be in the sandbox, or maybe you just shouldn’t even say it unless you have something to back your claims. Especially since they are so absurd at first glance. You really have to try harder, unless you’re only trying to be a half witted troll, and in that case, maybe try harder to be something else. So yeah…just try harder.

3

In the united states,

A combination of women, blacks, and jews, have all teamed together to demonize “the white man”, whitey. From this cooperation, of many versus a few, white males are finally receiving a lot of damage. Part of this damage comes from the male female specie divide.

I’ll begin with examples, since commoners need easy examples to understand philosophical concepts.

A woman can “rape” a man, or even a teenage boy, and none of us, nobody, really takes it seriously. A woman “forcing” herself onto men, is not a crime. Why not? Well, I know people here are too cowardly to answer simple questions, as the notorious trolls prove. So I will be answering my own questions. Why isn’t “female rape” a crime? Because it doesn’t exist, objectively. There is no such thing, in nature, or in civilization, of women “raping” men. It’s an impossibility. Sure an ugly woman can have sex with a beautiful man, but, who cares? He doesn’t have to take care of the child. And sex is about children, not pleasure. So liberals are wrong to say sex is only about pleasure. Sex is about children.

Women essentially can have sex with whomever they want to, have children, and never be punished.

Now reverse the equation. Can men have sex with women, without any hangups? No. Because male sexuality is a crime in and of itself. Let me repeat, for the slow minded and dim witted.

Male sexuality is a crime in and of itself.
Male sexuality is a crime in and of itself.
Male sexuality is a crime in and of itself.
Male sexuality is a crime in and of itself.

Why is this? Physics. Nature. Reality. Call it whatever you want to. Life is not fair. Gender is not equal. There is no such thing as “rape” in insects and the animal kingdom. What is called rape, is instead, an act of force of males against females. If males want to have sex, then “might makes right” in nature. Nobody really can stop alpha males from having sex whenever desired. Instead, what happens in nature, is that the fitter, stronger, and bigger bodies dictate the rules against everybody else. There is no “god” to step in, and take revenge against males who do whatever they want.

Humanity is a little different. Due to morality, culture, religion, and social laws, males are never, not once, allowed to “be male” and unleash male sexuality. So this leads to sexual repression. And mr reasonable will cut in here and say, “u mad cuz u cant get laid while i get all these fine, hot crack hoz”. That is beside the point. Because that doesn’t mean that the male, mr reasonable, is “choosing” to get laid. He’s not. And you’re not. You don’t have choice. Instead, in human circles, only women have “choice”. And what is choice?

Nevermind, most people here are too stupid, or too trollish, to answer simple, simple fucking questions. This isn’t a philosophy forum, where simple questions are asked and answers. Instead you have to use a fucking crowbar, and pry simple answers out of minds, like mr. reasonable. Because he’ll do all in his power to drag a good thread down, with him, into the gutter with his crack hoz. He will not answer simple, simple, child questions. He should. This is a philosophy forum, IS IT NOT? No, it’s not.

A good faith argument means that everybody, especially the creator of a threat, is obligated to ask and answer SIMPLE FUCKING QUESTIONS.

WHAT IS CHOICE? You don’t know, and, I don’t forgive you for your ignorance.

4

But we are in nature. Alpha male is a concept that you need to understand as evolving over time. Besides that, the rest of your post is just more repetitive droning and self serving nonsense. Repeating something over and over isn’t the same as demonstrating it. I also think you’re having trouble with what we mean when we say “equal”. There are differences between the genders, but not such to warrant that we allow brute force between them to be justified. Just because men are stronger physically doesn’t give them the right to take what they want. Human beings, for the purposes of civilization would rather have the benefits it gains from giving each person equal regard than those it loses when they don’t. Anyway, alpha males can still get laid, we’re still in a state of nature. So your view makes it seem like you’re confused about the world and that you’re some kind of beta male, or whatever you’d call it in bigot speak. Drone on buddy. You’ve got a lot of thinking to do.

5

Here is the fact you’ve missed and are oblivious to, like everything else in life outside of your purple haze, smoke some more pot crack.

You missed the idea of sex. If a guy and girl have sex, then who is “choosing”? You falsely believe that, because you have sex, that you chose to. I know your egotism. You don’t think or empathize with other people, like a typical person. You’re average, common, lack imagination. You don’t realize that it is not you choosing to have sex, even though you may “receive” sex. Receiving sex is not choosing sex. You can’t see the difference. And because you’re blind of this fact, I know the case and see things for what they are.

Sex is not evidence of choice. You understand? No, you don’t, because your philosophy is very childish like most. You haven’t grown up into an adult.

Sex is not evidence of choice. Sex is not evidence of choice. Sex is not evidence of choice. Sometimes two unwilling people have sex, sometimes one side is willing and not other, sometimes both sides are willing. But choice is something different.

Someday you may learn, and become intelligence, although I doubt it, and begin to do actual, real philosophy. When that day comes, you’ll learn this lesson that I teach.

It is illegal to be a man and have male sexuality. Because whenever a male imposes his “choice” over women, then this is, technically, definitively, literally, illegal, and also morally bad and evil. It’s the reason why it’s technically impossible for women to rape men. It just doesn’t happen, not in human civilization, not even in nature.

6

Your statement indicates that you feel powerless over yourself, and that you can only get laid when it’s granted to you like out of some kind of charity or something. If you don’t think it’s possible for a man to decide he wants to have sex with a woman and then to make it happen in a way that isn’t violent or impossible, then you’re not a man. If you understood that what’s “alpha” evolves over time, then you’d realize that the new way to do it is to work around the barriers that you’ve presented. You believe what you do because you’re unable, unfit and therefore can’t exercise your will in a civilized world. You want to go back to a time where you can just rape women because you’re horny and stronger than them? If so, then it’s because your concepts are dated. We are always in a state of nature. Certain kinds people can choose who they want to have sex with. Your experiences are not representative of what’s normal. Also, you seem to have a retarded conception of what it means for something to be legal. I wont humor your nonsense about what you think “real philosophy” is. My credentials speak for themselves.

7

You basically admitted that I’m right.

We agree that it is depraved for a male to want to have sex, without a female’s permission. We agree on this. So you agree with me.

Now you also must agree that it is not depraved, and even seen as a good thing, that a female can have sex with a male without his permission, or worse, that no such circumstance can exist.

I already know you agree with me, so no point responding, although I know you will pathetically attempt an emotional, ad hom cheap shot, as is your tendency. And it is also your tendency to fail miserably, and completely miss the point of philosophical discussions. For example, my original point has very little, or nothing to do with me personally, although we can go down that road someday, another time, when I have more luxury time. But for now, I will only stick to the topic.

Which is,

It is illegal and evil for men to impose sexuality onto women, but legal and good for women to impose sexuality onto men. And this is a given, and everybody agrees. And once this is fully realized, then people can begin to see my point for what it is. The point is, you cannot even begin to imagine how female sexuality could be “illegal”.

You can’t even see the contrary circumstances. So I know you’re trolling, poorly. Or you’re just that dense. Maybe try laying off the drugs for a few years.

8

You’re the type of person who thinks they are scientific when they are not. You make yourself and the word “Science” look like crap.

9

For those untainted from mr reasonable BS and trollage,

For those of you who are more innocent, open minded, and enter into threads with good faith,

You will see now that I am proving what I originally meant. There is nothing “wrong” with a female having sex with whomever she pleases, if she pleased to have sex with many partners. But there is something wrong, very wrong, with the idea that males can have sex with whomever men want. This is troubling. Is it a double standard? That doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter if life isn’t fair.

It matters if you people, can understand some very basic points about life, and existence. I can apply all of this to the animal kingdom, or insects, or even cellular biology, if so inclined. All of it proves that there is something bad, negative, evil, illegal, about male sexuality, but not female sexuality. Female sexuality is immediately, automatically, given the benefit of the doubt.

And presumed innocent. A very dangerous premise, if false.

10

Was this my weakest point? Surely you can do better with your retorts?

11

Man is illegal, because of sex, mostly.

What is sex? A penis penetrates the hymen, piercing it, and spilling blood. Isn’t this an act of violence? Actually yes, it is, and even feminists will agree with me on this point. Therefore, we can all conclude, that the male is the aggressor and cause of violence, not the female. Females are victims of sexual violence, and never can be considered perpetrators of it. Even in pedophilia cases where women have sex with young men, 12-18, then these are not treated seriously, by comparison to male pedophilia of girls of the same age. Male pedophiles are sick and evil. Female pedophiles are much less so, if at all. While most men agree, a young man or boy who is the “victim” of a woman’s sexual aggression, is lucky. He is a stud. Because males who have sex, are seen as intrinsically better than those who do not have sex.

Even on this forum, a couple of dipshits routinely make personal, ad hominid attacks, based on an accusation of “you can’t get laid”, as if this is a bad or negative trait, applied to men. The reverse is not true for women. If a woman has promiscuous sex, then she is attacked and denigrated as a slut.

Why this double standard between men and women, males and females? What is this about? Is it cultural?

No, cultural relativism does not apply to sexuality. Because no matter where you go around the world, human biology does not change. There is nowhere in the world that men have hymens to be pierced and lose male virginity. In fact, there truly is no such thing as “male virginity”, since sex is not an asset belonging to male, but to females. Therefore females are born with an intrinsic asset in life, while men do not, and must compensate for this lack of intrinsic value.

How do males compensate, as a specie, for the lack of sexual asset? Money, currency, and material assets is the answer. Men attempt to secure material assets, and then trade these for female sex. Asset trades for asset. This is usually done in the form of a house and home. Men trade a home, in a promise of marriage, and he is then guaranteed sex from the woman, his wife. This is the beginning of the institution of marriage and human cohabitation.

But that was 3000 years ago. Today, the world has changed. Women don’t need houses anymore. Women have it even better. Now women work “equally” with men, and get money, on top of their sexual value. So now men lose the money, currency, house, and marriage. Women have material assets AND sexual assets. What are men left with? The answer is nothing. Nothing at all. In the united states, this is producing radical results, such as the MGTOW movement, men going their own way. It is also causing the downfall and destruction of “traditional marriage”. This is a codeword for sex. Females no longer NEED to give sex, for a house and secure income. Now women have it all, literally, actually, materially. There is almost no area of life that females are not ready to invade and pervade with stupid drama, petty bullshit, and constant yapping and blathering.

So the postmodern man is in a unique situation in human history.

The fact about sex has always been there, and never changed. Even mr reasonable agrees with me and admits the basic points, on this topic. He mentioned in his first response how men need to “get around” certain barriers. Mr reasonable does this by drugging his victims, a classic method, and having sex with women after feeding them a cocktail of drugs including pot, cocaine, and crack rocks. He considers this “scoring”. I consider it, bad form and bad taste. A degenerate’s method of seduction. Similar to how college fraternity young men put roofies in young girl’s drinks and rapes them in a frat house or bathroom. Drugging women is a common method of “taking” a woman’s virginity or sex.

I would never do such a thing, but many of you, men, would, and will. Men do many heinous things for sex, which we’ll discuss later.

For now, I want to return to the point of this thread. The essential, innate, natural state of sexuality for man, is illegality. You are automatically worthless (worth zero) from birth, and your sexual compulsion is automatically a crime within human civilization. This is a necessary premise and morality in societies. Because male sex must be regulated in a similar method of regulating female sex. Society and civilization depend upon sexual regulation of the overall specie. Civilization criminalizes many behaviors, and hopes to deter or change them. This causes repression, not actual deterrence. For example, murder, theft, and rape are all illegal, but they still occur despite illegality, why?

Liberals don’t know and can’t figure this question out. Because they never pin criminality on an innate state of existence after birth. They don’t consider crime “natural”. To liberalism, crime is “unnatural”, and therefore, won’t make sense.

Just like sexuality. If you consider male sexuality “natural”, then you immediately run into moral and ethical problem after problem.

Most of you are too stupid to have an intelligent, worthwhile, philosophical conversation of this magnitude, but I will help a few of you further, to learn about reality, truth, and existence. You will learn the truth of sexuality, and the reason why every male born, is automatically evil, bad, immoral, and illegal, from the point of view of “civilization”. Outside civilization and human history, there really is no such thing as “crime” in nature.

Conclusions:

[b]All crime and immorality is ultimately derived from sex.

The male sex act is commonly known as “original sin”.

All men are born criminals, from the point of view of society, civilization, and women.[/b]

12

Is this supposed to be a serious discussion?

13

He wants things to be like they were many years ago, where you could buy women and slaves then force them to have sex with their owner.
All this rights nonsense needs to stop.

14

I agree Dan. I think that for someone to advocate for something like this is a sign of weakness because they’re unfit to compete in a modern state of nature. It’s a coping mechanism for the impotent to yearn for things to be other than the way they are.

15

The concept of insightfoul is more wrong than right.

The paradigm of the relationship between the spouces has been changed a lot. Those, who do not understand it, find it difficult to adjust.

IN the past, both men and women tend to cater different needs of the family. Their duties for the family were complementary, not same. Like, a man had to earn and a woman had to run the family from that earnings.

This has been changed. Now, both of them cater to the same duties. Both have to earn so that entails that both have to share the equal burden in running the families too. That is what troubles most of the males. They see it as an insult but there is no other option because we have built the society in that way.

The paradigm has been shifted from dependance on each other to companionship. Now, the spouces have to treat each other just as office colleagues, not more than that. Though, there may be some exceptions.

The same is true in the case of the sex too. Nowdays, having sex is not much different from working jointly on some project in the office. A new colleague for every new project. There is not much real commitment left. It is becoming more and more casual.

If it does not work out good with this one, i will try with someone else.

This use to apply to both; men and women.

But, the point that is missing here is that the ultimate purpose of the sex is not mere having temporary pleasure during orgasm, but that intimacy that manifests from that. But, that requires both time and commitment.

Though, contrary to the insightfoul, i feel that the situation is worse for women than men as they ( women) have to bear both of the burdens in most of the cases because of social and biological demands. In my opinion, the women in the less developed contries are better placed than the west. And, that is due to the existence of joint families in the east, which allows both of the spouces to go out for the work but that arragement is almost a fairytale in the west now.

with love,
sanjay

16

“Social Progress” has to do with reducing human suffering, usually, and also has to do with streamlining the economy so that everything is “stable”. Moderns serve capitalism but they also serve human pleasures, medicines and reducing human suffering. If you want to go back to cave man days and eat each other, I think you will soon run out of BBQ sauce.

17

Dan,

Every pleasure or progress does not reduce the human suffering by default. Some do but some add to it also.
The key is to bridle the progess in the right direction and extent also.
Extremes are always troublesome, either back or forth.

with love,
sanjay

18

Fuck! The fact that I’m not in jail right now means that everyone thinks I’m a woman! (or at least the cops do).

19

Just don’t wear a dress, few males have the legs for it, even kilts. :slight_smile: