Will Men Ever Change?

I see women like her as setting a standard for women that yes, we can be firm and no bullshit and very strong in our arguments and beliefs, and we don’t have to always hedge our opinions with sweetness or softness. We don’t have to listen or be nice to male losers whose goal is to oppress us, even if they aren’t aware that this is what they’re doing.

There are plenty of men who are extreme misogynists, and plenty of men and boys listen to those men, so why can’t we as women have as many women leaders who are also strong and aggressive in their opinions, but in favor of helping women protect ourselves.

its not like she’s advocating for harming men as men like Andrew Tate advocate for harming women. I’ve shifted my understanding of “extreme” to actually reflect what is extreme. It’s extreme to advocate for coercion, rape, domestic violence and abuse. Advocating for women’s best interests never seems to include those genuine harms that those who supposedly advocate for mens interests actively support.

So unless a woman is advocating for what men like tate and all those other misogynistic assholes are advocating for, I no longer can see her as extreme. What’s extreme is expecting women to tolerate and submit to living in a world that perpetually degrades and harms us because we are female. It’s extreme to expect women and girls to suffer male violence and then submit to continue living among the men that continue to harm us with few or no repercussions. When looking at it with the patriarchal-colored glasses removed, it’s far more extreme to tolerate the world as it currently is.

That shift in my understanding of what defines “extreme” has totally opened my eyes to what we are all expected to tolerate. I hope more women can shift their understanding and take off their patriarchal glasses.

Princella is pretty great. If you don't care... why are you commenting? Just scroll on... I'm interested for a number of reasons. I can be curious, while also centre-ing myself in my life, and having high standards. Additionally, I'm peripherally curious as to how I can best raise a boy, if I have one.

Outside influences are one thing, but internal 'system errors' are another. We all know how prevalent LVMism is. So, what makes a man grow up to be HV rather than LV? Wouldn't we all want all/most men to be HV? Wouldn't you like to live in a world where you don't have to be so guarded because men take responsibility for themselves? (I'm not criticising any woman for being guarded. It's a requirement in the current paradigm, and recommended. Vet, vet, vet.) I accept that the situation is what it is, and the older I get the more I let go of any illusion. Also, I'm in no way saying it's womens', nor your, nor my, job in any way to make this change for them/train them. I'm simply wondering whether it's possible to imagine a world like this, given the emergence of a different cultural paradigm, for example; or, if these tendencies are truly intrinsic, and we are doomed forever.

So I commented because it’s very clear that a lot of women aren’t aware of the basic biology that contributes to these systems and behaviors, and how that biology is genetically predetermined, because we are a sexually reproductive species.

Male and female reproductive strategies are in perpetual conflict with each other, so there will never be a world in which all men are high value, because in order for all men to be high value, the numbers of men would need to significantly decrease until all low value men are denied the opportunity to reproduce, in addition to society having to change such that men are not given synthetic advantages that allow low behavior to continue.

Patriarchy is a reproductive strategy for men. Patriarchy synthetically elevated the number of low value men that would have access to reproduce. You'll notice now that this is not happening in countries like the US, there are increasing rates of male violence and males/the patriarchs are freaking out, because men are not being synthetically handed pussy on a platter, like they often used to be.

As with any other species, the females reproductive role means that she has to be selective because she expends far more of her valuable resources in order to reproduce. The male only needs to get enough of his genetic material into enough females that a few of his offspring survive. This puts us in perpetual conflict, and it's the reason why things like hook up culture were so detrimental to women. Yes, of course, it would be wonderful if men could behave as rational human beings, and treat women with kindness and respect, but unfortunately, we are a biological species before we are a rational species, and biologically, men are driven to use whatever strategies necessary to get their genetic material passed on.

Now that more and more women are in control of our reproductive rights, and have taken back our natural position as the agents and determiners of the genetic future of the species, all of the men who on some level are aware that they have nothing to offer and are not worth reproducing, are freaking out about it.

We can absolutely build a future in which women have back our natural biological power as the genetic determiners of the species, and this should never have been taken from us because it has severely fucked up not only our species, but literally the entire planet, but this will never be received well, because that means that there is a significant number of men who would not be able to pass on their genetics, because they aren't good enough to be reproduced. Because of those men, we will never have a society of only high-value men, unless we actually remove those low value men from their ability to reproduce and their ability to contribute their own biased narrative into culture. I think that this is only possible if we do not have a 50/50 ratio of men and women. It would have to be heavily skewed towards women, so that any low value men as a population are reduced, and don't have an opportunity to pass on their genetics.

There are some examples of female communities who have recognized this, and there are examples throughout the animal kingdom in which females have secured their reproductive futures through various biological and social means.

Testosterone drives men not directly to violence, but to hierarchy and competition, and hierarchy creates violence and competition creates the desire to dominate. In order to move away from a dominant/submissive hierarchical culture, we need to recognize that low value men pose a threat because of their reproductive strategy, and they will not give that up because they will not be able to pass on their genetics.

It is biologically natural for a significant portion of males to not be able to pass on their genetics when they are synthetically inflated in population. So if you were thinking about raising a male child, maybe think about not doing that and raising another female instead so that we can return our society to its natural biological and reproductive organization.

Please don’t look at this, as if we are doomed, it only requires women recognizing our natural power and status as the genetic determiners of the species and reducing mens access to us to Start making a difference. If animals, with far less intelligent than ourselves, can do this, then, so can we.

Bonobos, who are our closest living relatives together with chimps, live in a true matriarchy. They are a peaceful, non-territorial species, since the ruling female coalition effectively suppresses and weeds out male aggression. In a way, that’s what FDS and female empowerment goes towards – selecting shitty men out of the gene pool. Back to the original questions, I think it’s both nature and nurture, but I couldn’t tell you at what ratio, plus, the two are often intertwined. I just hope that the movement grows, because men seem to become more and more unhinged every day.

Unhinged is the correct word.

Thanks for your input. I agree, all true. Howevere I do believe there are some HVM out there, just that they are in the minority. I think this is the FDS standpoint as well, if I understand correctly.