Reddit reviews Boys Are Stupid, Throw Rocks at Them!

Sorry, but there simply is no excuse for "hetero cis men are fucking disgusting."

There is nothing righteous about it. It is absolutely a bigoted statement. It absolutely dictates identity to a huge chunk of the human race. It is absolutely casual misanthropy. It is a not-so-subtle "influence that plays at one's perceptions and shapes one's language, one's actions," toward the very evil that these supposed crusaders are fighting against: viewing the world in some sort of terms of Self and Other to negate the dignity of individual human beings and justify hatred of the Other.

To reply that such hatred is immaterial--after all, everybody knows hetero cis men rule the world!--or even better, somehow justified, is to live in cognitively fluent narrative purporting to be an accurate representation of the past.

In the real world, today, "hetero cis men" rule very little. They lost most of the jobs in the recession and are a minority of the workforce. They are automatically assumed to be pedophiles, which might have something to do with the fact that men are currently seven percent of elementary school teachers, which might have something to do with the fact that boys are suffering from a severe education gap, which might have something to do with women holding the solid and rising majority of degrees beyond high school, which might have something to do with those unemployment numbers, bringing us full circle, but moreover, might have something to do with the fact that boys are eighty-six percent of adolescent suicides. Note that this statistic comes from that well-known bastion of patriarchal propaganda, the CDC.

But completely apart from the actual damage done by a steady diet of prevailing "progressive" narratives... hetero cis men are fucking disgusting, boys are stupid, throw rocks at them, men can't be trusted to sit next to children on planes, men can't be trusted to be schoolteachers, or whatever, this approach is inherently flawed, and doomed to failure.

Identity based in ANY Self vs. Other paradigm, regardless of whether you identify as an enlightened self-identified progressive or a pathetically ignorant, bigoted, and most importantly, oh-so-privileged "fucking disgusting hetero cis man", is inherently adversarial. You can draw the lines of identity any way you like. Catholics and Protestants, Ottoman Turks and Armenians, Francophone and Anglophone, it doesn't matter. It always presupposes Us against Them.

As such, "challenging" the people you have classified as Other will never work. It's an inherently adversarial approach, and only results in trenches dug deeper.

Instead, you have to empathize with them. You have to understand what's driving them, and not from the standpoint of curing a disease or anything so fucking condescending, but from the standpoint of understanding what legitimate physical and psychological forces are fueling the behavior you view to be problematic so you can hew to those. You're not looking to challenge, you're looking to share, to teach, to help broaden understanding. That's the key to effective teaching. You have to go to them, to figure out the things they already understand and relate to, and then build from there.

Such an approach, rather than seeking out adversaries to define and challenge, seeks out individual human beings on their terms, truly identifies them as they would be identified, and aims at connecting and helping.

Wikipedia entry for the lazy.

And here is the book, which informs girls of the following:

> Girls, here it is―everything you need to know about boys: 1. Boys come from the Stupid Factory. 2. Boys are pretty much smelly and useless. 3. It is possible to have fun with boys, however..... 4. If you decide to keep a boyfriend, he will need to be housebroken.

>Nobody has determined a causal link or anything more than a weak correlation between the males’ lower achievement and the feminization of education. Men did not perform worse; we only saw an increase in female test scores after education was “feminized,” but that may also be due to other benefits from the feminist movement overall. Remember that this was because women were already performing worse in subjects like Math and Science, so it brought them up to (give or take) the same level as men. The “feminization hurts men” argument relies on conjecture, but also on arguments about biological essentialism, so I’ll address these issues at the same time.

Seems you didn't do your homework or that didn't do enough homework. As the feminization of education has in fact harmed men/boys in education. I can only speak about the US (more knowledgeable about the education gap in the US than Canada), but with K-12 teachers being predominantly female the lack of male teachers has meant a lack of male role models in the classroom. This has in fact hurt boys as they don't have anyone from their gender to look up to. When boys do have a male role model in the classroom they in fact do better.

The feminization of the classroom has also meant that girls are graded more favorably over boys when they don't behave like girls in the classroom (ie sitting still, etc etc). And that boys are punished for not acting like girls in the classroom by being displinced more. You also have the whole "boys are dumb girls are smart" attitude which has only contributed to the feminization of schools and that hurt boys.

This is besides how feminism more exactly 2nd wave feminism pushed for more women in college and help create Title IX, a law that despite in language in spirit favors women over that of boys. And has lead to least the US's college enrollment gap and to other issues.

>Yes, people actually claim this is fact (!!). Christina Hoffman Sommers is one famous proponent of this argument and I have no qualms saying that you should never read her work because her “scholarship” is irresponsible at best, and dishonest, close-minded and fear-mongering at worst.

So because you disagree with Hoff that her work must be dismissed and labeled as irresponsible? Instead of writing it off maybe you actually counter what she says.. As too often feminists write her off because of simply who she is and how critical she is of feminism. As heaven forbid one is critical of feminism.

>Biology and socialization are not mutually exclusive. There are very intelligent people who disagree with this statement but the best research I’ve seen shows that brain structure is probably influenced by social circumstances. Thus, brain structure is very likely influenced to some degree by social gender norms.

There are studies showing early on that there may be in fact proof/evidence that boys and girls in fact generally learn differently due to brain chemistry make up. Mind you I am talking when boys and girls start preschool/kindergarten here and even before that. I bring this up as at such a young age they haven't had much of a chance to be shaped by gender norms/socialization. Also there are some studies of late (tho I think they are flawed due to study methods) showing women overall smarter than men and its why women test better than men do.

>The teachers I’ve met are also largely concerned with student achievement at the individual level.

Most teachers are. That doesn't mean at a macro level there aren't issues that the feminization of education has in fact harm boys/men despite you thinking otherwise. As looking at the micro level its very easy to dismissed how the feminization has harmed boys and helped or dare I say priviledge girls.

>Male-dominated work pays more than female-dominated work.

Not totally true.

>Thus, the assumption that all boys who drop out do so because they are disadvantaged must be nuanced.

You seem pretty quick to dismissed any such disadvantage boys may or in fact have in the classroom. Seems you don't want to admit boys have any said disadvantage at all in the classroom. Or more so face any harm in the classroom. While I can only more speak on the education issue in US I bet if look into Canada I find many of the same reason to why there is an education gap in Canada much like there is in the US. Also least US wise the college enrollment is the biggest among the poor with more poor women enrolled in college than that of poor men. I bring this up as you are quick to point out men drop out of high school due the so called allure of making money, but seems you have not at all account for one's economic situation. As US wise there is a lot more outreach for women to go to college with scholarships aimed at them besides outreach programs, none of which are there really for men. And so you likely have men seeing and that thinking college isn't even a possibility for them.

>I suspect it has more to do with patriarchy and the above-mentioned labour market draw than biology (though all three might easily play into it)

It is easy to blame the "patriarchy" especially when you even admit to no looking into why boys are less engaged in school than girls (hint: lack of male role models, lack of empowerment at home, and outreach programs likely be your reason).

Anti feminism isn't woman hating or cruelty wtf. Feminism =/= women? Nah.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/misandry-men-hate-crime-women-sexism-racism-feminism-a8586591.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-cant-we-hate-men/2018/06/08/f1a3a8e0-6451-11e8-a69c-b944de66d9e7_story.html?utm_term=.a5c1cbc4b59f

https://www.amazon.com/CafePress-Male-Tears-Unique-Coffee/dp/B00OOGO278

https://twitter.com/hashtag/killallmen?lang=en

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/10/why-misandry-and-misogyny-should-be-treated-differently-when-it-comes-hate

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

https://twitter.com/hashtag/menarescum?lang=en

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/evez7m/finally-a-new-emoji-to-mock-men-pinching-hand-emoji-update

https://twitter.com/hashtag/banmen?lang=en


My point is that it's fairly mainstream and socially accepted to hate on men. People using their real name and even those with blue checkmarks are free to say whatever they want about men on social media, they are able to write articles in mainstream publications about how men should be hated. There are zero repercussions for any of this. There is MaleTears merch and " "Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them" T-Shirts on Amazon FFS.

Create a twitter account, start up a #AllWomenAreCunts hashtag or something and see how long your account stays up. Go to the NYT and tell them you want to write anti female articles. Go to Amazon with "Girls are dumb" merchandise and see if they will approve of, stock, and sell it.

Did she just finish reading this book?:
http://www.amazon.com/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

I didn't even know it was a "book" too. This is outrageously fucking disgusting. Read the description at amazon. This is going to be a movie that literally vilifies young boys and endorses violence against them. Fucking hell, sometimes I wish I never started questioning feminism and society's myriad blind bigotries.

http://www.amazon.com/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

Immediately thought of these guys... the brand name escapes me, but looks like they are part of some nameable franchise.

Is this a feminist board game?

Edit: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0761135936/ref=mw_dp_mdsc?dsc=1 there's a product description for the book which I can't imagine is too different.

I'd say the guy is more a careless fuckwad than a feminist.

Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them

I'll just leave this here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

> I've seen guys wearing T-shirts proclaiming the merits of slapping around women.

Sure you have. Maybe there's some really fringe thing that you sort of remember seeing once but so-sorry, you can't find a link right now - but I can find things that make fun of violence against men on a major, nationally accepted website: amazon.com

http://www.amazon.com/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

Can you show me something similar directed at women on a mainstream site like that?

> "society tells girls it's okay for them to hit men." Got any citations for this?

A great example is this ad, which runs on mainstream network television. It features violence against men and there are no consequences for the abuser:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y09z8lwOEYA

or this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJejr9jRyZs

Can you show me anything even remotely similar that's actually aired on national television?

> "Women initiate violence at least 50% of the time. I can cite more than a hundred studies that show that." So cite them then.

• Davis. R. L. (2010). Domestic Violence-related deaths. Journal of Aggression, Conflict, and Peace Research, 2 (2), 44-52. ("when domestic violence-related suicides are combined with domestic homicides, the total numbers of domestic violence-related deaths are higher for males than females.")
  
  
• Anderson, K. L. (2002). Perpetrator or victim? Relationships between intimate partner violence and well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 851-863. (Data consisted of 7,395 married and cohabiting heterosexual couples drawn from wave 1 of the National Survey of Families and Households <NSFH-1>. In terms of measures: subjects were asked "how many arguments during the past year resulted in 'you hitting, shoving or throwing things at a partner.' They were also asked how many arguments ended with their partner, 'hitting, shoving or throwing things at you.'" Author reports that, "victimization rates are slightly higher among men than women <9% vs 7%> and in cases that involve perpetration by only one partner, more women than men were identified as perpetrators <2% vs 1%>.")
  
  
• Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680. (Meta-analyses of sex differences in physical aggression indicate that women were more likely than men to “use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently.”
  
  
• Capaldi, D. M. & Crosby, L. (1997). Observed and reported psychological and physical aggression in young, at-risk couples. Social Development, 6, 184-206. (A sample of 118 young men and their dating partners were surveyed regarding their own physical aggression as well as that of their partners. Findings reveal that 31% of men and 36% of women engaged "in an act of physical aggression against their current partner.")
  
  
• Capaldi, D. M., Kim, H. K., & Shortt, J. W. (2007). Observed initiation and reciprocity of physical aggression in young at-risk couples. Journal of Family Violence, 22 (2) 101-111. (A longitudinal study using subjects from the Oregon Youth and Couples Study. <see above> Subjects were assessed 4 times across a 9 year period from late adolescence to mid-20's. Findings reseal that young women's rate of initiation of physical violence was "two times higher than men's during late adolescence and young adulthood.")
  
  
• Carrado, M., George, M. J., Loxam, E., Jones, L., & Templar, D. (1996). Aggression in British heterosexual relationships: a descriptive analysis. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 401-415. (In a representative sample of British men <n=894> and women <n=971> it was found, using a modified version of the CTS, that 18% of the men and 13% of the women reported being victims of physical violence at some point in their heterosexual relationships. With regard to current relationships, 11% of men and 5% of women reported being victims of partner aggression.)
  
  
• Cogan, R., & Ballinger III, B. C. (2006). Alcohol problems and the differentiation of partner, stranger, and general violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21 (7), 924-935. (A sample of 457 college men and 958 college women completed the CTS. Results revealed that significantly more men than women <35.4% vs 26.0%> reported being victimized by their partners.)
  
  should I go on? I seriously have more than 100 of these.
  

Also: http://www.cafepress.es/boysrstupid

And of course: http://www.amazon.com/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

http://www.amazon.es/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1406228837&sr=8-1&keywords=throw+rocks+at+them

Feminists got no problems with this shit though:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XpxsyR_0HHI/TzRuIoqjs8I/AAAAAAAAAZc/8e-GoHbn2Mc/s1600/lt00002.gif

http://worldonline.media.clients.ellingtoncms.com/img/photos/2004/01/30/naSTUPIDBOYSPROTEST_t640.jpg?a6ea3ebd4438a44b86d2e9c39ecf7613005fe067

Or the bullshit misandrist book it spawned:

http://www.amazon.com/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Even worse, this shit demonizes little boys by targetting little girls perception of them. Feminism is a hateful ideology. If it cared about gender equality it would be right on tacking this kind of hateful shit instead of FINDING THINGS to be offended by. Why do they have to go over the top finding things to be offended about? Because the ideology is fucking irrelevant now. There is no institutionalism misogyny and there is no rape culture. It's 2014, not 1914, the ideology just makes shit up to remain relevant now and the low IQ imbeciles and poor fuckers indoctrinated in colleges eat it all up.

I'm just gonna leave all this shit here... fuck feminists, fuck blue pillers and the SJWs who support it. They support bigotry, and for all their talk of oppression, it is ironic that all they need to do to find the people who perpetuate hatred and intolerance is look in the mirror.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51pVGiq-rHL._SL500_AA280_.jpg

http://www.starstore.com/acatalog/D_&_G_Boys_Are_Stupid_bc_09.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Boys-Stupid-Throw-Rocks-Them/dp/0761135936

This is exactly the sort of mentality that makes me want to avoid working around women. It seems even the slightest interaction is so often treated as an opportunity to gloat, practice one-upmanship, and tell us what a useless bunch we all supposedly are. Tell me, is there anything men are actually any good at? It seems that the attitude of modern women is to insist at being as good at, if not better at anything men can do. We definitely seem to be entering an era of female chauvinism. And chauvinism really is the right word: 'the technique or practice of gaining an advantage or feeling of superiority over another person'. It's like the 1950s-60s, just flipped on its head: whereas it seems many men in that era tended to scornfully look down on women and patronise them at every opportunity, now certain women seem to take glee in doing the same to us. As if we haven't been through enough with the massive shit-test that is feminism, getting divorce-raped, deprived of contact with our kids, discriminated against in education and employment, still having to shoulder the burden of all the dangerous, dirty, shitty jobs that women don't want to do, having women demand more and more while giving less and less in return, now we have to suffer women peevishly telling us that even our greater physical strength is redundant. And I've got to say, that contrasts sharply with the female friend of mine who told me that "only men who do bodybuilding have 'proper' bodies". Don't forget, it's wrong to body-shame women, but average men's bodies are fit for little else but shovelling shit, it seems. Of course, if it wasn't for men's bodies, it's obvious where we would all be right now: living in grass huts and subsisting on foraged food, at best.

God damn, why can't you just be happy you helped someone. IDGAF what your co-worker said, you don't have to use it as an excuse to shit all over men. We've got enough fucking problems right now, in case you didn't realise.

You should get a copy of this book, it sounds right up your street.

Edit: I'm guessing you work in catering? Probably the worst boss I ever had was a female chef who used to treat me like absolute crap and call me a 'hysterical puff' in Italian. I've a feeling she was a man-hating so-and-so too.