Toxic Femininity Common fallacies women and feminists use against men

[Buried Alive 2.0]

As we all know feminism and women are all about manipulating society to get even more advantages to women while destroying men's lives. Here are some fallacies they commonly use:

• Apex fallacy: using men at the top, which are a minority, as a basis to define how men's lives are, while conveniently forgetting that most men have awful lives, much worse than women;
• False dilemma: if you're against feminism you don't support gender equality.
• Cherry picking: choosing specific facts to drive feminism while the reality is completely different. This is used on statistics, people and just about anything that could give them and advantage;
• Motte and bailey fallacy: using a reasonable and moderate points to drive an extremist one. A very famous one is "Feminism helps men too.", meanwhile feminist politicians are passing laws that screw men;
• No true scotsman: this is when they try to "exclude" the more radical feminists from their movement to gain support. When some feminist says "kill all men!" others will say "she's not a real feminist";
• Strawman: misrepresenting the opposing argument to easily dismantle it. Telling a feminist you don't support feminism will most likely get a response, like "why do you hate?". The truth is that being against feminism doesn't necessarily mean you hate women;
• Ad hominem: attacking the person instead of the person's argument to discredit it and dismiss it. "Shut up, incel!";
• Faulty generalization: assuming that because men are more violent overall, men also must be more violent with their wives and girlfriends than women with their boyfriends and husbands. Studies show that women are actually more violent towards their partners than men. Studies have showed that women are also more violent towards children and elderly people than men. (credit to @Balding Subhuman ).

Feminism uses many more fallacies and manipulation tactics than these, but these seem the most common. The movement is entirely based and dependent on twisting the truth, lying, and refusing to accept criticism.

 

[Epedaphic]

Nice post also high iq. Unfortunately if we bring any of these up they will claim they are tools of the patriarchy or some stupid shit like that. Their hysteria justifies anything they do or say.

 

[MillionBashStream97]

We are living in a female supremacists world, and while this threads is perfect (Not overly long, objectively correct, and to the point like a punch), females (feminist or not) and simps could care less about a single word of what you wrote.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

Nice post also high iq. Unfortunately if we bring any of these up they will claim they are tools of the patriarchy or some stupid shit like that. Their hysteria justifies anything they do or say.

We are living in a female supremacists world, and while this threads is perfect (Not overly long, objectively correct, and to the point like a punch), females (feminist or not) and simps could care less about a single word of what you wrote.

Yeah, this knowledge of how they lie and twist the truth is very effective in destroying all their arguments. Our lives are proof of how wrong they are. But they will just dismiss you and call you incel/nazi/fascist. Argument can be won easily, but it doesn't matter because they refuse to see.

 

[blackedpiller]

When a movement/ideology uses all these Fallacies, then it is not a good one to follow, especially for longevity.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

When a movement/ideology uses all these Fallacies, then it is not a good one to follow, especially for longevity.

Takes a lot of cognitive dissonance to run feminism

 

[verybasedindeed]

High IQ thread.

I'm just confused about this point:

False dilemma: if you're against feminism you don't support gender equality.

Supporting gender equality is not automatically feminism?

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

Supporting gender equality is not automatically feminism?

No, because in truth feminism doesn't want equality. It's a supremacist movement.

 

[verybasedindeed]

No, because in truth feminism doesn't want equality. It's a supremacist movement.

I see. And feminists demand equality of outcome more than they demand equality of opportunity.

For example, you can give women and men the equal opportunity to fight each other or compete in sports, BUT men are going to beat women every time because we are superior to them in sports/fighting.

So equality of outcome is not possible in that sense and feminists blame it on the "patriarchy".

 

[Shigeru Miyamoto]

Yuri bezmenov was right

 

[ControlledInsanity]

Nobody who actually needs to see this information is ever going to see it.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

I see. And feminists demand equality of outcome more than they demand equality of opportunity.

For example, you can give women and men the equal opportunity to fight each other or compete in sports, BUT men are going to beat women every time because we are superior to them in sports/fighting.

So equality of outcome is not possible in that sense and feminists blame it on the "patriarchy".

Not even equality of outcome, outright supremacy. See "women in the workplace" and "women in academia". There is strong push to put women into leadership roles much more than everything else. No push for women as trade workers. And in academia women already outnumber men, yet the effort continues and they still see themselves as oppressed. All this is called gender-fairness. I remember reading an article a while ago about how gender-fairness metrics don't achieve their max value at 50% or equality. This means the more women are benefited, the more equality there is.

 

[verybasedindeed]

Not even equality of outcome, outright supremacy. See "women in the workplace" and "women in academia". There is strong push to put women into leadership roles much more than everything else. No push for women as trade workers. And in academia women already outnumber men, yet the effort continues and they still see themselves as oppressed. All this is called gender-fairness. I remember reading an article a while ago about how gender-fairness metrics don't achieve their max value at 50% or equality. This means the more women are benefited, the more equality there is.

You know, I realised something recently that made me laugh: We're currently seeing men at their worst, and women at their best. It's the last part that really makes me shake my head: We're currently seeing women at their best!

The system artificially bolsters them in all walks of life. They are given limitless scholarships and careers. They have pussy privilege. They have never had it better than they have it now, and they are still less competent than men.

Meanwhile, men are abused and degraded in every possible way, and we still effortlessly come out on top in all aspects of life.

Does that tell us how worthless women are, or how competent men are? Both, I imagine.

 

[Buried Alive 2.0]

You know, I realised something recently that made me laugh: We're currently seeing men at their worst, and women at their best. It's the last part that really makes me shake my head: We're currently seeing women at their best!

The system artificially bolsters them in all walks of life. They are given limitless scholarships and careers. They have pussy privilege. They have never had it better than they have it now, and they are still less competent than men.

Meanwhile, men are abused and degraded in every possible way, and we still effortlessly come out on top in all aspects of life.

Does that tell us how worthless women are, or how competent men are? Both, I imagine.

Very true. Even with all the help they get they are still worse. Surely there are singular women that are better than some singular men, but these are exceptions. They need huge efforts of affirmative action to even have a change at competing. Except at sex, here they excel at and control the market. It's the only thing they're good at: sex and being supportive of someone greater.

 

[Fuckedupcel]

You know, I realised something recently that made me laugh: We're currently seeing men at their worst, and women at their best. It's the last part that really makes me shake my head: We're currently seeing women at their best!

The system artificially bolsters them in all walks of life. They are given limitless scholarships and careers. They have pussy privilege. They have never had it better than they have it now, and they are still less competent than men.

Meanwhile, men are abused and degraded in every possible way, and we still effortlessly come out on top in all aspects of life.

Does that tell us how worthless women are, or how competent men are? Both, I imagine.

High IQ observation, very true