A Better World Without Men?

I've only read the first 14 or so pages, but I felt the need to go ahead and post. I find it highly disturbing that you, OP, by your own admission, would take petty back stabbing and malicious manipulations over physical violence, and make it out as if they are really all that different. They are both forms of abuse. Just because you can't see tangible evidence of emotional and psychological abuse doesn't mean the wounds aren't there.

To put in perspective, let's take serial killers-- while most are admittedly men, have you looked at the psychological profiling of male serial killers? If so, you would find a trend that shows a significant percentage were chronic bed-wetters that were ridiculed and humiliated by over-domineering mothers. This psychological and emotional trauma is a significant influence in the development of many male serial killers, and, while other factors in their social environment no doubt play a part, is arguably the main contributing factor as to why some men become unable to control their homicidal urges.

Does this excuse these men from raping and killing their victims? Of course not. The point I'm trying to make is that mental abuse is just as bad, and in some cases worse than physical violence, and your somewhat flippant remarks in disregarding such potential dangers is quite disconcerting.

All one has one to do is watch a few episodes of Mob Wives, Bad Girls Club, Real Housewives, The View, and one can see the without men, life would have died out by self implosion long ago.

Originally posted by tom502
All one has one to do is watch a few episodes of Mob Wives, Bad Girls Club, Real Housewives, The View, and one can see the without men, life would have died out by self implosion long ago.

Seriously!???

The reality shows are about ratings. If you don't do your part in creating drama - - you will be removed from the show.

Why do you think they always have them drinking?

Originally posted by Punisher75
reply to post by Annee

 

LOL Should I assume that you are a narcissist by advertising Annee as your name, or maybe your name is Todd? LOL

Would you prefer I call myself George? Annee is a simple name - easy to remember.

It hardly is a descriptive with a skull avatar.

So - you are male - - right?

reply to post by 2manyquestions


No, the world would not be better off with no males, but, young males are a problem in many species. Many species just flat off run them out of the group, to make their own way in the world or die trying.

Clearly, if we used reason and science to make our cultural decisions, some version of that rule would likely be good for human society too. Like perhaps sending males off at puberty into some sort of service, like a militarized peace corps or something like it and hoping the strict order and discipline would get them safely through their adolescents until they are better citizens.

I know there are those who will cry out how unfair it is to target men in this way, and what about women, yadda yadda, but Im drawing the idea from not only what we observe about human males, but how many social mammals deal with their adolescent males.

And what are we currently doing? The upper classes DO send their adolescent males off into ordered environments, (military academies, colleges, prep schools, etc.) and the lower classes who cant afford to do that end up with their male children running wild, getting killed, generally being destructive, or ending up in jail. The middle classes often use sports and boy scouts etc to provide that kind of discipline and order.

In the past, families worked them and that provided the order and discipline.

Anyway, no the world would not be better off without men, but adolescent males ARE a problem in many species and it would be wise to come up with a good, sound, fair, practical solution to minimize the harm they do to society.

Well I am male and dont feel its better without femals so please show some of us LOVE ladies/femals ect...

A Better World Without Men?.. of course. But what a gay world.

Oh Joe, look, I'm not attacking you. I think that you are on the downside of the left arm of the ape and I'm on the tips of his right hand. I don't need to do a search on anthropology to know what I mean. We are the big brained hierarchical society. In this time and age, a smart man in a compromising situation would assess the situation and either fight or back down. Thats not to say one doesn't spar and then decide "hey, I'm in way over my head, I better move on down the road" Hence, my reference to the animal world. There are still times of fighting to the death in both worlds.

Peace.

Oh Joe, look, I'm not attacking you. I think that you are on the downside of the left arm of the ape and I'm on the tips of his right hand. I don't need to do a search on anthropology to know what I mean. We are the big brained hierarchical society.

reply to post by blujasper


Whether you are attacking me or not, (claiming I am young and naive) you are nonetheless wrong, were proven wrong, and like so many on these forums, unwilling to gracefully concede the point.

Our brains are no larger than the hunter-gatherers I referred to. Look it up yourself this time.

Joe, I'm getting the feeling you are quite agitated right now. That is not my purpose. I do not concede that I am wrong. I am not. Your reference is quite different than my opinion of MY post. You seem to be stuck on the young and naive part, and are forgetting that I was replying to another post and agreeing with what I believed to be true. Your puzzle and my thoughts on this subject are two different things and I stand by my thoughts of this social hierarchy that we live in.
Again, Peace...

reply to post by blujasper


You directly tried to refute my point that the natural state of mankind was egalitarian, that we existed in such a state for 99% of the time we've been considered "modern humans, " and that the roots of the current imbalance lie not in human nature, but instead in reaction to the unnatural condition of civilization. You asked where in history I found such an idea:

Egalitarian, REALLY ??? Where in history did you find this concept ??

Remember?
And when I pointed out that it wasn't an idea, but an established fact, and provided evidence of this fact, you attempted to focus instead on my supposedly offended feelings rather than concede the FACT that you were indeed wrong. Intellectually dishonest. Frankly, not worth my time or effort. A debate with someone who cannot concede a simple point when they've been proven wrong is a waste of time.

Have a nice night. I'm done with this.

Originally posted by 2manyquestions
I want to make clear from the very beginning that my intention is not to bash men or women during this discussion. Both sexes poses positive and negative traits. I only wish to explore a hypothetical world not operated or dominated by testosterone/men.

I recently came up on an article titled Californian Dolphin Gang Caught Killing Porpoises

SEEMINGLY random acts of violence by bottlenose dolphins on porpoises could be down to sexual frustration among young males. Cases of the cetaceans killing other creatures for no apparent reason have been reported in UK waters. Now bottlenose dolphins have been seen attacking harbour porpoises in the Pacific Ocean. Crucially, these observations show for the first time that the attackers are young males (Marine Mammal Science, DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-7692.2011.00474.x).

Since I've heard of young male elephants also wreaking havoc on their environment, attacking and killing other animals for no apparent reason, this article led me to a train of thought - "How would a world without men look and operate?"

If you examine the news of any day or year, you will find plenty of articles on men who have committed some violent crime or another. From rape, abuse, brutal murder, violent attacks, bar fights, to fraud, drug and human trafficking, most of these are committed by the males. Admittedly there are many women who also commit horrific acts. They are not to be left out of this discussion completely, but the ratio of male crimes vs. female crimes seems much higher than it should be. For example, according to this website: Bureau of Justice Statistics and Correctional Populations in the United States

In 2009, the majority (82%) of the total correctional population was male, and 18% was female. Men comprised a smaller portion of the total correctional population in 2009 than in 1990 (86%), while the percentage of women increased within the total correctional population since 1990 (14%).

I can tell you that if I decide to travel to a seedy neighborhood, I'm not afraid of what some woman might do to me, I'm more afraid of what a man, or group of men might do to me for my car, my money, or any number of things they may not like about me. It's rare (definitely not impossible) to be held up or beat up by a woman or a group of women. It's always an aggressive-looking group of men I find myself watching out for.

So then what is it about the male sex which makes it so prone to committing crimes? Is it the upbringing? Testosterone? Social conditioning? Social pressures on the male that lead them to a powerful desire to overachieve in any way possible? Since not all men are violent or commit crimes, what is it about the male sex that lands so many in a jail cell?

Some would argue that male aggression is nature's way of keeping a territorial balance. Men are hunters and protectors by nature. While this may be true to some extent, is the use of that aggression necessary in today's day and age, and is it something that can be overcome? Though imperfect, I consider most human beings quite intelligent, and smart enough to figure out that killing somebody for money or selling somebody into sexual slavery is not the best solution to a problem. I don't feel that raping, repeat-killing (serial killers), abusing, or torturing is necessary to a person's survival in most (if not all) cases. Why do so many men (as opposed to women) choose to commit violent acts?

That leads me to imagine a world without men (or at least without men prone to violent aggression). Would we have less wars? More compromise? More compassion? Less crime? Or would women take over where men left off? Would we spend so much money on weapons and defense? Would we have to be afraid to walk into a poor neighborhood? Would gang violence still be as big of a problem as it is now? Is violence necessary for the human race to evolve, or is it holding us back?

Truth is that struggle/survival forces us to invent and reinvent. Many of the technological perks we have today came about, because the technology was highly beneficial to fighting wars. Eventually society found good (non-violent) use for those items, but would they have come to exist without pending wars? Would we have invented many of the things we have today if males weren't aggressive? Maybe in due time. Is there any benefit worth the human pain, suffering and death which we receive from being violent?

I myself would love to figure out what we can do to scale down on male aggression. I suppose I have more questions than answers, and I'd love to hear your feedback. Do you sometimes find yourself out of control? Do you feel like there's no other alternative to causing physical damage? I know that sports can sometimes relieve that pressure, but clearly it may not be enough. What helps you stay in control, and do you believe everyone has the ability to fight off the "natural" urge to become violent?

I would be able to take your claim in the beginning seriously if you added in the fact that prosecutors often downgrade charges women face routinely. And women receive a 1,000% sentencing discount and gender is the number one discriminatory factor in sentencing even when accounting for same rap-sheet.

And you forgot to add that 1/3rd of the boy's, young men and men in jail are in jail for non-violent offenses.

Pretty much I view this article the same way I view other articles from sexist bigots, just trash.

P.S comrade feministo testosterone has no proven link to aggression. Also in the UK and the USA young women will soon pass(if they haven't already) young men in committing violent crimes. Heck if domestic violence law's where applied fairly more women then men would be in jail over domestic violence.

Fact: Nearly half of all "victims" of Domestic Violence are male.
Fact: If 3/4ths of the women who are "victims" of Domestic Violence didn't physically or emotionally abuse their partner first they wouldn't of been "abused"(meaning they assaulted or emotionally assaulted a person that defended themselves against them. meaning males are victims of domestic violence 80-90% of the time and only 10% of the women claiming to be victims, really are victims).

Look at how women in Serbia's military are responsible for the mass castration and murder of ten's of thousands of boy's and men during the genocides of the 90's.

before you create an ignorant topic you should learn to do better research!

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by 2manyquestions

 

No, the world would not be better off with no males, but, young males are a problem in many species. Many species just flat off run them out of the group, to make their own way in the world or die trying.

Clearly, if we used reason and science to make our cultural decisions, some version of that rule would likely be good for human society too. Like perhaps sending males off at puberty into some sort of service, like a militarized peace corps or something like it and hoping the strict order and discipline would get them safely through their adolescents until they are better citizens.

I know there are those who will cry out how unfair it is to target men in this way, and what about women, yadda yadda, but Im drawing the idea from not only what we observe about human males, but how many social mammals deal with their adolescent males.

And what are we currently doing? The upper classes DO send their adolescent males off into ordered environments, (military academies, colleges, prep schools, etc.) and the lower classes who cant afford to do that end up with their male children running wild, getting killed, generally being destructive, or ending up in jail. The middle classes often use sports and boy scouts etc to provide that kind of discipline and order.

In the past, families worked them and that provided the order and discipline.

Anyway, no the world would not be better off without men, but adolescent males ARE a problem in many species and it would be wise to come up with a good, sound, fair, practical solution to minimize the harm they do to society.

Another ignorant and blatantly bigoted reply. What is this a female supremacist gathering post? The problem is with neurological types. Psychopaths and Sociopaths.

P.S most young men in jail are in jail for non-violent crimes aka drugs.

Also your thinly veiled attempts at justifying slavery won't work soon; because young women are committing more and more and more violent crimes.

Heck look at all the discrimination and sexism young males face and your lucky we don't try to over throw society and make bigots like you serve sentencing in jail.

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
This thread to me suggests that women are not capable of violence or acts of aggression which is simply not true. Women are capable of being just as violent as men.


Besides, a world with out men would be a world with no humans after about 120 years.

Get rid of one sex and you wipe out the whole species.

So, no it would not be a better place.

That isn't entirely true. They can kind of use stem cells from women to create sperm, kind of(it is so unstable that human extinction would happen within a couple of hundred years). The only problem is they can only create females, rendering men extinct.

While on the other hand, all they have to do is work out the kinks in artificial womb technology and women permanently become obsolete. Because you can take sperm cells, convert them to stem cells and they form a 110% stable egg cell. Of course women would never become truly extinct since sperm cells dictate gender....

But add in controlled insemination + fembot type androids= no more dealing with female fantasies of male extinction and feminism's female supremacy garbage(yeah I bet you femnazi's didn't take to kindly to this post. Of course us guy's would never allow such a thing because we have empathy, but seriously end the hate before it blows up in your face).

barren of humans???
it takes two to crate a baby, take away the males, you have no babies..... without technology that is.....and well, sooner or later something will happen and the technology will be gone....
so no more babies, no more humans on earth!!

the dolphin thing is interesting, wonder if it has something to do with all the crap we put into our environment, mainly the stuff that acts like estrogen...
screwing up the males....

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I just want to comment on your post.

I find it very logical and insightful. Star!

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

Clearly, if we used reason and science to make our cultural decisions, some version of that rule would likely be good for human society too. Like perhaps sending males off at puberty into some sort of service, like a militarized peace corps or something like it and hoping the strict order and discipline would get them safely through their adolescents until they are better citizens.

The problem with that idea, is that very often boys that age get targeted for rape by men....and it can go on to damage them psychologically ,and cause much greater problems for them down the line.

Hardly think sending them off to strict order and discipline is the answer...not to mention what other " little damaging games" are allowed to take place in militarized communities.

Originally posted by TheOrangeBrood

Originally posted by mustfarhan
This happens because its basically Man's World. You need to understand that!

In the developed areas of the world, it is quite the opposite. Women literally get away with murder.

Sisterhood is so cute.

That makes me mad, because someone KILLED another person and all they got was probation. I understand it was probably an accident, but she was clearly intending to hurt her boyfriend in at least some way. She should have gotten at some jail time.

Originally posted by Hastings101
That makes me mad, because someone KILLED another person and all they got was probation. I understand it was probably an accident, but she was clearly intending to hurt her boyfriend in at least some way. She should have gotten at some jail time.

It's pretty disgusting that so few women are even willing to take notice of the bias in our justice system against males. A guy probably would have rotted in jail at least 10 years for this.

No one cares.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Hastings101
That makes me mad, because someone KILLED another person and all they got was probation. I understand it was probably an accident, but she was clearly intending to hurt her boyfriend in at least some way. She should have gotten at some jail time.

It's pretty disgusting that so few women are even willing to take notice of the bias in our justice system against males. A guy probably would have rotted in jail at least 10 years for this.

No one cares.

edit on 11-6-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

Women and young women intentionally turn a blind eye to the Justice system because by turning an open eye to it, would end all myths that males are the dominant gender.

One of the staples of history when judging between classes(which is master and which is slave, or which is at a higher elevation in the cultural/social hierarchy) is to look at how the Judicial(legal) system treats the different participants.

A noble in ancient Sumeria would of had to pay a higher price for killing someone elses slave then that lady payed for killing her boyfriend. So maybe the legal system views any male-female relationship as defacto ownership of male by said female? And since slaves do not have the right of self emancipation, it would explain vagimony.

The simple truth i guess is that we are nothing more then slaves of womankind. And instead of physical chains they use psychological, emotional and cultural chains to keep us down.