I'm sorry but in what world was that ever true to the extent that you say it was? You take something that has a grain of truth and then blow it out of proportion so let's debunk that:
Name me one relgion or secular culture or whatever, that ever existed, name one society that says women must submit to any man's desire to have sex no questions asked.
Fundamentalist Christianity, although they restrict this to a wife owing a husband sex (though this includes 'marriages' which the wife is forced into) and various stripes of MRA.
You can't possibly have failed to notice that Christianity thinks fornication is a sin period even if it's consensual (so I'm sorry but it's not actually very pro-male sexuality either) and many Islamic countries still punish you legally for fornication (and here again consent is not a defense either).
No, fornication outside of marriage is a sin and many fundamentalist Muslims consider such fornication the fault of the woman, by default, so the man does NOT get punished.
Nobody likes rapists either. They're actually seen as worse than murderers in prison, even though objectively speaking murder is a worse crime. The only thing worse than a rapist is a child rapist and possibly a corrupt cop, not entirely sure about that.
Interesting idea of 'objectively speaking' you have there. I would call it 'opinion', as, in my opinion, rape is actually worse than murder, as the victim continues to feel the effects. In murder, this is not true. Maybe that's your problem - you have no idea what an 'opinion' actually is, so think that your subjective opinions of 'masculine' and 'feminine' are objective facts, when, in fact, they're simply not.
Yeah it is. So name me one MRA that thinks women should submit by default to the wishes of any man.
Roosh V. Rollo Tomassi.
(cue the 'no true Scotsmen...oops, sorry, MRA, in 3...2...1...)
The truth is Elliot Rodger was not an MRA either. He never identified with the ideology, never promoted it,
No, he is not an MRA. He is a victim of MRA. He is a person who bought into the bullshit of them, and thought he was an utter failure because he couldn't easily get laid, then starting lashing out and putting the blame for this 'failure' on the fact that women wouldn't simply open their legs for him as soon as they saw them, despite seeing them with 'inferior' Mexican guys or 'inferior' black guys (yes, he was racist as well, despite being bi-racial, which probably fucked up his head even more than it was already).
"It's exactly that kind of toxic attitude of masculinity that contributed to the events in question."
And again I have no idea where this straw version of masculinity is promoted in any part of mainstream civilization.
The toxic masculinity I was referring to was your own post, where you chastise Elliot Rodger for being 'unmasculine' because he speaks and acts a certain way, and basically act as if this makes him not a man, which, of course, is a grievous insult. So the part of 'mainstream civilization' that promotes it you can see by going to the nearest mirror.
I'm glad you said "men" that implies that they're at least 18, so let's make it clear. No sane person over 18 (actually no sane person over puberty) literally believes that members of the opposite sex "owe" them sex.
Many people do. The state of their sanity, I will leave to the people with the necessary expertise to determine.
I think I know why. See it's not really about teaching anyone that nobody owes them sex. They know that. What you really want is thought police, you want men like Elliot Rodger who are failures with the opposite sex to basically just suppress their urges. Well, I'm here to tell you and you've probably heard it before, abstinence-only education doesn't work. It's been tried and failed on a much larger population.
Erm, how in the blue fuck did you get the idea I'm advocating 'abstinence-only education'? The simple fact is that if a guy cannot or will not find a woman who actually wants to fuck him, for whatever reason, then he simply does not get laid. Any guy should be brought to to accept that, as women are people too.
The fact you seem to have so many problems getting this simple, straightforward idea speaks volumes.
What does work is: 1. raise boys to be men, stop catering to PC extremists that think men and women are identical apart from genitals
I would prefer raising children, of whatever gender, to accept the simple reality that people come in a wide variety, including such things as men who have vaginas and women who have penises.
2. decriminalize prostitution, in fact I would go as far as to say there should be prostitution equivalent of the 2nd amendment, "the right of consenting adults to fuck shall not be infringed" not even kidding, enough of this totalitarian garbage.
Wow. You've actually said something sensible. Prostitution should be decriminalized - mainly so that prostitutes can then be legally safeguarded from abuse from both pimps and clients.
"and that having sex with a woman is NOT the ultimate purpose of life."
What makes you the arbiter of the ultimate purpose of life for other people?
If you really want to argue that vein, then you're actually arguing we shouldn't teach kids anything, as that would impact on their ideas for their life too much.
Maybe another man's purpose is to have a family but guess what? You need to be able to get a girlfriend before you can have a wife and a family. So even if your "ultimate purpose" isn't to score, you'll still run into that problem anyway.
Even if someone believes that to be the ultimate purpose of life, to fuck women, that's not the issue. The problem with Elliot Rodger wasn't that he wanted "hot blondes" to fuck, that's normal for young men, the problem was he wanted to do it by force. As long as you pursue your desires in a legitimate manner then there is no problem.
No, Elliot Rodger didn't want to do it by force, otherwise he would have raped women, not shot them. From his point of view, his actions were justified as revenge on women and society for arranging things so that he didn't get the sex he was owed.
Well it's also not natural for humans to ingest certain chemicals and live, but children don't know any better, which is why you don't keep bottles of colorful yet deadly chemicals around them.
[sarcasm]Yeah, because being a 'feminine' man or 'masculine' woman is as fatal as ingesting toxic or caustic chemicals.[/sarcasm]
The reality is that the only harm that comes to 'feminine' men or 'masculine' women is from bigoted fucks like you who consider them freaks. People actually brought up to accept difference accept them for what they are - people who are simply a little bit different from the average.
"The statement was that 'a guy is a guy and a girl is girl. And that’s all there is to it'. The simple fact that there are 'feminine' men and 'masculine' women shows this statement is not true. The only way this statement could be true is if these people do not exist. They do. "
So I take it you believe that the following statement:
"The life expectancy of a human is 75"
is inaccurate and isn't useful whatsoever on the grounds that a really tiny number of people have a condition called progeria which rapidly ages them and kills them by the time they're 15?
Yeah sorry I don't have time for nonsense like this. You're essentially saying you're too stupid or too politically correct to see patterns
And you're too stupid to see the difference between an absolute statement and statistical averages.
"And through this time, if the parents are like you, they're frantically and rabidly trying to 'correct' the boy by snatching away his Barbies and 'correct' the girl by snatching away her GI Joes, instead of simply letting the kids play happily and not getting their panties in a bunch over little or nothing whilst at the same time teaching them ideas like 'if you're different, you're a freak who must be punished for being a freak'. "
Did someone ever tell you you have a serious lack of imagination?
You don't need to take away his Barbie doll. You just don't buy it in the first place and if he does somehow develop an interest in playing with dolls from a friend or whatever, you propose more manly alternatives.
And the kid looks at you oddly and continues playing with his Barbies, wondering why grownups are so weird, or maybe simply takes the more 'manly' alternative - then plays with both.
The best solution, as I've said before, is simply not get your panties in a twist over little or nothing.