" The angry white man"

[narwhalParticipant]

Faust For Science wrote:

Marvelous double-speak on your part, Narwhal

I’m not sure what you mean by that.

Faust For Science wrote:

Many of Trump’s supporters are nationalists whom are white, whom are p~~~ed off a being screwed over by the progressive globalists.

But that isn’t the definition white nationalism. I would fit your definition since I am white and hold nationalist view points. The actual definition is that the person believes the white should be the dominant race in our nation. They are identify should be white. That does not describe me, nor do I believe that it describes the majority of the Trump voters.

The term is actually become synonymous with racism, which is not the same. Implying that Trump supports believe the white race is superior and that non-whites should be treated as less than whites. The reality is that it’s just an attempt to silence a dissenting opinion by making false claims and vilification.

Ok…I’m rereading what you wrote regarding ‘reality’ and ‘sociological conditions’. I understand why you see them as equals, but that was not my intention. Perhaps I’m not using the term ‘sociological conditions’ correctly. I mean it terms of a persons point of view on their position and condition in society.

Say you are a single mother raising a child alone in a poor neighborhood. This situation could very well lead you to believe that men and the government have let you down. That they should be doing more for you and your child. That none of this is your fault. Reality (or perhaps just my POV) would be different. Reality would be that she did not make wise choices and that’s the reason for her situation.

White Knights and women believe NAWALT. I’ve heard it said repeatedly regarding my past marriage. Yet AWALT is the reality, they’ve simply been condition to believe otherwise in order for their lives to make sense and proceed peacefully.

Ok. Then do it.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

CG27 wrote:

I thought it would be interesting to hear everyone’s thoughts on why they think so much of the world has discontent towards us as men.

The “world” doesn’t—only radical leftist feministas have a problem with men. The point of the article is to feed into the orthodoxy of the left. Since the positions/beliefs of the left cannot withstand logical review or analysis they require self-validation which is all this article represents.

Donald Trump won 3,084 of America’s 3,141 counties….does this mean 3,084 counties are dominated by angry white men? Not likely, nor is it likely “white hate” groups and fringe groups are dominate enough to control 3,084 counties. But then that is a factual analysis based upon reason and one can see immediately why hit piece article like the one under discussion are necessary for the left. Facts don’t matter, only dogma and orthodoxy thus they need a nice comforting bogyman to explain their failure.

[Eric LauderParticipant 12043]

The problem with sociology is that it isn’t a true science
Check that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89mile_Durkheim
and that
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Simmel
Two of the greatest sociologists ever, saying opposite things.
Who is right?
Both.
Sociology is a social science, it means that it isn’t a verifiable, true, science.

The problem with people like Kimmel is that today we are in a situation like there would have been just only Durkheim, and Simmel would had been silenced.
Why?
Because vagina, gynocentrism.

Opposing voices in academia exist, but they’re silenced.
From Psychology Today:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rethinking-men/201010/why-some-people-have-issues-men-misandry

12. Sexism: Michael Kimmel, who owns Men’s Studies in the States, is particularly misandric, opening his book “Manhood in America” (1996) with a long list of male villains – not a hero, hard working man, good father, Nobel Peace Prize winner, not a useful Newton, Darwin, Freud, Einstein, Gandhi, Mandela, King, Carnegie Medal winner in sight. It’s amazing. Then in “Men’s Lives” he adds more villains and this suggestion: “Perhaps we should slap a warning label on penises across the land. WARNING: OPERATING THIS INSTRUMENT CAN BE DANGEROUS TO YOUR AND OTHERS’ HEALTH” (2004:565. His emphasis). One wonders if he is wearing this label on his own penis. Does he practice what he preaches? Oh well. But such is the “scholarship” on men these days: dehumanizing.

Who wrote that?
A blogger?
No.
Anthony Synnott Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology at Concordia University in Montreal

After brief careers in the Royal Navy and the Jesuits, and studies in Rhodesia, the UK and Canada, Anthony Synnott, Ph.D., is now Professor of Sociology at Concordia University in Montreal. He is the author of The Body Social: Symbolism, Self and Society (Routledge, 1993); Shadows: Issues and Social Problems in Canada (Prentice-Hall, 1996); and co-author of Aroma: The Cultural History of Smell (Routledge: 1994), and Re-Thinking Men: Heroes, Villians and Victims (Ashgate, 2009).

https://www.psychologytoday.com/experts/anthony-synnott-phd

SUPREME LEADER KIM JONG-UN'S FASHION STYLIST - if you want a new look or if you're a very beautiful trans you can call me, phone number +85079255312 / mobile 01921421211. The worth of a man isn't the usefulness that women get from him. Avoiding living with a woman, a man isn't rejecting a lot of sex: he's rejecting sexual starvation. MGTOW IS TACKLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONVENTION OF ISTANBUL: http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e --- Article 4, Section 4 "Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention". WHAT I LEARNT FROM A GENDER STUDIES CLASS IN LUND, SWEDEN: every time feminists accuses men of doing something, odds are likely either them or persons associated with them are doing the exact same thing but a lot worse. WHO I'M RIGHT NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1okpAj7Fhw Basically my former life have been a conflict between this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_RQVkvke4 and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIMeyTK-sU That's, more or less, all about me.

[Anonymous 54]

Calling us angry white men is yet another tactict used for the objective of

Silenceing us.

I am a peaceful Man that is cool with everybody.

But you wouldnt want to p~~~ me off.

[PistolPeteParticipant 27143]

Addendum: Even if the angry white man meme is true—so what? why is that automatically negative?

BLM is an angry group…are they the only ones permitted to be angry—do they have a corner on the market? Why do they get a pass for their race baiting hatred and violence but somehow white people are unjustified in being angry?

Want to talk about something—talk about that!

[Anonymous 54]

CG27 wrote:

Awakened wrote:

Why would you bring this leftist CRAP here ??

Well after seeing this article earlier on today it got me to thinking about the growing trend of hateful behaviour towards men.

I thought it would be interesting to hear everyone’s thoughts on why they think so much of the world has discontent towards us as men.

But if you would prefer to shoot me down by brandishing me a tuna then that’s fine as well.

look at this last paragraph Gentlemen.

[Anonymous 54]

CG27 wrote:

Pedal, run, row wrote:

OP wants everyone else to jump through mental hoops

I want you to do whatever the f~~~ you want to do. Criticize me, denounce it outright, offer your opinion/ analysis

All contributions are valid

For the artical your writeing??? C~~~?

[Pedal, run, rowParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

CG27 wrote:

Pedal, run, row wrote:

OP wants everyone else to jump through mental hoops

I want you to do whatever the f~~~ you want to do. Criticize me, denounce it outright, offer your opinion/ analysis

All contributions are valid

For the artical your writeing??? C~~~?

I asked it 3 f~~~ing times to give its POV and what it thinks about the article… crickets… I don’t know if it is tuna or just a f~~~ed up mangina trying get us riled up and jumping through hoops for its entertainment.

I suspect it is “research” that it thinks it is doing so cleverly.

[Anonymous 22]

The liberals want you to think that straight, white men are angry. So, if you are a straight, white man, enjoy your life and p~~~ them off that way.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22521]

narwhal wrote:

But that isn’t the definition white nationalism. I would fit your definition since I am white and hold nationalist view points. The actual definition is that the person believes the white should be the dominant race in our nation.

No. That is not the definition of “nationalism”.

The globalists tact on “white” with anything they do not like. Which is bigotry on the part of the globalists.

The globalists believe that “whites” are a smear on humanity.

And I use both meanings of the word “smear” in my comment.

“Whites are bigots whom should not have rights” is the mantra of minorities and their globalist masters whom want to be the dominant race in this nation. This is hypocritical bigotry at its worst by said minorities and globalists.

One such example of Tom Perez, the new leader of the DNC, whom is a hispanic racist towards whites, whom openly stated he believes white people are not entitled protection under the voting rights act: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/02/tom-perez-white-people-not-entitled-protection-voting-rights-act/

The bigots in this world are doing their most to turn white men into monsters and if they accomplish their goals they are not going to enjoy the results.

For those that do not understand the concept of what I am talking about. Here is the link on the subject: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ThenLetMeBeEvil

[Anonymous 54]

The objective was to get us p~~~ed off, and act like angry white men. First off , were not all white.

Instead of talking about womens true nature, we would be fighting amonsgt our selfs.

Do you all not even recognize a womans manipulation?????

[CG27Participant 302]

Pedal, run, row wrote:

I asked it 3 f~~~ing times to give its POV and what it thinks about the article… crickets

I gave my opinion on the article around 15- 20 posts ago?

The single biggest threat to your happiness is women and the only way to win is to not play the game

[Anonymous 54]

Could be a mangina, with a female over his shoulder.

Arent you a good little boy!

[CG27Participant 302]

Anonymous wrote:

For the artical your writeing??? C~~~?

Hold on, you think I’m a journalist/ blogger?????

The single biggest threat to your happiness is women and the only way to win is to not play the game

[Anonymous 54]

CG27 wrote:

Pedal, run, row wrote:

I asked it 3 f~~~ing times to give its POV and what it thinks about the article… crickets

I gave my opinion on the article around 15- 20 posts ago?

keep writen!!

[Pedal, run, rowParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

The liberals want you to think that straight, white men are angry. So, if you are a straight, white man, enjoy your life and p~~~ them off that way.

They have a right to be angry, and they need to get angrier!

It is the dismissing the reality they now face as simply “they feel” bull s~~~ that p~~~es me off.

[Pedal, run, rowParticipant]

CG27 wrote:

Pedal, run, row wrote:

I asked it 3 f~~~ing times to give its POV and what it thinks about the article… crickets

I gave my opinion on the article around 15- 20 posts ago?

Not enough!

You need to critique points in the article, not just mumble that you don’t agree with it.

[Anonymous 54]

CG27 wrote:

Old Sage wrote:

For the artical your writeing??? C~~~?

Hold on, you think I’m a journalist/ blogger?????

I think your a female.Show me your not.

Why did you join this site?

What do you think of feminism?

What are your experiences with women?

Do you call them c~~~s when your p~~~ed off?

Do you have a temper?

[FrostByteParticipant 19005]

PistolPete wrote:

Addendum: Even if the angry white man meme is true—so what? why is that automatically negative?

BLM is an angry group…are they the only ones permitted to be angry—do they have a corner on the market? Why do they get a pass for their race baiting hatred and violence but somehow white people are unjustified in being angry?

Want to talk about something—talk about that!

Good point. Feminists are never angry, they’re triggered. Because if they are triggered it’s your fault they are screaming and rolling around on the floor. No f~~~ing accountability for their uncontrolled and unhinged anger. So that’s okay, but if they spit on white guy it’s his fault he is angry.

If you rescue a damsel in distress, all you will get is a distressed damsel.

[CG27Participant 302]

Anonymous wrote:

I think your a female.Show me your not.

and how would you like me to do that?

The single biggest threat to your happiness is women and the only way to win is to not play the game

[Author]

Posts