Before leaving Lemmygrad, I want to have a discussion on my "weird misogyny takes". No drama, just possibly a simple closure. - eviltoast

Final Edit: I have decided to take a break from here for undecided time. I might come back when sure of myself. Limited activity at main instance.

Edit: I am replying, so please refer to them to get an idea of my worldview.

Context: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/650259 and these removed comments of mine, before Forte temp banned me

a screenshot of my comments

Before I start off, I want to tell that it is true that I am a cis het male human that holds monogamist views with the mildest of traditional takes. It is also true that despite never having had a real mother or a girlfriend in my life, I never became an incel. My mindset at the core is unapologetically survivalist, independent and masculine. I have also been chivalrous with women, and have been inclusive of the non binary communities. Some people will try to portray this as me never getting female love in life and all kinds of assumption based crap, which I can counter with years of selfless privacy community work.

I want to know what is so misogynistic about:

  • a woman having multiple boyfriends and being a social player, which is very common today in the dating scene
  • traditional views like monogamy instead of promiscuity are better
  • social code being different for men and women
  • women often dating for free food
  • Western feminism not being a true representation of feminism, and how much it currently harms mainly men, and creating polarisation between both sexes
  • psychology of dominance and submission in relationships factoring into the stability of any long term relationships, including marriage

Is it not deceitful to deny these patterns exist, and to just call someone misogynistic and shut down the conversation? Or have I misunderstood what Lemmygrad means for these kinds of conversations?

When did this place become so lib, that people were straight up told to “change your ways before you end up ruining a poor girl’s life”, or how “using ‘male’ and ‘female’ to refer to men and women as if they’re animals” is a terminology that radical feminists would otherwise get excused for? What are these assumed ideas I have that are so batshit crazy, compared to the kinds of values that hardcore masculinity gurus, Tate fans, incels/femcels hold? And what is the defined threshold expected for this place to accommodate people?

I hope I do not see a “404:site_ban” before I get to engage and get answers on this, and have a decent conversation. I am not threatening. I merely want a dialogue.

  • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
    2·
    1 year ago

    This very first point of the article is the exact opposite of everything you’re trying to say here.

    People having a higher number of sex partners do not have higher rates of anxiety or depression, according to research.

    • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmygrad.mlOP
      05·
      1 year ago

      I never said it was necessarily depression. Substance abuse and alcohol abuse clearly is shown there. The concept of pair bonding is true to an extent, depending on how loyal people are. People engaging in casual sex are not loyal or committing people.

      I forgot to supplement this with another study, a mistake I will correct now.

      https://web.archive.org/web/20220930172620/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/more-sexual-partners-unhappy-marriage_n_5698440

      And in the same breath, I would recommend this one as well. https://web.archive.org/web/20220124003810/https://ifstudies.org/blog/counterintuitive-trends-in-the-link-between-premarital-sex-and-marital-stability/

      • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
        3·
        1 year ago

        The default assumption of those studies you linked, is that monogamous marriage is good, and multiple partners bad. You’re linking studies from patriarchal viewpoints which already share your own status-quo assumptions.

        Again, monogamy is not the norm of history, and only arose with class society. You haven’t done the reading so you haven’t learned this yet.

        According to researchers, the 23 percent of participants who only had sex with their spouse prior to getting hitched reported higher quality marriages versus those who had other past sexual partners as well.

        Ignorance is bliss.

        • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmygrad.mlOP
          02·
          1 year ago

          According to researchers, the 23 percent of participants who only had sex with their spouse prior to getting hitched reported higher quality marriages versus those who had other past sexual partners as well.

          I think this has got more to do with sexually frustrated men and women carrying out their dark thoughts, breaking down, healing themselves to become better men and women, ending up becoming more satisfied, since at this point they are over their internal frustration and possibly traumatic issues. Sexual act does serve as a venting outlet.

      • Prologue7642@lemmygrad.ml
        2·
        1 year ago

        I am not going to analyze both of these the same way as your first source, but, firstly, the second one is not even a paper, just a bunch of graphs with no methodology etc. Secondly, I would look at where are your sources coming from. Both of these are not scientific institutions and both of these are basically from the same source, which is conservative “think tank”.

        If you want someone who explains how these statistics are often misleading, I would look at this video. It basically deals with the exact same arguments from Lauren Southern.

        Please don’t use random articles as sources for such statements. At least use something that is based on some real research, even though it is often flawed.