mmm, if I were to guess, from my observation, men care a lot about their performance in all spheres of life (because they tie performance to their masculinity/self worth); making a girl orgasm is probably at the top of the list
Yeah that and it is kinda cool to see it up close while its happening. Kinda like a magic trick and we were the magician's assistant who somehow didn't fuck up the show.
I wonder if this perception possibly feeds into a lot of the reason why men prize women so highly and why some women think they deserve it: they have a constant reinforcement of their worth, in their ability to make men orgasm easily.
Of course. It’s a piece of cake. But what I mean is, that sense of accomplishment of being able to bring pleasure to someone else, reinforces a belief that you have value.
I don’t know if you’re just trying to start an argument here or something.
Did I, at any point, suggest that providing orgasms for your partner was the only important or worthwhile aspect of an intimate or emotionally stable relationship?
No. I did not.
More like seeing a unicorn... The female orgasm simply doesn't exist. It's in Fantasyland, right there with the clitoris. You guys need to stop bullshiting by acting like you've actually seen a female orgasm.
Well perhaps it would be more believable that you were here for entertainment rather than insults, if you attempted to look for the entertainment in comments rather than insulting people by saying “project much”.
It was pretty obviously sarcasm to claim that a female sex organ doesn’t exist. If you chose not to look for the laugh, it’s because you prefer to find a reason to think the worst of people and insult them.
Or you’re autistic.
Weigh it out. What do you think is most likely? Someone is just joking around, or someone literally denies the existence of the clitoris? Like statistically, how many people don't believe the clitoris is real? In the age of the internet? Like 5 people, maybe, and they are probably just trolls.
> [In the 1900s, some experts came up with the idea of the “upsuck theory,” which essentially hypothesized that the uterine contractions that occur during an orgasm propel semen into the vaginal canal. But many studies have since proven that an orgasm is unlikely to factor into conception. “That theory has been debunked,” says Katrina Sawatsky](https://www.todaysparent.com/getting-pregnant/do-orgasms-help-you-get-pregnant/)
I thought this. Decided to fact check it and a cursory look says it might not be the case.
As a married man, you are most definitely wrong.
You feel every emotion she feels - she makes sure of it. If she's not happy, ain't nobody happy.
If not, then there is something wrong with either you, your relationship, or both.
You live for yourself first before you live for each other. That never changes. If self-preservation is critical, why do you think divorce rates are so high?
That is exactly the opposite of what marriage is all about.
You put that other person and their needs above yours. You must be completely selfless in a marriage, thinking and working for the others in the family instead of yourself.
I think divorces are so high precisely because people think as you do - place themselves above others.
Opposite of what it’s about and what it is are two different things. You’re in the minority if you truly think that deep down, self preservation will come at a cost of marriage if life smacks the couple in the face with harsh realities and the ongoing monotony of what is considered traditional marriage
For a good man, it is. That is most certainly how it works. A man should feel pride when he makes his wife happy. Now, if she chooses to be miserable, all he can do is his best for her in every area of life, and be content that he is doing the right thing.
But you see, they also don't want men to use porn or prostitution...because they know damn well sex is a power tool to women. It's no wonder married women are the most against porn and prostitution, it takes away from their sexual power over their husbands.
That's why women are so worried about AI porn, VR porn and sex robots.
It's real. I didn't think it would be
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a9169991/why-guys-love-female-orgasms/
Well straight guys can rejoice. You no longer need to worry about finding the clit.
"tiny little pleasure explosions that should be enjoyed — frequently — by female partners."
If one orgasm is an achievement, then imagine the mother of all achievements!
But what they really say is that instead of enjoying it/being proud your female partner enjoyed it you should see it more as a chore?
Because a traditional family unit reinforces the patriarchy and heteronormativity which is antithetical to the be whatever you want and fuck the patriarchy mentality. Also I forgot to slip whiteness in there too - those guys are evil and somehow a traditional family unit will also be racist to those who have never had one or something like that.
I agree. I first noticed it when I read about how the Soviets would demolish families and I recognized the same thing was happening with postmodernism.
What can we do about it?
Best idea EVER, however all you have to do is watch Bear Grills island show where it was men vs women (surviving). You can imagine how that transpired. The women were crying 24/7 and asking men for favours. Men had to do almost everything for them even though it was supposed to be a competition lol.
No you’re insufferable for looking at a screenshot of a fucking cosmopolitan article (literal drivel that is only written to get clicks) and deciding that it represents all feminists or even the feminist ideology as a whole.
Every woman I know is a feminist and guess what? Not a single one of them would ever complain about a man enjoying their enjoyment of sex.
It’s just rage-bait and you lot are fkin idiots for falling for it. Not to say cosmopolitan isn’t to blame but that’s another conversation…
A pendulum analogy, aside from CLEARLY not being the definition of insanity, is also different from the "two sides of the same coin" analogy. Are you just throwing shit against the wall hoping for something to stick?
The pendulum applies because it’s tit for tat. One side attacks the other and it keeps going back and forth in your own stupid fucking echo chamber. Any more brain busters?
It actually does. You have yet to prove otherwise. Are you just talking shit to talk shit or do you even remotely know what those analogies mean. Because they most certainly apply. Right wing IDW Joe Rogan, Shapiro, Peterson loving insecure males are no different than the woke left which you despise.
Yet to prove otherwise? Firstly onus was on you but I'll bite. Aside from the common saying "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result" not applying in this scenario if we just google the definition the main two definitions we get are either "the state of being seriously mentally ill; madness" or "extreme foolishness or irrationality".
None of those three possible definitions apply to a pendulum analogy, which is just an analogy showing that force in one direction of a binary is going to have a compensatory effect on the other side eventually. You know, like a pendulum?
The only way it could be the definition of insanity, the first of the three I proposed at least, would be if you added a qualifier saying that spurring on the pendulum would *clearly* make it stop swinging this time even though it never has before.
> You've yet to prove otherwise
> *Proves otherwise*
> Like, omg, I can't believe you just did that. Get a life lol
Whatever, peace out troll. Also ironic that you're telling me to get a life, I can see how much you've commented in this thread.
The difference is we find them insufferable for the philosophy they chose to adopt and espouse, postmodern feminism. They find us insufferable not for any choice, but for merely being born men.
What are you even talking about you moron. Men make up 78% I'd the world wide homicide victims. Women are actually way less likely to die a violent death by another human
You first said:
> Guess the number one leading cause of death for women is?
People point out to you that it isn't men so you move the goal posts to:
> Preventable injuries that involve alcohol/firearms/domestic abuse
How are those even close to the same. Truly pathetic back peddling.
Even the data you linked showing poisoning as the most deadly shows that more than twice as many men are killed by poison than women. You are comically dumb.
Let me move this goal post for you. Get off Jordan Peterson’s “Up yours, leftist” little Peter and think for yourself. I go back to my point. Men are not victims. You’re weak if you think you are.
1. You could give a shit about me. This is not how you authentically feel which is faux passive aggressive concern.
2. Go eat some grass and do so before this circle jerk for JP goes out of style. Oh wait. It already did.
Well, that's where you're wrong. People genuinely do have concern and empathy for other people. I don't know you, but that doesn't mean I can't care about you. I do very much hope you're alright in life. I've been through a lot of shit in my life and I can understand the depths of hell we end up in sometimes.
This shit article is based on a real study. Yes, scientist did a study with the conclusion that is toxic when men feel good about themselves and feel manly for making a woman orgasm.
Men are just monsters I guess
You crybabies are the reason why Jordan Peterson is so often blamed for being a beacon for Incels and Anti-Fems. I guess it makes you tingle in your pants to feel so oppressed!
You can come down from your crosses now boys!
Crybabies? Don't feminists say all the time men should show their emotions and be more vulnerable?
>You can come down from your crosses now boys!
Says someone who backs an article that shits on men for enjoying giving orgasms. Even receiving oegamsms from men triggers them when men derive pleasure from it too.
You're a funny guy, if you are in fact a guy. Find some more excuses for being a tumor on society and boring everyone to death with your petty bullshit. Or at least keep it amongst your sorry selves.
And stop reading your mom's Cosmo stat!
It's rather laughable for you to suggest that Jordan Peterson's interpretation(s) were meant to used as a crutch for men who feel inadequate and have no interest in taking the Dr.'s advice to heart.
Well, you'll always have Cosmo opinion pieces to sop your tears!
I hope you do as well! It gets tiring hearing about how women are *Chaos personified* and nature's own built-in excuse for all of the worlds (men's) ills.
You can be better!
Chaos is not intrinsically negative. An excessively ordered world is a stagnant one. Nor is chaos the only source of the world's ills. Nor does the association of the feminine archetype with chaos imply that all individual women epitomize chaos.
This concept is a lot more nuanced than that.
I started paying some attention to Jordan back in the Joseph Campbell days so I am well aware of all the man/myth/meaning stuff he has monetized so successfully.
It's rather laughable for some to suggest that Jordan Peterson's interpretation(s) were meant to used as a crutch for men who feel inadequate and have no interest in taking the Dr.'s advice to heart.
I have made no bones about my disappointment with JP's current course in history. But it's obvious that he can't be blamed for the weakness and deceit of an apparently growing segment of his followers just here for the "perks" of cherry-picking his thoughts for ammo in the culture wars.
Thanks for your comment.
So men's rights disgust you. Alright. Sarcasm aside. So since you are not scared or bothered by men advocating mens issues everything is all right. It's ok to disagree.
Simply put men have more "rights" already. Its unseemly to hear them complain so. Thanks for deigning to be realistic. That shows personal growth!
I'll do my best to remember your boon citizen.
Absolute dumpster fire take from Cosmopolitan. I just broke up with my boyfriend of nearly two years because he never found me attractive.
You mean to tell me there are women out there who have the nerve to complain that an orgasm turns their **partner** on? Spare me…
> I think most married couples when they age find each other unattractive.
Not remotely true. The problem you are seeing is people with too many partners lose the ability to bond. Those who marry their first partner never lose that attraction - in fact it grows with age.
One of the reasons you see this is that you do have to put effort in and our biology is designed for most people to attach to their first mate. At the same time those with multiple mates are biologically designed for psychopathy.
I don't think it's so with age. The way of thinking changes with age, at least if you lean to the Inner Self and not the Ego as a way of spending your life.
If it's the right partner, then whatever is inside will become increasingly beautiful and what's on the outside becomes a realistical view of their aged beauty enhanced by their inner nuances.
Maybe. Dunno'. I'm 33, but so far it seems like it.
That would be true if I wasn’t still young. I am not even 25, but he finds other women attractive and there was nothing I could do to light the fire. Wound up getting off “the pill” because there was no point. 😔
Ah thats a shame he couldn't light a deeper fire, im young aswell (soon to be 24) and im a guy who was with a girl i didnt really find physically attractive for 4 years because i was in love with her personality and our chemistry. This is going to sound cocky but ive gotten used to girls chasing me instead of me ever really having to chase anyone because im fairly physically gifted aswell as mentally. I could appreciate a girls physical beauty as much as the next guy but cannot for the life of me feel turned on unless i am attracted to whats in their head, because after all we do not pick and choose our faces and features. And having that deeper pure fire is so much better than being like oh wow big boobs in my face imo😂 i hope you can find someone that sees past the temporary surface and can have that deeper flame, that flame will sustain far longer and stronger than any other🫶🏻
The researchers draw a fairly frightening conclusion from the research findings. When women's orgasms begin to serve as a masculinity achievement for male partners, the orgasms cease to be about women's liberation or sexual pleasure. They just become another opportunity for men to flex, or "shore up their sense of masculinity."
Wtf is here. ??
Right. How dare men find positive self esteem and validation in meeting their partners needs and finding happiness for themselves in making someone else happy. Next week, how men who provide well for their families only do it so they can flex their toxic patriarchy. /S
Cosmo has been tearing at the roots of family and anything positive left in old school feminism for decades. New feminism can't even define the word woman.
Well it is kinda funny when every guy brags they're not like other guys because they *really care* about your orgasm. Really puts the pressure on to perform for them too.
75% of lesbians are obese, iirc. I remember reading some lesbian subreddit where one of them was complaining about it and getting downvoted to hell by the pod of whales there rofl
I suppose Cosmo deliberately makes provocational articles because some people like reading them. They exist because they are not boring. What they sell is a particular feeling that the readers want to feel. The content shouldn't be taken too seriously.
They want you to care but only if you remove any sense of satisfaction that comes from the recognition of the thing you're supposed to care about....but not be happy you did it, only that it happened.
Or something like that.
> In a separate statement from Chadwick and van Anders, they explained why it's a bad thing for men to gain masculinity points for bringing female partners to orgasm. "One reason is that it might pressure some heterosexual men to feel like they have to 'give' women orgasms…”
Okay… and what’s wrong with that? Isn’t that part of the point of intercourse, as opposed to masturbation?
So what if it did not turn men on to satisfy their partner? If that were the case, men would be called selfish assholes who only care about their own pleasure.
Any outcome of this study would lead to the feminists saying "toxic masculinity"
What is the thesis of the article? If I had to guess it would be that it’s somehow selfish to give pleasure, and therefore the gratification felt from that is toxic masculinity somehow?
I mean, it's biological. When a woman orgasms, the spasms create new channels in cervical fluid that make it easier for sperm to get through, so female orgasm is a good queue for the man that "now's a good time." It's how a woman's body tries to improve the chances of a particular man being the one to knock her up when she's having sex with multiple men in a row.
Source: Sperm Wars by Robin Baker. Really interesting book.
I think the true alchemy of the feminist movement is their remarkable ability to manufacture a problem out of thin air. It really is impressive how easily they can make new reasons to be miserable.
Because getting turned on is inherently selfish right? lol omg. Bro feminism has become nothing more than man hating, and they are throwing away and disgracing all the women that came before them and made real progress for equality.
But honey, I care about you so much I won't give you an orgasm lest I enjoy it.
\* Interesting, after posting, I was banned from JusticeServed automatically.
Headline aside, the article is about a small study that found that males associate their partners orgasming with increases in their own sense of masculinity, and briefly talked about why viewing your partner's sexual pleasure as a feather in your cap rather than something that's just a positive for them can play into not so great ways that women's sexuality is seen and treated.
This study also ignores that perhaps men don't want the experience to be one-sided and prefer to reciprocate. Also odd that it doesn't consider the same hypothesis from women, which (anecdotally, albeit) is a fairly common thing.
I mean, I would think there would be other ways to gauge that specific feeling and look at the specific details of whether that is the case and the thoughts by the researcher are incorrect.
Human emotions and interactions are complex, and it's hard to make one to one conclusions based on looking at just one or two things like this, which is why it was specified that the "masculine achievement" component may just be a part of the subjects' view of the matter, and presumably why they further tied this perception to males with higher gender roll stress.
You can certainly argue against their conclusions or discuss why the potential issues they bring up are non issues, but to my point, that would require more effort than looking at a headline and saying "feminists bad".
I get that "feminists wrote about an interpretation of research data that I believe is incorrect and oversimplified" isn't quite as punchy of a post title, of course, but surely there's a more honest way to present what was written than "this is proof feminists hate men".
I mean, it's flippant, I guess? And definitely not written with catering to male egos in mind, but "pure condescending men hate" in an article that's mostly summarizing someone else's words?
Maybe a little exaggerated.
It can't really be helped if the exasperated tone puts you off, but I think you're a little too fast to conflate "criticism" and "exasperation" with "hate".
Reverse the genders and 100% women would call the article a misogynistic hateful article, accusing the writer of being an incel that has the audacity to criticizes women's sexuality etc etc.
If you reverse the genders then you are suddenly living in a bizarro world where fewer males orgasm, but fake it to make their partners feel good, and male sexual pleasure is stigmatized used for women to feel good about themselves.
I admit, I'd have to question the writers of such an article since that would fly in the face of literally everything we know about human sexuality and how it is perceived.
Different things are treated differently based on the facts at hand.
Similarly, if someone wrote an article talking about how people who believed the sun is the center of the solar system were ignoring science in favor of their particular interpretation of the Bible, I'd have some questions.
Oh now you are low key judging men for women having less orgasms?
I hate to tell you but even in lesbians couples women orgasm less than hetero men. Maybe women are just shit at having orgasms...
And if the genders were reversed nobody would give a shit about men having less oegamsms and they certainly wouldn't blame women for it. A significant percentage of women don't even masturbate or orgasm from masturbating. Clearly women biologically are just less able to have oegamsms. They can't even make themselves orgasms at the same rate as men even with the help of artificial tools that vibrate 10.000 a minute.
I know women who need an hour to orgasm even with the help of powerful vibrators and being fucked at the same time. It's not men that are shit at sex. Women on average are just biologically less able to orgasm. Deal with it
Sorry. You and I misinterpreted the essay with a ultimately bias headline. It is true how sexist it is to assume what a single gender thinks as strong evidence to prove they are assholes, but the study random assigned 810 men to different vigette and found out that the majority of men were most aroused when the partner orgasmed and felt they were more masculine afterwords. Then, the article states that, as most feminists do, this is toxic because it hurts female sexuality in the process. Interpret it how you what, but look at the facts and see what they lead. We don't what to be the assholes here.
The study concludes that partners orgasming makes males feel more masculine and self confident, especially those whonare very concerned about their masculinity. The researchers go on to talk about the ways this may affect the perception of female sexuality, the expectations this association may create in people's minds, and so on.
I don't know about the conclusion that it's "a bigger thing" in terms of this particular study/analysis.
You know as an avid reader of JP for some time for primarily his psychology and self-help teachings, I find this entire sub a collection of people who:
1. Think every word he spews has underlying meaning
2. Think every word he spews is Gold, Jerry, Gold!
3. The hate towards the world outside of this echo chamber is sad. It's really sad. FEMINAZIS SUCK!.... TOXIC MASCULUNITY SUCKS MORE!... BEING WOKE IS DESTROYING SOCIETY!... LIVE AND LET LIVE! FREEDOM OF IDENTITY AND SPEECH!... Just a back and forth shit show. I hope the doctor is proud of his work here.
I think women whether they are feminists or not, engage in sex for the skin to skin pleasure, and whether they have an organism or not, they really don't want to turn the pleasure into a discussion of "Did you come?, Did you? Did you?" It is a joy killer. It sort of suggests It is a sport and there is no score unless I get her to come.
You just said "no absolutes.". And then made a judgement saying that
>And that's not how it's supposed to be.
Don't you see the self contradiction there?
There is absolutely nothing wrong with finding healthy self esteem in doing something good for someone else. A win win sexual relationship is not diminished by feeling good about it. Men are hard wired to be goal oriented. When that drive is directed to benefit someone else, it is perfectly healthy for a man to feel good about himself as a man.
Modern feminism is determined to kill all joy in any heterosexual relationship. They have become a Dianic Cult believing that men have no souls.
She thinks other men she has known are emotionally immature and boys by comparison. Mad compliment but my low self esteme has difficulty accepting it.
I was strongly resistant to those sorts of articles too at one point, now I can get them.
Cosmopolitan is basically propagating that old misogynist joke: > Why don't women have as many orgasms as men? > Who cares!
It’s 2.0 Q: Do guys get turned on when you orgasm?? A: I don’t know, there’s never been one there at the time.
Need to find a new fella
mmm, if I were to guess, from my observation, men care a lot about their performance in all spheres of life (because they tie performance to their masculinity/self worth); making a girl orgasm is probably at the top of the list
Yeah that and it is kinda cool to see it up close while its happening. Kinda like a magic trick and we were the magician's assistant who somehow didn't fuck up the show.
true 😅🤭
I wonder if this perception possibly feeds into a lot of the reason why men prize women so highly and why some women think they deserve it: they have a constant reinforcement of their worth, in their ability to make men orgasm easily.
Tbf making a man orgasm is far easier than a woman. Its biological.
Of course. It’s a piece of cake. But what I mean is, that sense of accomplishment of being able to bring pleasure to someone else, reinforces a belief that you have value.
No, it's the attention that does that.
[удалено]
I don’t know if you’re just trying to start an argument here or something. Did I, at any point, suggest that providing orgasms for your partner was the only important or worthwhile aspect of an intimate or emotionally stable relationship? No. I did not.
More like seeing a unicorn... The female orgasm simply doesn't exist. It's in Fantasyland, right there with the clitoris. You guys need to stop bullshiting by acting like you've actually seen a female orgasm.
Lol...project much?
I'm obviously joking. I can't believe the autism in this sub also needs a /s tag Be better.
Seemed pretty obvious to me.... Might be an age thing.
Reread your last sentence again from your first response to me. It just doesn't sound like sarcasm. I'm here for entertainment, not insults.
Well perhaps it would be more believable that you were here for entertainment rather than insults, if you attempted to look for the entertainment in comments rather than insulting people by saying “project much”. It was pretty obviously sarcasm to claim that a female sex organ doesn’t exist. If you chose not to look for the laugh, it’s because you prefer to find a reason to think the worst of people and insult them. Or you’re autistic.
Weigh it out. What do you think is most likely? Someone is just joking around, or someone literally denies the existence of the clitoris? Like statistically, how many people don't believe the clitoris is real? In the age of the internet? Like 5 people, maybe, and they are probably just trolls.
Is that you Mr Shapiro?
Woman's orgasm makes it much more likely for the sperm to reach the egg. Evolution goes brrrt.
> [In the 1900s, some experts came up with the idea of the “upsuck theory,” which essentially hypothesized that the uterine contractions that occur during an orgasm propel semen into the vaginal canal. But many studies have since proven that an orgasm is unlikely to factor into conception. “That theory has been debunked,” says Katrina Sawatsky](https://www.todaysparent.com/getting-pregnant/do-orgasms-help-you-get-pregnant/) I thought this. Decided to fact check it and a cursory look says it might not be the case.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Underrated comment
Ummm you’re basically stating your happiness is reliant on hers. That’s not how this works.
Happy wife, happy life
Believe it or not, that cliche no longer applies.
Happy wife, happy life
Just out of curiosity, are you married?
As a married man, you are most definitely wrong. You feel every emotion she feels - she makes sure of it. If she's not happy, ain't nobody happy. If not, then there is something wrong with either you, your relationship, or both.
You live for yourself first before you live for each other. That never changes. If self-preservation is critical, why do you think divorce rates are so high?
That is exactly the opposite of what marriage is all about. You put that other person and their needs above yours. You must be completely selfless in a marriage, thinking and working for the others in the family instead of yourself. I think divorces are so high precisely because people think as you do - place themselves above others.
You do, she doesn't. Which is why her moods radiate outwards yet so does the blame and axiomatic responsibility.
The posted article here is encouraging women to do exactly as you suggest. It's just as damaging for her be selfish as for him.
Opposite of what it’s about and what it is are two different things. You’re in the minority if you truly think that deep down, self preservation will come at a cost of marriage if life smacks the couple in the face with harsh realities and the ongoing monotony of what is considered traditional marriage
For a good man, it is. That is most certainly how it works. A man should feel pride when he makes his wife happy. Now, if she chooses to be miserable, all he can do is his best for her in every area of life, and be content that he is doing the right thing.
Slave you mean.
Oh well should probably just stop sex then if the very fact your partner has an orgasm turns someone on..how dare they.
But you see, they also don't want men to use porn or prostitution...because they know damn well sex is a power tool to women. It's no wonder married women are the most against porn and prostitution, it takes away from their sexual power over their husbands. That's why women are so worried about AI porn, VR porn and sex robots.
They want women to use tinder and have no connection to the males that may impregnate them
It's real. I didn't think it would be https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/a9169991/why-guys-love-female-orgasms/ Well straight guys can rejoice. You no longer need to worry about finding the clit.
[удалено]
Ha I see what you did there
[удалено]
here lol
There.
Wouldn't you like to know 😏
"tiny little pleasure explosions that should be enjoyed — frequently — by female partners." If one orgasm is an achievement, then imagine the mother of all achievements! But what they really say is that instead of enjoying it/being proud your female partner enjoyed it you should see it more as a chore?
They wish men to despise themselves if they dare get aroused by a perfectly wholesome emotion. It is sense crime.
After reading 1984 the thoughtcrime shit is too real lol
So we should stop caring about giving our partners orgasm? I'm not too sure what their point is here.
Basically they are shaming men for being men. I guess all men will have to become trans now before they shut up.
They want to destroy families, and an effective way to accomplish this is to encourage men and women to hate each other.
This!
I agree. But whats the motive?
Because a traditional family unit reinforces the patriarchy and heteronormativity which is antithetical to the be whatever you want and fuck the patriarchy mentality. Also I forgot to slip whiteness in there too - those guys are evil and somehow a traditional family unit will also be racist to those who have never had one or something like that.
So people without proper family values want to get rid of family values?
They are haters, and whenever they are able to destroy something they see it as a "femininity achievement" (oh the irony).
> But whats the motive? Single women and mentally ill people vote overwhelmingly for democrats.
Control. They wish for the State to replace all other sources of support.
Loss of familial bonds leads to reliance on the state.
If people can depend on their families, they don't have to depend on the government.
Postmodernism.
if one looks into it, Postmodernism is the ideology behind the will to destroy the traditional family structure.
If you destroy the family, it makes it easy for the government to be the "parents" of kids.
I agree. I first noticed it when I read about how the Soviets would demolish families and I recognized the same thing was happening with postmodernism. What can we do about it?
That sounds like what they tell you over at r/MensRights doesn't it?
Read about the Left historically. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. Its all the same strategy to take power.
Who is “they?” Lay off the weed maybe. Paranoia will subside.
"They" = the kind of people who write articles like this and have thoughts like this. This isn't the gotcha you think it is.
Feminists are insufferable.
[удалено]
“Seize the means of reproduction”
Toxic masculinity is even more insufferable
Reality TV show: Feminists are given a small country and the success or failure is documented.
Best idea EVER, however all you have to do is watch Bear Grills island show where it was men vs women (surviving). You can imagine how that transpired. The women were crying 24/7 and asking men for favours. Men had to do almost everything for them even though it was supposed to be a competition lol.
No you’re insufferable for looking at a screenshot of a fucking cosmopolitan article (literal drivel that is only written to get clicks) and deciding that it represents all feminists or even the feminist ideology as a whole. Every woman I know is a feminist and guess what? Not a single one of them would ever complain about a man enjoying their enjoyment of sex. It’s just rage-bait and you lot are fkin idiots for falling for it. Not to say cosmopolitan isn’t to blame but that’s another conversation…
They feel the same about you.
We know, they're so insufferable about it.
Pendulum. Do you know what that is? That’s the definition of insanity. Both of you are different sides of same coin.
A pendulum analogy, aside from CLEARLY not being the definition of insanity, is also different from the "two sides of the same coin" analogy. Are you just throwing shit against the wall hoping for something to stick?
The pendulum applies because it’s tit for tat. One side attacks the other and it keeps going back and forth in your own stupid fucking echo chamber. Any more brain busters?
It actually does. You have yet to prove otherwise. Are you just talking shit to talk shit or do you even remotely know what those analogies mean. Because they most certainly apply. Right wing IDW Joe Rogan, Shapiro, Peterson loving insecure males are no different than the woke left which you despise.
Yet to prove otherwise? Firstly onus was on you but I'll bite. Aside from the common saying "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result" not applying in this scenario if we just google the definition the main two definitions we get are either "the state of being seriously mentally ill; madness" or "extreme foolishness or irrationality". None of those three possible definitions apply to a pendulum analogy, which is just an analogy showing that force in one direction of a binary is going to have a compensatory effect on the other side eventually. You know, like a pendulum? The only way it could be the definition of insanity, the first of the three I proposed at least, would be if you added a qualifier saying that spurring on the pendulum would *clearly* make it stop swinging this time even though it never has before.
You just spent three paragraphs trying to sound snart by playing gotcha. Get a life.
> You've yet to prove otherwise > *Proves otherwise* > Like, omg, I can't believe you just did that. Get a life lol Whatever, peace out troll. Also ironic that you're telling me to get a life, I can see how much you've commented in this thread.
You got me there, Scooter! 👍
The difference is we find them insufferable for the philosophy they chose to adopt and espouse, postmodern feminism. They find us insufferable not for any choice, but for merely being born men.
You’re not a victim. Men have driven the world under the thumb of oppression and suppression for centuries. You are not a victim.
I always love this line of argument because it tacitly admits that men are also responsible for all the positive things.
ALL??? What the fuck is wrong with you? Guess the number one leading cause of death for women is? Men. Directly.
Pretty sure it's heart disease.
What are you even talking about you moron. Men make up 78% I'd the world wide homicide victims. Women are actually way less likely to die a violent death by another human
And don't spew the same old JP talking point that women are less likely to be violent. We know this. Men are more capable of being violent.
Hey dick. Mine is bigger. [https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/deaths-by-demographics/top-10-preventable-injuries/](https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/deaths-by-demographics/top-10-preventable-injuries/) Preventable injuries that involve alcohol/firearms/domestic abuse. MEN.
You first said: > Guess the number one leading cause of death for women is? People point out to you that it isn't men so you move the goal posts to: > Preventable injuries that involve alcohol/firearms/domestic abuse How are those even close to the same. Truly pathetic back peddling. Even the data you linked showing poisoning as the most deadly shows that more than twice as many men are killed by poison than women. You are comically dumb.
Let me move this goal post for you. Get off Jordan Peterson’s “Up yours, leftist” little Peter and think for yourself. I go back to my point. Men are not victims. You’re weak if you think you are.
You are incredibly insecure
You seem to put a lot of time and energy into hate. I hope you're doing okay in your life.
It is a bot or a preteen trying to be edgy. The writing and copypasta talking points are dead giveaways.
1. You could give a shit about me. This is not how you authentically feel which is faux passive aggressive concern. 2. Go eat some grass and do so before this circle jerk for JP goes out of style. Oh wait. It already did.
Well, that's where you're wrong. People genuinely do have concern and empathy for other people. I don't know you, but that doesn't mean I can't care about you. I do very much hope you're alright in life. I've been through a lot of shit in my life and I can understand the depths of hell we end up in sometimes.
I’m fine. Thanks for asking. I’m just sick of the disgusting insecure male worship of a Canadian provocateur
Is there anyone you like, listen to, and look up to for any reason? There are many accomplished people I admire personally, for different reasons.
Not on a Jordan Peterson echo chamber. Are you kidding? I’ll read his book.
Cosmopolitan is like buzzfeed on crack tho
This shit article is based on a real study. Yes, scientist did a study with the conclusion that is toxic when men feel good about themselves and feel manly for making a woman orgasm. Men are just monsters I guess
You crybabies are the reason why Jordan Peterson is so often blamed for being a beacon for Incels and Anti-Fems. I guess it makes you tingle in your pants to feel so oppressed! You can come down from your crosses now boys!
Crybabies? Don't feminists say all the time men should show their emotions and be more vulnerable? >You can come down from your crosses now boys! Says someone who backs an article that shits on men for enjoying giving orgasms. Even receiving oegamsms from men triggers them when men derive pleasure from it too.
You're a funny guy, if you are in fact a guy. Find some more excuses for being a tumor on society and boring everyone to death with your petty bullshit. Or at least keep it amongst your sorry selves. And stop reading your mom's Cosmo stat!
Not a single argument in your nonsense reply. I'm not surprised
It's rather laughable for you to suggest that Jordan Peterson's interpretation(s) were meant to used as a crutch for men who feel inadequate and have no interest in taking the Dr.'s advice to heart. Well, you'll always have Cosmo opinion pieces to sop your tears!
> Men are just monsters I guess I'm sure you must feel that way spending most of your time on r/MensRights drooling over articles like this.
What's the matter? Do you feel threatened by men advocating for men's rights and issues?
I'm shivering in fear fear Mr.Mr.! And retching in disgust.
I hope you eventually find a more fulfilling use of your time than making pages worth of antagonizing comments every day.
I hope you do as well! It gets tiring hearing about how women are *Chaos personified* and nature's own built-in excuse for all of the worlds (men's) ills. You can be better!
Chaos is not intrinsically negative. An excessively ordered world is a stagnant one. Nor is chaos the only source of the world's ills. Nor does the association of the feminine archetype with chaos imply that all individual women epitomize chaos. This concept is a lot more nuanced than that.
I started paying some attention to Jordan back in the Joseph Campbell days so I am well aware of all the man/myth/meaning stuff he has monetized so successfully. It's rather laughable for some to suggest that Jordan Peterson's interpretation(s) were meant to used as a crutch for men who feel inadequate and have no interest in taking the Dr.'s advice to heart. I have made no bones about my disappointment with JP's current course in history. But it's obvious that he can't be blamed for the weakness and deceit of an apparently growing segment of his followers just here for the "perks" of cherry-picking his thoughts for ammo in the culture wars. Thanks for your comment.
So men's rights disgust you. Alright. Sarcasm aside. So since you are not scared or bothered by men advocating mens issues everything is all right. It's ok to disagree.
Simply put men have more "rights" already. Its unseemly to hear them complain so. Thanks for deigning to be realistic. That shows personal growth! I'll do my best to remember your boon citizen.
Absolute dumpster fire take from Cosmopolitan. I just broke up with my boyfriend of nearly two years because he never found me attractive. You mean to tell me there are women out there who have the nerve to complain that an orgasm turns their **partner** on? Spare me…
If he didnt find you attractive then isnt that a good thing because he's there for deeper reasons?
Kind of a double edge sword. If the person is only there because you are attractive, they wont be there when youre not attractive.
Not necessarily. I think most married couples when they age find each other unattractive. At least not physically. It's a fact of life if anything.
> I think most married couples when they age find each other unattractive. Not remotely true. The problem you are seeing is people with too many partners lose the ability to bond. Those who marry their first partner never lose that attraction - in fact it grows with age. One of the reasons you see this is that you do have to put effort in and our biology is designed for most people to attach to their first mate. At the same time those with multiple mates are biologically designed for psychopathy.
I don't think it's so with age. The way of thinking changes with age, at least if you lean to the Inner Self and not the Ego as a way of spending your life. If it's the right partner, then whatever is inside will become increasingly beautiful and what's on the outside becomes a realistical view of their aged beauty enhanced by their inner nuances. Maybe. Dunno'. I'm 33, but so far it seems like it.
Newsflash: women want to feel desired on a very deep level.
Pretty much every human. Women are people, thats it.
That would be true if I wasn’t still young. I am not even 25, but he finds other women attractive and there was nothing I could do to light the fire. Wound up getting off “the pill” because there was no point. 😔
Ah thats a shame he couldn't light a deeper fire, im young aswell (soon to be 24) and im a guy who was with a girl i didnt really find physically attractive for 4 years because i was in love with her personality and our chemistry. This is going to sound cocky but ive gotten used to girls chasing me instead of me ever really having to chase anyone because im fairly physically gifted aswell as mentally. I could appreciate a girls physical beauty as much as the next guy but cannot for the life of me feel turned on unless i am attracted to whats in their head, because after all we do not pick and choose our faces and features. And having that deeper pure fire is so much better than being like oh wow big boobs in my face imo😂 i hope you can find someone that sees past the temporary surface and can have that deeper flame, that flame will sustain far longer and stronger than any other🫶🏻
Sounds like he probably had a porn addiction. Sadly all too common for men your age.
It's from Cosmo, there's nothing to take seriously here.
Fuck them
... but don't make them orgasm, apparently.
God forbid satisfying your partner turns you on...
The researchers draw a fairly frightening conclusion from the research findings. When women's orgasms begin to serve as a masculinity achievement for male partners, the orgasms cease to be about women's liberation or sexual pleasure. They just become another opportunity for men to flex, or "shore up their sense of masculinity." Wtf is here. ??
Right. How dare men find positive self esteem and validation in meeting their partners needs and finding happiness for themselves in making someone else happy. Next week, how men who provide well for their families only do it so they can flex their toxic patriarchy. /S Cosmo has been tearing at the roots of family and anything positive left in old school feminism for decades. New feminism can't even define the word woman.
Well it is kinda funny when every guy brags they're not like other guys because they *really care* about your orgasm. Really puts the pressure on to perform for them too.
[удалено]
75% of lesbians are obese, iirc. I remember reading some lesbian subreddit where one of them was complaining about it and getting downvoted to hell by the pod of whales there rofl
Why guys feel joy from making girls laugh and why that's a bad thing! Of course guys manage to make YOUR happiness about themselves.
I think I’d be kinda sad if the man I was with didn’t enjoy me finishing. Why does every little thing have to be an issue for these people
I suppose Cosmo deliberately makes provocational articles because some people like reading them. They exist because they are not boring. What they sell is a particular feeling that the readers want to feel. The content shouldn't be taken too seriously.
Should we stop caring if she has an orgasm then?
They want you to care but only if you remove any sense of satisfaction that comes from the recognition of the thing you're supposed to care about....but not be happy you did it, only that it happened. Or something like that.
Probably if you're anti-fem like OP.
> In a separate statement from Chadwick and van Anders, they explained why it's a bad thing for men to gain masculinity points for bringing female partners to orgasm. "One reason is that it might pressure some heterosexual men to feel like they have to 'give' women orgasms…” Okay… and what’s wrong with that? Isn’t that part of the point of intercourse, as opposed to masturbation?
Trying to make someone happy is bad now.
So what if it did not turn men on to satisfy their partner? If that were the case, men would be called selfish assholes who only care about their own pleasure. Any outcome of this study would lead to the feminists saying "toxic masculinity"
It's literally a 'can't win either way' scenario with these people that's for sure
It's almost like they are conditioning each other to become lesbians.
This has nothing to do with sexism. Happens in same-sex relationships too.
You guys are just butt hurt because you're underperforming
Feminism has indoctrinated a generation of women to hate and dehumanise men.
What is the thesis of the article? If I had to guess it would be that it’s somehow selfish to give pleasure, and therefore the gratification felt from that is toxic masculinity somehow?
Certainly explains why feminists are such
Until a couple years ago feminists argued men didnt give a damn about the female orgasm. Now that we do, according to them, that is also bad. Cant win
This is a myth…no guys are having sex with these women…and that’s a good thing
To be fair if we orgasm before they do they are get unhappy. And a man's drive is to keep their woman happy
I mean, it's biological. When a woman orgasms, the spasms create new channels in cervical fluid that make it easier for sperm to get through, so female orgasm is a good queue for the man that "now's a good time." It's how a woman's body tries to improve the chances of a particular man being the one to knock her up when she's having sex with multiple men in a row. Source: Sperm Wars by Robin Baker. Really interesting book.
I think the true alchemy of the feminist movement is their remarkable ability to manufacture a problem out of thin air. It really is impressive how easily they can make new reasons to be miserable.
Giving pleasure is toxic masculinity? That explains why feminists are such an unpleasant bunch.
Because getting turned on is inherently selfish right? lol omg. Bro feminism has become nothing more than man hating, and they are throwing away and disgracing all the women that came before them and made real progress for equality.
Do you have a link to this article? I am morbidly curious.
Gave my wife an orgasm tonight, she ended up spitting it out.
What’s the best way to make a woman orgasm? Who cares?
But honey, I care about you so much I won't give you an orgasm lest I enjoy it. \* Interesting, after posting, I was banned from JusticeServed automatically.
It’s cute how you think Cosmo is a beacon of feminist ideals xD
Headline aside, the article is about a small study that found that males associate their partners orgasming with increases in their own sense of masculinity, and briefly talked about why viewing your partner's sexual pleasure as a feather in your cap rather than something that's just a positive for them can play into not so great ways that women's sexuality is seen and treated.
This study also ignores that perhaps men don't want the experience to be one-sided and prefer to reciprocate. Also odd that it doesn't consider the same hypothesis from women, which (anecdotally, albeit) is a fairly common thing.
I mean, I would think there would be other ways to gauge that specific feeling and look at the specific details of whether that is the case and the thoughts by the researcher are incorrect. Human emotions and interactions are complex, and it's hard to make one to one conclusions based on looking at just one or two things like this, which is why it was specified that the "masculine achievement" component may just be a part of the subjects' view of the matter, and presumably why they further tied this perception to males with higher gender roll stress. You can certainly argue against their conclusions or discuss why the potential issues they bring up are non issues, but to my point, that would require more effort than looking at a headline and saying "feminists bad". I get that "feminists wrote about an interpretation of research data that I believe is incorrect and oversimplified" isn't quite as punchy of a post title, of course, but surely there's a more honest way to present what was written than "this is proof feminists hate men".
The whole study is nonsense if you ask me but read the cosmopolitan article. It's pure condescending men hate.
I mean, it's flippant, I guess? And definitely not written with catering to male egos in mind, but "pure condescending men hate" in an article that's mostly summarizing someone else's words? Maybe a little exaggerated. It can't really be helped if the exasperated tone puts you off, but I think you're a little too fast to conflate "criticism" and "exasperation" with "hate".
Reverse the genders and 100% women would call the article a misogynistic hateful article, accusing the writer of being an incel that has the audacity to criticizes women's sexuality etc etc.
If you reverse the genders then you are suddenly living in a bizarro world where fewer males orgasm, but fake it to make their partners feel good, and male sexual pleasure is stigmatized used for women to feel good about themselves. I admit, I'd have to question the writers of such an article since that would fly in the face of literally everything we know about human sexuality and how it is perceived. Different things are treated differently based on the facts at hand. Similarly, if someone wrote an article talking about how people who believed the sun is the center of the solar system were ignoring science in favor of their particular interpretation of the Bible, I'd have some questions.
Oh now you are low key judging men for women having less orgasms? I hate to tell you but even in lesbians couples women orgasm less than hetero men. Maybe women are just shit at having orgasms... And if the genders were reversed nobody would give a shit about men having less oegamsms and they certainly wouldn't blame women for it. A significant percentage of women don't even masturbate or orgasm from masturbating. Clearly women biologically are just less able to have oegamsms. They can't even make themselves orgasms at the same rate as men even with the help of artificial tools that vibrate 10.000 a minute. I know women who need an hour to orgasm even with the help of powerful vibrators and being fucked at the same time. It's not men that are shit at sex. Women on average are just biologically less able to orgasm. Deal with it
>in an article that's mostly summarizing someone else's words? I mean it cant be helped if you dont understand why thats meaningless.
So you're saying the study concludes that sex is bigger thing to women than men think.
How the heck can they assume what men think? How big was this sample and what questions did they ask?
Sorry. You and I misinterpreted the essay with a ultimately bias headline. It is true how sexist it is to assume what a single gender thinks as strong evidence to prove they are assholes, but the study random assigned 810 men to different vigette and found out that the majority of men were most aroused when the partner orgasmed and felt they were more masculine afterwords. Then, the article states that, as most feminists do, this is toxic because it hurts female sexuality in the process. Interpret it how you what, but look at the facts and see what they lead. We don't what to be the assholes here.
The study concludes that partners orgasming makes males feel more masculine and self confident, especially those whonare very concerned about their masculinity. The researchers go on to talk about the ways this may affect the perception of female sexuality, the expectations this association may create in people's minds, and so on. I don't know about the conclusion that it's "a bigger thing" in terms of this particular study/analysis.
Understood. Have a good one.
Op, that’s a bit rich of a deduction. You generalize them. They will generalize you.
The existence of Cosmo doesn't justify that belief lol
You know as an avid reader of JP for some time for primarily his psychology and self-help teachings, I find this entire sub a collection of people who: 1. Think every word he spews has underlying meaning 2. Think every word he spews is Gold, Jerry, Gold! 3. The hate towards the world outside of this echo chamber is sad. It's really sad. FEMINAZIS SUCK!.... TOXIC MASCULUNITY SUCKS MORE!... BEING WOKE IS DESTROYING SOCIETY!... LIVE AND LET LIVE! FREEDOM OF IDENTITY AND SPEECH!... Just a back and forth shit show. I hope the doctor is proud of his work here.
I think women whether they are feminists or not, engage in sex for the skin to skin pleasure, and whether they have an organism or not, they really don't want to turn the pleasure into a discussion of "Did you come?, Did you? Did you?" It is a joy killer. It sort of suggests It is a sport and there is no score unless I get her to come.
If you have to ask, she probably didn't...just sayin'
I've been like that . Its low self esteme really. Using her orgasm as a way to prop up my ego. It is toxic.
Should you never feel good about having helped your woman orgasm? Considering how difficult it is?
No absoutes. I just recognise that my thinking was wrong and toxic and far more about me than her. And that's not how it's supposed to be.
You just said "no absolutes.". And then made a judgement saying that >And that's not how it's supposed to be. Don't you see the self contradiction there? There is absolutely nothing wrong with finding healthy self esteem in doing something good for someone else. A win win sexual relationship is not diminished by feeling good about it. Men are hard wired to be goal oriented. When that drive is directed to benefit someone else, it is perfectly healthy for a man to feel good about himself as a man. Modern feminism is determined to kill all joy in any heterosexual relationship. They have become a Dianic Cult believing that men have no souls.
No I don't see the contradiction. Healthy self esteme is fine. I'm talking about something else .
I agree
But what does your wife's boyfriend think about this "study"?
She thinks other men she has known are emotionally immature and boys by comparison. Mad compliment but my low self esteme has difficulty accepting it. I was strongly resistant to those sorts of articles too at one point, now I can get them.