But Who Will Protect You??

Video But Who Will Protect You??

Pages (2): 1 2 Next

Impress Polly
The kind they warned you about.

146

Dec 14 2025, 1:30 AM

Female is nature's default sex. Evolutionarily speaking, males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators. Human beings are now at the top of the food chain though, so what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

I'm inspired by the video below to say these things tonight. Therein, an armed robber attacks a woman while the much taller guy she's with hides behind a wall, leaving her to fend for herself, and comes out to comfort her only after the assault has ended and the mugger has been subdued by several random passers-by. If they're an item, she should dump his ass now!

Edited Dec 14 2025, 1:32 AM by Impress Polly.

Impress Polly

The kind they warned you about.

Dec 14 2025, 1:30 AM #1

YesYourNigel

324

Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM

Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Edited Dec 14 2025, 10:20 PM by YesYourNigel.

YesYourNigel

Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM #2

Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

dobby

Dec 15 2025, 5:04 PM

(Dec 14 2025, 1:30 AM)Impress Polly Female is nature's default sex. Evolutionarily speaking, males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators. Human beings are now at the top of the food chain though, so what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

I'm inspired by the video below to say these things tonight. Therein, an armed robber attacks a woman while the much taller guy she's with hides behind a wall, leaving her to fend for herself, and comes out to comfort her only after the assault has ended and the mugger has been subdued by several random passers-by. If they're an item, she should dump his ass now!

I just realized that we have the eggplant-snip and eggplant-chop emojis here, and it seems like the perfect reaction to this video! :snip:

Idk how to tag other site members here in comments but u/Clover in case you see my comment, omg I love your emoji selections in the emoji menu here! 🥰

dobby

Dec 15 2025, 5:04 PM #3

(Dec 14 2025, 1:30 AM)Impress Polly Female is nature's default sex. Evolutionarily speaking, males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators. Human beings are now at the top of the food chain though, so what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

I'm inspired by the video below to say these things tonight. Therein, an armed robber attacks a woman while the much taller guy she's with hides behind a wall, leaving her to fend for herself, and comes out to comfort her only after the assault has ended and the mugger has been subdued by several random passers-by. If they're an item, she should dump his ass now!

I just realized that we have the eggplant-snip and eggplant-chop emojis here, and it seems like the perfect reaction to this video! :snip:

Idk how to tag other site members here in comments but u/Clover in case you see my comment, omg I love your emoji selections in the emoji menu here! 🥰

ShameMustChangeSides

Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM

(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective, and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

ShameMustChangeSides

Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM #4

(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Impress Polly
The kind they warned you about.

146

Dec 19 2025, 8:52 PM

(Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM)ShameMustChangeSides
(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective, and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

It's about being contrarian for attention. :annoyed:

Can't say I'm unfamiliar with that sorta behavior. Takes one to know one, I guess, but still, at least I've got a bit of self-awareness and self-policing about it. Basically though, just notice that she pretty much never offers supportive words, or even reactions, toward anyone, but looooooots of long-winded critiques of others without sources and the steadfastly competitive structure of all conversation she does. She'll just say anything to contradict me (or really anyone, but especially me for some reason; I'm apparently seen as like a rival or something instead of fundamentally an ally).

The bullshit implications that I'm not only heterosexual, but furthermore a political conservative who derives my perspective on the sexes from "romance novels" are so asinine they don't even merit a response as far as I'm concerned. She didn't even get the content of the video itself correct in her rebuke (there were several people who came to the woman's aid, not all of whom were men; watch it again), but she wasn't trying, she was pwning.

The whole post was just a long-winded justification of the dude abandoning the woman he was with in her moment of greatest need, warning us to watch out more for the ones who help in a situation like that. After all, the most important thing in a potentially life-and-death situation like this involving male violence against a woman is that men learn to break with traditional gender roles and not be chivalrous, no? Thaaaaaat's what women's liberation is about, right? It's about liberating men from responsibility, no? Only a Christian conservative anti-feminist would have expectations of moids, right? She didn't have the option to freeze up or hide and you're a lot taller than both her and the attacker and you are also male. Do something!

Edited Dec 19 2025, 10:57 PM by Impress Polly.

Impress Polly

The kind they warned you about.

Dec 19 2025, 8:52 PM #5

(Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM)ShameMustChangeSides
(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective, and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

It's about being contrarian for attention. :annoyed:

Clover
Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

1,426

Dec 19 2025, 11:46 PM

I'm confused. I don't normally watch videos but I guess for the sake of the arguments in here I did. I don't like NYP since it's a ragebait rag like Dailymail.

The woman's male partner indeed cowered away and hid.
One male bystander comes by and tries to gently (?) get the attacker away from the woman. He eventually gives up and keeps walking.
Another male bystander runs in and more aggressively tries to subdue the attacker by hitting him with his motorcycle helmet.
It looks like three additional men ran in to assist with subduing the attacker.
It looks like a woman then runs in, followed shortly by another man and another woman. At this point the attacker was mostly subdued by the other men who started fighting him to stop his armed mugging of the woman.

YYN has a point that we don't know how we would respond during a knife attack. It's easy to judge him for not protecting his partner. But I'm not sure, why do we want to promote/encourage a machismo culture of men attacking each other to protect women? That is not to say the men who stepped in to fight the attacker weren't brave for trying to help protect someone, I just don't vibe with mocking men for not attacking other humans..? Idk just seems weird to me.

And YYN further has a point that the initial people to fight off the attacker were all men... Two women came in to help at a point when the attacker was outnumbered and subdued by multiple men fighting him.

In the end, I think the only male in this whole situation that should be getting bashed is the armed and violent man who attacked the woman...

Polly's initial point does stand though: women are frequently told we need "protection" by having male partners, with the unspoken part they fail to admit is that we need protection from men. The video basically shatters the claim that "women need a man to protect them [against other men]", since it shows the woman's partner did not protect her and she had to depend on bystanders. However in a typical NYP tabloid fashion, it focuses on her weak boyfriend being the problem — aka, she just needs a stronger man, as if that would somehow fix the societal problem of violent men roaming the streets attacking people... The conclusion of the NYP is basically "men need to be stronk PrOtEcToRs of their women and children." No, men need to stop creating a world where men are allowed to be violent and abusive and therefore create an artificial need for women to need men to be "protectors." It's a patriarchal racket.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Clover

Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

Dec 19 2025, 11:46 PM #6

I'm confused. I don't normally watch videos but I guess for the sake of the arguments in here I did. I don't like NYP since it's a ragebait rag like Dailymail.

The woman's male partner indeed cowered away and hid.
One male bystander comes by and tries to gently (?) get the attacker away from the woman. He eventually gives up and keeps walking.
Another male bystander runs in and more aggressively tries to subdue the attacker by hitting him with his motorcycle helmet.
It looks like three additional men ran in to assist with subduing the attacker.
It looks like a woman then runs in, followed shortly by another man and another woman. At this point the attacker was mostly subdued by the other men who started fighting him to stop his armed mugging of the woman.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Impress Polly
The kind they warned you about.

146

Yesterday, 12:07 AM

(Dec 19 2025, 11:46 PM)Clover Polly's initial point does stand though: women are frequently told we need "protection" by having male partners, with the unspoken part they fail to admit is that we need protection from men. The video basically shatters the claim that "women need a man to protect them [against other men]", since it shows the woman's partner did not protect her and she had to depend on bystanders. However in a typical NYP tabloid fashion, it focuses on her weak boyfriend being the problem — aka, she just needs a stronger man, as if that would somehow fix the societal problem of violent men roaming the streets attacking people... The conclusion of the NYP is basically "men need to be stronk PrOtEcToRs of their women and children." No, men need to stop creating a world where men are allowed to be violent and abusive and therefore create an artificial need for women to need men to be "protectors." It's a patriarchal racket.

I was basically just saying men are useless. (Do I ever say anything else?) They are the only real and serious threat to us themselves. One supposedly needs a man to protect us against men (pseudo-logic in itself), but there is no trait they might have (physical stature or whatever) that can make them reliable protectors. You literally don't know which one or ones you can count on. Somehow this point has been creatively twisted into me supposedly championing chivalry because the video was from the New York Post.

Edited Yesterday, 12:14 AM by Impress Polly.

Impress Polly

The kind they warned you about.

Yesterday, 12:07 AM #7

(Dec 19 2025, 11:46 PM)Clover Polly's initial point does stand though: women are frequently told we need "protection" by having male partners, with the unspoken part they fail to admit is that we need protection from men. The video basically shatters the claim that "women need a man to protect them [against other men]", since it shows the woman's partner did not protect her and she had to depend on bystanders. However in a typical NYP tabloid fashion, it focuses on her weak boyfriend being the problem — aka, she just needs a stronger man, as if that would somehow fix the societal problem of violent men roaming the streets attacking people... The conclusion of the NYP is basically "men need to be stronk PrOtEcToRs of their women and children." No, men need to stop creating a world where men are allowed to be violent and abusive and therefore create an artificial need for women to need men to be "protectors." It's a patriarchal racket.

Clover
Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

1,426

Yesterday, 2:32 AM

(Yesterday, 12:07 AM)Impress Polly Somehow this point has been creatively twisted into me supposedly championing chivalry because the video was from the New York Post.

While perhaps you're not "championing chivalry," the NYP video is. The NYP video frames the entire footage around mocking the man who didn't help, as opposed to the main disturbing event of a man assaulting a woman with a knife. It then concludes with Reddit comments making fun of her male partner who didn't help, and a synopsis praising some old patriarchal propaganda movie about how men need to be brave protectors of "their" women and children. The NYP is a sensationalist right-leaning tabloid owned by Rupert Murdoch, it's important to call out their agendas.

Edited Yesterday, 2:32 AM by Clover.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Clover

Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

Yesterday, 2:32 AM #8

(Yesterday, 12:07 AM)Impress Polly Somehow this point has been creatively twisted into me supposedly championing chivalry because the video was from the New York Post.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

YesYourNigel

324

Yesterday, 7:18 AM

(Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM)ShameMustChangeSides
(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

You know, it helps to actually read what a person is saying instead of immediately going for a knee-jerk "omg this person did not clap when someone said boys drool" response.

I am going hard against patriarchal gender roles being sold to women under the guise of "girl power". It is a way to scam women into abusive, unequal relationships because sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

Quote:You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective

Men did not evolve to protect, they evolved to feel like badasses when fighting. Sometimes this manifests as "protection" in the right conditions or if the man has a stronger (still patriarchal-approved) moral compass, but a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

Quote:and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist

Quote:WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

To push back on a conservative gender-role-infested wet dream being sold to women as feminism, as well as conservative gender roles in general. The problem with men is not that they are "weak" or scared or unmanly, the problem is that they do not treat women as human beings.
To push back on conservative women's reimagining of misogynistic evopsych ideas for the purposes of validating said conservative gender-role-infested wetdream. I really don't give a damn if women evolved to swoon over a prince on a white horse who might hit them but at least he defeated a dragon to "save" them (cough getsex cough), I give a damn that this arrangement is bad for women.
This is the least important, but I just cringe at the the general ignorance in how evolution actually works.

Edited Yesterday, 7:21 AM by YesYourNigel.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

YesYourNigel

Yesterday, 7:18 AM #9

(Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM)ShameMustChangeSides
(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

Quote:You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective

Quote:and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

Quote:WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

To push back on a conservative gender-role-infested wet dream being sold to women as feminism, as well as conservative gender roles in general. The problem with men is not that they are "weak" or scared or unmanly, the problem is that they do not treat women as human beings.
To push back on conservative women's reimagining of misogynistic evopsych ideas for the purposes of validating said conservative gender-role-infested wetdream. I really don't give a damn if women evolved to swoon over a prince on a white horse who might hit them but at least he defeated a dragon to "save" them (cough getsex cough), I give a damn that this arrangement is bad for women.
This is the least important, but I just cringe at the the general ignorance in how evolution actually works.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

YesYourNigel

324

Yesterday, 7:57 AM

#10

(Dec 19 2025, 8:52 PM)Impress Polly
(Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM)ShameMustChangeSides
(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective, and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

It's about being contrarian for attention. Can't say I'm unfamiliar with that sorta behavior. Takes one to know one, I guess, but still, at least I've got a bit of self-awareness and self-policing about it.

(writes a long critique of your statement)
WAAH she just wants attention!

Ok bud.

I'd argue a person posting right-wing videos about how men drool because they're soyboys and then bemoans the lack of positive attention given to it is the one who only wants attention.

Quote:Basically though, just notice that she pretty much never offers supportive words, or even reactions, toward anyone, but looooooots of long-winded critiques of others without sources

First of all, lol, "sources"? On a post about how men don't protect women because of some rando guy who didn't step in, and another rando guy (actually a bunch of them) who did? Yeah, that's a real scientific sample size right there. My "sources" are quotes from the person and then simple common sense and logic to show why that doesn't make sense.

Second, I write plenty of long comments about all kinds of things, one of which was previously on your long essay analysing feminism, which I liked. Not that critiqueing should in and of itself be bad - I fully reject "feminism" that's only about "supporting women" because that is how feminism implodes in on itself, because you're obliged to clap at any Nigel-approved crock of shit that any woman vomits out. It happened with libfems and it happened with RaDiCaL feminism. Hell plenty of people balk at the expectation that women should be expected to physically defend each other. So much for solidarity.

Quote:She'll just say anything to contradict me (or really anyone, but especially me for some reason; I'm apparently seen as like a rival or something instead of fundamentally an ally).

Well in your case you consistently say or reference wildly misogynistic things and don't really have much to offer other than shock that conservative rhetoric isn't seen as feminism in a space that was specifically created to be an alternative to that.

Quote:The bullshit implications that I'm not only heterosexual but furthermore a political conservative who derives my perspective on the sexes from "romance novels" are so asinine

I am not necessarily calling you yourself straight, I am saying that you are parroting delusional popular straight ideas romanticising the patriarchy, because that's what women are fed and that's what you've seen get positive feedback in conservative faux-feminist spaces. Which is why you don't really have anything to offer other than bemoaning a lack of said positive feedback. If you want to prove me wrong, feel free to engage in more productive discussion than lazily pointing at what a big meanie I am for disagreeing. You can think I'm a meanie, but actually address what I'm saying.

Also, the whole "moids should be strong and chivalrous" Female Dating Strategy thing is an inherently conservative idea. I mean, it's literally what all the ideas on benevolent patriarchy rely on. If you don't want to be seen as conservative, maybe don't literally say conservative things? Or post approving articles straight from conservative sources?

Quote:She didn't even get the content of the video itself correct in her rebuke (there were several people who came to the woman's aid, not all of whom were men; watch it again), but she wasn't trying, she was pwning.

You're the one claiming men do not defend women on a video showing precisely that. So I guess you failed at that "pwn" then.

Quote:The whole post was just a long-winded justification of the dude abandoning the woman he more for the ones who help in a situation like that.

Oh for fuck's sake...PEOPLE. START ACTUALLY READING WHAT IS SAID. It's embarrassing when I literally copy+paste responses because of how bad you are at it.

Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Christ no wonder the only thing you have is "WAAAH someone didn't clap at a woman's conservative wet dream vomit, I thought feminists support each other WAAAH". When you try to muster up a response, it's just...this. Literally stuff that's already been addressed. Maybe it's time to try being more involved?

Quote:After all, the most important thing in a potentially life-and-death situation like this involving male violence against a woman is that men learn to break with traditional gender roles and not be chivalrous, no?

LMAO mask off, huh? Yes, truly "chivalry" is what will save women! The main problem with the patriarchy is soyboys not opening doors for women anymore! I've never seen this scam before! It's not like that's the main angle the patriarchy has had for centuries!

Quote:Thaaaaaat's what women's liberation is about, right? It's about liberating men from responsibility, no? Only a Christian conservative anti-feminist would have expectations of moids, right?

Yeah, only a Christian conservative anti-feminist would have expectations of moids based in shallow gender roles and not any sort of human rights for women. You think the patriarchy doesn't have standards and expectations of how people should behave?

Actually, I wish only Christian conservative anti-feminists were still trying to rehabilitate gender roles but we have shit like Female Dating Strategy that's trying to rehabilitate gender roles as ackshully 💅gurl powerrr💄 And god is that painful to watch.

I'd take being treated as an actual human being every day over some moid's pinky promise that one day he'll be my knight in shining armour on the off-chance that I get attacked by a rando on the street if I wipe his ass and spoon feed him every day. Fuck moids' "chivalry".

Edited 4 hours ago by YesYourNigel.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

YesYourNigel

Yesterday, 7:57 AM #10

(Dec 19 2025, 8:52 PM)Impress Polly
(Dec 15 2025, 5:33 PM)ShameMustChangeSides
(Dec 14 2025, 10:05 PM)YesYourNigel
Quote:males exist to diversify the gene pool and protect us from predators

The sexes have evolved way way before any sort of notion of "protection" even came into play. Plenty of species have males that barely interact with females, and those that do tend to use their strength to control, rape and isolate females. Males want to control female reproductive function, not arbitrarily "protect" them because they evolved to be knights in shining armours. Males have historically abused, starved, raped and isolated girls and women to the point that female bones tend to have signs of this abuse, and men didn't give a shit as long as women (and girls) kept popping out babies for them. Don't get your ideas on evolution from romance novels plz

Quote:what predators do we need male protection from at this point? Ah yes, other men! Moids who cannot even do that don't deserve female companionship.

Just...no. I would hope that no woman would date a man just because he knows how to protect his "property" or that she'd find that romantic in any way. This is some conservative gender-role-worshipping horseshit. Sure, the guy might beat you or think you're subhuman, but at least he'll be your knight in shining armour when you get attacked, just like in your romance novels 🥰

People don't act like action movie stars, especially if they are unused to conflict, let alone physical conflict, doubly so in the modern world (for better of for worse). I would not blame anyone for freezing or feeling scared. These videos are posted to mock men for not being "real men" by the same crowds who then watch "crazy Karen meltdown" videos. The same men who fancy themselves "protectors" will spend most of their time making excuses for rapists and domestic abusers.

The man who freezes might be someone who's anxious and has never physically fought with anyone in his life because he doesn't like violence or he could be some gamer loser who's willfully isolated himself from any real life difficulties. The man who fights back might be someone who happened to have had to physically subdue unruly men, or he might be an aggressive maniac who's used to blowing up and fighting with other men (in my experience the latter is much more common). Bottom line is that a man's tendency to get violent says absolutely nothing about how good of a partner he is and especially whether he respects women or not.

Also, the person who came to this woman's rescue was, guess what, a man. So it's bizarre to use this example to prove men aren't even good for protecting women when there are countless examples of them doing that because, surprise surprise, men are socialised to feel like badasses when fighting. It says absolutely nothing about how much they value women or their romantic partners. Men do shallow shit all the time that gets sold to women as "protection" and "romance" and women are suckers who buy into it even though men couldn't give a damn about them.

If "cowardice" and "protection" is what we're evaluating people by, then other women suck at that. I have constantly had women stand on the side and not even help when there was no danger, just physical help that was needed, and they wouldn't lift a finger. I also have my doubts that most women I know would have my back if it came to physical confrontation. The difference is that I don't blame them or anyone for reacting this way because I recognise reacting in the moment is not easy and there are far more important metrics to whether someone is a good person, let alone a feminist (although I do think everyone and especially women should be encouraged to be in touch with their physicality for when the need arises).

Why are you going so hard for men rn? They would neverrrrr go this hard for you or any of us.

You start by saying that men didn't evolve to protect, they evolved to be violent towards women, and then switch to saying that actually men are protective, and then switch to demeaning women as a class for not being MORE protective?

WTAF is this? What is your goal here?

It's about being contrarian for attention. Can't say I'm unfamiliar with that sorta behavior. Takes one to know one, I guess, but still, at least I've got a bit of self-awareness and self-policing about it.

Quote:Basically though, just notice that she pretty much never offers supportive words, or even reactions, toward anyone, but looooooots of long-winded critiques of others without sources

Quote:She'll just say anything to contradict me (or really anyone, but especially me for some reason; I'm apparently seen as like a rival or something instead of fundamentally an ally).

Quote:The bullshit implications that I'm not only heterosexual but furthermore a political conservative who derives my perspective on the sexes from "romance novels" are so asinine

Quote:She didn't even get the content of the video itself correct in her rebuke (there were several people who came to the woman's aid, not all of whom were men; watch it again), but she wasn't trying, she was pwning.

You're the one claiming men do not defend women on a video showing precisely that. So I guess you failed at that "pwn" then.

Quote:The whole post was just a long-winded justification of the dude abandoning the woman he more for the ones who help in a situation like that.

Quote:After all, the most important thing in a potentially life-and-death situation like this involving male violence against a woman is that men learn to break with traditional gender roles and not be chivalrous, no?

Quote:Thaaaaaat's what women's liberation is about, right? It's about liberating men from responsibility, no? Only a Christian conservative anti-feminist would have expectations of moids, right?

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

Pages (2): 1 2 Next

Print Thread

Recently Browsing
1 Guest(s)