2013-09-23 20:50 PM 138 2,754 115 0 765

Views 138


Video Info & Description

Tommy Sotomayor (super-cool surname pronounced “Soh-toh-my-yore”) on the double standards of having standards. You will often hear the question posed: “Why are women allowed to ____(insert culturally acceptable thought, opinion or action)_____ but men are not?”. Sometimes it’s also phrased “Why is it OK for a woman to ______ but a man can’t”.

A few examples that crush the concept of a fabricated patriarchy:

• “Why are women allowed to hit a man but men are not allowed to hit back?”
• “Why are women allowed to demand equality but are disappointed when a man expects her to pay half”
• Why are women allowed to tweet “short men have no place on this earth” but I am a shallow jerk if I refuse to date women over 30?
• “Why are wives allowed to cheat and collect a payout for it, but men are not?”
• “Why is it OK for a woman to discard all of her parental responsibilities on a whim?”
• “Why do women think vandalism and the destruction of property is their right because he didn’t text her again?”
• “Why are women on the Maury Povich show coddled and treated like poor little victims, after learning he is NOT the father?”

That’s the worst possible non-violent offense against a man there is. So why does Maury give her a hug when she bursts into tears instead of insisting she drop to her knees to beg him for forgiveness? Why did she not even turn to him and say sorry? That should be punishable with a fine of $ 250,000 in the form of 216 monthly payments – the average cost of raising a child to 18. Extract it from her paycheck if you have to. And make it tax free.

Just because she got away with something doesn’t make it “allowed” – or OK.
Some things are also “legal” (or not illegal) but that doesn’t make them right.

It’s not OK. They are not allowed. They only got away with it. Not the same thing at all.

There’s an unspoken clerical error hidden in the question itself. Since she refuses to accept responsibility, someone must. And if she gets away with it, that someone will be a man. Therefore, the very nature of the question “why is it allowed?” implies that it is generally acceptable and you won’t do anything more about it until someone else does. Asking the question isn’t good enough. Remove the question mark, make the declaration, enforce it, and set a newer and better standard. Instead of asking “why is it OK?”, acknowledge it is not.

The line is drawn when you decide it’s no longer OK.

What are you prepared to do to make absolutely certain it’s not OK? Refuse to associate with her? That’s an option. If she is allowed, then it’s already too late and you didn’t practice prevention. That’s accepting responsibility in advance. You will make damn certain it’s not OK. You can refuse to let it be OK by not engaging with her at all. Want to change the world? That’s how it’s done with absolute determination. The only reason she is “allowed” is because men didn’t prevent it. Who cares if others allow it when it’s already too late? Those who attempt to fix what’s so tragically broken in society are not actively doing enough. They have accomplished nothing but allowing p~~~-poor standards.

Tommy is being far too polite by asking the question(s). He makes his point perfectly, but he’s still asking the questions. Change will begin to take place immediately when a man decides “I will choose what I feel like choosing” and he decides that’s the end of the conversation. There will be no polite negotiations, excuses or explanation. If anyone asks, a man will date only slim brunettes under 25 and under 5’6 because he prefer slim brunettes under 25 and 5’6. Who you date is your policy and you write the terms. All of them.

It is allowed for a woman to decide “I will not date men under 6′” but that’s where it gets funny. Not only has she has just eliminated +90% of men on the planet from her dating options, based on criteria This includes Justin Bieber (5’9″), men like Tom Cruise (5’7″), and every other man who worked that much harder to obtain some advantages – knowing how women women are about “height”.

A man could be everything else. He could have fame, power, business success, gobs of money, be a man of integrity and value and she won’t date him because he’s 5’11?

A man is in a position to eliminate women over 32 as potential prospects and with good reason. He doesn’t need to justify it or explain to anyone that women under 30 are the LARGEST population of women who are attractive, available, unmarried, non-divorced and not the mother of someone else’s children. He selects from this group to INCREASE his options of finding a suitable mate and possible mother of his children to build a history and relationship with over time that is worth more than just a D-cup. It’s perfectly sensible to widen his options.

A woman who decided “I will not date men under 6’2” has just done herself in. She’s not even tall herself. She is not in a position to eliminate 90% of men – including Ryan Gosling (only 6’0″)…. unless she really likes cats. Instead of stating her preference, she tells shorter men they are not even worthy of living. In 15 years, these women will have

If you are still compelled to wonder why it’s allowed (and OK) for women to tweet “short men must die”… it isn’t. They only got away with it. For now.