Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

TV shows and even cartoons portraying men as weak fools.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • TV shows and even cartoons portraying men as weak fools.

    **This article was inspired by Karen Straughan, who mentioned that men or husbands are portrayed as idiots.**

    **Feedback is more than welcome.**


    A large amount of popular shows nowadays portray the main character man, husband, or boyfriend as a goofy, stupid, lazy person. The main character wife however, is portrayed as a smart, self-reliant, strong woman. Don't believe me? Let's take a look at some of these shows:

    The Simpsons (From 1989 – Present)

    The Simpsons is a prime and easy example. Homer Simpson, one of the main characters, who is a father, plays a fat, stupid, and sometimes drunk idiot. Marge Simpson, however is the voice of reason, the smart one in the relationship and the wife.

    Is that bad? Well let's look at the other characters on the show. Bart Simpson, son of the Simpsons, plays the delinquent, troublemaker. Whereas Lisa Simpson, Bart's sister, is the smartest in the entire family, then Marge, then Bart, and finally Homer being the dumbest. (A part of me wants to count the pets as well, and they're still portrayed smarter than Homer.)

    Also I'm not going to count baby Maggie Simpson, simply because she's too young, but at the same time if you've ever seen her on the show or movie, there's already signs that she's smarter than Homer. Giving hand gestures and performing actions that most babies wouldn't be able to do.


    Family Guy (From 1999 – Present)

    Here's another example with more or less the same setup. Peter Griffin is this show's Homer, another fat, stupid, and almost always drunk man. The only real difference besides that Peter drinks way more than Homer, is that Peter is always doing stupid things that either destroy houses or wreck the town. Seriously just type in Peter Griffin on Youtube and you will most likely see acts of his stupidity.

    Now Louis, Peter's wife, seems to be more wild than Marge, but is still clearly the smart, sophisticated (by comparison), and voice of reason in the family; always giving Peter advice.

    Chris, there son is portrayed as yet another fat, stupid person. Meg, there daughter, seems to be portrayed as the one that everyone doesn't like. She's still leaps and bounds smarter than Chris and Peter combined, but always seems to be down on herself because of her appearance.

    Stewie, the baby of the family, is the only child whose seen as a genius. He's on a whole other level when compared to Maggie or any of the Griffins, BUT his genius is usually used to give some episodes some sort of wacky adventure. Like his time pad, or his inventions, and in more recent episodes he is seen as a homosexual and is often made fun of for being so – whether it's him dressing like a woman, or the show giving some sort of hint that he's gay in some way.

    So basically Stewie is seen as either a genius to give that episode some plot, or is seen as a homosexual to still yet AGAIN to be made fun of. (There really isn't any relevance to mentioning Brian, their talking dog, who is still smarter than Peter or Chris.)

    So the only 3 characters that aren't made fun of are Louis, Meg, and Brian the dog.

    --------

    For the sake of article length, let me give you some other examples, but shorter descriptions:

    Home Improvement (1991 – 1999)

    The man of this show is Tim Taylor who is another goof. He's always doing something wrong on his own little show called “Tool Time.”

    And yet again the wife Jill Taylor is the voice of reason and the smart one.

    Everybody Loves Raymond (1996 – 2005)

    The main character, Ray Barone is a sports writer who is still seen as a goof and a joke on most occasions. And again the wife is seen as the sassy and smart one.

    Futurama (1999 – 2013)

    Another show where the main character Fry, is just another stupid clumsy male and Leela is the competent, strong, alien fighting female.

    American Dad (2005 – Present)

    Now this show is slightly different. Francine, the wife, is usually seen as either sexy, stupid, or sometimes the voice of reason to her husband. HOWEVER Stan Smith, the husband, is seen as an over the top macho man whose usually doing a lot more harm than good for the family and sometimes the town; he's still portrayed as an idiot. And let's not forget the kids, Steve Smith is the nerdy, wimpy, boy who tries to get with women and fail; and Hayley Smith is seen as the peace loving, smart, strong woman who most likely is the smartest in the family. (There's no point in mentioning Rodger, as he is a talking alien in their attic, kind of like an alien version of Stewie Griffin, minus of course the intellect.)

    Now I know what some of you people might be thinking, there just shows, they don't have any effect on people; least of all men.

    Well let me ask you something, if all the media like magazines and TV shows make women feel bad about their bodies by featuring “hot” women – then why can't men feel insulted or just feel like it's a joke to become a husband?

    The answer: people just don't expect a man to feel anything, society automatically deems men as disposable and have no problem being making us look like weak stupid fools.

    And since this article is getting a lot longer than I though it would, here's a kids cartoon too, letting the younger generation of what fools we are:

    The Amazing World of Gumball (2011 – Present)

    The father of this family, Richard Watterson, is yet ANOTHER lazy, fat, character; the only real difference is that this character is also jobless – bravo. The wife, Nicole Watterson, is you guessed it, the smart one with a job, whose the voice of reason. Even Gumball, their son is just another idiot. The young sister Anais is the only other smart character who seems to be a genius. (No point in mentioning the fish Darwin, another talking character who is almost as dumb as Gumball.)

    I'm sorry if I made any spelling mistakes or grammar errors, I am a man after all......
    Feminism: Making men perpetual trouble makers and making women perpetual victims - it hurts everyone.
    Feminism isn't about a "sisterhood", it's about victimhood.

  • #2
    It's part of driving men out of the education system to be used as menial labor. You could go through nearly every show and find hardly any decent male role models. The only males deemed respectable on TV are almost inevitably enforcers of violence working on behalf of the state.

    I suggest the book from a Mass Media Professor at the University of Texas called "The CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film and Television"
    Last edited by Androgen; 03-10-2014, 05:32 AM.
    "Women are like that they dont acquire knowledge of people we are for that they are just born with a practical fertility of suspicion that makes a crop every so often and usually right they have an affinity for evil for supplying whatever the evil lacks in itself for drawing it about them instinctively as you do bed-clothing in slumber fertilising the mind for it until the evil has served its purpose whether it ever existed or no" - William Faulkner

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Androgen View Post
      It's part of driving men out of the education system to be used as menial labor. You could go through nearly every show and find hardly any decent male role models. The only males deemed respectable on TV are almost inevitably enforcers of violence working on behalf of the state.

      I suggest the book from a Mass Media Professor at the University of Texas called "The CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film and Television"
      Thanks for the response, I just hate how the husband role isn't even seen as something to respect anymore, and most men aren't going to get married to play the fool or slave.
      Feminism: Making men perpetual trouble makers and making women perpetual victims - it hurts everyone.
      Feminism isn't about a "sisterhood", it's about victimhood.

      Comment


      • #4
        Saw a really good documentary about how this kind of strategy has been used by Hollywood for years in relation to Arabs. It's called Reel Bad Arabs. Worth watching if you have 50 minutes to spare. Available on you tube.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHihlTw5Kck
        Last edited by nawotsme; 03-10-2014, 03:05 PM.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJV81mdj1ic

        What can I say?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by nawotsme View Post
          Saw a really good documentary about how this kind of strategy has been used by Hollywood for years in relation to Arabs. It's called Reel Bad Arabs. Worth watching if you have 50 minutes to spare. Available on you tube.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHihlTw5Kck
          Except Muslims are some of the most vicious advocates of male disposability in the contemporary era, and, indeed, for most of history. It is the one and only religion that was founded and persisted in such a large way based on the philosophy of a brutal, conquering warlord. Muslims despise human rights, they execute men arbitrarily for sexual orientation, they execute atheists and they treat non-Muslims like second class citizens and demand a special tax be paid by them (unless you're an atheist which is criminal in nearly all Islamic countries). There have been 20,000 Islamic terror attacks since 9/11 and there is no closer ally of contemporary feminism than Islam. Feminists want to invite the one consistent and dedicated enemy of western culture for 1600 years into Western nations as a symbol of their hatred of our culture and our men. They would rather be lashed by Muslim men, forbidden education, trafficked, and have no religious freedom than "sexually objectified" by unvilified male sexuality. There is nothing that represents my freedom as an individual less than being forced into a monolithic Islamic system - as nearly all Islamic countries are.

          https://trcs.wikispaces.com/file/vie...of_Caliphs.gif

          Don't get me wrong, I'll take all the Eastern Christians they want to send - Copts, Syrian Orthodox, etc.

          There's a reason that "stereotype" exists in western culture about Islam - and that's because the Qur'an orders Muslims to kill for religion and they take their religion extremely seriously:

          www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmXihHcvibc

          Even the U.S. built Iraqi constitution says:

          "Article 2:

          First: Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation:

          A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established."

          Here's the same "stereotype" from the 14th Century. This is from Chaucer, "The Man of Law's Tale." The Christian princess is to be wed to the Sultan's son, and he has decided to convert to Christianity for her. So infuriated is the Sultaness at her son's willingness to abandon his faith, she has the entire wedding banquet slaughtered violently:

          " These Christian people arrived in Syria with a large and stately following. Straightway the Sultan sent his messenger, first to his mother and then to the entire surrounding realm, to say his wife had truly come. He asked his mother to ride to meet the queen for the honor of his realm. The crowd was huge and the spectacle was rich, when the Syrians and Romans met together. The Sultan's mother, richly and splendidly attired, received Constance with as glad an expression as any mother could show to her dear daughter, and then they rode to the nearest city with slow and stately pace. Not the triumph of Julius, of which Lucan boasts, was more royal or more sumptuous than this joyous assembly. But under it all this scorpion, this wicked spirit, the Sultaness, for all her flattery, was planning to give a mortal sting. 406

          The Sultan himself came soon after in royal fashion wondrous to speak of; and welcomed her with all joy and bliss. Thus in mirth and joy I leave them, for the fruit of it all is what I tell. When the time came it was thought wise that the revelry should cease, and all went to rest. 413

          The time came for the feast which this old Sultaness had ordained, and to it all the Christian people went, both young and old. Here one could see a royal feast, and more fine food and drink than I can describe to you. 419

          But before they rose from their seats they paid too dearly for it. Oh sudden woe, ever successor to the bliss of this world, which is ever sprinkled with bitterness, the end of the joy of our earthly labors! Woe is the end of our gladness. Listen to this counsel for your security: on the day of joy do not forget the unknown woe or harm that follows. 427

          For to tell shortly, in a word, the Sultan and every Christian, except Lady Constance alone, were stabbed and hewn in pieces at the table. This old Sultaness, cursed crone, had through her friends done this cursed deed, because she wished to govern all the country. Nor was there a Syrian who was converted and knew the counsel of the Sultan that was not all hewn to pieces before he could escape. They took Constance instantly and set her on a ship, without a rudder, God knows, and told her to learn to sail from Syria back again to Italy. 441"

          The reason this stereotype exists is because it is based in a very real and very violent reality.

          The fact that a fair portion of feminists didn't jump ship from the left when everyone on the left started getting really cozy with a culture that's been trying to kill us for 1600 years and exhibits levels of misogyny that you'd be hard up to find in the most ardently vindictive MRA shows that the majority of them are about as bright as a smouldering candle in the sunshine.

          However, it is kind of fun to know they're getting played.
          Last edited by Androgen; 03-10-2014, 04:49 PM.
          "Women are like that they dont acquire knowledge of people we are for that they are just born with a practical fertility of suspicion that makes a crop every so often and usually right they have an affinity for evil for supplying whatever the evil lacks in itself for drawing it about them instinctively as you do bed-clothing in slumber fertilising the mind for it until the evil has served its purpose whether it ever existed or no" - William Faulkner

          Comment


          • #6
            I think the problem with focusing on obvious negative representations of males like this is that it plays into a feminist narrative in which male characters are 'free' to be anything they want 'good' or 'bad'..while female characters are 'limited'.

            Furthermore you could make the arguement that negative comedy characters are more about mocking and pointing out what NOT to be...whereas heroes or characters meant to be 'relatable' everymen are more about how people SHOULD be or are supposed to WISH they were.

            To this end I think the loveable loser archtype found in stoner comedies or the senstive modern man(gina) are far more insideous cultural stereotypes. The boorish husband is nothing new.

            The loveable geeky loser, the senstive 'new man' ...these on the other hand are the dangerous stereotypes that have risen in conjunction with the rise of feminism and misandry in our culture.
            Last edited by Maxx; 03-11-2014, 12:13 AM.
            "Being a cunt doesn't make you wrong." ComradePrescott

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Maxx View Post
              The loveable geeky loser, the senstive 'new man' ...these on the other hand are the dangerous stereotypes that have risen in conjunction with the rise of feminism and misandry in our culture.
              We fight for men's rights to not be who they want to be.
              "Women are like that they dont acquire knowledge of people we are for that they are just born with a practical fertility of suspicion that makes a crop every so often and usually right they have an affinity for evil for supplying whatever the evil lacks in itself for drawing it about them instinctively as you do bed-clothing in slumber fertilising the mind for it until the evil has served its purpose whether it ever existed or no" - William Faulkner

              Comment


              • #8
                "The reason this stereotype exists is because it is based in a very real and very violent reality"

                Then we would have to ask if the stereotypical violent wife beating rapist, and weak buffoon male is based in reality. I can provide numerous examples to demonstrate why this stereotype is true. Both historic and contemporary.

                Cesare Borgia wasn't much of a dinner host either.

                I would also ask that you throw away the translation of the Quran that you have because nowhere in the book does it say that Muslims should kill for religion.

                The stereotypes of males being portrayed in the mainstream media is a major concern. Being pre judged based on these stereotypes is the result. I'd rather be judged on my actions rather than some pre existing shorthand method of placing me in a category.
                Last edited by nawotsme; 03-11-2014, 04:21 AM.
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJV81mdj1ic

                What can I say?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                  I think the problem with focusing on obvious negative representations of males like this is that it plays into a feminist narrative in which male characters are 'free' to be anything they want 'good' or 'bad'..while female characters are 'limited'.

                  Furthermore you could make the arguement that negative comedy characters are more about mocking and pointing out what NOT to be...whereas heroes or characters meant to be 'relatable' everymen are more about how people SHOULD be or are supposed to WISH they were.

                  To this end I think the loveable loser archtype found in stoner comedies or the senstive modern man(gina) are far more insideous cultural stereotypes. The boorish husband is nothing new.

                  The loveable geeky loser, the senstive 'new man' ...these on the other hand are the dangerous stereotypes that have risen in conjunction with the rise of feminism and misandry in our culture.
                  Let me try giving an example: Everybody Loves Raymond (Or any show listed above that you have seen.), how many times do you remember Ray, Robert, or even Frank getting slapped by their wives or assaulted by a woman? (Like the cookie lady Peggy beating Ray.) If you watch the show, those parts of the show are seen as "funny".

                  Even if you haven't seen the show, a man getting kicked/hit in the testical/balls or getting slapped in the face, or even just straight up beaten by a woman is seen as something that is hilarious by society; you would rarely see anything like that in reverse. It would be looked down upon and be taken seriously.

                  The point of this article is that even in the media, especially in the media, men are seen as just jokes; disposable, idiotic, incapable of real feelings, worthless jokes. And it's really sad to even just say that, and even if you don't feel that these male characters aren't doing any harm in society - they are definitely not helping us at all.
                  Feminism: Making men perpetual trouble makers and making women perpetual victims - it hurts everyone.
                  Feminism isn't about a "sisterhood", it's about victimhood.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Geos59 View Post
                    Let me try giving an example: Everybody Loves Raymond (Or any show listed above that you have seen.), how many times do you remember Ray, Robert, or even Frank getting slapped by their wives or assaulted by a woman? (Like the cookie lady Peggy beating Ray.) If you watch the show, those parts of the show are seen as "funny".

                    Even if you haven't seen the show, a man getting kicked/hit in the testical/balls or getting slapped in the face, or even just straight up beaten by a woman is seen as something that is hilarious by society; you would rarely see anything like that in reverse. It would be looked down upon and be taken seriously.

                    The point of this article is that even in the media, especially in the media, men are seen as just jokes; disposable, idiotic, incapable of real feelings, worthless jokes. And it's really sad to even just say that, and even if you don't feel that these male characters aren't doing any harm in society - they are definitely not helping us at all.
                    It's called conditioning to be the recipient of abuse. One of the worst things I've seen is women piling on the "Hillary Clinton is immune from violent political parodies" train. I can play a game where I get to beat the crap out of Bush or Kerry or Obama, but a video game where you "slap Hillary" even the Republicans complain about: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3745252.html

                    Of course, this is a woman who, if she becomes President or had become President, she would be ordering killing, violence, brutality, etc.. At some point, as a society, we have to tell a woman that she's lost the "but I'm a helpless damsel" card.

                    Ironically, Maxx was arguing that Joss Whedon's work was misandristic, I was arguing it was not particularly misandristic compared to the large portion of contemporary media, and his shows are the few times in American literature where you regularly see a woman become the target of male violence because of her evil. One thing I appreciate about Joss is that he doesn't give women a "free pass" to be evil and will make them targets of violence when they choose evil (e.g. https://vimeo.com/88736558).

                    Of course, the instances where women are just targets of violence in the real world tend to be less than when men are due to the fact that men are conditioned to be overtly aggressive by contemporary media - and because they're the target of extreme abuses they don't understand the source of: a systemic hatred of men. More frequently than women, men are forced into survival mode because society considers him "expendable" where women are rarely considered such, which leads to more measures that may be illegal but are born out of a sense of self-protection.

                    Of course, I don't think we need "more intimate partner violence" on TV. That I find highly disturbing whether its male or female. It's not something that should be encouraged or praised. Unfortunately, we live in a society that has accepted this proposition, that females are always justified to do violence against men, and, considering that nearly 40% of the victims of intimate partner homicide are male (50% among blacks), it's a very very serious matter that deserves a very serious response.

                    I've been given two black eyes by a woman and slapped by another. I "deserved it" neither time. It wasn't in the context of a relationship either time. I didn't hold it against either, and still consider them both good people.
                    "Women are like that they dont acquire knowledge of people we are for that they are just born with a practical fertility of suspicion that makes a crop every so often and usually right they have an affinity for evil for supplying whatever the evil lacks in itself for drawing it about them instinctively as you do bed-clothing in slumber fertilising the mind for it until the evil has served its purpose whether it ever existed or no" - William Faulkner

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by nawotsme View Post
                      "The reason this stereotype exists is because it is based in a very real and very violent reality"

                      Then we would have to ask if the stereotypical violent wife beating rapist, and weak buffoon male is based in reality. I can provide numerous examples to demonstrate why this stereotype is true. Both historic and contemporary.

                      Cesare Borgia wasn't much of a dinner host either.

                      I would also ask that you throw away the translation of the Quran that you have because nowhere in the book does it say that Muslims should kill for religion.

                      The stereotypes of males being portrayed in the mainstream media is a major concern. Being pre judged based on these stereotypes is the result. I'd rather be judged on my actions rather than some pre existing shorthand method of placing me in a category.
                      Except these stereotypes are systematically endorsed in society. Islam systematically endorses violence to enemy factions. Guilt or innocence is determined by adherence to religion. Citizenship status is determined by orthodoxy.

                      Additionally, Islam has made itself known as a persistent and avid enemy of western society since its inception and subsequent conquest of over half the Roman Empire. Make no mistake Muhammed and his successors were very much a medieval Hitler - marching steadily through Africa, the Middle-East and into Europe conquering everything in their path and forcing conversions by violence. In subsequent years they have expanded further East due to the Catholic defense of Europe and headed towards India where they are equally despised by the Hindus and Buddhists for their barbaric violence and totalitarianism.

                      It is far different for a culture to apprise people of a persistent, longstanding foreign enemy than systematically demonize their own citizens.

                      Islam has made zero concessions in its countries towards non-Islamic values, there's no reason to suspect they ought to be regarded as anything but hostile to our culture. Individuals, of course, may not share these values, but until the Middle-East as a whole changes its views, they are justly regarded with deep suspicion.

                      Domestic violence has nearly always been hated in western society. I've seen a few ads and the like from the 30's or so that seemed to endorse it - but I still have trouble believing anyone was systematically endorsing this philosophy. The Sir Walter Scott chivalry junk has been so engrained in western society that I find it hard to believe that there ever was a time when men actually regarded beating women as a normal and acceptable behavior. "Defend the women and children" has been the rallying cry of western society for centuries. You can find it throughout Chaucer, so it's at least 600 years old.

                      There are countless instances where Islam has regarded violence against Christians and Jews as acceptable behavior. Hence we apprise our citizens of a real and legitimate safety concern. Make no mistake, western culture has been imperialistic, but Islamic culture has been as well. We just ended up being generally better at it when we started making huge technological advances which is why people view Islam as some sort of "victim" of the establishment of the state of Israel.
                      Last edited by Androgen; 03-11-2014, 11:02 AM.
                      "Women are like that they dont acquire knowledge of people we are for that they are just born with a practical fertility of suspicion that makes a crop every so often and usually right they have an affinity for evil for supplying whatever the evil lacks in itself for drawing it about them instinctively as you do bed-clothing in slumber fertilising the mind for it until the evil has served its purpose whether it ever existed or no" - William Faulkner

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Makes me wonder how it's lasted as a religion really. Salat 5 times a day, out slaughtering Christians, Jews and unbelievers, and then home to beat your 4 wives. Not much of a life.

                        It's just not my experience having lived with Muslims.

                        On the issue of stereotypes, it seems to me to be the first step in a process. Stereotype, stigmatise, and then dehumanise. I see elements of each of these in my culture relating to men. The OP points to the first, rape culture being an example of the second, and the disposable male relates to the last. May be worth examining these as a process rather than individually.
                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJV81mdj1ic

                        What can I say?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by nawotsme View Post
                          Makes me wonder how it's lasted as a religion really. Salat 5 times a day, out slaughtering Christians, Jews and unbelievers, and then home to beat your 4 wives. Not much of a life.

                          It's just not my experience having lived with Muslims.

                          On the issue of stereotypes, it seems to me to be the first step in a process. Stereotype, stigmatise, and then dehumanise. I see elements of each of these in my culture relating to men. The OP points to the first, rape culture being an example of the second, and the disposable male relates to the last. May be worth examining these as a process rather than individually.
                          Hey, don't get me wrong - I think invading their countries is a waste of money and human life. It's not a stereotype that they believe in executing gays and atheists, that they treat Christians and Jews as second class citizens, that they have imperialistically conquered huge portions of land and play victim because that little tiny piece that is Israel is given back to its owners, that they chop off body parts as punishment for crimes (meaning amputation for punitive measures), that there have been 20,000 terror attacks since 9/11, that they do have active, written and discovered plans to invade and start war against the western nations, that they do not believe in any concept like "separation of mosque and state," that they do believe in capital punishment for "blasphemy," they don't believe in freedom of speech, they don't believe in the freedom to drink, etc.

                          They are incredibly opposed to everything that Western Society is supposed to stand for. The difference is that Muslims are not unfairly stereotyped, men are.
                          "Women are like that they dont acquire knowledge of people we are for that they are just born with a practical fertility of suspicion that makes a crop every so often and usually right they have an affinity for evil for supplying whatever the evil lacks in itself for drawing it about them instinctively as you do bed-clothing in slumber fertilising the mind for it until the evil has served its purpose whether it ever existed or no" - William Faulkner

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I have no idea how many gays or atheists or "blasphemers" were executed last year.

                            Christians and Jews as second class citizens, i know that where I live there is a large group of people treated this way based on the colour of their skin.

                            Imperial conquest, I'm not even going to go into that one.

                            I have heard of amputation being done, but have never met anyone who even knew someone who has had it done. The threat seems to keep levels of crime to a minimum.

                            I feel sure that the 20k terror attacks are related more to civil wars rather than directed at western targets.

                            This line of reasoning would be reduced to the "white swan" hypothesis.

                            I disagree when this reasoning is applied to all men, and disagree where it is applied to all Muslims (or any other large group of people).
                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJV81mdj1ic

                            What can I say?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Maxx View Post
                              The loveable geeky loser, the senstive 'new man' ...these on the other hand are the dangerous stereotypes that have risen in conjunction with the rise of feminism and misandry in our culture.
                              Why exactly do you think so? Im just interested.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X