A continuation of my review of this following article. Again I suggest that you read and review this and other articles at this site
In part 7 I finished at code brown but there’s clearly more.
Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)
Discussion: The target’s sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question. Examples:
“Are you gay?”
“I need a real man, not a sissy.”
“You’re such a wimp.”
Response: Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.
This one gets tossed at MGTOW’s more frequently than any other group in the greater men’s movement. Mostly because with MGTOW there are more than a few people that cannot even conceive of any other alternative other than the straight up pair bonding. The current cultural climate has also de-facto made MGTOW a negative thing. Naturally MGTOW that have already left the plantation can just laugh this off. MRA’s, on the other hand, are sometimes with someone and sometimes not. There are also a few homosexual MRA’s starting to surface as well, as the feminist veil slowly comes down. No matter how you break it down a person’s sexual orientation has no connection to the issue being discussed most of the time.
Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)
Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women. Examples:
“I’m not like that!”
“That’s a sexist stereotype!”
Response: One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men. Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point. Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing. Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.
Yes, woman especially feminists can and do make overgeneralized statements of men on a regular basis. In fact, this tactic is quite commonly found not just in the comments section but in entire articles! Gamergaters also find themselves subject to having to deal with AGGers attempting to project the actions or opinions of one Gamergater to mean that ALL of them are like this. Unless they’re in an echo chamber site, these posts and articles are routinely mauled and torn to shreds. Ironically enough I can remember in the early 90’s Prominent Blacks complaining about how they had to answer for the actions of some idiot who’s only connection to the person was because they both happened to have the same skin colour.
Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)
Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:
“You misogynist creep!”
“Why do you hate women?”
“Do you love your mother?”
“You are insensitive to the plight of women.”
“You are mean-spirited.”
“You view women as doormats.”
“You want to roll back the rights of women!!”
“You are going to make me cry.”
Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or“argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).
Ah yes, if you’re around long enough (AKA very soon), it’s guaranteed that you’ll have this one tossed at you. What the original author of this article says holds true. What is pro-male isn’t necessarily anti-female. Not that this will work with the rad-fem crowd in the least. I’ve also encountered this code when I start winning an engagement online. This can and does get used to dismiss your arguments as invalid because well you’re a misogynist! The response I bring to it is a couple of things; one my relationship with the woman in my family ISN’T pertinent to the discussion and/or; Simply calling me something doesn’t make it true and please get back to the original point. Generally once they’ve been reduced to name called (aka calling you a misogynist), they’ve usually used up all the ammo they have. That’s not to say they’ll shut up though some people are too stupid to realize that they’ve been knocked out and will simply keep talking. I ran into a guy like this just recently who went on for a whole month.
Charge of Instability (Code White) – The White Padded Room Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable. Examples:
“You have issues.”
“You need therapy.”
Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.
This one is very similar to a lot of the previously covered codes. It tends to come out when the person you’re dealing with is starting to lose, or simply wants disbelieve what you said. Like the original post says, ask what part of what said was crazy and then ask for an explanation of what part of a person’s research is crazy. I get this quite frequently in regards to political compass when either people on the far right or left get pissed off when they’re shown that a particular person’s political positions aren’t anywhere near where they wished it was.
Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)
Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory. It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits. Examples:
“You are so materialistic.”
“You are so greedy.”
Response: It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge. For instance, one may retort, “So you are saying I shouldn’t spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you —and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?”
Very similar to code lavender except that in this case the person you’re dealing with has decided that you’re selfish as opposed to being a homosexual. This one is personal for me. I had to battle like a wolverine to establish my identity. Part of that identity was so self-identify as MGTOW as well an MRA and Red Piller. That fight has made me realize that I have the right as a person to live my life the way I see fit as long as I do no harm to others
Given the sensitive special snowflakes we’re dealing with a lot of the time, stepping on toes is necessary more often than I’d like it to be.
Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) – The All-That-Glitters Charge
Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences. Examples:
“If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …”
“How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”
Response: Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, “high-maintenance” women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).
As a male, you have preference. I like large boobs and redheads. I also dislike blue haired, 350 pound heavily tatted land whales. It’s called a preference guys have it, and hopefully nobody here is so epic stupid as to try and say that women don’t have it either. Some men and women even prefer their own gender yet somehow it’s not OK to be avoiding certain types of women. I frequently have the comeback that women quite frequently judge a guy based on the amount of bling he shows off (Cars, clothes, jewelry, etc.) and that this is also a form of objectification. The number of women and men that then try to claim that this isn’t the case is staggering even when they agree that cars, clothes, etc. are objects! In short you can and should have filters up. And there are examples aplenty as to why you should avoid certain types of women.