Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

We need a thread to discuss the terrible plague of Manspreading that is infecting our society!

Btw, the above statement is sarcasm (I probably have to say this or Michael will delete this thread).

What is manspreading?

Apparently it is this:
manspreading14-c84ca7ae0350841d96977604c

Or this:
Man-Spreading.jpg

Yes apparently men are spreading their legs too much when riding transport. Not only does this take up more space, but according to leading 3rd wave feminists and social justice warriors it is a form of pecocking and men imposing their patriarchal dominance on females by presenting their junk.

This is apparently such a problem that New York City has made manspreading illegal. Not only that, but arrests have been made. Now of course the cops are primarily arresting blacks and latinos, and they make arrests at midnight when the buses are primarily empty, but that's just a minor detail.
http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/05/nypd-is-now-arresting-people-for-manspreading-their-legs-too-wide-on-subways/

To combat manspreading, feminists on tumblr and elsewhere have been publicly shaming men in cities such as London, New York and Toronto for manspreading via taking pictures and posting them online.

In all seriousness, feminism has long passed the point of 'fighting for equality' and now because fighting against the patriarchy for women's rights is the raison d'etre for so many people, they have to make up problems.

Dear 3rd wave feminists (male, female or other) and SJWs, you may not have noticed this but men have these things called testicles. They are male reproductive organs that are located between the legs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testicle. Due to these organs, it is extremely uncomfortable not to have your legs somewhat apart while sitting if you are male.

Not only that but there is an issue of stability. Men have a higher centre of gravity. Due to that, they have a greater moment of inertia for a given mass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia. Not only that but men have smaller hips relative to their body mass compared to women. To compensate this and to avoid falling on those around you, one needs to have legs somewhat apart while sitting on a moving vehicle. This is not only an issue for men but for women that have greater upper body strength and relatively slim builds.

I can understand complaining about manspreading if someone has their legs like 180 degrees apart, but 30 degrees apart? Seriously? Has our society become so misandric that we have to publicly shame men for existing and having testicles or higher centers or gravity?

Edited by -1=e^ipi
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 172
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Men have testicles if we sit with legs together it hurts our testicles. Well I can only speak for myself. I have large testicles so maybe I'm the exception and not the rule I'm not sure. I can only speak from personal experience. I almost never take public transit since I own a car but I spread where ever i sit down. I must or I will crush my manhood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only is a certain degree of spread necessary, standing up only to shake them out and reposition, then sit down a little wider than before is also sometimes required. I just measured it, and in order to sit comfortably in my office chair, a minimum of 38 cm of spread between my knees is needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear 3rd wave feminists (male, female or other) and SJWs, you may not have noticed this but men have these things called testicles. They are male reproductive organs that are located between the legs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testicle. Due to these organs, it is extremely uncomfortable not to have your legs somewhat apart while sitting if you are male.

Not only that but there is an issue of stability. Men have a higher centre of gravity. Due to that, they have a greater moment of inertia for a given mass https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moment_of_inertia. Not only that but men have smaller hips relative to their body mass compared to women. To compensate this and to avoid falling on those around you, one needs to have legs somewhat apart while sitting on a moving vehicle. This is not only an issue for men but for women that have greater upper body strength and relatively slim builds.

I can understand complaining about manspreading if someone has their legs like 180 degrees apart, but 30 degrees apart? Seriously? Has our society become so misandric that we have to publicly shame men for existing and having testicles or higher centers or gravity?

This is the dumbest thing you've ever posted. I'd suggest leaving the basement sometime and seeing how people actually sit.

Edited by Black Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

Men have testicles if we sit with legs together it hurts our testicles. Well I can only speak for myself. I have large testicles so maybe I'm the exception and not the rule I'm not sure. I can only speak from personal experience. I almost never take public transit since I own a car but I spread where ever i sit down. I must or I will crush my manhood.

Parody account?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have testicles. I assume they are roughly average sized (I've never taken them out to compare, but it would be a reasonable assumption based on my height, build and,uh, other factors). Unless I'm squeezing my thighs together as hard as possible with the berries pushed up in between, I have no problems at all with sitting with my legs together or only slightly akimbo (like two or three centimeters max). That's probably completely normal. The kind of space necessary for comfort is completely compatible with the space allotted to a single seat on a subway train/bus/streetcar and is certainly not the kind of thing described by the term "manspreading."

If your balls are so gigantic as to require up to a foot or more of space between your legs, I'd advise proceeding to a doctor as soon as possible because, brother, there's something real wrong with you.

Edited by Black Dog
Link to post
Share on other sites

If your balls are so gigantic as to require up to a foot or more of space between your legs, I'd advise proceeding to a doctor as soon as possible because, brother, there's something real wrong with you.

If you need 1-2' of space between your knees, you're probably suffering from elephantiasis and should get your sack drained and be put on antibiotics.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have testicles. I assume they are roughly average sized (I've never taken them out to compare, but it would be a reasonable assumption based on my height, build and,uh, other factors). Unless I'm squeezing my thighs together as hard as possible with the berries pushed up in between, I have no problems at all with sitting with my legs together or only slightly akimbo (like two or three centimeters max). That's probably completely normal. The kind of space necessary for comfort is completely compatible with the space allotted to a single seat on a subway train/bus/streetcar and is certainly not the kind of thing described by the term "manspreading."

If your balls are so gigantic as to require up to a foot or more of space between your legs, I'd advise proceeding to a doctor as soon as possible because, brother, there's something real wrong with you.

Agreed, this stems from assholes taking up two full spots on the bus sitting as though they were waiting to be, ah, serviced, yes, it is conceivable that men might need a bit more room for anatomical reasons, but not that much more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I don't think the people in the pictures are spreading legs to far at all. Looks natural to me. If someone was trying to sit next to me I would close them somewhat but if no one is then who cares? Why care? If it's not hurting or affecting you in any way what does it matter? jealousy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I don't think the people in the pictures are spreading legs to far at all. Looks natural to me. If someone was trying to sit next to me I would close them somewhat but if no one is then who cares? Why care? If it's not hurting or affecting you in any way what does it matter? jealousy?

The first one you posted might be a little wider than necessary, but the second one is perfectly reasonable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Similar Content

    • By drummindiver
      Clearly political correctness is getting out of hand. How does the pendulum get back to the middle?
      http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/full-comment/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-b-c-teacher-fired-for-having-the-wrong-opinion
    • By Evening Star
      It's hard to find good coverage of this issue but it seems like it might have major repercussions:
      http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-ruling-in-twitter-harassment-trial-could-have-enormous-fallout-for-free-speech
      http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2014/01/09/gregory_alan_elliott_frustrations_boil_over_in_twitter_harassment_trial.html
      http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/christie-blatchford-the-twitter-trial-of-gregory-elliott-is-becoming-much-like-twitter-itself-shrill-and-uber-sensitive
      http://metronews.ca/news/toronto/448441/alleged-harassment-over-twitter-leads-to-criminal-charges-for-toronto-man/
      Depending on the source, Elliott is either being targeted and silenced for holding views that are in conflict with those of young feminist activists or he was actually stalking and sexually harassing young women online. Either way, this could be the first case of someone going to court for social media harassment.
      What I find curious is that the accusation of sexual harassment only seems to appear in the Metro version of the story. Based on what the Post and the Star report, it seems like Elliott's comments were relatively mild and he is in fact being targeted here.
      Unfortunately, it seems like most of the coverage of this story is coming from sources that I am reluctant to trust, such as MRA groups. Anyone have info or thoughts on this?
      Edited: added link to Christie Blatchford's piece from last week
    • By -1=e^ipi
      One of my biggest issues with using the term feminism to describe a position of gender egalitarianism is that it is an inherently ungender-neutral term and therefore it doesn't make sense to use it to describe a gender neutral position.
      People who identify as feminists often support gender neutrality. For example, using police officer instead of policeman, or using gender-neutral pronouns. However, if gender neutrality is important then should this not also be applied to feminism itself if feminism means gender equality?
      Another advantage to using gender egalitarianism over feminism is clarity. There are many different kinds of feminism (1st wave, 3rd wave, etc.) and feminism can mean pretty much anything from gender egalitarianism to misandric hate ideology. So if you tell someone you are a feminist then this can lead to confusion, where as if you tell someone you are a gender egalitarian, there is no confusion.
      Another issue with using feminism to describe a position of gender egalitarianism is that it subconsciously puts emphasis on a single gender rather than all genders (men, non-binary individuals, etc.). As a result, this can lead to people who would otherwise support gender egalitarianism to dismiss gender issues when they disadvantage a gender that is not female (see men's rights thread that Kimmy started for a list of some men's rights concerns).
      Lastly, since Feminists frame Feminism as desirable and Patriarchy as undesirable they associate female with desirable and male with undesirable. This perpetuates traditionalist gender roles and male disposability. It also sends a continuous subconscious message to males that they are undesireable (a form of micro-aggression), which can lead to males losing self-esteem and eventually committing suicide (males have 4x as many suicide victims as females). If one promotes gender neutrality, male should be equally desirable to female.
      So please, don't be a feminist against patriarchy. Be a gender egalitarian against traditionalism.
    • By -1=e^ipi
      I found this immensely funny, but other people probably won't understand the full context.
      Apparently, the Social Justice Warrior (SJW) infiltration of the mainstream media has gotten to the point where the BBC has now achieved Poe's Law.
      Poe's Law: "Without a clear indication of the author's intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism [by other extremists]."
      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law
      So I'll give some context, an 20 year old British male from York by the name of Godfrey Elfwick created a parody twitter account of Social Justice Warriors. https://twitter.com/godfreyelfwick
      Godfrey's twitter profile describes Godfrey as a "Demisexual genderqueer Muslim Atheist. Literal good guy. Itinerant jongleur. Pronouns are Xir, Xirs Xirself. Filters life through the lens of minority issues."
      If that isn't obvious enough of a parody, I'll list some of the tweets by Godfrey:
      "Don't want to be labelled a rapist? Then respect women's boundaries and remember that consent can be revoked at any time. Even after sex."
      "Remember #FreeSpeech and #HateSpeech are synonymous. Your right to offend stops at my right to not be offended."
      "It's a sad fact that as a trans-black person I suffer worse bigotry and abuse than most other black people. #Racism #WrongSkin"
      "I used to identify as #atheist as I don't believe in God but when I saw how racist the movement has become I converted to moderate Islam."
      "I was born white but realized later in life that I was #WrongSkin and transitioned mentally to black."
      "I have #HIV and I still donate blood. If people are too bigoted to accept it then they shouldn't have lost so much in the first place."
      "Universities should be places where the correct topics are discussed with the correct people in the correct environment. #Feminism"
      "If you're a straight man and you don't find #BruceJenner sexually attractive since he became a woman you're transphobic"
      "Men will be men. Thank god I'm a transwoman so it doesn't apply to me."
      Anyway, the BBC's Angela Sheeran saw one of Godfrey's tweets:
      "I've never actually seen #StarWars but the fact that the bad guy was all black and ate watermelons was unbelievably racist even for the 70's"
      And believing that Godfrey is a SJW with the 'correct opinion' (and unable to distinguish between parody and a true believe of SJWism), she invites him (or should I say xir?) onto her show to discuss the recent star wars trailer. Here is a brief clip:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EabGCJ9rm4w
      The full 'interview' is 8 minutes long and includes Angela Sheeran rambling on about how Frozen is sexist, terrifying and treats women as sex objects.
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...