Feminism SUCKS.

[Orangey]

How is anyone responding to this? The OP was basically illucid.

 

[unnamed]

I think that's what I meant by "conceptually". I've personally never come across the type, that proverbial feminist woman that does things to men akin to what PETA does to fur wearers. I'd imagine them so few and far between I can write the subset off as being incapable of rationalizing the subject.



Makes sense. It'd be easy pickings for those of us that made it through

You don't wash them, you go hunting >=)

Honestly,I don't have a strong opinion of don't allow people wear fur.

[Video removed - Patches]

Maybe I just don't like that personally .


But I don't think that's the image of"peaceful women" they want to publicize.
Quite hypocritical.

 

[21%]

I don't think I have ever heard of the "women are peaceful, men are violent" argument in support of feminism (or anything else, for that matter)

Any attempt to claim that one sex is 'better' than another is not feminism -- it's just sexism.

 

[Scheherezade]

Honestly,I don't have a strong opinion of don't allow people wear fur.
[Video removed - Patches]
Maybe I just don't like that personally .


But I don't think that's the image of"peaceful women" they want to publicize.
Quite hypocritical.

this is so last season, the latest episode of GoT shows it so much better, also it s a woman doing this

 

[unnamed]

this is so last season, the latest episode of GoT shows it so much better, also it s a woman doing this

Yeah,I heard about that they used endangered animal skins,rabbit is soooooooooooooooo cheap.

 

[Society]

I wasn't a women's studies major or anything but I did take some classes and read quite a bit of feminist academic writing, and I can honestly say that the bolded is not really even close to what feminist scholars/writers say. A small subset, perhaps. I never really met anybody who agreed with them, though.

see that's always a problem: from the outside, you never know if the stance you hear most often in relation to a group is because it predominates the group, or because it's the loudest and most interesting (a.k.a. offensive) within that group.

just to be clear, what i am talking about is this sort of thing:
- everything violent is blamed on the patriarchy, a.k.a. "this is what happens when men are allowed to rule".
- women are portrayed to be as naturally egalitarian, thus better then the hierarchical males doh.
- correlations between gender inequality and human right violations are selectively picked.
- correlations between female leaders and wars initiated under their rule are explained as circumstantial.
etc..

so you're saying that's not the actual teaching, just the loudest nuts you hear about from the other side?
like i said, i really don't know.

I never said that's what females should be doing. Who said I'm even a guy?

1. i'm a guy *checks to make sure* - yep, still a guy.
2. i was just building on the notion of matriarchy by placing males in the same positions females were in the patriarchy.
3. it was a god damn joke inspired by your quote, which had absolutely nothing directly to do with you.

You make me remind nazi's glorify Hitler build highway.
They don't care the academic stance right or not,which nazi's care that?
They just attack people think different.

1. in the history of discussion boards, the "that's just my opinion" defense has never actually worked.
2. express an opinion about a movement that pushed to equality, you'll piss off the people who gained equality.

Makes sense. It'd be easy pickings for those of us that made it through

sure - easy for you! but can the rest of us to gain equal rights with robots?

I think that's what I meant by "conceptually". I've personally never come across the type, that proverbial feminist woman that does things to men akin to what PETA does to fur wearers. I'd imagine them so few and far between I can write the subset off as being incapable of rationalizing the subject.

i didn't used to think i knew any either. but since the MRA does to some extent represent me now in the very specific legal war of divorce laws & father rights, my life has sort of become something that feminist of that sort have an opinion to express.

 

[unnamed]

1. in the history of discussion boards, the "that's just my opinion" defense has never actually worked.
2. express an opinion about a movement that pushed to equality, you'll piss off the people who gained equality.

You sure that's "pushed to equality"?I don't think so,IMO.

 

[Society]

You sure that's "pushed to equality"?

meh, in the early 19th century the right of women to say no to marriage was being questioned & debated in britain. now we're debating wage difference statistics & cultural nuance. they did something right.

 

[unnamed]

meh, in the early 19th century the right of women to say no to marriage was being questioned & debated in britain. now we're debating wage difference statistics & cultural nuance. they did something right.

I think it just political issue.

 

[Ivy]

see that's always a problem: from the outside, you never know if the stance you hear most often in relation to a group is because it predominates the group, or because it's the loudest and most interesting (a.k.a. offensive) within that group.

just to be clear, what i am talking about is this sort of thing:
- everything violent is blamed on the patriarchy, a.k.a. "this is what happens when men are allowed to rule".
- women are portrayed to be as naturally egalitarian, thus better then the hierarchical males doh.
- correlations between gender inequality and human right violations are selectively picked.
- correlations between female leaders and wars initiated under their rule are explained as circumstantial.
etc..

so you're saying that's not the actual teaching, just the loudest nuts you hear about from the other side?
like i said, i really don't know.

well, it has been a while. I haven't been in college since 1997. But at that time I don't recall hearing anyone say any of that in any women's studies classes, except to point out an extremist position that they disagreed with.

 

[Ivy]

Good lord unnamed, must you post a huge image to go with every single one of your posts?

 

[unnamed]

Good lord unnamed, must you post a huge image to go with every single one of your posts?

It just for MANE.

 

[Society]

It just for MANE.

but i've just said...

1. in the history of discussion boards, the "that's just my opinion" defense has never actually worked.

why are you expecting me to be the exception?

 

[unnamed]

but i've just said...



why are you expecting me to be the exception?

I didn't expect you to be the exception.

 

[Bamboo]

Whenever I see these sort of comments, I wonder why people take something so large - many different people with different viewpoints may describe themselves as "Feminist", and then just lump it into one category.

Either you have a lot of trouble distinguishing between distinct subgroups, or you have a very brief, focused experience with what "feminism" is and don't realize there is something beyond that immediate perception.

It's a good rule of thumb when introduced to any new "group" that you are probably only aware of just the tip of the iceberg and there is more to it that you realize.

You can reasonably be sure there are unknown unknowns.

Or there are other reasons that I'm not sure of.

 

[cafe]

Basically, it's like saying all Christians are like Westboro Baptist, all Muslims are like Al Qaeda, all people that care about animal rights are like PETA, etc.

 

[En Gallop]

I don't really understand this thread... how can equal rights for women be a negative thing? Women are of equal worth to men (or I assume so as I have no reason to think differently) and should be treated as such. To suggest that Mary Wollstonecraft and "feminists" like her "suck" is, I think, rather stupid.

Also, I think the question of whether women are as violent as men is an entirely different topic, and has no relevance to feminism whatever...

 

[Lark]

I don't really understand this thread... how can equal rights for women be a negative thing? Women are of equal worth to men (or I assume so as I have no reason to think differently) and should be treated as such. To suggest that Mary Wollstonecraft and "feminists" like her "suck" is, I think, rather stupid.

Also, I think the question of whether women are as violent as men is an entirely different topic, and has no relevance to feminism whatever...

Is feminism just synomynous with egalitarianism then? If it is why is egalitarianism not sufficient?

I'm sympathetic to some sorts of feminism but over time I've been less sympathetic to all varieties, that said its a very, very diverse and disparity camp to try and generalise about like the OP, I gather, has.

 

[En Gallop]

Is feminism just synomynous with egalitarianism then? If it is why is egalitarianism not sufficient?

.

Yes, in my book; and it is sufficient.

 

[Bamboo]

Basically, it's like saying all Christians are like Westboro Baptist, all Muslims are like Al Qaeda, all people that care about animal rights are like PETA, etc.

Furthermore, I think that extreme groups tend to attract each other, it's like they recognize and agree with on some level not always what but how each other thinks.

Is feminism just synomynous with egalitarianism then? If it is why is egalitarianism not sufficient?

I'm sympathetic to some sorts of feminism but over time I've been less sympathetic to all varieties, that said its a very, very diverse and disparity camp to try and generalise about like the OP, I gather, has.

Well I'll jump on that.

I'd support gender equality before any gendered movement myself but women face issues specific to them, so it seems appropriate. One goal of some who call themselves feminists (shortened to: "one goal of feminism") would be to address those specific issues. In theory I'd support groups focused on men's issues too, but in practice a lot of those groups seem to be reactions to feminism rather than addressing actual problems men have. That said, I don't think it's right to make problems men have illegitimate because they are the oppressors with iron fists commanding the world from atop their misogynist throne.

(cue someone coming in starting a sentence with "nobody/everyone/huge sweeping generalization applied defensively to a whole group thinks...")

So feminism serves a role representing the needs of one group, along with other groups where there is 'intersectionality'. Personally I see it within a framework of anti-meaningless-discrimination goals. (I support merit based discrimination.)