User Tag List

First 42829091929394102142 Last

Results 911 to 920 of 1614

  1. #911
    Senior Member Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,324

    Default

    The problem is not just that people are naive about what feminism is. It's that, before someone who's telling the truth can even explain it to them, some source that hates feminists (and possibly women in general) gets to people first and feeds them misinformation about feminists that makes them sound so crazy no one would ever want to listen to a feminist afterward.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right
    Likes Ivy, BluRoses liked this post

  2. #912
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    The problem is not just that people are naive about what feminism is. It's that, before someone who's telling the truth can even explain it to them, some source that hates feminists (and possibly women in general) gets to people first and feeds them misinformation about feminists that makes them sound so crazy no one would ever want to listen to a feminist afterward.
    So the writing of Ann Manhart, Susan Griffin, Susan Brownmiller, Lilia Melani & Linda Fodaski, the online archives of the National Organization for Women's website and the arguments made in TwoXChromosomes have all provided us with misinformation about feminism...



    You are creating a false dichotomy between been educated about feminism and agreeing with feminism to discredit disagreements without having to answer the content of the arguments. Have you considered that it might be exactly behaviors such as this which make people think feminism is "so crazy no one would ever want to listen to them"? Who knew that intellectual exclusion would have this weird tendency to make people feel excluded.
    Likes jixmixfix liked this post

  3. #913
    Senior Member Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    So the writing of Ann Manhart, Susan Griffin, Susan Brownmiller, Lilia Melani & Linda Fodaski, the online archives of the National Organization for Women's website and the arguments made in TwoXChromosomes have all provided us with misinformation about feminism...
    Right, because that's the reading list of the typical anti-feminist.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  4. #914
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    Because that's how they can win. By using rhetoric to deliberately alter the meaning of established terms like "feminist" until they're ridiculous, they can make feminists look silly. It's easier to turn "feminist" into a slur than to actually argue against the tenets of feminism. It already works for American politicians; look at how the word "liberal" has been twisted into such an ugly slur that nobody wants to be one, and how the word "patriot" has been deliberately used as a catchall descriptor for conservatives while taking advantage of the word's positive connotation to give conservatism a shiny glow. These things don't happen by accident; deliberately changing the meaning of words is a potent tool in culture wars, and feminism is the latest target.
    You have it completely backwords No one has scewed the meaning of feminism more than feminists themselves the people who are against feminism are simply responding and arguing against the current posirion of these self proclaimed modern feminists.These modern feminists include a wide array of those with political and social status such as beyoncee Barack obama and universirites that teach gender studies they have all contbuted in defining what is current day feminism.

  5. #915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    You have it completely backwords No one has scewed the meaning of feminism more than femininists themselves the people who are against feminism are simply responding and arguing against the current posirion of these self proclaimed modern feminists.
    No. You are wrong.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  6. #916
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    No. You are wrong.

  7. #917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarlaxle View Post
    So the writing of Ann Manhart, Susan Griffin, Susan Brownmiller, Lilia Melani & Linda Fodaski, the online archives of the National Organization for Women's website and the arguments made in TwoXChromosomes have all provided us with misinformation about feminism...



    You are creating a false dichotomy between been educated about feminism and agreeing with feminism to discredit disagreements without having to answer the content of the arguments. Have you considered that it might be exactly behaviors such as this which make people think feminism is "so crazy no one would ever want to listen to them"? Who knew that intellectual exclusion would have this weird tendency to make people feel excluded.
    Yes, those writings are out there, and those writers are calling themselves feminists, but if they don't represent the interests of most feminists, just identifying as a feminist doesn't make it so. What you are doing is the equivalent of making every Christian own the teachings of Fred Phelps or making every Muslim own the teachings of ISIS.
    Everybody have fun tonight. Everybody Wang Chung tonight.

    Johari
    /Nohari

  8. #918
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EffEmDoubleyou View Post
    Yes, those writings are out there, and those writers are calling themselves feminists, but if they don't represent the interests of most feminists, just identifying as a feminist doesn't make it so.
    I have no doubt that many gender egalitarians who identify as feminists exist. But why so quiet?

    These "not true feminsts"? They are literally the interest groups representing american feminism in front of congress, in courts, in municipalities & campuses, they are ones making an impact. Let's say I accept your "no true scot-feminist would do that" argument, the nature of the discussion is that valid arguments to be made against them are deflected on the basis that other self proclaimed feminists aren't like them.

    Even in the microscale, within this very thread, I've gotten to speak to both gender egalitarian feminists who you might recognize as "true feminists" and others who follow the dogmatic view who you might recognize as "not true feminists". Why are the first arguing with everyone else for getting associated with the later rather then argue with the later?

    Edit: And @SpankyMcFly can attest that I have openly & thoroughly called him out on it in Vent in disagreements about this very topic.

  9. #919
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    15,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jixmixfix View Post
    Yes and it would of been completely stupid for women at the time to do so and most women at the time would agree as well. Would you have worked full time hours at coal mine steel mill and construction? with little to no safety regulations? due to the lack of technology most of the jobs at the time were labor intensive. This is also why many of the women in third world countries still stay at home as well. Women in society were valued for their reproductive ability and in order for a society to flourish they were protected and secluded from high risk high intensive labor jobs. Feminism is completely toxic it pays no mention to these important facts.
    In those days, even housework was labor intensive, as was the agricultural work that farm women did, and later the factory work they did after the industrial revolution. This last was particularly lacking in safety measures. There were also jobs in medicine, law, clerical work, teaching, crafts, and commerce that were no more labor intensive than the average housewife's day. These were mostly off-limits to women, however, regardless of ability and interest.

    Medicine provides an especially interesting case. Centuries ago, most babies were delivered by midwives. If you are looking for an occupation that should be filled by women, this is it. With the advent of "modern" medicine, male doctors took over this activity from the midwives. Eventually women were prohibited both from practicing as midwives, or joining the ranks of doctors. Some of these rules persist to this day. The result was a medicalization of the natural process of childbirth from which western society at least is still trying to recover. But that is another topic.

    Suffice it to say, women have never been strangers to hard work or danger. The only question is whether they were allowed to compete for jobs on their own merits, and be fairly compensated once employed.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...
    Likes Ivy liked this post

  10. #920
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    834

    Default

    This thread reminds me of this:


    Love the last verse:
    Everybody: We're a little bit country, and we're a little bit rock n' roll
    Stuart: We can be a nation that believe in war,
    Mr. Mackey: And still tells the world that we don't.
    Everybody: Let the flag for hypocrisy fly high from every pole

    Ofcourse, liberals and republicans argue and actively compete for power all the time - not just use each other as talking points (At least not exclusively). But what''s happening here would be the equivalent of american liberals avoided that completely and instead just complained about how the Iraqi are misrepresenting them and holding america responsible to the Bush administration's actions (And having the audacity to do so while the Bush administration was still in power).

    When it becomes realistic to point to the rethorics and conduct in political arguments as a role model for improvement over your own...

Similar Threads

  1. A new INFJ *waves!*
    By moonlit_reveries in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 01:14 AM
  2. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 PM
  3. The Ocean Waves: a NF introduction
    By music_educe in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-16-2007, 08:00 PM
  4. *waving*
    By Sandy in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 08:29 PM
  5. Hello :D *waves*
    By Indranizia in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-12-2007, 04:40 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts