Toxic Feminism

[Smilephantomhive]

Why are people so obsessed about gender?

 

[StrawberryBoots]

[MENTION=4347]Virtual ghost[/MENTION],

Thank you for your interesting reply. Even though we've gone off-topic, I still wanted to contribute to this threaded hotbed of disturbance by tying everything together with Toxic Feminists in a novel way. However, I must confess, I'm in way over my head, as I'm still not knowledgeable enough on the subject matter.

 

[Starry]

In what ways is it complex though? patriarchy theory pretty much lays it out right in front in you that men are to blame for pretty much all of the worlds problems including every single bit of women's incompetency in just about every aspect of life.

Patriarchy is a system where men have the power and/or where power will always default back to men. <-That's it. It can absolutely not be said that this system is representative or reflective of men. It doesn't represent their hearts and souls...their values...what men want...what men don't want. All it is is a system where...once it is in place, unchallenged...the power defaults to men. Even in instances where men do not want that power or wish to give that power away.

Now we're talking about power though. What we are definitely not saying here is...all of the cupcakes default back to men or all the snowflakes or all the ponies...but all of the power. And when you hold the power you now chart the course for all those who do not. Are you worthy to sit at the helm? Because you will now be in a constant state of having to prove it. And due to the fact not every man is born good or wishes to wield his power in ways that ensure everyone's survival and wellbeing...not every man will be able to justify his power in straight-forward -> honorable and legitimate ways.

The system will...out of necessity...generate it's own mythology. The only way something like this can be done...the only way to justify the power always going to X...is by making Y inferior. That's the only way it can be done.

To me...slavery is an obvious abomination - my god. And yet do I think for one moment that the majority of slave owners went to sleep at night thinking "I'm an evil, fucked-up bastard." <-Hell, no. That's the system's myth. These guys walked around absolutely believing they were good, Christian folks. Shit...many of them convinced themselves that they were helping their slaves by giving them something to do for 18 hours a day and a nice, warm dirt floor to sleep on at night. Because they bought into the myth.

Men and women have worked so hard for decades now to break down the myth...but why would I blame you for example for actually believing you were more intelligent than I am? Why would I? Is it your fault? Why wouldn't you believe you were more intelligent than me?

I seriously question whether feminists ever consider what the world would actually be like without any men. I don't think any of them thought this through.

I would end it all today in a world without men.

It's a politics forum where am i suppose to debate then? and why can't I debate?

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm fine with all of this. You've always treated me respectfully. I was merely questioning whether you cared to debate or not or if your mind is made-up and in actuality you see yourself as merely informing me of the truth.

Simple, there is no problem. The free market decides who is right and wrong for the job. Someone with "x" amount of talent regardless of their color, sex or race would be hired if they showed enough competency because any company that decides not to do so will lose out productivity and financial growth. It's only a problem if you believe that the free market is a problem.

I will say that it doesn't surprise me that you believe the market will ensure the best *man* for the job will always be chosen.

 

[Coriolis]

As this thread has progressed, it has become apparent that some participants are clinging to simplistic black and white thinking. Such thinking not only does not reflect reality, but its repeated and vehement promotion starts to drown out the voices of those actually trying to explain their PoV, or respectfully question/criticise the PoV of another.

Examples of this include notions like:

1. Feminists want to get rid of men
2. Feminists blame men for "all of the world's problems"
3. Feminists all subscribe to "patriarchy theory" as defined in 1 & 2
4. Advocating for women helps only women
5. Focusing on one group precludes any inclusion of other groups
6. There is never a cost to privilege, or a sacrifice made to get/keep power
7. First world problems (national debt) are comparable to third world problems (e.g. starvation)
8. The views of small, vocal minorities represent the majority
9. The only labor that counts is manual labor
10. The statistically greater size and brute force strength of men overrides most other considerations, even today
11. The only families that matter have one mom, one dad, and x kids
12. Dividing labor by gender justifies giving one gender power over the other
13. Having the right to say something makes it valid, useful, constructive, or worth saying

While there may be a grain or two of truth in some of these, they are grossly oversimplified at best, or at worst, just plain wrong and demonstrably so. Then, of course, there are obstructionist tactics like ascribing to someone a position they have clearly stated they do not hold (just a step away from deliberately misquoting); and slapping ambiguous, loaded, or pejorative labels on someone without explanation/justification. Those who resort to such tactics, and cling to this sort of simplistic thinking in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, are clearly not open to changing their views. That is, of course, their right, and their RL interactions will likely mitigate the effects of this perspective in their daily life at least. Fortunately they can do no lasting harm here.

Disco gave the concise version:

Arguing is a waste of time (at least here). Just make your points.

No one is going to change anyone elses mind. But those reading still deserve to hear all points of view.

Yes, indeed. If you want others to hear and better understand your PoV, there is no substitute for actually presenting your own PoV, in as clear and well-supported a manner as possible. You may not change the mind of the person you are addressing directly, but don't underestimate the impact of a case well and patiently made on someone quietly reading the thread, perhaps without posting at all.

For example:

I see sexism as a form of prejudice- which I see as a consequence of human intelligence paired with self awareness divided by the inherent limitations of both. We can recognize patterns and make projections based on them for the sake of self preservation, but we are limited in how accurate or objective the "meaning" we assign those projections can be. The ironic reality is that prejudice sexism and bigotry are not rooted in stupidity, but rather intelligence! To go to war with them is not going to war with ignorance, but rather with an incomplete logic that the limited human mind is nigh incapable of completing. It's a noble but nearly impossible task, yet such tasks are always at the root of our finest endeavors. Christians chide sinners, but first and foremost acknowledge that they themselves are sinners as well. The Leftist Religion, in its current infancy, hasn't yet earned the wisdom and awareness that everyone- including themselves- is prejudice by nature, and that Religions are a service to their members- not everyone else in the world BUT their members, as the Spanish Inquisition christians and current political zealots tend to be. Anyone who wishes to combat prejudice by proxy of sexism needs first to combat it within themselves.

On another note, I believe that feminists who think that the disparity between the general interests of adult men and women stem from sexist social conditioning as children and a lack of encouragement at a young age are on the right track towards truth, but they don't follow it far enough back to quite get there. At the very very bottom, and studies back this if common sense isn't enough, boys and girls have slight hardwired differences in preferences regarding what they want to accomplish. This is pivotal in garnering confidence in particular avenues of life, as the first step in confidence is CHOOSING to attempt something. It can't be forced upon someone, the way self esteem was attemptedly forced on millenials via participation awards. A boy might choose to try flattening his plastic ball with his plastic hammer, while a girl might choose to pick out three flowers that look good together and stick them to the wall. Fast forward 20 years and that boy is fully confidant flattening trees with a chainsaw, while that girl is fully confidant designing interiors. Huge differences in outcome, but a product of their CHOICE, influenced by their biology, not a product of a patriarchal conspiracy to keep women from all the fun crappy paying man jobs.

Now that's more like it. I agree with much of the above, but not all. More importantly, you have actually attempted to explain your PoV with reasoning, examples, and evidence. The reader can learn from this, understand your perspective better, and have something substantive to hang either support or criticism on.

I've addressed this content before in many places, so I won't repeat myself, other than to point out that we will know that observed gender differences are truly inherent when and only when we have removed all external forcing functions. We aren't there yet, but we are getting closer.

Thank you for your interesting reply. Even though we've gone off-topic, I still wanted to contribute to this threaded hotbed of disturbance by tying everything together with Toxic Feminists in a novel way. However, I must confess, I'm in way over my head, as I'm still not knowledgeable enough on the subject matter.

If only others similarly lacking in information would be as forthcoming about it. I appreciate your candor.

Could Jixmixfix be any braver and more vulnerable than he has already been in this thread?

Of course he could, but that is off-topic.

I think so too. I'd love to, but I couldn't safely wield a chainsaw if my life depended on it. Put me on a ladder with a chainsaw and everybody better stand back.

I'm not a fan of chainsaws either, though I appreciate their utility. A bowsaw, axe, sledgehammer, and splitting wedges are more my style. Why I do most of the woodsplitting at home instead of my much larger, stronger husband is just another example of tailoring labor allocation to individual circumstances.

 

[jixmixfix]

Patriarchy is a system where men have the power and/or where power will always default back to men. <-That's it. It can absolutely not be said that this system is representative or reflective of men. It doesn't represent their hearts and souls...their values...what men want...what men don't want. All it is is a system where...once it is in place, unchallenged...the power defaults to men. Even in instances where men do not want that power or wish to give that power away.

There are many forms of power men typically held institutionalized power and women typically held sexual power over men, they were the ones who chose which male they decided to mate with. Furthermore Women choose alpha males because this means that her and her offspring will have the greatest chance of survival. So tell me what exactly is wrong with this? If this is what nature intended I genuinely want to know.

Now we're talking about power though. What we are definitely not saying here is...all of the cupcakes default back to men or all the snowflakes or all the ponies...but all of the power. And when you hold the power you now chart the course for all those who do not. Are you worthy to sit at the helm? Because you will now be in a constant state of having to prove it. And due to the fact not every man is born good or wishes to wield his power in ways that ensure everyone's survival and wellbeing...not every man will be able to justify his power in straight-forward -> honorable and legitimate ways.

So who is worthy of that power if not men? if a man cannot prove his worth he will be out cast by his society and many women will not mate with him. This is exactly why I'm saying patriarchy does not necessarily benefit men at the expense of women which is the typical feminist narrative (not saying you say this) because women will choose the best male mate. Women are contributing factors in a patriarchal society. I don't think a hard on full patriarchy is civil where men are constantly killing each other for approval of women. However competition has always shown itself to be a good thing.

The system will...out of necessity...generate it's own mythology. The only way something like this can be done...the only way to justify the power always going to X...is by making Y inferior. That's the only way it can be done.

You lost me here.

To me...slavery is an obvious abomination - my god. And yet do I think for one moment that the majority of slave owners went to sleep at night thinking "I'm an evil, fucked-up bastard." <-Hell, no. That's the system's myth. These guys walked around absolutely believing they were good, Christian folks. Shit...many of them convinced themselves that they were helping their slaves by giving them something to do for 18 hours a day and a nice, warm dirt floor to sleep on at night. Because they bought into the myth.

Reason why slave owners thought they did good was because many blacks were sold from blacks to richer people in Africa who were generally poor. The slave owner would provide food and shelter to their slaves which would ensure them a form of security.
This is just how things were run at the time society wasn't exactly ideal at the time in terms of development.

Men and women have worked so hard for decades now to break down the myth...but why would I blame you for example for actually believing you were more intelligent than I am? Why would I? Is it your fault? Why wouldn't you believe you were more intelligent than me?

There is no Myth just facts. I never claimed to be more intelligent than you.....

I would end it all today in a world without men.

what?

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I'm fine with all of this. You've always treated me respectfully. I was merely questioning whether you cared to debate or not or if your mind is made-up and in actuality you see yourself as merely informing me of the truth.

Contrary to popular belief I am actually a really good listener and like to hear different points of view. It's when people are obnoxious which I see a lot of in here causes me not to respect other people's point of view.

I will say that it doesn't surprise me that you believe the market will ensure the best *man* for the job will always be chosen.

Of course the free market hires people based on their level of competency not their sex, race, religion etc. Only the true racists will choose otherwise.

 

[Mole]

Why are people so obsessed about gender?

Gender is very successful in our war with parasites. There is a constant war between the hosts and the parasites, and we gained an immense, but not absolute advantage, over our parasites by mixing our genes together.

Of course we don't think about stealing a march on our parasites when we are having sex, we focus on our pleasurable feelings.

Some of us do become obsessed with our feelings, and this is common in a society based on narcissism, and some of us love to think as well. We love to think about natural selection and gender, from where we came from, and where we are going. We find the combination of sexual feelings and thought to be the most deeply exciting activity. And there is a whole literature on gender, perhaps a good place to start is The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir, click on http://uberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/1949_simone-de-beauvoir-the-second-sex.pdf

 

[LovecraftianMonstrosity]

Eh I think it's a phase smart women go through around 24. Over time they learn to express these opinions in more relatable ways with men. Women really so have to put up with a ton of shit. I wonder if you just relate more to the different people as you mature. If I called your thread toxic chauvinism it probably wouldn't get a mature response.

 

[Lark]

I just noticed this is in general psychology rather than the politics and current events.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Gender is a social construct too often confused with biological sex.

 

[anticlimatic]

we will know that observed gender differences are truly inherent when and only when we have removed all external forcing functions.

Forcing functions or influencing functions? The former seems done, the later impossible. The evidence is there. If you reject it on intuition, what's the play to vet your theory?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Some people have dicks. Some people have vaginas.

The two aren't the same. /fin

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

Some people have dicks. Some people have vaginas.

The two aren't the same. /fin

That isn't in contradiction to what I said unless you conflate gender with biological sex.

Personally I think we put too much emphasis on gender and gender roles. I liken biological sex to hardware and gender to software.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

That isn't in contradiction to what I said unless you conflate gender with biological sex.

Personally I think we put too much emphasis on gender and gender roles. I liken biological sex to hardware and gender to software.

I equate "gender disphoria" with mental illness.

But I guess it's just because I look at suicide rates.

 

[ceecee]

I equate "gender disphoria" with mental illness.

But I guess it's just because I look at suicide rates.

And the suicide rates couldn't possibly be because you and people like you continue to assume gender disphoria is a mental illness and make sure anyone with gender disphoria knows your views? Nah couldn't be.

 

[Amargith]

I actually developed a mental disorder from being bullied every day for being what i wasnt supposed to be.

Chronic stress and helplessness like that is crippling and the fear of not belonging in a social animal like humans is very real, very reasonable and detrimental to their mental wellbeing when it comes true - especially in the teen years

I can only imagine the level of this crap transgenders go through every day.

It would affect anyone in a very real and negative way - especially children who are still building up mental and emotional defences as well as confidence i who they are- that s a no brainer.

 

[Kingu Kurimuzon]

All the more reason for people to be less hung up on gender.

I think of sex as a spectrum, with two poles. The majority of people will hover at either end of the spectrum but we should be aware of and sensitive to those in the middle. IIRC, research has shown gay people have similar brain chemistry to members of the opposite sex. And this may also be the case with people experiencing dysphoria. And hermaphrodites would be the most obvious physical evidence that sex is not an absolute binary and that some people are on a spectrum between poles. So we should recognize all of the people on the spectrum and not chastise them. I think if they were experiencing something like a mental illness, it would be due to being forced to fit some role determined by society, their parents, et al--the pressure of being forced into a gender role that doesn't really reflect where they are on the spectrum of biological sex. Gender roles also don't really gel for a lot of people who might describe themselves as androgynous. I'm a somewhat androgynous male, so I can identify.

That's why I said several pages back that I think the SJW and third wave types who advocate creating multiple new gender categories may actually exacerbate this problem. I don't see it as a solution to the old binary gender model that tradcons like Disco advocate. I think the feminists who see gender completely as a social construct are more on the money. However some of them take it a step further and almost seem to feel biological sex is a construct as well and that we're blank slates. In being sensitive to people in the center of the sex spectrum, we shouldn't forget those at the opposite poles either. I think tradcons and some antifeminists make a mistake of overemphasizing sex differences, however I think many feminists also take the opposite extreme of downplaying or ignoring sex differences. Either approach is potentially harmful, in my opinion.

However at the same time I personally choose to respect people who are transgender, so if you want to be a missus or mister, I'll call you such out of respect. don't expect me to know every single gender identity (otherkin? or whatever) but if you call me on it I suppose I'll try to adapt and call you the preferred pronoun if it matters to you. I just happen to believe we'd all be better off approaching people as individuals rather than as representatives of identity groups.

 

[Starry]

There are many forms of power men typically held institutionalized power and women typically held sexual power over men, they were the ones who chose which male they decided to mate with. Furthermore Women choose alpha males because this means that her and her offspring will have the greatest chance of survival. So tell me what exactly is wrong with this? If this is what nature intended I genuinely want to know.

The only thing I think is wrong here is men with MRA sentiments have really taken to using evolutionary theory as if it is scientific fact. And I'll tell you...this is something that I actually have a formal education in as I had originally planned on becoming an Archaeologist. It worries me too...and not even for the reason it is being put forth as fact in the first place (to demonstrate that it is natural for females to be subservient to males). No, I'm worried about what this does to males...when they are tied to such a two-dimensional understanding of themselves based on what any social scientist would concede is absolute conjecture. These are evolutionary theories based on very little hard evidence...and are not merely "subject to change"...trust me...they will change each and every time a new discovery is made. Please do not define yourself by another man's speculation over a couple of clues. Don't back yourself into a corner with another myth.

FWIW The prevailing theory of the day... scientists believe they have identified some sort of 'on/off' switch in our primitive brains...which for females...causes them to bond with the aggressive, alpha male you mentioned when resources are scarce. But when resources are plentiful (the switch is 'off')...females prefer/bond with nurturing, attentive, gentle males (males that are willing to invest heavily in a single mate and their offspring). Social scientists are currently entertaining the thought that it's only the threatened female that finds the aggressive, win-at-all-costs male attractive.

So who is worthy of that power if not men? if a man cannot prove his worth he will be out cast by his society and many women will not mate with him. This is exactly why I'm saying patriarchy does not necessarily benefit men at the expense of women which is the typical feminist narrative (not saying you say this) because women will choose the best male mate. Women are contributing factors in a patriarchal society. I don't think a hard on full patriarchy is civil where men are constantly killing each other for approval of women. However competition has always shown itself to be a good thing.

Yes, we are saying the same thing...Patriarchy does not necessarily benefit men at the expense of women. <-This is Feminism 101 and I hope you believe me here. Obviously, I can't get you to actually read some feminist literature...but I think you would find it quite different than what makes the evening news. At the very least...if you sense that I am truthful and believe me when I say that I don't think anything poorly of men...even the ones doing the kinds of things I'd like to put an end to...I have compassion for. <-If you can believe my account of my feminist views...perhaps you can be open to the possibility that we are not the man-haters we have been made out to be.

Anyway, you have a very idealistic view of how society functions without feminism that it is difficult for me to respond. If you only knew how distrustful I am of society in the first place...hello Salem Witch trials just came to mind for some reason...I think because I just saw some Halloween decorations. I hate society...it is so unstable to me...and I think they are going to do the wrong thing every time. I would most definitely be the person that would end up in a bad relationship with someone that should be cast out of society... and from there I'd end up being burned at the stake.

 

[jixmixfix]

In general, being different in a way that makes people uncomfortable isolates you socially, at best. At worst, it makes you a target for violence and abuse - verbal and often physical as well. Non-stop fearing for attacks on your person, whatever form those attacks take (even if the party doing them just considers them a joke, they can still be experienced as exceedingly traumatic as the person enduring them has no way of stopping them), is exhausting and debilitating. Everyone deserves to feel safe. And everyone deserves to feel loved/accepted. In fact, it's essential to growing up as a balanced individual. Now it's one thing to endure this stuff out there in society, as an adult, when you have a close knit support net at home. But when you're a kid and your own parents or family even torture you for this shit and dismiss you because of it...yeah, real damage is often done, because there is no place to run, to feel loved or even feel safe. Meanwhile, you go to school and you give off an 'off vibe' coz your self-esteem is in the toilet and you become the target of bullies. You're literally stuck in hell, at that point. Considering that kind of rejection happens over mundane stuff like not living up to your parents expectations in sports, or in terms of intelligence, or whatever skillset, you think it doesn't happen when it comes to controversial shit like this? It doesn't take much to kill a child's self-confidence. Just chronic self-doubt and verbal abuse It's the same for animals, btw - I encounter it all the time, in both owner and animal.

In general, being different in a way that makes people uncomfortable isolates you socially, at best. At worst, it makes you a target for violence and abuse - verbal and often physical as well. Non-stop fearing for attacks on your person, whatever form those attacks take (even if the party doing them just considers them a joke, they can still be experienced as exceedingly traumatic as the person enduring them has no way of stopping them), is exhausting and debilitating. Everyone deserves to feel safe. And everyone deserves to feel loved/accepted. In fact, it's essential to growing up as a balanced individual. Now it's one thing to endure this stuff out there in society, as an adult, when you have a close knit support net at home. But when you're a kid and your own parents or family even torture you for this shit and dismiss you because of it...yeah, real damage is often done, because there is no place to run, to feel loved or even feel safe. Meanwhile, you go to school and you give off an 'off vibe' coz your self-esteem is in the toilet and you become the target of bullies. You're literally stuck in hell, at that point. Considering that kind of rejection happens over mundane stuff like not living up to your parents expectations in sports, or in terms of intelligence, or whatever skillset, you think it doesn't happen when it comes to controversial shit like this? It doesn't take much to kill a child's self-confidence. Just chronic self-doubt and verbal abuse It's the same for animals, btw - I encounter it all the time, in both owner and animal.

Damn thats' harsh kinda reninds me of someone growing up as a straight white male in the 21st century.

 

[Lord Lavender]

All the more reason for people to be less hung up on gender.

I think of sex as a spectrum, with two poles. The majority of people will hover at either end of the spectrum but we should be aware of and sensitive to those in the middle. IIRC, research has shown gay people have similar brain chemistry to members of the opposite sex. And this may also be the case with people experiencing dysphoria. And hermaphrodites would be the most obvious physical evidence that sex is not an absolute binary and that some people are on a spectrum between poles. So we should recognize all of the people on the spectrum and not chastise them. I think if they were experiencing something like a mental illness, it would be due to being forced to fit some role determined by society, their parents, et al--the pressure of being forced into a gender role that doesn't really reflect where they are on the spectrum of biological sex. Gender roles also don't really gel for a lot of people who might describe themselves as androgynous. I'm a somewhat androgynous male, so I can identify.

That's why I said several pages back that I think the SJW and third wave types who advocate creating multiple new gender categories may actually exacerbate this problem. I don't see it as a solution to the old binary gender model that tradcons like Disco advocate. I think the feminists who see gender completely as a social construct are more on the money. However some of them take it a step further and almost seem to feel biological sex is a construct as well and that we're blank slates. In being sensitive to people in the center of the sex spectrum, we shouldn't forget those at the opposite poles either. I think tradcons and some antifeminists make a mistake of overemphasizing sex differences, however I think many feminists also take the opposite extreme of downplaying or ignoring sex differences. Either approach is potentially harmful, in my opinion.

However at the same time I personally choose to respect people who are transgender, so if you want to be a missus or mister, I'll call you such out of respect. don't expect me to know every single gender identity (otherkin? or whatever) but if you call me on it I suppose I'll try to adapt and call you the preferred pronoun if it matters to you. I just happen to believe we'd all be better off approaching people as individuals rather than as representatives of identity groups.

I have had my own thoughts on the subject regarding the issue of binary genders vs multgenderism and I personally think overall unless its harmful to the persons own health (For example I would tell someone they weren't a star or a car for example ) a person can be who they want in a non-legal/professional setting gender wise and again its a easy thing to call one by the pronoun they want as its a easy thing to do to keep them happy. I do think having like 500 genders is way too overboard for practical reasons since to legally and socially recognize them all is a huge burden so I would instead of setting a set in stone spectrum instead just let each person find their own place on the spectrum of gender in a personal sense and then work with said identity in a way.

Alas who knows what lies in the future as I imagine society in 100-200 hell even 50 years time will be very different but I think gender is far too ingrained in humanity to change massively as unlike race and some other factors gender is more "universal" for lack of a better word being found across all cultures no matter how diverse or closed off it is plus its possibly the oldest form of role setting in society being found even in animals.

 

[ceecee]

I'm surprised this hasn't been posted somewhere on the forum but it belongs in here.

Your Refusal To Date Conservatives Is A Reason We Have Donald Trump


Conservative men are ass clowns because (wait for it) women won't date them (it's not really the conservative part as much as the men that are ass clowns part, which is party-less but I'll let them think what they want). Excuse me, because liberal women won't date them (Jerrod should have put that clarification in the title of his article). But I agree with Jerrod. Keep blaming women. It's working great for you all so far.