‹‹ Back to the Serious discussions Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 [20]
Posts: 583  
Users visited: 353  
Search this topic:  


The original post

Posted by on 22.10.2006 at 20:47
I'm really tired of all the feminists who blames every single bad thing in the society on the men.

A few years ago the leader of the national organisation for women- and girl-helpcenters (dont know the proper english translation) said, in public, that all men are pigs. How the hell can she say something like that? How the hell can women draw the conclusion that ALL men are bad?
Afterwards, when it had been on the first page in every newspaper, there was a reporter who asked her if she still meant what she said. She answered "But all men ARE pigs. Don't YOU think so?"
When I heard that I was like "whoa!" I mean, she sounded like a freakin maniac. I was honestly scared.

Another feminist debate in Sweden was whether we would boycott the FIFA World Cup just because prostitution is legal in Germany. Some stupid feminist (can't remember name) wrote a blog about that men "should take their responsibility". She said that if you're not against it, you're with it. How the hell can she really believe that i can't enjoy football without having to fuck a prostitute after a game? Talk about preconceived opinions.
"Men are pigs" pfff... That fucking feminist blogger is nothing but a filthy animal.

Since a new party started in Swedish politics, Feministic Initiative, I am no longer a feminist. I do believe that men and women should be equal to eachother, but the word feminist has got a new meaning to me. Feminism is now a synonyme to the word "sexism".
This party wanted all men to pay a certain tax that would pay for the rehabilitation of beat up women. Fucking fascists!

And have you heard about the book "The SCUM-manifest"? The author basically says that men are the reason why the world is as bad as it is, and that all women should exterminate the male gender. Hmm, that sounds familiar somehow. Could it be MEIN KAMPF, written by freakin ADOLF HITLER??? Only the word "jew" has been replaced by the word "male".

I am not a feminist, but I am a feminimasculinist. I don't want women to run the world. I want both men AND women to do it. Therefore, I am a feminimasculinist.
All feminists should burn in hell. Boycott feminism.



Page 20 of 20

IronAngel

Posts: 4409

Age: 25
From: Finland

  28.11.2014 at 21:47
The Sarkeesian deal is complicated. It tends to be polarized to "for" or "against" but the truth is something else and people have been misled by jumping on the bandwagon.

Sarkeesian herself has a poor method: she claims more credibility for her "research" and "analysis" than it warrants, going so far as to suggest it's fit for educational purposes. She is selective and misleading in providing evidence for the case, generally completely omitting anything that might qualify or contradict her statements. She systematically looks for material to support her preconceived notions rather than genuinely attempt to test and refute her own hypotheses. In short, her approach is political rather than academic. I have a particular distaste for her technique of cutting game footage out of context to run in the background of her video, not directly commenting on it (so that she need not defend against counter-arguments because she's not actually not claiming anything) but rather letting the watcher draw the implicit connection between what she's saying and what is being shown. This is a cheap trick and means she actually has much less evidence for her case in each video than it appears. Not once have I seen her question herself and admit that the issue with a particular game isn't as black-and-white, or that there are different games too. Then there are cases where she just atrociously twists the truth, like the infamous Hitman strip club scene. (I must admit here, however, that I haven't watched nearly all of her videos.)

On the other hand, the phenomena behind what she talks about are more or less true, even if she doesn't do a very good job at analyzing them. The video game industry does tend to do a poor job representing women, and it deserves to be recognized. It is irrefutable that sexualized female characters are overrepresented, even the norm, in video games. Prostitution and strip clubs are a universal signifier of "seedy urban environment", used much more frequently than "realism" would warrant. Female characters tend to come in a few archetypes (femme fatale, strong wo-man, cute and geeky, gentle caregiver, damsel in distress, whatever) and are often overly defined by this gender-related archetype. There is much more diversity to male characters, and that is a fact.

Then again, this is just a general trend we're observing. There are plenty of exceptions and shades of gray in reality. Sarkeesian (to my knowledge) never mentioned great female protagonists who weren't defined in terms of their gender, like Heather in Silent Hill 3 or Jade in Beyond Good & Evil. There are many games who let you choose the gender of the protagonists, and some (like Mass Effect) make it work incredibly well and empower all sorts of players to identify with the hero. Ironically, though, Mass Effect doesn't do as good a job with the rest of its cast, offering quite stereotyped and sexualized women to party up with and fuck.

Aaaand on the other hand, this isn't particular to video games. A lot of the hate against Sarkeesian probably stems from her appearing to call out video games in particular as a bad medium (though I don't think she does; it just happens to be the subject she's discussing). In truth, the limited scope of female representations is a feature of our culture in general, and especially mainstream entertainment, be it books, films or TV commercials. Video games are just one symptom and, I would argue, nowhere near the worst offender. If anything, video games have a greater potential for subversion than bigger media like Hollywood blockbusters, due to production costs and the ability to offer many alternate stories/characters in a single game. But that doesn't mean these bad tendencies shouldn't be exposed and criticized in video games as well, as long as we remember they aren't particular to them.

We must not forget that this isn't solely a female-related issue, either. There are plenty of male stereotypes, too. They are just more numerous and not as overtly defined by their gender. All in all, I am not against any specific representation, male or female, but I think there ought to be more diversity, more critical reflection on how we depict men and women in video games, and more courage to break the mold. This is already done in plenty of indie games, and a few mainstream titles, but the biggest franchises are woefully guilty of misogynistic and one-dimensional clichés.

Then again, you could ask whether horribly misogynistic games like GTA are such a big deal. I don't think they are. Some critics/feminists are a little inconsistent here, I feel: diversity of options is critical, and that ought to mean of good and bad options both. A gaming monoculture of any kind is undesirable, and that means we can't dictate the acceptable kinds of representation of men and women - that would just be replacing one cultural discourse with another. For true freedom and equality, we need to tolerate the kind of offensive (but fun, to some) games on both ends of the spectrum, whether they involve banging whores before shooting them, or abusing the genitalia of male rapists. Let people choose the kind of games they want to play and identify with.

One thing is clear: whatever the merits of Sarkeesian in uncovering and demonstrating misogyny in gaming (very few, I think), the violent reaction against her is ample proof that there exists a very vocal section of male gamerdom on the internet who are rampantly misogynistic and whose attacks, motivated as they might be in part by justified frustration, demonstrate the continued need for feminism. She has been attacked, not for the technical fallacies in her argumentation, but for being a woman and for being a feminist, and in terms which are gendered. The Gamergate phenomenon, too, betrayed a misogynistic attitude towards female commentators rather than men who said much the same things. I don't think there is a widespread culture of misogyny on the internet, specifically, but I think our culture is such that it enables gendered attacks on women specifically (whereas men are more often attacked on other grounds). I have never been threathened or criticized in terms related to my manhood; you'll find few active female bloggers who haven't been belittled due to being just a girl, commented upon sexually (even that redhead science chick on YT is almost exclusively praised for her "sexy voice"!) or threatened with rape. It's not necessarily that women are attacked or criticized more than men, as a rule. (I don't have solid statistics on this.) But when they are, it's clearly done in gendered terms, whereas men are held to some more universal standard (of political opinion, profession, age, proficiency of argumentation or whatever).

In the end, though, it shouldn't be about how you feel about Sarkeesian. It shouldn't be about how many stupid, exaggerated feminazis or misogynists you've argued with on the internet. There are stupid people on every side of every argument. That shouldn't blind you to the real problems behind the debate. You just need to distance yourself from the trenches and take a cool, analytical look over the issue to realize it isn't as simple as it's made out to be.
Rasputin

Posts: 236
From: USA
  29.11.2014 at 09:01
"Look. What you are mentioning here is not a clusterfuck at all. Of course men are, on average, stronger than women. That is, indeed, why some men have no problem in overpowering a women when wanting to rape them. But does that make them submissive to men? Of course not. Women have the right to do whatever they want, just like men. And this should be common sense. That is why the position of women can be equally strong (look at how this doesn't necessarily imply 'physically strong') and independent to the one of men, but at the same time they are sometimes afraid of men to overpower them because men are physically stronger. What is so hard to understand about this? It is completely logical to me that women are sometimes afraid of men to overpower them, this is why feminism exists. If only some men could just refrain from violating women like that..."

But that is the thing man, the feminist front is working on rewriting biology even. I read an article, a feminist driven article towards A&P part of things, and I was shocked to find that they stated that the reason why the men are allegedly stronger (it agreed at that time that males are stronger which confused me at first) because they are peer pressured from an early age to work on their upper body strength. And not, what many feminists I tried to debate with argued about was that women are as strong and if not better than men. It's funny how you say that woman are sometimes afraid of men to overpower them, yet they do nothing to thwart a potential rape situation. Then they continue to scream about "rape culture." Well, the men who violate woman like that are a vast minority, and they are breaking the law already, what I find hard to understand is this constant fight against potential rapists, by physically and socially doing nothing, aside from posting articles and inciting arguments, in which you as a male lose, because you get blamed to be a rape apologist, or just right out blocked. It is unfathomable for some people that you can be someone who does not support feminism, it is synonymous with being a bad person almost. The thing is, I understand where you are coming from with your view and defense of feminism, and on some level I would agree with you, but as I stated before the feminism you believe to support, is not the same feminism that they support, that's where the problem lies. If anyone for a second thought that there were not issues with feminism, I think everyone, or at least a vast majority would accept feminism as equally as we accept today that slavery should be outlawed, but the problem is that feminism is not an issue that is black or white like that, it has levels of gradation and too many shades for my taste to accept and embrace. Did you follow the recent incident with the comet probe guy when he attacked by one of the feminists by wearing a "sexist" shirt? The feminists exploded online about this issue, and called this guy a pig and numerous other names, for wearing a shirt that his female friend made for him. Now, these same people, who had issues with objectifying women defended the hell out of Kim Kardashian and her naked photoshop ass and stated that it was alright that she did that. Facepalm on a facepalm. Then you had Anita Sarkeesian attacking games and gamers by completely taking everything out of context and making up shit. So when she got trolled and received threats, she started crying and blaming patriarchy again and all that other happy jazz. Then you had some broad who wanted to make video games where a female gamer dies equal to a "rape zone" and that killing female gamers in games has the same effect as rape in real life, and that causes fear in female gamers and something should be done to stop that. Do you want me to continue? This is just recent BS, the insanity continues.

"To me it doesn't make sense at all that dolls and toy vaccuumcleaners are targeted at girls while action men, videogames, Lego and anything encouraging creativity at boys. If a boy wants a toy vaccuumcleaner, let him have it. If girls want to make things and use their creativity, give them paper and pencils or Lego. It is interchangable and it really should be. In every toy magazine this still is so extremely skewed and split between the typical pink and blue. This should just go. And that is what feminists are fighting against. To me that is completely logical. Why should there be this seperation?

Next to that, I don't think you should feel offended. I highly doubt they are really attacking men in general. I think this is much more about the overall preference for men and that women with the same qualities are much less likely to get chosen for something like a job interview. That is this patriarchy thing you seem to hate so much. That term does not mean at all that women should hate men, or the other way around.

About Sarkeesian; one may completely agree with her statements or one may think she is exaggerating things. Whether you agree with her or not, she does not deserve the threats she received.
Videogames have been targeted at guys for years. Now more and more women are playing videogames and start to notice the quite sexist way women are portrayed in games. There is nothing wrong in changing future games a little bit to make this go away."

I don't disagree with that being equal, but I disagree with you that the feminists are arguing to change that just because of that. I think there are many other things going on here. I'm not a Psychologist or Sociologist, but I would like to see some data as to the development of the child and influence on that development by the toys he/she are playing with.

But that is just it, they have no evidence to prove their claims. They still claim that a woman makes 78 cent to a man's dollar and that simply is incorrect. I don;t know how long, or how much are you actually involved with feminism and feminist issues, but the more I read and observe, the more I see ingrained hatred towards men that is both overt and covert. Maybe you will see it in the end, maybe not, after all you and I are just discussing things.

I think she had it coming, and for that matter anyone regardless of the sex/gender would've gotten the same. You have another antifeminist called Thunderfoot, he gets threatened all the time, but no one cares because 1) he is a guy, 2) he does not make a big deal out of it like she does, 3) threats made by trolls should not be taken seriously. Internet is internet, it is anarchy and that is what should be expected. You are right, games and gaming industry revolved mostly around males and the games were targeted for that audience, however, the game creators are also females, and they also have a contribution to it, so you can't blame "Patriarchy" for that. Second of all, her argument was illogical, misinformed, driven by disdain and manipulation, not to mention it was not well researched at all. We seem to be having 2 completely different modes of operation that cannot function in unison. There is a choice, you either do not objectify women or you do, there is no middle ground here, that seems to escape most feminists. They complain when women are portrayed a certain way in the media, yet they contribute to it willingly. So make up your mind already. The other thing with Anita's argument about no strong female characters is total bullshit, and honestly from the capitalist standpoint, if you do not have a market for something, why would you make a game and lose your money? She even pitched a video game idea that was not picked up by anyone. Why? Because there simply is no market for it. Patriarchy has nothing to do with that, yet again.

"Straight people don't get to determine what homophobia is. White people don't get to determine what racism is like for people of color. Men don't get to determine what women consider harassment.

Since I am male, I'm probably not 'true'. That doesn't make me less supportive for their cause. Men should not harass women. Men should not rape women. Women should not be forced into prostitution. Men should not get paid more for the same job as women. Women should have the same rights as men. It doesn't get more true than that.
You are fighting against this mirage of 'feminazis' while true injustice is being done to women globally."

I agree, straight white men don't determine anything, we are just things to be acted against in this modern society. Straight is the benchmark of nature, which makes homosexuality an aberration. The blacks or any other so called "minority" are not above and beyond discrimination themselves, as we can see in Ferguson, where the white people who came to support the blacks were basically insulted and attacked verbally by being there. Racism exists everywhere, the white people don't have a monopoly on it. And men seem to be obsolete and their issues irrelevant. If only a woman can dictate what harassment is, then I am sorry but that is bullshit, you are giving one group too much power to control a very important issue in any society, and that is the issue or relationships, love, sex and dating. What we have right now is this projection of absolutes, that only women for instance can determine and dictate and change their mind about being sexually assaulted or not. That is the problem where our world is heading, when we worry more about offending someone and catering to someones emotions over dealing with the real issues at hand.

Define me harassment? Men should not rape women, and humans also should not commit murder, lie, cheat and steal, but it is a part of human nature, good luck changing that. Many women these days think that prostitution, porn and stripping is a form of empowerment so good luck there, they are being manipulated into believing that that is fine and that is just wrong, but I agree that they should not be forced into prostitution. Women already have the same rights as men under the law, if not more. Men do not get paid more than women for the same job, if that was the case, men would be fired and the woman would be working, because why would I pay a man a dollar more when I can pay the woman a dollar less. Does not make any sense from economical standpoint. I am not fighting against a mirage, you are just not seeing what I am seeing, and the most damage that is being done on females globally is coming from themselves.
Twilight
IntepridTraveler

Posts: 1173
From: The Netherlands

  29.11.2014 at 11:34
Not only women can dictate what harassment is. Men can do that too. What I said was that only women can say what they consider harassment for themselves. The same can be true for males. I am really not picking a side here, but I think you know that. And I think we both know what harassment is.

I am getting the feeling you are almost seeing feminism as some sort of threat to modern society. Like a lot of people are also afraid of the Islam taking over the western world for some reason. Your fears seem very similar to that, but instead the male population is being threathened. I don't get that. No one is taking over anything. Feminists just want to be treated equal and have equal rights. And there really is some ground to be won here. Maybe women have equal rights on paper or in the constitution, that doesn't make it real yet, unfortunately. And if you don't believe women get paid less than men, well yeah, I guess I can throw some more evidence about this toward you, but I don't think it will help. Of course companies wouldn't fire men, because then the problem would even be more obvious. And for most employees these problems aren't well known or recognised.

Do I really come across as someone going around hating men for what they do? Because, no, that is not the case. And I find it strange that you are seeing this. Yet again a sign for me that you are really living in some sort of fear. While there really is no reason for that. I am very concious about that males should also have equal rights for many things in which females are given the better part of the deal, like in a divorce. And if there are feminists around that are saying women should have more rights and more power, like you are stating, then they are no true feminists. I've even seen this happen on forums; some woman rises and speaks out her hatred toward men, but then other women reply, saying they're ashamed of women who speak like that and that they are the cause people are not taking feminists serioiusly. So yeah, there is a big difference going on within the movement too.
It saddens me to see you think that most women are doing the most damage to themselves. It sounds almost like the pope who once said women wearing revealing clothes are asking for it. Do you really share his thoughts in this? Because that is quite worrying.
Anyone should have the right to wear whatever the fuck he or she wants. If someone else is getting too horny because of that, he or she should just goddamn practice some self-control. It's probably hard for some people, but not impossible.

The problem is that there is no real dialogue going on. There should be. I bet sometimes there are these small interviews on television, which I haven't really encountered yet, but most of the time they get too little attention or are overshadowed by some screaming conservative christian from Fox news.
----
And when our eyes will meet there
We will recognize nothing's wrong
IronAngel

Posts: 4409

Age: 25
From: Finland

  29.11.2014 at 12:42
I assume the deal with women getting paid less for the same job applies to positions where you can negotiate wages. Men, perhaps, know how to ask for more, and employers are more willing to give them more. This isn't some insidious plan to oppress women, and women's inability to recognize this issue and address it in their own lives may often be a major contributor, but that doesn't make it any less real. Of course it doesn't apply in every field; many jobs have a standard wage everyone gets.
Twilight
IntepridTraveler

Posts: 1173
From: The Netherlands

  29.11.2014 at 13:39
^ Agreed. It is very real and it is like you said: It isn't some insidious plan to oppress women, even though it might sound like I meant it like that. It's just something that crept into the system and that is probably also the reason why many people think it is an outrageous lie. It is probably some kind of inheritance from times before women got the right to vote.

Although I am not entirely sure if it only applies to jobs with negotiable wages:

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/19/gender-pay-gap-women-bosses-earn-35-percent-less-than-men
http://time.com/2870940/millennial-women-are-still-getting-paid-less-than-men/
----
And when our eyes will meet there
We will recognize nothing's wrong
Rasputin

Posts: 236
From: USA
  29.11.2014 at 23:30
Written by Twilight on 29.11.2014 at 11:34

Not only women can dictate what harassment is. Men can do that too. What I said was that only women can say what they consider harassment for themselves. The same can be true for males. I am really not picking a side here, but I think you know that. And I think we both know what harassment is.

I am getting the feeling you are almost seeing feminism as some sort of threat to modern society. Like a lot of people are also afraid of the Islam taking over the western world for some reason. Your fears seem very similar to that, but instead the male population is being threathened. I don't get that. No one is taking over anything. Feminists just want to be treated equal and have equal rights. And there really is some ground to be won here. Maybe women have equal rights on paper or in the constitution, that doesn't make it real yet, unfortunately. And if you don't believe women get paid less than men, well yeah, I guess I can throw some more evidence about this toward you, but I don't think it will help. Of course companies wouldn't fire men, because then the problem would even be more obvious. And for most employees these problems aren't well known or recognised.

Do I really come across as someone going around hating men for what they do? Because, no, that is not the case. And I find it strange that you are seeing this. Yet again a sign for me that you are really living in some sort of fear. While there really is no reason for that. I am very concious about that males should also have equal rights for many things in which females are given the better part of the deal, like in a divorce. And if there are feminists around that are saying women should have more rights and more power, like you are stating, then they are no true feminists. I've even seen this happen on forums; some woman rises and speaks out her hatred toward men, but then other women reply, saying they're ashamed of women who speak like that and that they are the cause people are not taking feminists serioiusly. So yeah, there is a big difference going on within the movement too.
It saddens me to see you think that most women are doing the most damage to themselves. It sounds almost like the pope who once said women wearing revealing clothes are asking for it. Do you really share his thoughts in this? Because that is quite worrying.
Anyone should have the right to wear whatever the fuck he or she wants. If someone else is getting too horny because of that, he or she should just goddamn practice some self-control. It's probably hard for some people, but not impossible.

The problem is that there is no real dialogue going on. There should be. I bet sometimes there are these small interviews on television, which I haven't really encountered yet, but most of the time they get too little attention or are overshadowed by some screaming conservative christian from Fox news.

Well, what I am seeing is this bullshit as I said before, when a woman first is receptive of man's advances and then without any indication goes off the wall and claim harassment. The policy of harassment in my eyes is not only being abused, but it is also going to outrageous levels. "he was looking at me and I was offended," then we have the good old favorite "eye rape" which for me is still a head scratching moment at how many feminists are advocating "eye rape must stop." I must've missed the memo where they all of a sudden can read minds, and at the same time have the authority to be mind police.

Feminism is a threat to normal relationships, and it is a direct attack on males, I am just surprised you don't see that. I see that all over in the USA. Most of their media outlets, the majority of their articles to include even scholarly articles, the passive aggressive default response when someone claims not to support feminism of being a bad man/woman. I did not say for them to fire men, but if it is true that women get paid less, I would not hire any guys, I would hire women if that was true, but it is not. Like I said before, feminists manipulate data to suit their agenda, like with this wage gap where they picked and chose the jobs where the majority of the workforce was male and at the same time the higher end jobs where the males so far had more training and/or experience, that is how they came with that 75-78 cents to a man's 1 dollar wage. I honestly don't see what else you can do to change something that has already been achieved? The feminist movement, or what's left of it anyway, already accomplished it's mission, now, because of fear of being dismantled they start inventing imaginary enemies and issues, while at the same time arguing for the nonexistent "white MALE privilege" fight against the "Patriarchy" and basically creating an emotion centered world, opposed to logic and reason. How many fucking times do we hear the bullshit on TV stating "That is very offensive" or "That offends me" and people are forced to apologize. Since when does such a cope up give you clemency for your bullshit? No wonder nothing is progressing forward, because like you said there is no dialogue, and it is like I said before, Feminists don't want dialogue, because their entire movement would be dismantled in few simple logical arguments, that is why they throw these red herrings and blocks from anyone questioning anything that does not support their cause. It reminds me of the climax of Christian influence where you couldn't question anything, and you were shut down immediately, or if we just remember the last war that USA got into, where there was no unbiased reporting, and that anyone who was against the war was blackballed or just not allowed to say anything in the media. It took 10+ years for someone to say "You were right, we fucked up."

I don't have fear from feminism, I have nothing but contempt and disdain for it, because it is poison. I say to you, go on youtube and actually listen to numerous podcasts of these so called "equality feminists" and after a while you may get a gist of what I am talking about. It's funny you should mentioned that they are ashamed of those feminists, yet they do nothing to curb that kind of behavior or to speak out against it. I looked at the last couple of blunders by Anita or by that girl who called that scientist a sexist, and there was no protest from the feminist side, and I don't expect it to be. You start reading their Women Studies textbooks and lectures and it is a great process of indoctrination as any, so the only thing they do is regurgitate the hammered in beliefs and there you have it, regardless of how illogical it is they cling to it. Feminism is a cult, because it does not deal with facts, it makes erroneous conclusions and forms indefensible belief structures much like the organized religion, henceforth you can't really win a logical argument because they change their premises on the spot. And you constantly keep claiming that they should have the same rights? What rights are they lacking? More women are in school then ever, even more then men, more women are in the workforce day by day, they can vote, even have the sole right to chose when they are going to abort a child even without the consent of the male because that is their "pro choice" but when a guy wants the child aborted that is none of his business and he has to pay child support. I already mentioned that a female has the sole right to determine if she was raped or not, even if the sex was consensual, even 10 years later with no evidence and still win, women don't have to be drafted to the military, there is more assistance available (at least in the USA) for women than for men...I am not seeing inequality, what I am seeing is a bunch of spoiled, truly privileged women bitch and complain about how their life is so hard and how patriarchy is keeping them down. I hear the same story from the Native Americans and Blacks here, who simply want a handout and don't want to work for anything. That pisses me off, since I worked hard all my life and no one gave me anything, but somehow because I am white I am so privileged that I am not aware of it, and I have it that much better. Sure. This is kind of the same flavor I am hearing from the feminist front.

You don't think they are doing damage to themselves? Going into porn is not damaging? Or stripping? Or being a prostitute? Those are some of the things as I stated before that feminism argues to be liberating and empowering, but it is beyond demeaning as I said before. Then, knowing full well that the world is fucked up, that this a dangerous and violent world, you do absolutely nothing to protect yourself, instead you go and get wasted and then get raped, and it is somehow a fault of "rape culture." I don't necessarily agree with the Pope's statement, however, I understand the sentiment. If you dress a certain way, and go to a certain location (bad place in town, hook up with strangers, one night stands, walk alone in the middle of the night through a bad part of the city) then you are just asking to be hurt. While I agree that everyone should wear what they want, but at the same time I am not stupid to think that I can just do it because I think I should or could. There are consequences from any choice, and that is something that they fail to accept. They want all the freedoms and choices without responsibilities, but freedom does not work like that. You are solely responsible for yourself, the world and other humans don't owe you a thing, and it is quite stupid for anyone to be so trusting of other people. And as I said before, the ones who rape are outliers and there are consequences for their choices as well.

And check this anti-feminist I follow on You Tube. She knows what she is talking about, almost every podcast is very good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA&list=PLbA7X2U_AzlKZhRkaHH-cJgRq9azNygpV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o-OcTSeVcs
Rasputin

Posts: 236
From: USA
  01.12.2014 at 20:23
And another interesting article that shows the stupidity of feminism.

6 Ways That Feminism Insults And Demeans Women While Claiming To Protect Them
Janet Bloomfield, November 21, 2014

I've been a bit vocal lately on how feminism negatively affects men and fathers and encourages them to behave in ways that ultimately undermine themselves, women and relationships. In the interest of fairness and equality, today I would like to point out how feminism insults and demeans women. Feminists claim to represent and promote the interests of women, but if you scratch the surface, you'll find that feminism embraces a streak of misogyny to make the ancient patriarchs green with envy. Here are six ways that feminism insults, belittles and demeans the women it is supposedly supporting and encouraging.

1. Yes Means Yes

The new Yes Means Yes affirmative consent law in California achieves a few astonishing feats: it turns normal, consensual sex into rape and it strips the accused of due process by requiring confirmation of consent at all stages of sexual encounters. Consent must be enthusiastic, ongoing and affirmed. Not only does this turn sex into a decidedly unsexy, legally fraught encounter, but it also implicitly requires men to obtain consent from women and not the other way around. I have yet to have a feminist give me a clear answer to one simple question: "I have never, ever once requested permission from a man to have sex with him—am I a rapist?" What underlies the whole affirmative consent program is the idea that women are emotionally crippled, fearful, insecure and immature weaklings who cannot possibly make their thoughts and desires clearly known to adult partners.

Feminist laws about consent turn grown women into slobbering, babbling toddlers who must be interrogated at every stage of the game to see what their thoughts might be, rather like trying to figure out which underpants your two-year-old wants to wear when he has forgotten the words "Incredible Hulk." My, how empowering. No thanks.

2. Trigger Warnings

Trigger warnings are the most ridiculous, patronizing and infantilizing creations ever to come out of feminism. The general idea is that individuals who have experienced some particular issue (rape, fat-shaming, street harassment, papercuts, etc.) might confront an article called "I Got a Papercut and Was Fat-Shamed by a Street Harasser Two Days After I Was Raped," have absolutely no idea what the article might be about, proceed to read said article and subsequently require medication to deal with the PTSD triggered by the memories of the traumatic event(s). Exactly how pathetic do you have to be to confront words describing situations you might find upsetting and require authorial permission to stop reading? Know what I hate? Reading about adults who kill infants. It makes me feel sick to my stomach, so when I see headlines like "Mother Microwaves Baby," I don't read them.

In the era of clickbait journalism, it's incredibly rare to see headlines like "Unusual Situation Happened Last Night" or some other misleading or elusive headline that downplays the actual events. Quite the opposite. But feminists adore trigger warnings because it reinforces the idea that women are ruled by their emotions, are incapable of recovering from trauma and are just generally hysterical nitwits unprepared to confront adulthood and reality. How encouraging! How supportive! No thanks.

3. Domestic Violence and the Duluth Model

One of the most frustrating things about watching feminists deny that women can be and are violent in their personal relationships is that feminism is in essence denying that women are fully human. In order to perpetuate the narrative that men are violent monsters who must be controlled by women lest we all end up chained in basements, feminists deny the full humanity of men and women. The goal is undoubtedly to create a climate of fear that discourages women and men from creating loving, trusting relationships with one another beyond the control of the state or an ideology. But in dehumanizing men, feminism also dehumanizes women. Men are left with strength, power, agency and responsibility (which of course they abuse), and women are left with weakness, powerlessness, resignation and defeat.

The Duluth Model—which emphasizes that no matter what injuries a woman has inflicted on a man, the man should be considered the perpetrator—also reinforces the idea that women are equivalent to children who must not be held responsible for their actions because they lack the maturity and rationality to understand what they are doing. You don't arrest a child for kicking her mother, but you do arrest a mother for kicking her child. When it comes to domestic violence, feminists consider the women children. Gee, that's not infantilizing at all. The trouble with being human is that sometimes humans suck and they act like deranged, violent assholes and, sorry, feminists, but men do not have the market cornered on that at all (*cough* Hope Solo *cough*).

4. Affirmative Action for STEM Programs

Affirmative action programs were born out of a time in which black students in particular were denied access to higher education for no reason other than the fact they were black. They had the abilities, grades, achievements and skills to be in a particular discipline and were denied the opportunity because of the level of melanin in their skin. Those were worthwhile programs that needed to happen, but then feminists got hold of them. They began to change programs from ones designed to address real, actual prejudice and promote a meritocracy into ones designed to force access for the un- or under-qualified simply because.

Interestingly enough, affirmative action programs that push qualified black students higher up the academic chain are more likely to result in those students dropping out, since being perfectly qualified to compete in a B-level school but getting shoved up to an A-level because someone thinks superficial diversity is a good idea means that a competitive student is suddenly facing adversaries he or she is not qualified to compete with.

This is the exact impact that pushing women into STEM careers is having. Women are encouraged to ignore what their natural needs and wants are, enter careers that they are only nominally qualified to be in and guess what happens? The vast majority of women with STEM qualifications are not working in the field at all. Money and time wasted, all because feminism thinks women should be forced into ideologically defined roles (Engineer! Astrophysicist! Chemist!) that meet their fantasies of "equality." Feminism insults women by telling them that their natural interests are wrong and they are too stupid to know what's good for them. No thanks.

5. Microaggressions

If trigger warnings are the dumbest thing to come out of feminism, microaggressions are a close second. The very definition of pettiness, microaggressions are teeny-tiny irritations that women are encouraged to nurture into long-standing grudges until they spill out into hysteria and mania. Did you once go for coffee with a guy and it led to sex? Any time a guy asks you for coffee, it automatically means he wants to fuck you! Were you one time slightly uncomfortable in an elevator with a guy you sort of knew but not really? Men on elevators will attack you! Did a guy on an elevator ask you for coffee? Sexual harassment! Alert the presses! Asking women for coffee is a way to remind them that elevators are perfect places to rape!

What feminists refer to as microaggressions, the rest of us sane adults call life. Getting cut off in traffic, having someone snap at you because they're having a shitty day, a socially awkward moment with a colleague, a stranger rushing past you and inadvertently bumping your coffee—these are not things meant to point out your meaningless existence and your powerlessness in the face of others. They're just life.

The concept of microaggressions encourages women to think that every single thing in the world is, or should be, about them. It encourages breathless levels of narcissism, solipsism and just plain delusion. You know who else thinks that everything in the world is about them? Two-year-olds. Feminism encourages women to believe that they have the same reasoning and coping abilities as toddlers. No thanks.

6. Street Harassment

When researchers at Loyola University asked men and women whom they preferred to make the first move, 83% of men and a whopping 93% of women preferred that men do the asking. Any man who reasonably expects to initiate a relationship with a woman had better be prepared to suck it up and put himself out there to risk rejection, and potentially very humiliating rejection.

Is it really any wonder that some men, particularly those of lower socioeconomic standing, might mitigate against rejection by injecting some levity or a degree of inappropriateness into their approach? Poor men, and poor men of color in particular, are of the least social value to women. Women still want rich guys. Big surprise. And women want men to approach them. Now take a white woman and have her stomp through economically deprived New York neighborhoods with a scowl on her face, acting like she owns the damn place, and what do you think happens? She gets a few comments. And then promptly begins to shriek about street harassment.

Street harassment is the trifecta of feminist insults to women. Women are presumed to be racist, classist and sexist all at the same time but still encouraged to imagine themselves the victim. It is sexist for women to expect men to make the first move in establishing contact. It is racist for women to enter public spaces dominated by people of color and then sneer at those people for attempting to initiate contact. It is classist for women to enter lower socioeconomic neighborhoods and then behave contemptuously towards the people who live there. That street harassment video was especially infuriating for promoting a cluelessness in women that relentlessly insults and degrades poor men of color, all the while encouraging women to exult in their own victimhood status.

Women are perfectly capable of understanding race, class and sexism and acting in ways that perpetuate none of those things. Women are more than capable of understanding which situations afford them privileges and not to take advantage of those privileges in a way that dehumanizes and abuses other people. Once again, feminism insists that women are toddlers and whoever takes the sippy cup from their hands is mean and wrong.

Women as children, women as hysterical, women as irrational, women as incapable, women as selfish, women as unaccountable—these are all accusations that feminists throw at the so-called patriarchy. But when you put down the dictionary and look at what feminism actually says and does, who is it that insults, infantilizes and demoralizes women?

The broader culture treats women as adult humans capable of making choices and dealing with the consequences of those choices, just as we expect all men to do. Feminism is the social movement pushing to treat women as large children who need protection from their own actions.

The earliest waves of feminism fought long and hard to give women all the rights and some of the responsibilities of adulthood. I would like to see women achieve full equality by accepting all the same responsibilities that men do. The only thing standing in the way of equality that I can see is feminism. And we don't need a movement that undermines women's agency and adulthood.

We don't need feminism.
IronAngel

Posts: 4409

Age: 25
From: Finland

  01.12.2014 at 23:33
What, pray tell, does that have to do with feminism?

You are being very dogmatic and lap up every claim you're predisposed to accept and integrate as part of your belief system.
Rasputin

Posts: 236
From: USA
  03.12.2014 at 18:37
Written by IronAngel on 01.12.2014 at 23:33

What, pray tell, does that have to do with feminism?

You are being very dogmatic and lap up every claim you're predisposed to accept and integrate as part of your belief system.

If you are referring to my last post, that is a direct response to the version of Feminism we have in the US. Micro aggressions, trigger warnings etc., are all creations of the modern feminist in the USA. If you don't believe me, check out huffingtonpost, bithmedia or jezebel, where most of the feminists congregate and gobble this shit up. This is some of the asinine things they are arguing for? Is it possible that the feminism you are seeing over there by you is quite different than the one that is picking up speed here in the USA???
IronAngel

Posts: 4409

Age: 25
From: Finland

  03.12.2014 at 19:27
There seems to be our problem. You suppose there is some monolithic "feminism" (or regional versions of it, anyhow) that somehow connects all the people who identify themselves as feminists and all the opinions those people have. Feminism (like Christianity or liberalism or nationalism or whatever) is only a loose label to signify people who have some belief that there are still social issues, conventions and inequalities related to gender and, perhaps, especially as regards women. (Personally, though, I just think giving up the term "feminism" is a spineless cop-out and detachment from history, even if I don't have any special interest in women's issues. I think the concepts of sex and gender, in general, should be very critically re-evaluated and, to a large extent, obscured from legislation.) There is no "right" definition of feminism, no authoritative doctrine or manifesto, no organisation with exclusive rights to the term.

I am not saying the people who espouse the things you listed (though they are all more or less unfamiliar to me) aren't "real feminists" or don't genuinely believe what they are pushing for is in the spirit of feminism. If they identify themselves as feminist, who am I to tell them otherwise; I'd just call them stupid people, and that has nothing to do with their feminism. To take their interpretation as the best representation of feminism is not only inaccurate, it also gives undue credibility and authority to these people you think so little of. Why should "they" (whoever they are) get a monopoly on defining the term?

It's like saying some gang of rednecks in Pantera T-shirts drinking cheap beer and beating up hippies represent "metalheads." Yes, they may very well be metalheads, but they have no special privilege to defining the concept for every metalhead out there. I'm not even saying you shouldn't generalise - that would be banal, and besides generalisations can be useful. But when you do generalise, it should be at a level that allows for generalisations (the vague, worldwide, centuries-old, hotly debated label of "feminism" is not very generalisable) and you should be sensitive to new evidence - i.e. you can't just ignore feminists who don't fit your model (like me and Twilight here, apparently) with a "No True Scotsman" dismissal.

You are absolutely right that the masses, including self-declared feminists, are victim to gender stereotypes. If everyone who identified themselves as feminist was actually emancipated from these vestiges (like myths of gender differences) there would hardly be need for feminism. But plebs will be plebs; you can't seriously expect most people to see past the most obvious, socially acceptable issues and tackle real, half-hidden and controversial topics.
Rasputin

Posts: 236
From: USA
  04.12.2014 at 05:10
Written by IronAngel on 03.12.2014 at 19:27

There seems to be our problem. You suppose there is some monolithic "feminism" (or regional versions of it, anyhow) that somehow connects all the people who identify themselves as feminists and all the opinions those people have. Feminism (like Christianity or liberalism or nationalism or whatever) is only a loose label to signify people who have some belief that there are still social issues, conventions and inequalities related to gender and, perhaps, especially as regards women. (Personally, though, I just think giving up the term "feminism" is a spineless cop-out and detachment from history, even if I don't have any special interest in women's issues. I think the concepts of sex and gender, in general, should be very critically re-evaluated and, to a large extent, obscured from legislation.) There is no "right" definition of feminism, no authoritative doctrine or manifesto, no organisation with exclusive rights to the term.

I am not saying the people who espouse the things you listed (though they are all more or less unfamiliar to me) aren't "real feminists" or don't genuinely believe what they are pushing for is in the spirit of feminism. If they identify themselves as feminist, who am I to tell them otherwise; I'd just call them stupid people, and that has nothing to do with their feminism. To take their interpretation as the best representation of feminism is not only inaccurate, it also gives undue credibility and authority to these people you think so little of. Why should "they" (whoever they are) get a monopoly on defining the term?

It's like saying some gang of rednecks in Pantera T-shirts drinking cheap beer and beating up hippies represent "metalheads." Yes, they may very well be metalheads, but they have no special privilege to defining the concept for every metalhead out there. I'm not even saying you shouldn't generalise - that would be banal, and besides generalisations can be useful. But when you do generalise, it should be at a level that allows for generalisations (the vague, worldwide, centuries-old, hotly debated label of "feminism" is not very generalisable) and you should be sensitive to new evidence - i.e. you can't just ignore feminists who don't fit your model (like me and Twilight here, apparently) with a "No True Scotsman" dismissal.

You are absolutely right that the masses, including self-declared feminists, are victim to gender stereotypes. If everyone who identified themselves as feminist was actually emancipated from these vestiges (like myths of gender differences) there would hardly be need for feminism. But plebs will be plebs; you can't seriously expect most people to see past the most obvious, socially acceptable issues and tackle real, half-hidden and controversial topics.

While I agree with you that there are non monolithic examples of feminism, I am pointing out that so far only the mainstream feminist garbage is gaining traction, to the point where no other feminism is even heard of or talked about. It is becoming a black or white issue in the USA, where you either agree with feminism, regardless of the flavor (since while the feminists themselves will sit down and state that they are "humanist feminist" or "grass root feminist") or you don't and then you are marked as a misogynist and an overall bad individual. You are right, a certain group of people should not dictate the use or definition of the word, but I think after a word has been abused for so long, it loses its original meaning and provokes more conflict in the end. For instance, while there is nothing wrong with the word "negro" you can't use that word in the USA without it being attached to a racial slur. This is why I am against using the word feminist, since it is destroyed, and more and more people are rejecting it.

I am not the one ignoring you or Twilight, I am merely stating what was stated to me several times, that the only "true" feminists are females. Now, while I respect they are for women's rights and you identify as feminists, I am not targeting you in my "rants" but the ones who are actually leading this disorganized movement in 30 different directions, each one resulting into chaos. My observation is that I found for female feminists to only listen to other females, regardless of how legitimate attempt is made from a male, it always seems like it is not enough, or it is just cast aside. I don't know how it is where you are, but at both of the campuses I attended in the USA, one smaller one and one quite large, I noticed the same thing happening. Also, the issue that I have is that the Women Studies textbooks, and the overall new feminist thought is being pushed towards the radical levels, where the examples I have shown previously are appearing more and more. They started arguing to place "trigger warnings" on most classes which I find absolutely insane. And I do not expect most people to see past the obvious, but that is the problem, we have the hoi polloi running the show, while the ones who have something to say and are actually there to help are being ignored and silenced, which further hurts the females and males. You and I agree on several issues, but disagree on others, and that is fine with me. I guess the bottom line is, I am fighting against these flavors of feminism that are driven by emotion and lack of reason and common sense, yet while I don't identify with the term feminism for the reasons we have already discussed I am all for tackling real issues.
ThunderAxe1989
Irreligious

Posts: 7337

Age: 25
From: Bahamas

  19.12.2014 at 05:13
This is the book which I'm reading right now:

Rasputin

Posts: 236
From: USA
  19.12.2014 at 23:23
Interesting book, I will check it out, but I think I already know why that is.

Advertise on Metal Storm
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 [20]


Login or register to post here.



Similar topics

Forum Topic Similarity Started
Serious discussions 2008 U.S. Presidential Election 3 13.08.2007 by Konrad
Serious discussions The Nuclear World - Problems and Politics 3 05.10.2006 by
General forum Alternative fuels 2 21.06.2007 by Arian Totalis
General forum They are killing, they are killing, they are killing in Tehran 2 28.12.2009 by
General forum Obama and Afghanistan 2 02.12.2009 by Arian Totalis