^ 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/

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

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.

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.

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???

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.

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.

This is the book which I'm reading right now:

Interesting book, I will check it out, but I think I already know why that is.

It is interesting.

I swear though, there are too many people these days who seem to have difficulty distinguishing between modern feminism and historical feminism. Every time feminist apologists cry about how 'feminism is equality', to me, that's the same as when conservatives stick up for police officers saying, "Who are you gonna call when you're in trouble?". It's like, I'm not disputing job description, or what a certain group is SUPPOSED TO be like, I'm criticizing what they are like in REALITY. Cognitive Dissonance is a bitch, I swear


Anyway, here's something a bit edgy which I just found, haha:

Written by Guest on 30.12.2014 at 03:22


Anyway, here's something a bit edgy which I just found, haha:

erm, should I regret it that I don't find it funny ? Sorry, I'm not a dead serious chicken. But this ... I don't know. It sounds like a bad joke, like looking down on feminist literature which are of great value whether in strong language or in content. However, correct me if it's just again failure of my sense of humor.

That men on strike book sounds ridiculous

i find that joke funny mary, but it is a bit like the old....i'm not racist or anything, but *insert racist comment or joke*

Written by Guest on 30.12.2014 at 03:22

Written by Mattybu on 31.12.2014 at 05:32

sexist pig!

@ThunderAxe
If I remember correctly, she is blaming the porn industry for men boycotting. Interesting, considering that modern feminism is arguing that porn is empowering. Hmm, mindfuck. You are right about cognitive dissonance though, it is very rampant. The thing is, they cannot seem to grasp that feminism on paper and feminism in action are two very, very different things. They can scream all they want how it is about "equality" the only thing you need to listen what they are saying in their articles and blogs, to see how much hatred is geared towards men, and how much supremacy are they arguing for, it is fucked up.

White Male Privilege
Rape Culture
Rape Apologist
Slut Shaming
Victim Blaming
Mansplaning
Women are a different species
Wage gap
1 IN 4 rape statistic
Patriarchy
Teach men not to rape
Yesallmen
The issue of male sexuality
Destroy the Alpha Male....

The list goes on and on, of all the things that they fight for under guise of equality. They spend all this time and energy pissing people off, and then they want to have a dialogue. To me, the worst people are the males who contract to their bullshit, and start defending them (Beta Males) and like good little trained puppies they get a treat when they clash with the other males. But the funny thing is, women are bitching and wondering where are all the "real men"? I scratched my head at that. You spend all your energy to destroy what a man is through your Gender Studies bullshit, and then you complain how you can't find any? Check your friendzone, check the Beta Males around you, that is what you get now.

Feminism just needs to stop. It destroyed itself, and forever it will be associated with the worst that this movement has to offer, because the only difference between the feminist and modern feminist is that one is completely oblivious of the damage it is causing, and the other thrives on it.

Written by angel. on 30.12.2014 at 09:05
...correct me if it's just again failure of my sense of humor.

I mean humor is completely subjective but that got a chuckle out of me.

They're called offensive jokes for a reason. They're designed to piss off the people who take things too seriously as much as they're designed to make people laugh for pissing said people off.

Written by Rasputin on 31.12.2014 at 18:42

@ThunderAxe
If I remember correctly, she is blaming the porn industry for men boycotting. Interesting, considering that modern feminism is arguing that porn is empowering. Hmm, mindfuck. You are right about cognitive dissonance though, it is very rampant. The thing is, they cannot seem to grasp that feminism on paper and feminism in action are two very, very different things. They can scream all they want how it is about "equality" the only thing you need to listen what they are saying in their articles and blogs, to see how much hatred is geared towards men, and how much supremacy are they arguing for, it is fucked up.

I don't want to get into a long-winded argument, mainly because my keyboard is covered in honey, but I think what you view as feminism may differ from what others do. I personally don't view the men and women fighting for special privileges as feminists. If someone were to criticize the "alpha male" simply for existing, or claim that women should get special treatment due to previous discrimination, I wouldn't call them a feminist. That's primarily because "feminism" is defined by equality. In my mind, anyone who doesn't support equality between men and women is just an idiot. I don't care if you call yourself a feminist, an equal rights activist, or nothing at all, but when I see some people getting into arguments over the term "feminism" I can't help but wonder if they really know what they are arguing against. At any rate, if someone were to ask me if I'm a feminist, I'd definitely say yes simply because I hate gender discrimination caused by irrational stereotypes. I get that the norm is for men to be stronger then women, but me being a scrawny male doesn't make me any less of a male. It's really that simple to me, and I think some people get way too caught up in semantics that they miss the big picture. Oh also I hate some of the "feminists" in the public sphere (like Sarkeesian...fuck Sarkeesian)

Oh god people still fighting about the definition of this shit.

Look, there are intersectional feminists who believe in all things equality: aka the "good" feminists.

There are radical feminists who believe women are superior to men: aka the "bad" feminists.

This division of "good" and "bad" occurs in all things.

For some reason people focus on the "bad" ones because they're more militant and vocal about their demands. However, they still represent a minority of feminists and have essentially killed the "good" name of feminism for themselves and unfortunately for their counterparts.

Do away with the word. If you preach equality, consider yourself egalitarian. Take the "fem" out of it as it misleads the commonfolk.

Troy, I tried once to have a discussion with Rasputin but it failed, just saying.

Written by angel. on 31.12.2014 at 20:48
Troy, I tried once to have a discussion with Rasputin but it failed, just saying.

Been there done that got the t-shirt. It was more of a general statement based on his comment but I know by now that he and I have opposing views on too many things to argue constructively.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 31.12.2014 at 19:54

Oh god people still fighting about the definition of this shit.

Look, there are intersectional feminists who believe in all things equality: aka the "good" feminists.

There are radical feminists who believe women are superior to men: aka the "bad" feminists.

This division of "good" and "bad" occurs in all things.

For some reason people focus on the "bad" ones because they're more militant and vocal about their demands. However, they still represent a minority of feminists and have essentially killed the "good" name of feminism for themselves and unfortunately for their counterparts.

Do away with the word. If you preach equality, consider yourself egalitarian. Take the "fem" out of it as it misleads the commonfolk.

I love how you guys continue not to see the truth. Cognitive dissonance is a bitch. Your dividing line is the same that we hear about Islam. It is always those "radical Muslims" not the "Moderates." Sure.

And you have it wrong again. The feminism you describe, is now a vast minority, while the full on aggressive and insulting feminism is the new standard. I mean, when you have feminists from all sides complain and attack women who moved away from feminism and are against it now by calling them "stupid, uneducated, traitors, woman haters, patriarchy supporters" what can I say. It is alright for "feminists" to speak their mind and women to speak their mind, only if it benefits feminism, if it god forbid questions anything it is being attacked to no end.

You have more and more women speaking out against what feminism has become, so if they can see it, why can't all of you. This is so like the topic on Islam. Deadone and I can cite so many examples, to include the shitty ass Kuran and it is being just brushed aside.

Great article for anyone interested,from a former feminist
http://rachaellefler.hubpages.com/hub/Feminist-Beliefs-I-No-Longer-Agree-With

Written by Alex F on 31.12.2014 at 19:49

Written by Rasputin on 31.12.2014 at 18:42

@ThunderAxe
If I remember correctly, she is blaming the porn industry for men boycotting. Interesting, considering that modern feminism is arguing that porn is empowering. Hmm, mindfuck. You are right about cognitive dissonance though, it is very rampant. The thing is, they cannot seem to grasp that feminism on paper and feminism in action are two very, very different things. They can scream all they want how it is about "equality" the only thing you need to listen what they are saying in their articles and blogs, to see how much hatred is geared towards men, and how much supremacy are they arguing for, it is fucked up.

I don't want to get into a long-winded argument, mainly because my keyboard is covered in honey, but I think what you view as feminism may differ from what others do. I personally don't view the men and women fighting for special privileges as feminists. If someone were to criticize the "alpha male" simply for existing, or claim that women should get special treatment due to previous discrimination, I wouldn't call them a feminist. That's primarily because "feminism" is defined by equality. In my mind, anyone who doesn't support equality between men and women is just an idiot. I don't care if you call yourself a feminist, an equal rights activist, or nothing at all, but when I see some people getting into arguments over the term "feminism" I can't help but wonder if they really know what they are arguing against. At any rate, if someone were to ask me if I'm a feminist, I'd definitely say yes simply because I hate gender discrimination caused by irrational stereotypes. I get that the norm is for men to be stronger then women, but me being a scrawny male doesn't make me any less of a male. It's really that simple to me, and I think some people get way too caught up in semantics that they miss the big picture. Oh also I hate some of the "feminists" in the public sphere (like Sarkeesian...fuck Sarkeesian)

No, no, no, no, my view is based upon the Feminism I see, in the Academia, online, on Facebook and on those feminist websites where they post their garbage. I am not making shit up, nor I am drawing erroneous conclusions. To argue that feminism stands for equality after an overabundance of evidence and examples would be equal to claiming that Hitler fought for world peace. The definition of feminism is one thing, feminism in action is another thing, and we are pass the point of dictionary reference. You can cite all that you want, but the evidence states otherwise. It is not the norm for men to be stronger than female, it is biology, biologically we are stronger than females, because we have more muscle mass, however the females have more gray matter in the brain. Only in Women Studies bullshit classes do you hear their "science" where they state that the only reason males are stronger is because from an early age they are pushed to use their upper body strength more. What is the big picture? I keep hearing about these rational "true" feminists and yet you cannot see or hear one in the public sphere or on the feminist websites. Why? Because there is a stigma if a feminist questions another feminist, because women should support women no matter what. This was illustrated very well in the recent Rape hoax that the Rolling Stone magazine pushed forward and the feminists flocked around like crows around a dead corpse. Come to find out, the female in question lied and invented shit that never happened. And instead of calling it out for what it is, and helping those guys who were wrongfully accused, the feminist camp made statements to the effect of "it does not matter she lied, we should still be understanding of the situation." So basically, we will give her a pass for ruining someone's life, for lying and creating a hysteria, because she is a female and she's very sensitive. Well, fuck that. List me 10 positive "real feminist" achievements this year, since I cannot seem to find any, because there aren't any. The bottom line is, Feminism achieved it's mission, and now it has nothing better to do, than generate garbage to justify it's existence. And Sarkeesian is actually considered a "real Feminist" in case you failed to notice. You may label her as a radical one, but she is the current definition of Feminism in it's true form.

" Because we have more muscle masses." I'd like trying to punch your balls to see how your masses of muscle helps you to be stronger.

Written by angel. on 01.01.2015 at 11:38

" Because we have more muscle masses." I'd like trying to punch your balls to see how your masses of muscle helps you to be stronger.

Number one, very peaceful from a "feminist."

Number two, I guess all those football players, body builders and wrestlers are not strong at all, and muscle mass has nothing to do with their activities. Good to know. I suggest you start playing football, and test your little theory of how relevant or irrelevant muscle mass really is.

You are so smart Mary...

Written by angel. on 01.01.2015 at 11:38
:lol: " Because we have more muscle masses." I'd like trying to punch your balls to see how your masses of muscle helps you to be stronger.

Not that I take any form of pleasure in agreeing with the Bill Maher of Metal Storm, but he has a point there. Males are genetically predisposed to achieve more muscle density than females.

And a swift cougar kick would cripple you in the same manner.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 02.01.2015 at 19:59
Not that I take any form of pleasure in agreeing with the Bill Maher of Metal Storm, but he has a point there. Males are genetically predisposed to achieve more muscle density than females. And a swift cougar kick would cripple you in the same manner.

OK, but more muscle doesn't immediately make every man in every situation physically stronger ? It depends on so many factors. For example, imagine a skinny guy and an athlete woman, which of them physically can be stronger ? Generally, yeah you're right. Still giving birth to a baby is a very painful phenomena, it needs a strong body, if a mother doesn't possess a strong body she may hurt her own health or even her baby. I mean physical strength can be in different kinds, what do you think ?


yeah I tried to be sarcastic, mainly because the guy has a serious misogynist tone. I was trying to say there is still things that men are weaker in them and there are strong sides of women too. Of course I accept there are so many biological differences between men and women but that doesn't make any of them superior to the other one. Any of these particular features has a function for them in different ways. I must add that lesser muscle masses of women didn't limit them in sports.

Written by angel. on 02.01.2015 at 21:00
OK, but more muscle doesn't immediately make every man in every situation physically stronger ? It depends on so many factors. For example, imagine a skinny guy and an athlete woman, which of them physically can be stronger ? Generally, yeah you're right. Still giving birth to a baby is a very painful phenomena, it needs a strong body, if a mother doesn't possess a strong body she may hurt her own health or even her baby. I mean physical strength can be in different kinds, what do you think ?

yeah I tried to be sarcastic, mainly because the guy has a serious misogynist tone. I was trying to say there is still things that men are weaker in them and there are strong sides of women too. Of course I accept there are so many biological differences between men and women but that doesn't make any of them superior to the other one. Any of these particular features has a function for them in different ways. I must add that lesser muscle masses of women didn't limit them in sports.

You're arguing a different point. I'm talking about genetics. Potential. Males have more potential to be stronger than females, with very few exceptions (most of which are related to various types of illness).

And yes some women can give birth, but if we're shooting down generalizations like you did with the muscle comments, not all women are capable of this. That doesn't mean women are inherently weak, just that "it depends on so many factors".

Lastly, there are differences between males and females. And until feminists acknowledge that (some do, of course) they'll be fighting a battle that they'll never win. The two sexes are different and should use those differences together in order to achieve more as a whole. That's real equality, not claiming that Dick and Jane are the same because they can both bench 250 pounds.

Written by Troy Killjoy on 02.01.2015 at 21:34

Lastly, there are differences between males and females. And until feminists acknowledge that (some do, of course) they'll be fighting a battle that they'll never win. The two sexes are different and should use those differences together in order to achieve more as a whole. That's real equality, not claiming that Dick and Jane are the same because they can both bench 250 pounds.

Well-said, I agree fully. And seriously I accept the biological differences with open arms, I mean I have nothing against at all, it's just there's no superiority in these differences. Sometimes people give me rolling eyes look when I say "Equality between men and women in every aspect is not right"

Written by angel. on 02.01.2015 at 21:00

Written by Troy Killjoy on 02.01.2015 at 19:59
Not that I take any form of pleasure in agreeing with the Bill Maher of Metal Storm, but he has a point there. Males are genetically predisposed to achieve more muscle density than females. And a swift cougar kick would cripple you in the same manner.

OK, but more muscle doesn't immediately make every man in every situation physically stronger ? It depends on so many factors. For example, imagine a skinny guy and an athlete woman, which of them physically can be stronger ? Generally, yeah you're right. Still giving birth to a baby is a very painful phenomena, it needs a strong body, if a mother doesn't possess a strong body she may hurt her own health or even her baby. I mean physical strength can be in different kinds, what do you think ?


yeah I tried to be sarcastic, mainly because the guy has a serious misogynist tone. I was trying to say there is still things that men are weaker in them and there are strong sides of women too. Of course I accept there are so many biological differences between men and women but that doesn't make any of them superior to the other one. Any of these particular features has a function for them in different ways. I must add that lesser muscle masses of women didn't limit them in sports.

I have a misogynist tone??? Wow. So anyone who has anything to say against modern feminism is a misogynist? Typical answer I would expect. Let's just forget about all the negative aspects that I keep on listing that creates a disservice to both males and females, none of those things are in no way offensive, detrimental or just plain batshit crazy right?


Men and women should have equal rights, period. I don't know how much clearer I can be on this issue. My problem with modern feminism is that it creates class warfare of us versus them mentality, where one side makes erroneous conclusions and offensive statements while failing to take responsibility for any of its actions. Until the rhetoric changes, there will be no progress. Day in and day out, in USA there is an attack after an attack on males, and an actual agenda to undermine everything male and masculine, so some mentally inferior and logically deprived women could feel empowered. We have more and more of this, and not enough of the common sense. If logic, reason and common sense are a misogynist device and a tool of Patriarchy so be it then.

And "Patriarchy": "The Patriarchy" as defined by feminists, is a system in which all men oppress all women for the benefit of men - That men as a class oppress women as a class. We tend to say it doesn't exist because not only because there is no substantial evidence that MEN created the customs that "oppress" women, there is plenty of evidence that men have voluntarily sacrifice their own well being for the benefit of women.
Feminists were able to sell "The Patriarchy" to gullible women of leisure, only after technology had made men's sacrifices less immediately visible to women. Two hundred years ago, if you had told women that the men on whom their very survival depended, were actually oppressing them, most women would have laughed.
"The Patriarchy" does not exist; it is nothing more than a monster-under-the-bed myth used to manipulate women into compliance with feminism."

Also, Men and Women are not the same, nor they are equal physically, they cannot be, due to the genes, due to the hormones that maintain equilibrium, the way the brains work and process problems, to the way we experience reality. What feminism is trying to do, is create metrosexual/transgender Frankenstanian creation where everyone is "equal" which means that having a penis and having a vagina at the same time is completely natural, normal and something to be sought after.

And no, I didn't say that ALL MALES are stronger than females, I stated a fact that genetically, men are predisposed to have more muscle strength, and to an extend more bone dexterity. This was proven time and time again. We had women who tried to play full contact sports, and would get injured more easily, because their bodies are not set up the same way, however, women have more pain tolerance than males and other traits that don't make them better, they just make them unique and different from males.

Males and females are not supposed to be at war with one another, or try to be something they are not, they are supposed to compliment each other, an in a fashion of Jing and Jang work together towards a common goal. That is what modern feminism does not want to accept, and is categorically working towards destroying it, both knowingly or unknowingly.

I don't see what physical and biological differences have to do with the topic. We're discussing politics, ethics and culture, and there should be no room for biological generalisations in those spheres. I am not as strong and big as some other man, nor do I have the potential to be - yet that has no effect on my legal rights and my status in society. Why should the difference between sexes be any different? Those differences are statistical, they are generalisations; even if they were the best way to categorise people (and I'm sure there are better empirical ways, such as measuring actual physical performance) I don't see what possible consequence they should have.

People are not the same, men or women or transgender. We're all varying degrees of different, but that does not mean all those differences are relevant in society and before the law. Gender is one such irrelevant difference, except in a choice few special cases. I might as well misrepresent your twisted worldview, Rasputin, by claiming you are trying to create brutish but paternal alpha males and fertile and sensitive wife-mothers, a culture where the hierarchical family unit of man and woman is completely natural, normal and something to be sought after. That doesn't make it true (though in your case, it might) or a very interesting accusation.

Written by IronAngel on 03.01.2015 at 13:05

I don't see what physical and biological differences have to do with the topic. We're discussing politics, ethics and culture, and there should be no room for biological generalisations in those spheres.

You tell that to the feminists, because they are creating women to be a different specie almost.

And you think that the politics, ethics and culture are not influenced by the physical and biological differences or in this case feminist perversion of reality and complete disregard for scientific facts? And what generalization was made? What I stated early on comes from a medical textbook.