Are you a feminist?
Yes
30.5%
275
No
56.3%
507
Maybe/unsure/rather not answer
13.2%
119
901 votes
KaceSpace said: When you invite other people to look down upon you, it's you that should "fix up".katsucats said: what's with your constant looking down upon? fix up Why should I feel bad for having overestimated you? 1 out of 4 (or whatever) women have been raped. If you never seen this statistic or flaunted it, that's besides the point. Well, I was addressing how Patriarch feminists are the majority, wherein you accused me of exaggerating. It's all enshrined in the quote history. Go ahead, scroll up, I'll wait. And while you're at it, please learn about how a bald assertion is not an argument. and no, they're on majority, and the simple definition of the theory as zerg provided above is the correct definition. but people always try to argue that it's not true when you can read on feminist sites about them. A definition is a tautology; the proof is in the pudding. When you can't even bother to provide a biased feminism site on the topic of feminism about your supposed tautology, an institutional definition of feminism rather than an empirical one, then you do not even have the self respect to carry out a reasonable discussion. I can only surmise that you truly don't care about feminism, or that you're intellectually lazy. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
-shotz said: Patriarch theory is far from the unanimous stance across the larger body of social scientists, not to mention the general public. If feminism is largely identified with patriarch theory, then it cannot be said to be doctrine-less. I don't even need to get into what's so controversial about patriarch theory to make that point. Once we agree that feminism is not doctrine-less, we more or less agree that feminism is not about simply eliminating gender roles or gender equality.katsucats said: well i don't see anything too controversial about patriarchy theory. i don't think most people would still argue a country like the US is absolutely patriarchal, but it is clearly still manifest in certain aspects of society. You (or at least people) often see videos of mythical "normal" feminists who only care about equal rights that, when pushed ever so slightly, are made to insensitively dismiss notions of men's rights while propping up the Patriarchy straw man. Certainly, I've never cared to debate a feminist in real life, and the ones that openly admit to the label often have an eye of disdain that make me not want to approach. It isn't that all self-professed feminists are rabid activists that spout man-hating words all the time, but that even though they claim feminism to be a neutral, doctrine-less movement of various opinions, they all -- all -- follow a doctrine fashioned off Marxist inequality. I have never seen a feminist, in real life, online, or in media, reject Patriarch theory. Scratch that. I have read of one editorial of a feminist decrying patriarchy, and as far as I know she was shot down and burned within her movement. i know what you're talking about with the eye of disdain, but i get that from some professors across the board, feminist or not. P.S. Having male-led institutions does not itself support all the implications of patriarch theory. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| I am a proud feminist. |
katsucats said: KaceSpace said: When you invite other people to look down upon you, it's you that should "fix up".what's with your constant looking down upon? fix up and no, they're on majority, and the simple definition of the theory as zerg provided above is the correct definition. but people always try to argue that it's not true when you can read on feminist sites about them. A definition is a tautology; the proof is in the pudding. When you can't even bother to provide a biased feminism site on the topic of feminism about your supposed tautology, an institutional definition of feminism rather than an empirical one, then you do not even have the self respect to carry out a reasonable discussion. I can only surmise that you truly don't care about feminism, or that you're intellectually lazy. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.well at least you're being more friendly with your last sentence, it touched my heart <3 i already stated that the definition that zerg provided, is the one i accept, that is that equal standing with men, in which no law can restrict the woman. what's so hard to understand? and why are you so against doctrine? |
KaceSpace said: What you personally believe is irrelevant to the majority; it's an anecdote of insufficient sample size. A movement cannot be simultaneously doctrine-less and have a doctrine. That is a direct contradiction, one that feminists try to shove under the rug like an Iranian nuclear bomb. Why is it so hard to understand that just because you are capable of tautologically defining terrorism as delicious chocolate puffs does not make its popular usage in empirical reality? Defining feminism as "we want women to be on equal standing with men" (vagueness notwithstanding) would be about as useful as defining Christianity as "we want to discover the truth" when the doctrine is much more specific. It would be ingenuous, even outright dishonest. But so long that you try to sidestep this issue by talking about yourself, I can only guess that you're either naive or dishonest, or that you honestly believe that no further implications about feminism exist in the world whatsoever, while you selectively ignore evidence and refuse to present any of your own.i already stated that the definition that zerg provided, is the one i accept, that is that equal standing with men, in which no law can restrict the woman. what's so hard to understand? and why are you so against doctrine? |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: KaceSpace said: What you personally believe is irrelevant to the majority; it's an anecdote of insufficient sample size. A movement cannot be simultaneously doctrine-less and have a doctrine. That is a direct contradiction, one that feminists try to shove under the rug like an Iranian nuclear bomb. Why is it so hard to understand that just because you are capable of tautologically defining terrorism as delicious chocolate puffs does not make its popular usage in empirical reality? Defining feminism as "we want women to be on equal standing with men" (vagueness notwithstanding) would be about as useful as defining Christianity as "we want to discover the truth" when the doctrine is much more specific. It would be ingenuous, even outright dishonest. But so long that you try to sidestep this issue by talking about yourself, I can only guess that you're either naive or dishonest, or that you honestly believe that no further implications about feminism exist in the world whatsoever, while you selectively ignore evidence and refuse to present any of your own.i already stated that the definition that zerg provided, is the one i accept, that is that equal standing with men, in which no law can restrict the woman. what's so hard to understand? and why are you so against doctrine? no, you seem to think that the feminists who state facts like how men have been more dominant are wrong simply because of the way they speak, you even said that you get a chilly vibe from them. |
KaceSpace said: So the fact that I get a chilly vibe from feminists with an eye of disdain indicate that I think that feminists who state facts about dominant men are wrong because of the way they speak? You're beyond hope. Provide some evidence or examples of feminists stating facts about dominant men, or just keep spouting vapid justifications for the ignorance of your own brand. I hope you're trolling, because where you could have just left with a respectable exit, you persist to make feminism look like a bunch of daddy's little girls.katsucats said: no, you seem to think that the feminists who state facts like how men have been more dominant are wrong simply because of the way they speak, you even said that you get a chilly vibe from them.What you personally believe is irrelevant to the majority; it's an anecdote of insufficient sample size. A movement cannot be simultaneously doctrine-less and have a doctrine. That is a direct contradiction, one that feminists try to shove under the rug like an Iranian nuclear bomb. Why is it so hard to understand that just because you are capable of tautologically defining terrorism as delicious chocolate puffs does not make its popular usage in empirical reality? Defining feminism as "we want women to be on equal standing with men" (vagueness notwithstanding) would be about as useful as defining Christianity as "we want to discover the truth" when the doctrine is much more specific. It would be ingenuous, even outright dishonest. But so long that you try to sidestep this issue by talking about yourself, I can only guess that you're either naive or dishonest, or that you honestly believe that no further implications about feminism exist in the world whatsoever, while you selectively ignore evidence and refuse to present any of your own. P.S. I prefer to carry a conversation with Patriarch feminists than people who sound like they've sniffed a can of nitrous before deciding which movement to identify with using eenie-meenie-minie-moe. |
katsucatsApr 8, 2015 12:39 AM
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
| I support equality for both sexes. I am from India and I think my country is still clinging on to the traditions and cultural heritage on women's clothing and the way we treat them, for too long. I think woman are not treated equally in my country. They are not allowed to wear clothes they like, they are not allowed to do what they want, they are not given the same pay as their male counterparts, they are not allowed to think freely, they are not allowed to live their life how they want to live their life, and I can go on and on about how our customs ,culture and traditions limit women from doing anything a man can, in our society. Its not like how it is in an Islamic country. We are talking about the largest democracy in the world. I still cannot believe that there are men who think that woman should not wear tight jeans because we,men, cannot stop ourselves but rape them. THAT IS , IN MY OPINION, THE MOST RETARDED ARGUMENT I HAVE EVER HEARD. Indian men think of themselves too highly, does not appreciate woman and look at them as nothing but objects they can "own". These are directly or indirectly faults of our own traditions and the way we have treated woman throughout the generations. I think we are moving in a right direction with the current generation though. There is a lot of awareness, campaigns to felicitate women rights. ( I am an active member of one of the groups) I think country in itself is moving forward and is changing with the tides of this generation and the generations to come. Like how the Delhi rape case became that widespread, if it were 10 years earlier.. it would have been buried under some lawyers desk and never come into light.. So its getting better. We are nowhere near a state where we can say that the country itself is aware of its problems entirely. But we are reaching a lot of people around the country and this will make a shift in the tide. It can only get better from now on and I am a firm believer of that. |
| We need a strong, unifying, broad statement that the populace can agree on as defining "Feminism" before we can go anywhere, giving out a yes or no. Someone do the work for me please: |
| A great protagonist once said, "It's only overpowered if you can't return the favor!" |
katsucats said: KaceSpace said: So the fact that I get a chilly vibe from feminists with an eye of disdain indicate that I think that feminists who state facts about dominant men are wrong because of the way they speak? You're beyond hope. Provide some evidence or examples of feminists stating facts about dominant men, or just keep spouting vapid justifications for the ignorance of your own brand. I hope you're trolling, because where you could have just left with a respectable exit, you persist to make feminism look like a bunch of daddy's little girls.no, you seem to think that the feminists who state facts like how men have been more dominant are wrong simply because of the way they speak, you even said that you get a chilly vibe from them. P.S. I prefer to carry a conversation with Patriarch feminists than people who sound like they've sniffed a can of nitrous before deciding which movement to identify with using eenie-meenie-minie-moe. i'll answer your first assumption with silence, who are you to think i'm a girl? and who do you think you are when you use the daddy's girl insult? if your mindset is like this then obviously you will never change, try being more open and rational rather than throwing insults |
-shotz said: Having an ideology makes it impossible to claim that you are simply fighting for equality. That common definition of feminism should carry no such baggage.well whether feminism has a doctrine seems pretty moot to me, as it's a very broad ideology with varying perspectives on patriarchy. -shotz said: I take it you're still using man-hater and penis-cutter metaphorically? Those are not words that I've used. I'd prefer more direct language that doesn't carry a recipe for a strawman. Patriarch theory, rape culture theory, etc., are narratives wherein a gender-based structure is created that must be shut down. You might see this as non-controversial, only if you prescribe to these facts that such structures exist, and have come to exist in the way that patriarch theory describes it. Feminists who take these theories seriously are predisposed towards gender discrimination if we're looking at it from an outside perspective, where men have not, in fact, coordinated a power dynamic for the benefit of other men to take advantage of women, or that gender roles are not, in fact, solely a social-cultural institution meant to suppress the rights of women.i still fail to see how subscribing to patriarch theory makes someone a man-hater or penis-cutter. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
KaceSpace said: Daddy's little boy then? My mindset of intellectual integrity will never change. You do not deserve openness when you consistently undermine discussion with irrelevant truisms and ad hominem dismissals. Who do I think I am? I'm Katsucats. lmaoi'll answer your first assumption with silence, who are you to think i'm a girl? and who do you think you are when you use the daddy's girl insult? if your mindset is like this then obviously you will never change, try being more open and rational rather than throwing insults The problem is you've approached this topic as making the other person change when you've provided nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to the table. I've patiently engaged you for several rounds, but as you can see, I'm no saint. I should be lauded for the effort, while you pathetically wasted both my time and yours. If you want other people to treat you with respect, first you'd have to demonstrate the capacity to receive it. This has nothing to do with your gender, as you might perceive, but that you are a taker that bites the hand that feeds it. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: KaceSpace said: Daddy's little boy then? My mindset of intellectual integrity will never change. You do not deserve openness when you consistently undermine discussion with irrelevant truisms and ad hominem dismissals. Who do I think I am? I'm Katsucats. lmaoi'll answer your first assumption with silence, who are you to think i'm a girl? and who do you think you are when you use the daddy's girl insult? if your mindset is like this then obviously you will never change, try being more open and rational rather than throwing insults The problem is you've approached this topic as making the other person change when you've provided nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to the table. I've patiently engaged you for several rounds, but as you can see, I'm no saint. I should be lauded for the effort, while you pathetically wasted both my time and yours. If you want other people to treat you with respect, first you'd have to demonstrate the capacity to receive it. This has nothing to do with your gender, as you might perceive, but that you are a taker that bites the hand that feeds it. as if you hold the key to intellect and as if you hold the key to openness. just because i highlighted, called out and dealt with your stereotypical mind frame of what a feminist is, doesn't mean i will be harsh to you, but the truth is bitter sometimes so just get over it and stop with the self advertising, it's very cringeworthy oh and i don't necessarily care about respect on the internet, you shouldn't be that naive to think so. from underneath your username, it seems to imply that you are in denial of reality and are being a forum antagonist, you need to learn from the very intellectual integrity that you boast about. |
Shitposta said: TheKaiserKnight said: How bout fuck no. The movement was originally for women by women. Because they were oppressed in similar manners to blacks such as the rights to vote and get certain jobs. Now we're in a time where we have people like Anita Sarkeesian who has absolutely zero ability to properly research anything involving the male gender. And they take advantage of peoples brainwashing into worshiping the pussy. The average man is the person who got her tens of thousands of dollars just so she can pretend to play games and review them about "male" dominance in video games despite the fact that no one has the time to play ALL video games and in detail review the portrayals of the men and women in them. We have it now where a man and a woman apply for the same job. The woman is probably 80% if not 100% bound ot get the job over the equally qualified man. I say fuck Feminism. There's already a term for equality. Egalitarianism. So no. I'm not a god damn feminist. Because the current publicized movement is run by ignorant cunty twats who want superiority and think that female superiority and master status over males equates to equality of a utopia. Those are the kinds of people who, if we still had hooded executioners, and they were about to be beheaded, I'd salute the executioner. And I'd literally wipe the blade clean and kiss it. Fuck Female rights. Fuck men's right. Hail HUMAN RIGHTS. GITGUD. Calm the fuck down. No. When people ask me how it is, that's how it is. |
The devils baking a damn barbeque out here. Imma shit on the baked chicken.  |
princessv said: Do you consider yourself a feminist lol no and how do you define feminism? |
| BAN ME |
| I would never identify myself as a feminist. |
 |
katsucats said: If you think they're a vocal "minority", then ask yourself why these Patriarch feminists control the curriculum for any gender studies course in liberal arts colleges, and why they are being employed across all major newspapers as paid contributors to the editorial section. These feminists get less backlash than terrorism in a mosque. Oh yes, the feminist monopoly on those all important gender studies courses! The control room for the entire social order! Alright, joking aside, you're quite right that journalists have the capacity to influence the general population and to shape debates. I'm not entirely sure if they are being hired across all major newspapers though, especially those with a right-wing bias. I'm sure you recall the 'shirtgate' fiasco; I know that many of the Conservative newspapers defended the scientist while the left and liberal newspapers supported the "protesters". So I don't think your claim that they are behind all the major newspapers is accurate. As for how much backlash they receive, it seems plain that many people disagree with some aspects of modern feminism. There are many people expressing their dislike of feminism within this thread, and I don't see any reason why this place would be unrepresentative of the general public, so the backlash they actually receive is actually quite considerable. But the real question is, do you think that news sources shouldn't have feminist commentary at all? |
| Losing an Argument online? Simply post a webpage full of links, and refuse to continue until your opponents have read every last one of them! WORKS EVERY TIME! "I was debating with someone who believed in climate change, when he linked me to a graph showing evidence to that effect. So I sent him a 10k word essay on the origins of Conservatism, and escaped with my dignity intact." "THANK YOU VERBOSE WEBPAGES OF QUESTIONABLE RELEVANCE!" |
| feminism is bigotry, but when you call people out on it you're the bad person. |
| Whoa, ancient thread out of nowhere. No, I'm not. I consider myself an egalitarian. Feminism had a purpose, but now it's more about special treatment than euqality. And the argument that there is genital mutilation going on in Africa will be valid when western feminism actually tries to do something about it. Right now they seem to mainly want to scream at sub-cultures, not really something I'm interested in. |
 |
WeebSpaceCommie said: Not exactly sure why this would be valid. By that I mean, to my knowledge, there isn't a single Western Nation that requires or strongly encourages "genital mutilation" in females, so I don't know why Western Feminists should care (unless they want to start attacking other's culture, however that is more likely to bring about a negative reaction within both parties of the culture). Never been a fan of leaning one way or the other either, while it may be lesser, it is common practice for men to get circumcised, more so than women, so this really holds no "inequality" value whatsoever.And the argument that there is genital mutilation going on in Africa will be valid when western feminism actually tries to do something about it. Right now they seem to mainly want to scream at sub-cultures, not really something I'm interested in. |
 |
JD2411 said: feminism is bigotry, but when you call people out on it you're the bad person. Bigotry, how? I don't follow. Just so you know, most feminist thinkers aren't the kind who most people typically associate them as being (i.e "kill all men", etc.) |
| Yes in a way. My mom's family is from south asia and there is a lot of sexism that goes on there. Women are discouraged to do well in their jobs because if they do really well they won't find a husband (over there apparently it is bad if the wife gets a higher salary than the husband), they are forced to marry at a very early age by their families etc. I don't care about all the objectifying women and the SJW crap but I believe both men and women must have equal opportunities. |
Pirating_Ninja said: cliterectomy =/= female circumcision (removal of clitoral hood) .WeebSpaceCommie said: Not exactly sure why this would be valid. By that I mean, to my knowledge, there isn't a single Western Nation that requires or strongly encourages "genital mutilation" in females, so I don't know why Western Feminists should care (unless they want to start attacking other's culture, however that is more likely to bring about a negative reaction within both parties of the culture). Never been a fan of leaning one way or the other either, while it may be lesser, it is common practice for men to get circumcised, more so than women, so this really holds no "inequality" value whatsoever.And the argument that there is genital mutilation going on in Africa will be valid when western feminism actually tries to do something about it. Right now they seem to mainly want to scream at sub-cultures, not really something I'm interested in. |
| ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣸⠋⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⡔⠀⢀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⡘⡰⠁⠘⡀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠁⠀⣀⠀⠀⡇⠀⡜⠈⠁⠀⢸⡈⢇⠀⠀⢣⠑⠢⢄⣇⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢰⡟⡀⠀⡇⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡇⠈⢆⢰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠤⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡼⠀⣧⠀⢿⢠⣤⣤⣬⣥⠀⠁⠀⠀⠛⢀⡒⠀⠀⠀⠘⡆⡆⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⢵⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠀⢠⠃⠱⣼⡀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠛⠳⠶⠶⠆⡸⢀⡀⣀⢰⠀⠀⢸ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⣀⣀⣀⠄⠀⠉⠁⠀⠀⢠⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⣼⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠴⠢⢄⡔⣕⡍⠣⣱⢸⠀⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⡰⠃⢀⠎⠀⠀⡜⡨⢢⡀⠀⠀⠀⠐⣄⠀⠀⣠⠀⠀⠀⠐⢛⠽⠗⠁⠀⠁⠊⠀⡜⠸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢀⠔⣁⡴⠃⠀⡠⡪⠊⣠⣾⣟⣷⡦⠤⣀⡈⠁⠉⢀⣀⡠⢔⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡤⡗⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⣠⠴⢑⡨⠊⡀⠤⠚⢉⣴⣾⣿⡿⣾⣿⡇⠀⠹⣻⠛⠉⠉⢀⠠⠺⠀⠀⡀⢄⣴⣾⣧⣞⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠐⠒⣉⠠⠄⡂⠅⠊⠁⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣻⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⢠⣷⣮⡍⡠⠔⢉⡇⡠⠋⠁⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ |
| Feminism is about female privledges, it has nothing to do with equality. |
| SCARY MONSTER |
AnnoKano said: The control room for the feminist social order. And no, I'm not kidding.katsucats said: Oh yes, the feminist monopoly on those all important gender studies courses! The control room for the entire social order!If you think they're a vocal "minority", then ask yourself why these Patriarch feminists control the curriculum for any gender studies course in liberal arts colleges, and why they are being employed across all major newspapers as paid contributors to the editorial section. These feminists get less backlash than terrorism in a mosque. |
| My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com THE CHAT CLUB. |
katsucats said: AnnoKano said: The control room for the feminist social order. And no, I'm not kidding.Oh yes, the feminist monopoly on those all important gender studies courses! The control room for the entire social order! I know you're not, and I don't disagree with you either. |
| Losing an Argument online? Simply post a webpage full of links, and refuse to continue until your opponents have read every last one of them! WORKS EVERY TIME! "I was debating with someone who believed in climate change, when he linked me to a graph showing evidence to that effect. So I sent him a 10k word essay on the origins of Conservatism, and escaped with my dignity intact." "THANK YOU VERBOSE WEBPAGES OF QUESTIONABLE RELEVANCE!" |
AnnoKano said: katsucats said: The control room for the feminist social order. And no, I'm not kidding. I know you're not, and I don't disagree with you either. You guys are making me want to take a gender studies course to see what the commotion is all about. |
GuusWayne said: Feminism is about female privledges, it has nothing to do with equality. I've never once met a feminist that has said that they want superiority to men or anything like that (not counting the minority who do want this), it's always been about the desire to be treated in a more fair and equal manner and to be objectified less. Where exactly are you pulling your ideas of feminism from? Sounds to me like you get your ideas from people who parrot misogyny and "anti-sjw / feminazi" bullshit, rather than actually getting it straight from the source. It's whatever though, you can keep believing in your deluded ideas for a movement you have not attempted to understand anything about. I felt the exact same way that you did until I sat down and actually gave it a chance and interacted with people involved with the community. |
BurningFarmApr 8, 2015 11:19 AM
| I don't care enough to be a feminist |
  |
GuusWayne said: Feminism is about female privledges, it has nothing to do with equality. This is actually not true at all. |
apatch3 said: -JonasTheJay- said: This is actually not true at all. I'd argue that it's quite true, the state of modern feminism is deplorable, in that there is a major denial that gender roles have disadvantaged men just as much as they have disadvantaged women. For instance, the male privilege to be drafted into armed conflict, or support multiple dependents on a single income. If there are feminists who feel that men are just as hard done by gender roles then I have yet to meet them, most seem to think women have the short end of the stick and will continuously revel in their victimhood. If there were ever to be a real movement for gender equality it wouldn't be named after men or women, it would just acknowledge that gender roles are oppressive to both sexes and leave it at that. I'm sorry that you've not been able to meet someone who has more level thinking, but a lot of feminists do think that the gender roles assigned to men are toxic, and are a root in the cause to why they're left at a disadvantage. Having to live by male stereotypes is hard, maybe even almost as hard as that faced by women, especially when these roles do not fit who you are truthfully. To say they don't have the short end of the stick though is a bit much, as the discrimination that women face is far greater and normalized then what men have to face. Not to discredit any problems that men face as a whole, though. Anyways, I do view the movement as being penultimate to reaching any form of equality, despite the movement being named for women. Men already carry enough influence in society and are subject to far less discrimination so it's better to bridge the gap for women rather than just to start a new movement to discredit their views and progress they have made. |
Giygaszor said: I know enough of what it's doing to see the effects it's having on society. You openly say you want equality but that's only when it suits you. You are completely blind to your own double standards, anything you do is only to put women ahead of men to the point they've become second class citizens. Any effort or campaign you have are for women's benefit. You don't need to be genius to see how screwed up western society has become.GuusWayne said: Feminism is about female privledges, it has nothing to do with equality. I've never once met a feminist that has said that they want superiority to men or anything like that (not counting the minority who do want this), it's always been about the desire to be treated in a more fair and equal manner and to be objectified less. Where exactly are you pulling your ideas of feminism from? Sounds to me like you get your ideas from people who parrot misogyny and "anti-sjw / feminazi" bullshit, rather than actually getting it straight from the source. It's whatever though, you can keep believing in your deluded ideas for a movement you have not attempted to understand anything about. I felt the exact same way that you did until I sat down and actually gave it a chance and interacted with people involved with the community. |
| SCARY MONSTER |
Pirating_Ninja said: WeebSpaceCommie said: Not exactly sure why this would be valid. By that I mean, to my knowledge, there isn't a single Western Nation that requires or strongly encourages "genital mutilation" in females, so I don't know why Western Feminists should care (unless they want to start attacking other's culture, however that is more likely to bring about a negative reaction within both parties of the culture). Never been a fan of leaning one way or the other either, while it may be lesser, it is common practice for men to get circumcised, more so than women, so this really holds no "inequality" value whatsoever.And the argument that there is genital mutilation going on in Africa will be valid when western feminism actually tries to do something about it. Right now they seem to mainly want to scream at sub-cultures, not really something I'm interested in. You know that there is a difference between removing the foreskin of a man and the shit they do to women in some African countries right? Judging by your post you either want to upset me (not succeeding by the way) or you're an ignorant twat. Your choice. |
|
JD2411 said: feminism is bigotry, but when you call people out on it you're the bad person. This^ |
 |
WeebSpaceCommie said: There is a difference, and it is clearly obvious which is worse. However feminists should be concerned with issues within their own culture, and if you were truly fighting for equality instead of purely focusing on female rights, it is questionable why you bring up "genital mutilation" as an issue - Seeing as how it doesn't occur within Western Culture. The fact that you skip over circumcision, to attack another "wrong against females" that isn't even within your own culture comes off to me as you only favoring the issues of one sex. I am not condoning the act, I am merely pointing out that this line of thought clearly shows hypocrisy, in the fact that the only issues feminists should care about, are ones regarding females, and yet still maintain this belief that feminism is a gender-neutral movement, fighting for equality. There are quite a few issues still within Western Culture that are horrendously unequal (Take Child Custody for example), but the fight is considered "over" after women have achieved equality?Pirating_Ninja said: Not exactly sure why this would be valid. By that I mean, to my knowledge, there isn't a single Western Nation that requires or strongly encourages "genital mutilation" in females, so I don't know why Western Feminists should care (unless they want to start attacking other's culture, however that is more likely to bring about a negative reaction within both parties of the culture). Never been a fan of leaning one way or the other either, while it may be lesser, it is common practice for men to get circumcised, more so than women, so this really holds no "inequality" value whatsoever. You know that there is a difference between removing the foreskin of a man and the shit they do to women in some African countries right? Judging by your post you either want to upset me (not succeeding by the way) or you're an ignorant twat. Your choice. I would also like to distinguish those who believe in striving for equality within one's own country, and those striving for "equality" within another's culture, as horrendous as an act may be, it is for their culture to fight. I do not believe that taking shots at another culture's customs will benefit in the fight against said "custom", and in fact could just make it worse. |
Pirating_NinjaApr 8, 2015 2:35 PM
|
| I suppose I am if you mean actual gender equality. I'm a feminist in a place where feminism is still fundamentally relevant for an equal society and hasn't yet been turned into some kind of sordid joke. I wouldn't desire to be associated with modern feminism if I lived in, say, the US or the UK. |
 |
| no cause bitches ain't shit |
 |
| I want equal rights for both waifus and real girls |
 |
| If I were a feminist, I'd be more concerned with raising the level of basic human rights of women in other countries. Once they're all good and educated and they become smart enough to move out of whichever archaic hellhole they were born in, they can become a part of the feminist army! You get to do something "good" that nobody will bat an eye at, and you'll get to increase the feminist movements troop size. |
| Kenjataimu mode status: 恒久 |
| It's the evil industrial complex, feminist have long achieved the same freedom and opportunities as men but feminism cannot exist without "inequality". That's where all these fake statistic, double standards and manipulation comes from. Their existance depends on there being inequality which ironically makes them part of the problem. |
| SCARY MONSTER |
| No, because I'm not a blithering mongoloid. GuusWayne said: This is why feminism is inherently bigoted and retarded. They've long since reached the finish line, but manufacture controversy and fan the fires of fake issues to score more victimbucks, whether it's inflating rape statistics by distorting the definition of the word or misrepresenting statistics to bitch about the illusory wage gap. Listen and believe, please donate to my Paetron.It's the evil industrial complex, feminist have long achieved the same freedom and opportunities as men but feminism cannot exist without "inequality". That's where all these fake statistic, double standards and manipulation comes from. Their existance depends on there being inequality which ironically makes them part of the problem. There may very well be cause for the original ideals of first wave feminism in less developed shitholes where women are actually oppressed, but even in that case I'd say the term has long since outlived it's usefulness, egalitarianism is a much more fitting brand. |
Baman said: No, because I'm not a blithering mongoloid. GuusWayne said: This is why feminism is inherently bigoted and retarded. They've long since reached the finish line, but manufacture controversy and fan the fires of fake issues to score more victimbucks, whether it's inflating rape statistics by distorting the definition of the word or misrepresenting statistics to bitch about the illusory wage gap. Listen and believe, please donate to my Paetron.It's the evil industrial complex, feminist have long achieved the same freedom and opportunities as men but feminism cannot exist without "inequality". That's where all these fake statistic, double standards and manipulation comes from. Their existance depends on there being inequality which ironically makes them part of the problem. There may very well be cause for the original ideals of first wave feminism in less developed shitholes where women are actually oppressed, but even in that case I'd say the term has long since outlived it's usefulness, egalitarianism is a much more fitting brand. You literally look like a blithering mongoloid. Like, I look at your profile picture, and all see is this guy on my Facebook feed who posts nothing but how men are a legitimately oppressed class and "dank memes." Take that as you will. |
BurningFarmApr 8, 2015 5:52 PM
Giygaszor said: sry if i triggered u X---DDBUTTHURT |
More topics from this board
» things you know aren't real/true but secretly wish were.TheBlockernator - Sep 16 |
37 |
by ashen_one1
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» Good on Paper, But Still Never Been Close to a Relationshipremoved-user - Sep 20 |
45 |
by ryan77999
»»
30 minutes ago |
|
» How do you react to bad restaurant service? Do you complain when that happens?Rinrinka - Yesterday |
15 |
by Malkshake
»»
59 minutes ago |
|
» when do you know is the right time to switch to 'ore'?XMGA030 - Sep 26 |
25 |
by LifelineByNature
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» What's the craziest or creepiest thing you've heard a stranger say?TheBlockernator - Sep 26 |
12 |
by LifelineByNature
»»
2 hours ago |