Why so much hatred for feminism?

truethat said:
That's not what was posted. This is what I mean about cultural hegemony. The president and congress are not in "control of the women" if anything they are in control of society.
Click to expand...

Are women not part of society? How will women get to have a say in the direction and governance of this society? Women didn't even get the vote everywhere in the US until 1920! And that amendment didn't get passed until forty years after it was written and first submitted...and even then, there were court challenges (filed by Guess Who) to try and overturn it.

So the sexist assumption is that just because they have a penis they will automatically favor men.
Click to expand...

At the very least, they're unlikely to spend a lot of time and effort on issues that are important to women.

What evidence is this based on.
Click to expand...

History, mostly.
 
Last edited:
truethat said:
where does that happen in the US? More of your rare extremes bookitty.
Click to expand...

You said you were degraded for wanting to be a stay at home parent but didn't present evidence. Given the nature of your story, that's expected. The problem is that a 3rd party like me hears both stories and doesn't know how true either story is. It seems unfair to ask evidence of a personal anecdote when we are to accept yours at face value.
 
Captain Obvious said:
Have you ever wondered that by implicitly accepting the implied importance of the gender divide - that is so ubiquitous in feminist thinking - you're unsuspectingly turning yourself into just another kind of bigot?
Click to expand...

Nothing unsuspecting about it. "Look at me, the politically correct bigot."

A key deception being deployed is to commandeer gender equality, as if that were a "feminist" position and not the frikkin' normal point of view since at least the last 50 years. You don't have to be a "feminist" to believe in racial equality.

So they spend all this effort trying to deceive people about how their views are not bigoted because, see - we're for "equality" just like you. Then they go about framing everything in deceptive gender-biased terms. The OP is a great representation of that.


Look how there are more registered female voters than men. We need to do something about that inequality. Playboy bunnies - not one man!

My nude chat channel is hardly making any money it all. I want an equality subsidy.
 
KingMerv00 said:
I ask because I feel you are suffering from confirmation bias in this regard. You seem to focus heavily on the disagreements but forget common ground.
Click to expand...

This is one answer to a lot of beliefs we discuss in the skeptical community. I'd submit that it even is one answer to the OP.
 
truethat said:
How does the president exert control over women? How do the congress and senate exert control over women?
Click to expand...

I assume there is an underlying concern that you want me to discuss because the answers to those questions are self-evident.

Let me repeat: The problem isn't just what people do with the power they have. It's the fact that one group has more power than another in the first place.
 
Last edited:
tyr_13 said:
When discussing why people have a negative view of feminism, feminists who oppose father's parental rights or dismiss the plight of men when those are the topics would seem to be relevant. I believe the bulk of that post was supposed to be an example of that based on the lines, "Try discussing men's issues and they are batted away with a sledgehammer of all the ails of women. Only discussing women's issues matter."
Click to expand...

In my experience, that is not the case. Men's issues always get shoehorned into a thread, like this one, that is about feminism. I've been told several times that until I tackle areas in which men specifically are unfairly targeted, my work as a feminist is hypocritical. (Funny thing is, I do target those areas because I'm fighting for gender equality.)
 
Haven't you ever wondered why congress is elected from the various states and local congressional districts within those states? Why don't we just vote from a single nationwide pool of candidates, so that it's entirely possible that, say, all 535 members of congress could end up coming from New York City, if that's how the vote ended up?
 
Last edited:
Feminists in power in Iceland decided to ban pornography amongst other things, all other politically relevant feminists (as feminist goes) support the same thing, along with countless other retarded ideas. (just look up the communist party's website or the feminist party's and have a laugh)

Whenever some 'feminist' does anything political in this and all other Nordic countries it comes down to one thing: favoritism of women in all forms (It's not discrimination when it's pro-woman and anti-man!). It's all that simple. "What's that? You have a vagina? OH PLEASE GET IN FRONT OF THE LINE IN-FRONT OF EVERYONE ELSE! WHO CARES ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS OR ACTUAL EQUALITY WHEN SEX IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF THEM ALL!"

And before you mouth breathers scream "DURR ONE TRUE FEMINIST HURR DEY ARNT TRUE FEMINISTS HURP" just remember, this is the only relevant feminists that exist in these countries and it is them that push the agenda.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
So they spend all this effort trying to deceive people about how their views are not bigoted because, see - we're for "equality" just like you. Then they go about framing everything in deceptive gender-biased terms. The OP is a great representation of that.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate something I've said that is bigoted.

Look how there are more registered female voters than men. We need to do something about that inequality.
Click to expand...

Sure. Why not? We should encourage everyone to vote.

Playboy bunnies - not one man!

My nude chat channel is hardly making any money it all. I want an equality subsidy.
Click to expand...

I don't suppose it would help if I said those don't represent my opinions in any way and as parodies they don't work?
 
ANTPogo said:
Haven't you ever wondered why congress is elected from the various states and local congressional districts within those states? Why don't we just vote from a single nationwide pool of candidates, so that it's entirely possible that, say, all 535 members of congress could end up coming from New York City, if that's how the vote ended up?
Click to expand...

The Constitution is one reason. :p
 
Arcade22 said:
Feminists in power in Iceland decided to ban pornography amongst other things, all other politically relevant feminists (as feminist goes) support the same thing, along with countless other retarded ideas. (just look up the communist party's website or the feminist party's and have a laugh)

Whenever some 'feminist' does anything political in this and all other Nordic countries it comes down to one thing: favoritism of women in all forms (It's not discrimination when it's pro-woman and anti-man!). It's all that simple. "What's that? You have a vagina? OH PLEASE GET IN FRONT OF THE LINE IN-FRONT OF EVERYONE ELSE! WHO CARES ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS OR ACTUAL EQUALITY WHEN SEX IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF THEM ALL!"

And before you mouth breathers scream "DURR ONE TRUE FEMINIST HURR DEY ARNT TRUE FEMINISTS HURP" just remember, this is the only relevant feminists that exist in these countries and it is them that push the agenda.
Click to expand...

Or it could be that the Nordic countries have been experimenting with different implementations of gender equality for decades. Some of those ideas worked, some didn't.

In this case, I would guess that the ban on pornography was an attempt to reduce sexual exploitation. While there are many people for who pornography is a valid choice and satisfying occupation, that is not true in all cases. The viewer has no way of knowing if the participants have fully consented to being filmed.

As both men and women are shown in pornography, they are both equally protected from exploitation if pornography is banned. Unless you believe that men can not be exploited, this ban did not primarily benefit women.
 
Arcade22 said:
Feminists in power in Iceland decided to ban pornography amongst other things, all other politically relevant feminists (as feminist goes) support the same thing, along with countless other retarded ideas. (just look up the communist party's website or the feminist party's and have a laugh)

Whenever some 'feminist' does anything political in this and all other Nordic countries it comes down to one thing: favoritism of women in all forms (It's not discrimination when it's pro-woman and anti-man!). It's all that simple. "What's that? You have a vagina? OH PLEASE GET IN FRONT OF THE LINE IN-FRONT OF EVERYONE ELSE! WHO CARES ABOUT QUALIFICATIONS OR ACTUAL EQUALITY WHEN SEX IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF THEM ALL!"

And before you mouth breathers scream "DURR ONE TRUE FEMINIST HURR DEY ARNT TRUE FEMINISTS HURP" just remember, this is the only relevant feminists that exist in these countries and it is them that push the agenda.
Click to expand...

I don't really care whether or not you call me a feminist. If you insist the word best describes the radicals, fine. Call me a "bleebo" if you like. However, when I start talking about equality, like I do in the OP and don't accompany it was a battlecry to ban porn or USE ALL CAPS, I'd thank you not to associate me with crazy misandrists and actually address why or why not my points are valid. Fair?
 
Last edited:
KingMerv00 said:
Girls have no sense of humor.
Click to expand...

yukichibi3.jpg


( :D )
 
Last edited:
bookitty said:
Or it could be that the Nordic countries have been experimenting with different implementations of gender equality for decades. Some of those ideas worked, some didn't.

In this case, I would guess that the ban on pornography was an attempt to reduce sexual exploitation. While there are many people for who pornography is a valid choice and satisfying occupation, that is not true in all cases. The viewer has no way of knowing if the participants have fully consented to being filmed.
Click to expand...

Sure we do. At least as well as we can for any other TV footage.
 
KingMerv00 said:
I assume there is an underlying concern that you want me to discuss because the answers to those questions are self-evident.

Let me repeat: The problem isn't just what people do with the power they have. It's the fact that one group has more power than another in the first place.
Click to expand...

ZING and there ya go. The PENIS GROUP. I mean this is what we are saying. This is your problem.


How are you arriving at this group? This magical group with all the power and control and money. It's check yer pants boyz, and if ya got one, yer in.

Sorry the "group" is not that simple. And when feminists oversimplify it this way people get annoyed. Downright angry at time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom