The state of Feminism, the good the bad

[kgambit]

 

So your entire contribution to the conversation is to say that you wont be contributing to the conversation?

 

Only because I'm too tech illiterate to vomit over people on the internet.

 

 

Which is sad because it's a target rich environment.  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

"Which, you have to admit, is a pretty big tent for an ideology."

 

Have you heard about this guy Jesus?

Yeah, I drink with Jesus Rojas pretty often.

[BruceVC]

Just an update, after reflection and consultation with certain third parties I have decided to not use the word feminist anymore when describing myself because there  does appear to be an uninformed and negative view around this word. So I will prefer to say I am a liberal who believes in gender equality

Edited August 16, 2014 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

 

 

Actually the semantics started on page one.

 

But yeah, I always hesistate before calling myself a feminist. I prefer to say that I am pro gender equality. Most people see "feminist" and read "feminazi" or "white knight".

 

Its funny you say that but about 3 weeks ago I was talking to this girl at a bar and I said "I'm a feminist, do you care about the struggle for gender equality" ( the truth is she was arrogant and I could tell this would annoy her ) anyway she said to me " you should speak to my friend, she cares about feminism " ( I knew she was being sarcastic ) so I went to her friend and said "hi, your friend told me you care about feminism" ....she gave her friend this annoyed look and said to me " well I will have to have a chat to her about that "

 

At least there is still strip bar/hostess club/escort service.

 

 

You can do both of them, as long as you are honest. So you meet ladies in bars and you can go to strip clubs but its not advisable to do this if you are involved

[Leferd]

A couple weeks outdated, but the best team in the NBA hired Becky Hammon to be an assistant coach.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/12/sports/basketball/becky-hammon-takes-big-steps-from-russia-to-san-antonio.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0

 

This on the heels of Corinne Diacre being named head coach of Clermont Foot in France (second division football).

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

I will toss you some true stories about feminism:

 

I'm in higher management in my company, I can walk all day smacking girls asses making comments on their looks and so on. But lately I had to fire a lower grade worker for saying, and I quote: "Hello Lisa, you look really good in your new haircut". The young "lady" that found that statement offensive was the same gal that took my advice to show some cleavage to the point I could see her belly button the next day. 

 

 

Which proves exactly what, aside from the fact that the system is rigged to favor the rich?

 

 

Another thing is sex. Women claim that they want gentle, loving guys. Bull**** they want violent, abusive guys. Why do you think those "Grey" books sells so well? I went one time in delegation with this new girl from marketing. After the meeting we slept in hotel and because she was kinda cute I went to her room and proposed sex. She started to say that this is inappropriate and so on. So I smacked her across he face a little and done my business. Of course she came on to me several times after that begging to do this to her again.

 

 

So, you have found a person who likes a little slapping. Good for you! Given the fact that studies say about 35% of adults are into BDSM to an extent, I'm frankly surprised it took you so long. But having kinky preferences doesn't mean said person is into "violent, abusive guys".

 

 

It's a movement to bring back polygamy into the world.

 

 

What.

 

 

They gather in the univeristy and do nothing else as to sit around in a confortable room with couches and vegetarian food and talk about things like "we have 12 genders" ... yes right 12 gender types or more. 

 

Given the fact that you have at the very least a chromosomal gender (XY/XX/other), gonadal gender (ovaries/testes/other), hormonal gender (androgens/estrogens) and genitals (****/vagina/other), 12 genders seem fairly conservative to me. And this is just the biological side, without going into the issues of gender identity.

 

Let me rephrase it: when you deny and ridicule the existence of "12 or more gender types", you just show how little you know about biology, not how ridiculous those wacky feminists are.

[ktchong]

Paternity Fraud - how the US legal system enables feminism to defraud men:

 

 

[ManifestedISO]

Whatever is the opposite of interesting, informative, fun to read, impartial, cleverly written, and thoughtful posts, you are nailing it. 

[Volourn]

"does appear to be an uninformed and negative view around this word."

 

It's not uninformed. Feminism as a word  and as tenant has been tainted.

 

 

"So I will prefer to say I am a liberal"

 

Meh, Liberals are just as bad as conservatives.

 

 

" who believes in gender equality"

 

Thumbs up.

[BruceVC]

 

 

I will toss you some true stories about feminism:

 

I'm in higher management in my company, I can walk all day smacking girls asses making comments on their looks and so on. But lately I had to fire a lower grade worker for saying, and I quote: "Hello Lisa, you look really good in your new haircut". The young "lady" that found that statement offensive was the same gal that took my advice to show some cleavage to the point I could see her belly button the next day.

 

 

Which proves exactly what, aside from the fact that the system is rigged to favor the rich?

 

What women do or do not do is not a part of the system. I seriously doubt that the any women says "I will allow this guy to molest me but not that one because the system is rigged", no they allow this guy because they want to.

 

 

 

Another thing is sex. Women claim that they want gentle, loving guys. Bull**** they want violent, abusive guys. Why do you think those "Grey" books sells so well? I went one time in delegation with this new girl from marketing. After the meeting we slept in hotel and because she was kinda cute I went to her room and proposed sex. She started to say that this is inappropriate and so on. So I smacked her across he face a little and done my business. Of course she came on to me several times after that begging to do this to her again.

 

 

So, you have found a person who likes a little slapping. Good for you! Given the fact that studies say about 35% of adults are into BDSM to an extent, I'm frankly surprised it took you so long. But having kinky preferences doesn't mean said person is into "violent, abusive guys".

 

It's not ONE person it's all of them.

 

 

 

It's a movement to bring back polygamy into the world.

What.

 

Usually a question end with "?", you know.

 

 

Wait, are you telling me you work for a company where management can go around slapping the asses of attractive girls and  not only is this allowed but the girls themselves don't mind this?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

What women do or do not do is not a part of the system. I seriously doubt that the any women says "I will allow this guy to molest me but not that one because the system is rigged", no they allow this guy because they want to.

 

 

So, is Rich Guy's ability to hire better lawyers, put her on a blacklist, or just generally make her life as unpleasant as he can supposed to be completely inconsequential to a woman's decision-making process when she decides to let aforementioned Rich Guy (who is also her boss, remember) molest her?

 

 

It's not ONE person it's all of them.

 

So you're saying every girl with whom you have slept with forced you to slap them around before you were allowed to put your **** in them? Intriguing.

 

 

 

 

 

It's a movement to bring back polygamy into the world.

What.

 

Usually a question end with "?", you know.

 

 

""What." You've just been witness to something so bizarre, so eye-crossingly stupid (or possibly so mind-crushingly terrifying as to put you beyond the capacity for rational thought), that your brain no longer has the cognitive faculties to put together a more articulate response."

Edited August 17, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

So, is Rich Guy's ability to hire better lawyers, put her on a blacklist, or just generally make her life as unpleasant as he can supposed to be completely inconsequential to a woman's decision-making process when she decides to let aforementioned Rich Guy (who is also her boss, remember) molest her?

With all social stigma of molestation, rape etc. and all the feminists organizations that are willing to help the "victims"? And mind you any "woman rights" organisation capability of hiring lawyers surpasses most "Rich Guys" capabilities to do so.

With that in mind, yes I think women decision to not persecute a specific person of high status is her own conscious decision that she do not mind being "molested" by this particular type of men.

 

I think you're vastly overestimating a/ the power of feminist organizations, b/ the amount of women seeking help from said organizations, c/ the willingness of courts to prosecute in cases like this, and d/ the speed of the legal process.

 

But still, "attractive guy with bright future prospects expressing an interest in me" is different from "guy I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole expressing an interest in me", and I don't think it speaks of moral bankruptcy if someone complains about the latter while welcoming the former. 

 

 

 

So you're saying every girl with whom you have slept with forced you to slap them around before you were allowed to put your **** in them? Intriguing.

Yes, they all liked it. Mind you I personally think that most of them would not allow it if I was the guy of lower social status.

 

I'm gonna chalk it up to selection bias (girls who aren't attracted to strong, domineering guys wouldn't get into a relationship with a strong, domineering guy, and girls who are attracted to them generally find it attractive if their partner behaves in a strong and domineering fashion).

 

Most subs I know don't like to be dominated by people they perceive as their inferiors, but I think this has more to do with what goes into their kink than them being eeeeevil.

 

 

Sorry, for I'm not a native English speaker and was not aware of this trope. If there is anything I could clarify more in this statement that confused you so please ask.

 

I just don't see how feminism could lead to widespread polygamy, that's all.

[BruceVC]

 

Wait, are you telling me you work for a company where management can go around slapping the asses of attractive girls and  not only is this allowed but the girls themselves don't mind this?

Is there any other kind of companies? Besides the ones led by gay people.

 

 

 

 

Okay well Polish labour  laws must be different to other countries. I work for a large global corporation and I work for other corporations all the time and I have never heard of a company that would allow any male in that company to be able to slap the asses of its female staff. All companies have codes of conduct around this  this type of behaviour and its most definitely prohibited 

 

Also its highly unlikely any women would enjoy this type of attention unless it was from there partner. The idea that you really think that most women would consider this to fun or normal amazes me?

[JadedWolf]

 

 

Wait, are you telling me you work for a company where management can go around slapping the asses of attractive girls and  not only is this allowed but the girls themselves don't mind this?

Is there any other kind of companies? Besides the ones led by gay people.

 

 

 

 

Okay well Polish labour  laws must be different to other countries. I work for a large global corporation and I work for other corporations all the time and I have never heard of a company that would allow any male in that company to be able to slap the asses of its female staff. All companies have codes of conduct around this  this type of behaviour and its most definitely prohibited 

 

Also its highly unlikely any women would enjoy this type of attention unless it was from there partner. The idea that you really think that most women would consider this to fun or normal amazes me?

 

 

You shouldn't be surprised. Poland is very ... Let's be polite and call it conservative.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I really think I don't overestimate those things.

 

I guess we can agree to disagree then *shrug*

 

 

 

But still, "attractive guy with bright future prospects expressing an interest in me" is different from "guy I wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole expressing an interest in me", and I don't think it speaks of moral bankruptcy if someone complains about the latter while welcoming the former.

To the point that she is willing to persecute the latter in court? That is a little extreme don't you think? I mean how is a guy supposed to meet a women if just by trying to talk he can be persecuted in court or be on employment blacklist or even jail? Are feminist allowing only the upper class of men to be worthy of female attention? That is extremely sexist. 

 

 

Well, individual women can be scum just as well as men can be, but I doubt blanket statements like "all women want to be abused by rich, powerful and good-looking men" are helpful based on that fact. Also, "feminists deeming only the upper class of men to be worthy of attention" would be classist, not sexist, were it true

 

 

 

I'm gonna chalk it up to selection bias (girls who aren't attracted to strong, domineering guys wouldn't get into a relationship with a strong, domineering guy, and girls who are attracted to them generally find it attractive if their partner behaves in a strong and domineering fashion).

 

Most subs I know don't like to be dominated by people they perceive as their inferiors, but I think this has more to do with what goes into their kink than them being eeeeevil.

Or maybe you know only one side of them and if you would have a higher social status they would allow you to behave differently? Ever thought about that?

 

*squints* How does that question follow from what I've said?

 

 

 

I just don't see how feminism could lead to widespread polygamy, that's all.

It's my theory, and I'm not talking about the ideology of feminism but rather the implication of their action not words. 

 

 

Well, you're entitled to your theories, but I still don't see it.

 

 

Again what women say is different from what they do.

 

 

True enough, but I doubt many women you've been involved with would identify as feminists

Edited August 17, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I came bearing gifts!

 

Specifically, I think I've hit a point where feminist rhetoric becomes ridiculous to me, and that is the argument of "having sex with your partner after cheating on them is rape".

 

Argument goes like this:

 

"Views on the ethics of infidelity. Which she maintained is inherently wrong even if the person who was cheated on never finds out, because (aside from willfully endangering their partner by way of increased STD risk) if the unfaithful party then has sex with their partner, they are doing so under false pretenses, and therefore without their partner’s consent. That is, sex with a partner who doesn’t know you’ve cheated on them is sex without consent."

 

Based on the idea that consent must be informed, so if it ain't informed, it ain't consent. I'm not sure I'm buying it. Discuss.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Bit of a slippery slope. That logic ends where if your partner is unaware of ANY sex you've had(past or present), you are raping them. Cheating is still a ****ty thing, but calling it rape is bizarre, to say the least.

Edited August 19, 2014 by KaineParker

[Longknife]

I actually have a very detailed opinion on this subject matter that I usually keep to myself cause both sides of the argument are usually so busy screaming and I don't want to get involved. But I have a couple points:

 

 

 

1) The Average Feminist

 

 

I cannot for the life of me name a female friend of mine who doesn't refer to herself as a feminist. Typically all they mean is that they deserve equal rights, equal pay and equal opportunities in society, which is the most reasonable stance in the world. I don't think anyone has an issue with this stance.

 

 

2) What the average Feminist doesn't understand

 

 

The above in group one is perfectly fine. However, unfortunately I know many female friends (again calling themselves all feminists) who take offense to people saying they don't like feminists. For them, they naively assume this person doesn't want women earning equal wages or the like, which is not the case at all. This is where a divide begins and where this more or less simple subject begins to become complex. This brings me to my next point about the very group giving feminists a bad name....

 

 

 

3) When Feminism becomes a problem

 

Anita Sarkeesian. Naming her because she's someone you're likely all familiar with. I don't care about her alleged scams or lies because all of that is irrelevant to her ideology or her cause.

 

Why are women like this a problem? In this sense, feminism isn't just a belief women deserve equal rights and treatment, it becomes an ideology. It hits a point where Anita and other extreme feminists see the world as right and wrong, where something is either done fairly or done incorrectly.

 

 

   My prime example and why I think feminists like Anita are ridiculous dreamers and ideologists incapable of objectively recognizing the world around them: take for example when she said "I saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" is a sexist song because it implies all women are promiscuous cheaters. No you stupid idiot, it's about a dad dressing up as Santa to fool his kid and make him think he met Santa, but then he goofs and kisses his wife while the kid is looking, and the kid being dumb and believing in Santa rationalizes that mom kissed Santa rather than Santa is dad. It's supposed to be a song about how adorably stupid kids are.

   But Anita labels this song as sexist. There's three problems with this:

 

  1) By that logic, the song would be equally sexist if it were "I saw daddy kissing Santa claus."

  2) St. Nicholas was infact a man. It's a very warped way of thinking to suggest we as a society should re-write history to make the gender diversity seem more even.

  3) Ultimately, the type of feminism Anita is supporting is one that wishes to govern art.

 

Number three is the biggest issue to me and the reason feminism in this form is so undeniably stupid, so undeniably impossible and so undeniably delusional. You see, sometimes the rant is "how come X protagonist isn't female?" Probably because the creator was male and relates to male characters better. It's as simple as that. Art is a form of expression, after all, so no one can dictate what's good art and what's bad art. There's no such thing as bad art (well there is. Just go check out Twilight or Sonic fanfics and you'll see what I mean, but that's besides the point). There can be art you don't prefer, but that's how art works. The point is that SOMEONE relates to it and gives it meaning. If a story is about a more male-orientated issue and you don't relate to it, no you won't like it, but no that's not a crime against humanity that someone wished to express themselves in a way relevant to their gender. In that same light, you are free to produce art that relates back to being a woman.

   But if we were to take Anita's advice on "how to make it better" that she so often provides for various songs, stories and video games, we'd literally be ripping out a small portion of the creator's expression to do so. Likewise, her dream of a perfect equality within art, where 50% of protagonists are male and 50% are female, is exactly that: a dream. It's unfortunate, but we have 2000 years+ of art created pre-dominantly by males because cultures back then were indeed sexist. That some woman never got a chance to write her fantastic and brilliant work of art novel that she COULD'VE written had society back then been less sexist? That is truly a travesty. However, Don Quixote is still a work of brilliance. Just because you want equality in society and just because unfair tendencies led one brilliant work of art to not come to light doesn't mean we should actively burn another to be fair.

 

The only way to have a perfectly equal world would be if art forms were 50-50 aswell. Art imitates life imitates art; art has dramatic influence on a culture. For all art forms to be equal for men and women, we have 2000 years of bias towards men to make up for. The only way to remedy that would either be to actively burn brilliant works like Don Quixote or actively censor and govern art created today, forcing people to utilize female protagonists and female-centric stories. Two wrongs do not make a right, and sure enough we'd be limiting and gimping expression of today by doing so. Recovering from the faults of bygone generations is LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE without commiting more travesties.

 

 

In that sense, this perfect world that Anita and some other more extreme feminists dream of is just that: a dream. And what do they do? Sit on their asses and complain. Ironically, this IS a situation where criticism is "unwelcome." It's always welcome, but what I mean is, if you don't like that -insert famous work of art here- has a male focus or a male protagonist or whatever.....then make a ****ing work of art yourself. No seriously, it's that simple. I mean, I myself am disabled, and let's pretend for a moment that I have a beef with how few one-legged protagonists there are in media forms. (and in a way I do. I swear to god if I encounter one more weeaboo fangirl who reacts to my disability with "OMG JUST LIKE EDWARD ELRICK KAWAIII DESU ONII-CHAN!!! ^_^" as if the vapid little **** has no life outside of her anime, I'mma strangle someone; another one-legged protagonist might kill that little reaction I keep hearing) If I governed or basically coerced another author/developer/writer/painter to include a one-legged character solely on the grounds of equality, there's no way in HELL he'd be able to depict it as properly as I could. In that sense it's just an awkward mess, with the author losing sight of the purpose of his work (perhaps he wants to write about corrupt capitalism and a selfish modern-day culture, where such a disability issue is largely irrelevant and only ditracts from the main message) in the midst of all the political correctness messages he feels pressured into including, all of which he cannot even personally relate to. It would be much better if I wrote the damned story about the disabled guy myself.

  Same exact rule applies to Anita and other feminists. If you don't like the inequality in novels, movies, video games or what-have-you.....go make one. Seriously wtf, go make one and you can make it as gender equal as you like. That's the beauty of art.

 

But she doesn't. She sits there and whines and moans at others for not sharing her same political stances, all with a tone that suggests the world would be a better place if art were somehow governed, regulated, or expected to meet a quota. Imagine if Stephenie Meyer went to release Twilight (not that that's a great work of art) and then was alerted that unfortunately we as a human race have not met this year's male quota or gay male quota, and therefore Bella must become Bob. You can see how that might upset her as the creator.

 

 

 

So the bottom line is that no, the world was not always equal, and art reflects that. But art is beautiful. We can always ALWAYS learn from art, so censoring or governing or altering art is absolutely 100% out of the question. I'd personally never agree to that. There is not a way to please Anita without doing this however, as many of the writers/directors/developers surely have the gut reaction to create male characters/protagonists/male-centric storylines solely on the grounds that they - as men - naturally understand and empathize with such stories better and express them more naturally.

  Complaining about any of that is tantamount to complaining about free speech. And while I 100% respect her rants and criticisms as her own form of free speech, I can't help but feel like she and other feminists like her are ABSOLUTELY wasting their time, as they could be more effective towards the very cause they believe in if they'd simply take part in producing books/movies/games of their own with their own ideas and emotions writing them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And again, that's where the basic message of "I want equality" gets lost with men, because I feel as though women should understand that yeah, it's kinda freaky and stays in a dude's memory longer when we encounter an Anita Sarkeesian who goes on a rant about how we're terribly sexist for liking a story where 80% of characters are male. Mind you, men should ALSO understand and realize that many women who claim "I am a feminist" simply mean they believe women deserve equal rights.

  Overall, I just hope a day comes where....even now equal rights for women is not even really a debate in modern society (stress on MODERN society) and it's really more there's still that 5-10% that's sexist, but is entirely drowned out by society, government and businesses. (with businesses sadly being the minority, as inequality with pay being the #1 example of inequality between genders) When that day comes, the feminist label will not even be considered neccesary by the average woman, and then the average man and woman will understand each other better as there'll be no "what do you mean you hate feminism" discussion, and the remaining feminist movement will be the extremists, who I have no doubt will garner little support.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Given the complete lack of interest, I think we should repurpose this thread and use it to discuss everything feminism/"SJW"-related (still hating the word).

 

In this spirit, ladies and gents, I present you Coming Out Simulator 2014. It's really fun, you get to snark at the author and stuff.

[Agiel]

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Shared by a Mexican friend of mine.

[Walsingham]

Firstly, Longknife, can I suggest you have a prosthetic like in that Tarantino film, except instead of an M16 you have a live Nile crocodile.

 

Liked your post. When it comes right down to it I think most of us want to be judged by what we can achieve, not what we look like we can achieve or what some other **** achieved. And since we want that for ourselves, and we're grown ups we allow that other people want the same.

[Orogun01]

Firstly, Longknife, can I suggest you have a prosthetic like in that Tarantino film, except instead of an M16 you have a live Nile crocodile.

 

Liked your post. When it comes right down to it I think most of us that have shame want to be judged by what we can achieve, not what we look like we can achieve or what some other **** achieved. And since we want that for ourselves, and we're grown ups we allow that other people want the same.

Fixed it.

[Agiel]

In my readings I've generally found the Anglo-American approaches of feminism takes more after the moral guardian tradition as opposed to the continental European post-modern, sex-positive approach. I think if Anita was more committed to constructively breaking perceived barriers rather than finger-wagging then more people would be far more amiable to her cause.

[Oerwinde]

Feminism is like Islam in that the whackjob extremists go on their whackjob tirades, and there is little to no condemnation by the average moderates, so the whackjob extremists are perceived as the norm.