/b/ - Random

In Definition I am a feminist, as in I believe that there aren't actually that many differences between men and women. And that it's not defined if you're better or worse at something just because you're male or female. I have to distance myself a lot from SJWs and radical feminists though. So much that I often feel weird and judged when I say that I am a feminist.

>>3374
I think SJWs and radfems just miss the mark. Years ago I'd encounter people like this and they'd mainly get shut down because their support group was too small, but with echochambers on the internet like tumblr/reddit, these groups are beginning to thrive. I don't personally want to have to distance myself from the word, but I feel with the current situation, extremists make this very difficult. I often find that even in real life, people's views of feminism are tarnished by extremist types and leaves a bad taste. Most people end up talking over eachother because they kneejerk about extremists and act like they make up the entire group.

That said, I'm a bit of a social liberalist and can accept that feminism should and does encapsulate a lot of egalitarian views and should include fighting against stereotypes for both men and women, because both create a negative dynamic. I also feel that women who are feminist because they believe all their problems are caused by men, or that men are the issue are really ignorant. It helps the cause much more to teach men that while many in their group abuse the way society has shaped gender roles, feminism is designed to release everyone from their gender roles. I think this is generally overlooked by many groups who falsely think we can only focus on the issues of women. I definitely don't agree with that and I think we should be more open to feminist related mens issues as well(things such as the idea of men being emotional=being like a woman=being weak) things like that contribute heavily to internalized misogyny. Obviously that shouldn't be a focal point but it's important to b ring up. In most developed countries, we have gotten to the point where we are fighting less for basic rights, such as autonomy, or freedom in a literal sense, but instead in a cultural sense.
SJWs really do spoil the movement because you have these people who wouldn't care either way get turned MRA because they think we're all out to enslave them and buy into the lies of people who are the real problem. I'm not saying all MRAs are innocent, just that they play into the lies because some things are perpetuated by extremists and resonate with them. Extremism in general causes problems and ends up making neutral people more enticed by the other side.


Sorry for the blog post.

I call myself a feminist. I probably fall under classic feminism, maybe a bit more on the radical side?

But I hate what fringe groups have turned the term in to. When I was at university my classmates asked if I was a feminist because I said it was good we were studying more women in our field (the guys were complaining that they added 1 female theorist to our course which had had none and were saying they were pandering to women) and when I said yes they said they were surprised because nowadays it's considered such a ridiculous/SJW term, so even if women consider themselves feminist they don't call themselves so anymore to not be considered the REEEEEE DIE CIS SCUM tier.

>>3375
I definitely agree with everything you have said. Toxic masculinity/other social problems with men need to be addressed and fall under the feminism umbrella, and it's frustrating when people think that feminism is just women's issues.

I don't know. I used to think I knew, but now I don't. What even is the definition of a feminist anymore?

I'm a feminist and I support trans rights and LGBT in general as well as intersectional feminism, but overzealous aggressiveness of a certain group harms the movement and its chances to be taken seriously, and you can't say anything because muh respectability politics!

>>3377
I don't even know feminism is or isn't at this point. I agree with a lot of points brought by the second wave, and by their standards​ I am definitely a feminist, but I'm not sure if I understand/like modern feminism. At all. And I'm not even talking about Tumblr feminism, just modern feminism in general.

>>3379
Same.

I don't know if I'm a feminist. Some people will probably consider me one, since I want equality for everyone. Others will say I'm not a real feminist since I'm not as nuts about it as they. Idc anymore.

One thing I do not support is trannies and their inclusion in feminist issues, I just see them as mentally unwell people who need help and I don't think they should be able to give birth (if FtM) or adopt because they're clearly not mentally sound. And I don't think what they have is a sexuality so I don't see why it's being included in lesbian, gay and bi movements.

Aside from that I don't have any strong feelings one way or another that deviate from the norm.

>>3380
>And I don't think what they have is a sexuality so I don't see why it's being included in lesbian, gay and bi movements.

THANK YOU. It's not a sexuality. It definitely needs to be out of lgb and feminist groups. They're their own thing, and until medicine can perfectly replicate the opposite gender's body, we need to acknowledge that.

Not sure where else to ask this, but I would like to read anything about current non Tumblr feminism, TERFs and the like, mostly for the sake of curiosity. Why suggestions on what I should look for? Sites, books or authors.

>>3382
Radfeminism is also in. thanks in advance!

>>3381
>>3380
I can see why trans individuals would be involved in LGB since to understand sexuality you have to look at gender too. Is it wrong to say that gender identity development has no role in sexuality development?

>>3382
Try the sidebar at /r/GenderCritical

>>3384
>since to understand sexuality you have to look at gender too
Nah, you really don't. Trans doesn't need to have anything to do with gender, either. It only does if you get into queer theory.

LGB did just fine before trans was involved.
>have penis = man
>have vagina = woman
>like same genitals as your own = gay/lesbo
>like both genitals = bi
>end of story

Please don't take this as an offense, but how old are you? It's usually people under 20 who tend to think gender is that important.

>>3386
I get what point you're trying to make but I disagree.

Trans should definitely be part of that discussion/grouping because of exactly what you break it down to, the penis/vagina thing. Of course in a perfect world where genital surgery would work perfectly it wouldn't be as much of an issue, but today it isn't so you have people who identify as women with penises and men with vaginas. It really isn't as clear cut. Sex (as in the act) and gender are very much linked and they should be part of the discussion.

Plus, just looking at the history of the LGBT movement, they were all so close together and their communities intertwined constantly.

Just because there are some shitlords today ruining the image of transgender folk doesn't mean they should be excluded.

>>3387
Your first mistake is taking people seriously when they 'identify' as something they aren't. They shouldn't get free reign to invade whatever spaces they please just because they made a delusional (at best) or fetishizing and misognyistic (at worst) choice to think of themselves as different to what they actually are.

>>3387
>people who identify as women with penises and men with vaginas
>identify
That's the thing, using a self-made decision as a valid measurement of what a person is or isn't.

I can identify as a black woman all I want and my white ass will still be white. I still won't know what it feels like to experience systematic racism. I'll still be told by everyone that I am white and nothing I do will ever change that.

Because deciding you are something does not make it so.

>>3388
>>3389
Identify is just a quick term. It's like someone who identifies as gay or lesbian or bisexual or whatever. They feel one way and have for a long time and want to have their outward appearance match their inner.

Obviously we won't get anywhere with this because we have complete opposite opinions on transsexuals.

>>3390
You're either gay or you're not. You can identify with certain types of gay culture, like being overly flamboyant or denial and repression, and live as such, but that doesn't make someone any more or less gay than they already were.

I'll use Rachel Dolezal as a foil since people are less accepting of transracialism (outside of cross race adoptions) than transsexualism/transgenderism.

Identifying with something doesn't automatically make you that thing. Rachel Dolezal struggled with being raised in a isolated, strict conservative religious home and feeling like an outsider to other white people who weren't raised that way. She related her feelings of otherness with the otherness some American black folk feel. She found purpose in furthering their cause. Rachel Dolezal is not black, no matter what other people might assume, no matter how good her perm is, Rachel Dolezal is not black.

In the same sense, I don't discount some transwomen's identification with womanhood, or femininity, or the female sex. I'm fine if they feel more comfortable with wearing dresses or putting on make up or doing their very best to pass. Like Rachel Dolezal, they're free to do whatever it takes to look the part, but at the end of the day looking the part is not being. They are only causing themselves mental anguish with delusional statements like "penises are female genitalia".

And unlike Rachel Dolezal, many trans"women" are not merely interested being a voice for the cause. They criticize and demean ciswomen. Call for violence against them on social media. Are misonygistic and fetishizing. How can they ~identify~ with something they apparently are disgusted by and hate?

And to top it off, I've seen many people cite "transgenderism" in animal species when those are just survival traits. Males mimicking female coloring/traits to save themselves from conflict with other males, are still males of that species. Species who shift between male and female reproductive organs are merely doing so out of a reproductive need. Nowhere in biology will you see a male animal gouge out his dick to create disgusting neovagina.

I feel like jumping into this is not super wise of me, and I don't even know where to reply to this, but here we are.

It's a false comparison between "transracial" and "transgender" because in today's society trans people, especially trans women, face a lot of the same kinds of discrimination or hardships that cis women do. Obviously cis women have some problems that most (or at least some, depending on whether you're accepting non-binary people as trans, which isn't a discussion I'd care to have with you right now) trans women don't, but then again, trans women have other problems that cis women don't. So, sure, the list of problems isn't a perfectly overlapping venn diagram, but there's still a fair amount of overlap.

When you talk about Rachel Dolezal, though, by identifying as black, she doesn't take on many, if at all, struggles of the black community genuinely. When a person who was assigned male at birth decides to transition, they effectively give up most of the privileges associated with being a cis man in society, because society generally stops viewing them as a cis man. On the other hand, Rachel is still viewed as a white woman, even with her attempts to mask it. It's not just that she can make a choice to go back to being white, it's that she never really stopped being white in the first place.

It's also important to note that the oppression of black people in America and the oppression of women is completely different, and while you can draw some comparisons, you can't equate the two, so that's also going to account for a lot of differences between "transracial" and transgender examples.

>>3398
That has literally nothing to do with the argument though. It's not about the discrimination they face, it's about the logic and justification behind the actual concept of being trans-something. Ie that it is illogical and unjustified regardless of how people react.

>>3399
In the case of transracialism it actually is about the discrimination they face. That's why it's shitty to identify as black as a white person, specifically.

>>3398
Rachel Dolezal never stopped being white but she has actually fooled people into categorizing her as a light skinned/mixed black person. She actually says that before she even started calling herself black, people assumed that she was anyway. If random people just instinctively categorize her as some kind of black person then she is absolutely subject to any racial prejudices those people may have.

>Rachel is still viewed as a white woman, even with her attempts to mask it. It's not just that she can make a choice to go back to being white, it's that she never really stopped being white in the first place.
Transwomen are still viewed as men, even with their attempts to mask it. It's not just that they can make a choice to go back to being men, it's that they never really stopped being men in the first place.

>>3401
Transwomen may not be always categorized as women, but they're also not categorized as or treated as men. For most nasty people they'll be put in a third category calling for treatment different but similar to cis women

>>3401
>She actually says that before she even started calling herself black, people assumed that she was anyway. If random people just instinctively categorize her as some kind of black person then she is absolutely subject to any racial prejudices those people may have.

That's projection on her part. The woman never looked black before the tanning and perms.

Either way this is completely irrelevant to Feminism.

Please continue the trans discussion either in >>21 or a new dedicated thread.

I used to be pretty on the fence about feminism (despite being from a liberal state), particularly because I didn't want to be aligned with "the crazies" but egalitarian didn't feel right either. Then i started to actually pay attention to the rhetorics of incels, pua, mra, and trans women, so now im 100% on the (rad) feminism train. Although i do agree with the lib fem side that racial intersectionality is important.

I think being from a traditional family also helped me to see how gender is being used to box intelligent, creative, and ambitious women into these stupid roles. Feminism, in my mind, is really just about giving women choices without having to conform.

Sorry for bumping, but i don't really have a place to talk about this

I think everyone should be treated equally but nowadays a lot of people and companies push the feminism agenda to sell their products/self market themselves and that makes me really pissed off to the point it's put me off completely.
>see also; politicians wearing "this is what a feminist looks like tshirts".

>>3406
true, I think (liberal) feminism is becoming corporate. Buzzfeed comes to mind. It's sad that people are using feminism for their self gain and money instead of trying to teach others about critically looking at gender and sex based oppressions.

I guess the people who do buy into these products also just want to make sure others know which side they're on.

>>3406
Makeup comes to mind. Ladies, it's empowering to spend an hour a day meticulously blending in your $60 Urban Decay eyeshadow. Gimme a break.

For a while I was pro-feminist, before realizing my friends and dates from countries without feminism were overall more pleasant to be around, and seemingly happier (also men tended towards being more generous and less jaded).

I believe everyone deserves enough rights to be able to shape their own lives (including all animals, which is why I'm careful where I buy meat from) for the better, but really, most countries no longer require feminism imo. In fact, I'd say most countries never really needed it. Men and women are biologically different, and in nearly every species of animal they play different roles.

I've personally noticed many feminists blame men for so much, rather than appreciating what they do. Personally, the best people I know are men and in my experience men are much more likely to give their own lives to save a partner or even pet. Women will generally give their lives for their children, but that's it.

I don't dislike other women (quite the contrary), but feminism tears apart families and is responsible for a lot of misery imo by pulling apart the foundations of society that have worked just fine for tens of thousands of years.

Thought I'd chime in as someone who isn't completely anti-feminism, but is not pro-feminism either. Obviously, I have more to say on the subject, but again, I just wanted to share a different view on the matter rather than write a blogpost.

>>3409
it's easy to blame women and feminism on the destruction of the "foundations of society" because society doesn't try to change along with the women. In those countries that do not have feminism, they use the excuse of biology to force women into being wives and mothers and nothing else (maybe a nursery teacher or a nurse if you're undateable). My grandmother, is still unable to retire from her housewife job, constantly serving my grandfather. It's also quite upsetting that you think women are not as heroic and won't sacrifice their lives for others. That's your bias showing my dude.

>feminism tears apart families
Basically saying that women who don't want to be wives and mothers (women-turned-feminists) should just shut up and make happy little families against their will. Should mention that feminism is not saying "don't get married to the evil men", it's saying that there are a lot more career choices out there.

I don't necessarily think that women have to identify as being a feminist or constantly think about gender politics. But blaming feminism because women are not the 1950's version of themselves anymore is stupid.

Sorry if that came out a little mean, but having to see my mother and grandmother feel trapped in their role as a woman (aka their ""biologically"" dictated roles) left quite a large impact on me. (obviously this is my bias)

>>3409
>>3409
>men are much more likely to give their own lives to save a partner or even pet.

Isn't this not true? I'm pretty sure I've read statistics on how men are more likely to leave a sick spouse than the other way around. Men don't nurture or care.

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/men-more-likely-to-leave-spouse-with-cancer/

>>3409
>but feminism tears apart families and is responsible for a lot of misery imo by pulling apart the foundations of society that have worked just fine for tens of thousands of years

Why are you contemplating society in such a rigid, linear fashion? Society as a concept is dynamic, it can exist in a myriad of forms and fashions and is never exclusively singular.
Maybe you need to stop and really consider the reality behind the fact that the previously implemented version of society was only able to function off of the persistent subjugation and servitude of over 50% of this planet's human population - of course I'm talking about we of the lesser sex. If you think feminism is really so dreadful you should probably think about hopping off your media device and back into your corset and marigolds, because friendly reminder sweetheart, back in the good ol' days you would have had zero rights over your mental, emotional, psychological, physical, political, familial and sexual autonomy. As an average woman you would have been property, only good to be raised, sold, used, bred and eventually discarded.

>>3409

>For a while I was pro-feminist, before realizing my friends and dates from countries without feminism were overall more pleasant to be around, and seemingly happier (also men tended towards being more generous and less jaded)

Wow, it's almost like if you're taught from birth to always be pleasant and obedient and hide your internal pain at sacrificing your own happiness and wants for someone else you get good at pretending or something. You'd get good a smiling when I tell you your a worthless piece of shit and you have to do what I say when the alternative is me raping and murdering you!

>most countries no longer require feminism imo

There's thousands of female sex slaves in the US alone, but we don't needs feminism. Right.

> Men and women are biologically different, and in nearly every species of animal they play different roles.

Not as much as you think, and not in a way that makes any difference in day-to-day life. That last sentence is particularly stupid, don't talk about biology if you know nothing about it.

>I've personally noticed many feminists blame men for so much, rather than appreciating what they do.

What do men do? Besides rape, murder, rob, do drugs, sit on their asses, fail to raise their children, get fat, be entitled, be hypocrites, hate women for no reason, and overall be shit?

>experience men are much more likely to give their own lives to save a partner or even pet

Lol and how often does that even happen?

> but feminism tears apart families and is responsible for a lot of misery imo by pulling apart the foundations of society that have worked just fine for tens of thousands of years.

Men tear families apart because they can't pull their own weight and throw a fit that they've lost their slaves. Anything that is built on the foundations of subjugating others deserves to be destroyed.

>Thought I'd chime in as someone who isn't completely anti-feminism, but is not pro-feminism either

"I don't think feminism should have ever existed but I'm tots neutral gaiz :^)"

Fuck off robot.

>>3409
It's a thing that even in very gender neutral countries that women will still generally tend towards the traditional jobs and social roles. So feminism doesn't ruin society except that women who would be miserable in those traditional roles wouldn't have to do them. Which is a great thing; like myself for instance, I'm emotionally aloof and not super understanding and if I had to raise children or help the elderly or something I'd just make miserable and possibly mentally fucked up people. Where's the sense in that?

Western countries may not "need" feminism like countries were revenge rapes and such occur (like rape victim's family members will go out and rape a female relative of the rapist as revenge) but get off the internet for 2 seconds and you will see the majority of random people outside will still believe/accept/follow more traditional gender roles.

There are many aspects to the commercialized/respect-my-triggers-or-i'll-dox-you type of feminism that's toted around as ruining the fabric of society that doesn't sit right with me, obviously. But those people are easy to avoid and I've never had a problem with meeting such types and I'm from a place considered to be the arse-end of the worse kind of only-feelings-matter type of progressivism.

Women in general are still becoming nurses and now we don't have to put up with men thinking that dinner and a movie means you need to fuck him. I'll most likely never get revenge raped in my lifetime in my country, but I don't like the idea that the worst possible things that could happen to a woman are the only reasons why we should care about women's rights.

I am curious, where do you feel feminism is failing society?

>>3415
I'm really interested and curious about the possible inputs for the last question anon made. Constructing criticism is always healthy.

>>3409
I've dated men from societies where feminism isn't prevalent, and to tell you the truth, at the beginning everything was cute. Of course they shower you with gifts and drive you around wherever you wanted to go.

But only at the beginning. When the relationship started to develop, all of them turned into control freaks. With one of them I couldn't even go out without his permission, he was jealous all the time, always coercing me into having sex (because he felt entitled to it, all those gifts weren't for free, you know) and he talked to me in a way as if I were a little child or a mere idiot… I can understand why many guys would want that kind of relationship though, which is sad.

Tbqh I prefer a guy from a "feminist" country. I don't mind paying for him an buying him nice stuff, after all he does the same for me. I don't need him to drive me around because I can move by my own. I'm not a princess for fuck sake, only a normal person, a woman.

And of course, the best part is having freedom, voice and a choice.

>>3409
>I believe everyone deserves enough rights to be able to shape their own lives (including all animals, which is why I'm careful where I buy meat from)
Lmao, in what world do you live in where ANY farm animal has any ounce of control over its own life? If you care about animals rights don't eat them.
Sage for OT but it doesn't surprise me someone who'd say bullshit like this would argue feminism is bad.

>>3410
No worries anon, you weren't mean. My grandfather allowed my grandmother a lot of freedom, and cared deeply about her and the kids. Meanwhile, my moms first husbands were more feminist, and terrible (lazy, stingy etc). My stepdad is in his 80's now,p and from the South of the U.S., and he's literally the best person I know. So for me, my situation was different in that regard.

>>3414
>For a while I was pro-feminist, before realizing my friends and dates from countries without feminism were overall more pleasant to be around, and seemingly happier (also men tended towards being more generous and less jaded)

>>Wow, it's almost like if you're taught from birth to always be pleasant and obedient and hide your internal pain at sacrificing your own happiness and wants for someone else you get good at pretending or something. You'd get good a smiling when I tell you your a worthless piece of shit and you have to do what I say when the alternative is me raping and murdering you!

Sorry, but you seem incredibly ignorant.

>most countries no longer require feminism imo

>>There's thousands of female sex slaves in the US alone, but we don't needs feminism. Right.

Sex slavery is a different subject than feminism, and is illegal around the world.

> Men and women are biologically different, and in nearly every species of animal they play different roles.

>>Not as much as you think, and not in a way that makes any difference in day-to-day life. That last sentence is particularly stupid, don't talk about biology if you know nothing about it.

Our brains and bodies are literally different. This IS biology.


>I've personally noticed many feminists blame men for so much, rather than appreciating what they do.

>>What do men do? Besides rape, murder, rob, do drugs, sit on their asses, fail to raise their children, get fat, be entitled, be hypocrites, hate women for no reason, and overall be shit?

See a therapist. Most men are normal, decent people. What you are describing is unacceptable in traditional cultures.

> but feminism tears apart families and is responsible for a lot of misery imo by pulling apart the foundations of society that have worked just fine for tens of thousands of years.

>>Men tear families apart because they can't pull their own weight and throw a fit that they've lost their slaves. Anything that is built on the foundations of subjugating others deserves to be destroyed.

That's why in feminist countries, women are generally berated for staying at home with the kids….? In these cultures women are expected to cook, clean, work full time, pay half the bills, raise the kids, and be a partner. Also, in just about every country women are allowed to go to college and work (Maybe some countries like Saudia Arabia or very rural places are the exceptions).

>>3415
Thanks for your mature response anon. I've lived in a few countries and my boyfriends have all been from non-feminist countries. As are most of my friends…I never felt as unsafe as in California. Men from feminist cultures still expect sex eventually, but also expect you to drive yourself, pay meals, and carry your own bags etc. My partners from non-feminist countries actually did not pressure me, and I instead pressured them the first times. Some I dated months with no intimacy except kissing and hand holding.

>>I am curious, where do you feel feminism is failing society?

I feel it puts more pressure on women to do more than necessary (it's expected that women work and take care of household duties and child raising generally fall to women anyway). Men don't know exactly how to treat women, as carrying a woman's groceries or opening the door can be offensive. In non-feminist countries, sex outside marriage is usually looked down upon, which helps to prevent single parent families (meaning children raised in overstressed, unstable and often poor families). Obviously we all have biases, but my experience is that it's only in feminist countries that women have to contribute more to families than men, and you'll have men being lazy mooches.

>>3416
It's okay we have different views. I respect your views, but wanted to share mine simple because they are different. My experience with my ex boyfriends have been pretty good, and helped shape my views. Yes, they think women aren't as smart and coerce sex, but they also "princess" me as you mentioned. I'd prefer being viewed as lesser and needing of care over being viewed as an equal, but not treated nearly as well (ex boyfriends bought me everything, drove me anywhere I wanted, took me to eat every day and also cooked, did the chores, washed my laundry, gave me spending money etc). My stepdad from the South also does the same things (American example of conservative, not raised with feminism). I find this treatment much better than "feminist" treatment, where I'm actually treated worse.

>>3417
To be fair anon, I eat free range, pasture raised meat as that at least offers animals freedom of movement, freedom to choose friends and when to eat/sleep etc (most farm animals don't do that much else tbh).

As I said, I'm not extreme in my views and of course, have no desire to argue. I just want to contribute some different views. And I appreciate and respect everyone, independent of gender, so I also appreciate your anon's views. They are simple different from mine. I won't reply to this thread after this. I just figured with the amount of responses I've received, it was only fair to give some reply.

>>3418
can you please expand on the biology part and how it affects women's role in society? as someone with a good grasp on human physiology, i'd like to hear your thoughts.

>>3419
I know I said I won't reply again, but I'd be happy to explain what I meant a bit better. What I mean is that women are physically weaker than men. It doesn't seem unreasonable that men should hold open doors, carry groceries etc., but many feminists argue against these gestures. Apparently, they imply we are physically weaker….but we are.

Likewise, our brains actually do function differently from men. That's why transgendered people are often found to have brains that function more like the opposite gender that they actually feel they are – there is a comparable difference. This is why women generally want to stay home with their kids, while men generally prefer to work and provide for their families. Sure there are exceptions, but for most of us this holds true.

Likewise, our physical differences are a large reason women have a difficult time fending ourselves from violent men (which is why women are not recommended to carry weapons, as they can be used against us). How many men take self-defense classes? These classes focus primarily on targeting a male attacker's weak points, as we aren't an equal match.

In my opinion, societies were built based on these comparable differences. Feminism messes with this imo. I hope this is a decent explanation.

>>3418
>"to be fair anon, I eat free range"
>she thinks free range means all the animals live in a happy little pasture in the middle of a grassy, sun-kissed meadow"
You know the only criteria necessary in order to label animal products as "free range" is that they technically have access to a small run built onto the side of their confinement areas? What this actually means is that they pack thousands of barns full with as many animals as they can, so much that they can barely move let alone actually access the run, and then they get to enjoy £££ rolling in from people like you who believe they're making the more moral choice. Video related is what all your "free range" virtue signalling is paying for in the case of hens, and if you're going to say you never go out and buy takeout and fast food I going to call you a liar.

I don't give a shit if you're going to eat meat, but don't pretend like you're a good person when you're just funding slavery with but with extra steps.

>>3418
>sex slavery is a different subject than feminism, and is illegal around the world
You gonna go over to Ghana, Togo, Benin, Sudan, Liberia, Niger, Sierra Leone, Mauritania and tell them that, or do the darkies not count in your books?
How about India? Nepal? Pakistan? Thailand? The Persian Gulf? You gonna go over there and tell every woman currently indebted into sexual servitude as a result of sale by their families or human trafficking that they don't need feminism in their country because sexual slavery is technically illegal?
How do you have the gall to label other people ignorant right now escapes me completely. Seriously, is this a man or an exceptionally stupid woman?

>>3421
not everyone is going to be vegan, and many freerange farms exceed the minimum standards. It's sad so many vegans are like you, and would rather promote all or nothing rather than better living standards for farm animals.

>>3422
And how many countries have you actually been in or lived in anon?

Women are raped, kept as sex slaves in basements, etc in Europe and the U.S. Sickness has nothing to do with feminism. What you are describing are issues of poverty, corruption, and mental illness.

>>3424
You are an incredibly mature representation of feminists, anon.

It's funny how so many of you are attacking another woman for holding different views, yet claim to be for women's rights to hold their own thoughts and make their own choices. Guess this only counts for your own clique.

>>3426
Arguing against someone and making fun of them is not persecuting them. If you give your opinion out there then you're ready to have people argue against you more or less intelligently.
Feminist doesn't mean we're supposed to coddle everyone because "wow you make choices by yourself and have your own opinions! you go girl!". It's good you can think freely, but I'm allowed to disagree with you and use shitty immature greentext if I damn want. If that's too harsh for you then I really don't know what to tell you.
It seems a lot of your counter arguments boil down to "stop being mean, that's not how you'll convince me".

>>3418
I'm not sure what your boyfriends have to do with anything I wrote. I'm happy to hear that you've had great experiences though.

>it's only in feminist countries that women have to contribute more to families than men
>men from feminist cultures still expect sex eventually
The US is a poor example of a feminist country because we are still in that transition period between moving away from the traditional roles and to being more excepting of feminist values. Women are obviously the first to change in this way, taking on jobs and more responsibilities overall. Most men continue to lag behind, expecting women to continue the traditional work, as well as everything else she wants to do. A truly feminist society would have men taking on more responsibilities themselves, like cooking or cleaning half of the time and raising the children, being a partner, paying half of the bills, etc. As well, traditional society limits how much men can do to contribute to their households and childcare. Men in general would like to be able to take paternity leave, and have opportunities to bond with their children, but social stigma holds them back. The social fabric requires that they go out and work to provide for their families, it's not an innate thing that they do all of that just because they're men. Men becoming lazy "mooches" just proves that everyone loves being pampered if they have the opportunity to do so.

Women/both partners working full time on top of everything else is an economic issue than a result of feminism.

>>3420
As I've said, in general, people continue to take on roles more suited to themselves. This persists as women becoming nurses, men doing labor work, etc. The only thing it messes with, that I've seen, is that now strong women can join the military and soft men can care for the elderly.

Societies were built on all sorts of things. Holding open doors didn't even start as a thing about women's strength, just that wealthy ladies shouldn't have to do anything "below" their status. No one back then was holding open doors for the poor and working class women.

Sorry if my paragraphs are a bit disjointed. I also hope this doesn't read to be attacking you. I'm just trying to have a discussion.

>>3425
Except in these countries and others world over this isn't a case of a minority of mentally-ill males confining women in secret in order to carry out their socially reviled sexual proclivaties. These are entirely institutionalised, societally recognised practices emanating from backwards regions in which women are still viewed as property. Family owes a debt? Sell your 13 y/o daughter to get fucked in the ass by a geriatric sadist for the next 40 years.

>what you are describing are issues of poverty, corruption, and mental illness
Really because it kinda looks like a human rights issue to me, specifically a gendered woman. Try and twist it whatever way makes you feel better, poverty, corruption, mental illness, in the end it's always the women that suffer.

>>3427
Did you see which comment I was responding to anon? I didn't even use green text, but OK anon. I'm not returning to this thread. Some of you have been civil, and I appreciate hearing your different viewpoints. Unfortunately, I don't appreciate anons calling my views idiotic or insulting me for things such as eating free range meat, rather than going vegan. The OP asked if we are feminists. I decided to contribute a different view to the thread, not expecting so many replies. I enjoy this image board, but will remain off this thread. I will continue to read it as I appreciate learning different views, however, please do not expect me to respond any longer.

>>3423
It's so sad that people like you are content to exist in self-perpetuated ignorance, deluding yourselves into believing that all the agony you're paying other people to inflict on other beings all to satisfy your tastebuds is somehow erased because your eggs are occasionally sourced from institutions that are a mere half-step above battery.

Fun fact: "free-range" hens still get debeaked, a process that involves young birds having their incredibly sensitive beaks inserted into a machine and then crushed/sliced off. They do this because due to the inhumane and overcrowded conditions the birds frequently lose mental faculty and will peck each other to death.

brb tho, just gonna be over here actually having the grit to stand by my convictions and practice what I preach. Hypocrite.

>>3430
If you can't handle the heat, you know what to do already.

>>3429
>specifically a gendered woman
A gendered one*

>>3430
Learn some reading comprehension, I was saying I was allowed to use green text, which I did.
But yeah, go back to threads about cute and happy images because it's pretty obvious you are not ready to take on any more serious topics. I guess that's why you need traditionnal gender roles to stay right, so you don't ever have to think for yourself.

>Yes, they think women aren't as smart and coerce sex, but they also "princess" me as you mentioned. I'd prefer being viewed as lesser and needing of care over being viewed as an equal, but not treated nearly as well (ex boyfriends bought me everything, drove me anywhere I wanted, took me to eat every day and also cooked, did the chores, washed my laundry, gave me spending money etc). My stepdad from the South also does the same things (American example of conservative, not raised with feminism). I find this treatment much better than "feminist" treatment, where I'm actually treated worse.

I'm so fucking done. What is this morally corrupt nonsense?

>>3435
sorry meant to reply to >>3418 obviously

Am I the only one that doesn't think a lazy man = feminist? Actually seems quite the opposite.

IMO is actual feminism when the couple share housework.

An anon said earlier her bf do all the chores and said that wasn't feminist for her. Funny thing is that in my country that's considered super feminist. In my country you have to do all the housework. If you want (or in most instances, have the need) to work or study, you are still obligated to do all the housework. In any case, your man will pick his dish and put it in the sink for you to wash it, and that'd be progressive and helpful enough according to him.

>>3415
>Where do you feel feminism is failing society?
I'm curious about it too. Please somebody elaborate on it.

>>3418
>determines the usefulness of feminism based on how well men treats her personally
I think this is the main reason why people are getting angry. feminism is about liberating every women from sex based oppression, and yes, this includes prostitutes (a huge topic of discourse in feminist circles btw).

>Our brains […] are literally different
gendered brains (aka lady brains) is a huge subject as well, many studies do find differences but a lot of them conclude that it's barely significant in determining whether or not brains are based around a person's sex (lots of overlap). This ambiguity is why radfems believe transgendered people are promoting gender stereotypes, and that there is no such thing as "feeling like a man or a woman inside"

>I'd prefer being viewed as lesser and needing of care over being viewed as an equal
…k you do you

>>3418
>our brains and bodies are literally different. This IS biology.

This is actually untrue, at least where our brains are concerned.
Our brain chemistry is most certainly different, but physically our brains are identical. If you were to be walking through the woods and stumbled across a pile of brains, for whatever reason, the only way you'd be able to determine the sex of the person the brain belonged to is genetic evaluation, otherwise it's an impossible task. The misogynistic spiel you see incels and robots throwing around about how women have underdeveloped regions or smaller overall mass is complete fiction.

I guess i am a feminist in theory, but i don't agree with the current movement. Too much SJW bullshit.
I do believe everybody should be free to make their own choices. I'm particularly a very traditional-oriented woman and i'd absolutely LOVE to be a housewife and care for my children 24/7 etc., and i do believe men and women are different, and i get a lot of hate from "feminists" for thinking like that. Tbh if you want to be the CEO of an incredibly sucessful company and get badass shit done then go for it, but it's just downright contradictory to preach that women should be able to make their own choices then treat women who want to be housewives and mothers like they're the scum of the earth and responsible for the patriarchy.

>>3445
I do wish more feminists were kinder to housewives, but at the same time, i think it's a good thing to warn women about the shitty aspects of being one and to promote other choices for girls. People seem to have a very flowery image of being a full time mom and housewife. I think being one has a lot of perks and i sure did love having my mom around and, honestly, having a servant around (i am embarrassed to confess this, but it is the truth of being a housewife). You also have to think about when you get older. I've said this before in another reply, but my 70+ old grandmother is still a mini servant for my grandfather (granted, they are not american or european so it might be different being a white housewife). There is also the chance of divorce, and housewives get majorly fucked by that.

I think full time mothers and housewives are great, but it's also a good thing to know that its a lot more work than what people imagine. But if you do decide to be one, good luck! your children will definitely appreciate having a mom waiting for them at home. if it's possible, i think you should have a business at home tho, my mom is always envious of working women who have their own spending money.
saged for being more about housewives and blogpost

>>3439

Well our brains slightly smaller than men's, maybe about 1-1.5% smaller but that's it. Size has no effect on the brain, cognition-wise. Remember that Einstein's brain was smaller than the average.

I will agree that there are little but noticeable mental quirks between women and men, such as multi-tasking.

>>3449
Am I the only one who's complete garbage at this "multi-tasking" thing? Makes me wonder if it's just a myth along with logical thinking or whatever is the male equivalent

>>3450
I was under the impression that no human can truly multi-task. But my mom always told me that men can only focus on one thing at a time since they're simple minded heh. tbh i think it's probably because men don't practice using the part of the brain that makes them considerate towards others. They're just free to focus on whatever they want.

It's also funny to know that "logic" is considered a male thing, when in other countries, it's stereotypically women who are the cold, logical ones and men are the artists and the dreamers. Gender stereotypes are so weird, and i feel like it changes whenever it's most convenient to men. Like men are more detail oriented on some days, but they're big-picture guys the next day.

>>3451
Whenever I hear talk of men being the logical sex I roll my eyes so far back into my head I can view my prefrontal cortex. If men are so logical then why are they overwhelmingly the primary aggressors in incidence of violence, domestic assault, sexual child abuse, rape, murder etc? And of course whenever ot is they're captured the excuses they give are always eerily reminiscent of one another:

>"she wanted me to"
>"I just couldn't control myself"
>"she made me do it"

Sounds like the words of a real logician alright.

>>3451
>it changes whenever it's most convenient to men

lol yeah. ever seen incel/redpill posts about how women are cold hearted and incapable of feeling love/emotions and that's why all the great love poets/writers were men or how that's why women can be so callously gold digging/chad fuckers while the poor beta man is just simply in love with her and would do everything for her? then in the same post they'll say how emotional we are kek.

it's so funny that sites like reddit/4chan/redpill are full of whiny baby posts by men that they still try to claim that level-headedness and logic are somehow inherently male traits.

>>3451
>tbh i think it's probably because men don't practice using the part of the brain that makes them considerate towards others. They're just free to focus on whatever they want.
This resonates with my situation so hard. My brother passed from taking out his anger on me to my mom and, coupled with my dad doing the same, I can't help but feel like shit for her, despite her forgiving and continuing to coddle him.
I'm used to my parents "fighting" almost everyday, but my brother joining in and using some insults coined by my dad against her is becoming too much. So I try to help with the dishes, cleaning around, making food and ask her if she wants us to bake something or watch a movie or go for a walk.

Sometimes I feel like my brother has no remorse or empathy, he's able to just take and focus on his stuff. And, sometimes, I wish I could be able to do the same, forget about my mom and dad and just focus on what I want… but I can't?

Sorry for ranting, I just don't know anymore man.

Hello friends,
What are you thoughts on pornography? I really think pornography is unhealthy. I've noticed that many men on the internet are aware of the negative impacts on pornography (with jokes talking about how they feel disgusting after masturbating and I think there's a group of anti-porn men now because they got erectile dysfunction) but i've also noticed that when feminists critically discuss pornography and the industry behind it, a lot of men get extremely angry. Ironically telling these women that they need to be violently fucked, when feminists rightfully point out how the aggressive nature of porn changes the attitude of men towards women (and how women view themselves, but i don't think men care about that).

I also watched a debate with Milo in it, and he stated that there is a "dark side to male sexuality." do you think this dark side exists? or are men just lacking discipline in controlling their emotions (such as anger and lust)?

>>3455
Yeah, I agree with you anon. Porn is pretty unhealthy for the most part imo. My male best friend is a porn addict and it's basically fucked his chances of ever having a successful relationship. On the other hand I know plenty of guys the same age who don't appear to have been fucked up by porn. Just because they don't appear negatively affected doesn't mean porn isn't unhealthy, but it's odd to see how drastically it can impact some men vs others.

>>3455 I think that pornography should be promoted as something unhealthy to be honest.

The amount of guys I know who have struggled with addiction is insane. Combined with the fact that I know men turn to "no fap" etc once they've found themselves toying around illegal pornography, I'm convinced it's something men really should stay away from. It's technically voyeurism. Masturbation is healthy and something that shouldn't be shunned but porn is so damaging.

Not to mention the effect it has on women. Sex education is so bad in most countries that young men and women are learning about their and each others bodies from porn to the extent that;
1) nobody knows how to truly please women
2) women are pretending to enjoy things because porn is like YOU MUST CONSTANTLY BE MOANING LIKE A GUTTED COW
3) Men are spending more time fapping than having intimate, consensual interactions with women/men.
4) The spikes in chemicals in peoples brains can cause similar chemical balances to the brains of schizophrenics etc

>>3455

Fuck Milo. Him saying this dark side bs is like the male equivalent of the "not like other girls" women that claim womenkind is inherently linked with drama/arguing. I'm sick of all this broad gender generalizations.

>>3455
>What are you thoughts on pornography? I really think pornography is unhealthy.
I've begun to strongly agree with this lately. As someone who has been a habitual porn consumer for the past decade or so, I can say it's had negative effects on my sexuality. It's made me incredibly dependent on visual stimulation to reach orgasm, and perverted some of my natural tendencies. I used to be very open minded towards porn as a way to express sexuality, I think I've pretty much done a 180 after suffering some of the brunt of it myself.

>i've also noticed that when feminists critically discuss pornography and the industry behind it, a lot of men get extremely angry. Ironically telling these women that they need to be violently fucked
Typical of those types of men.

>I also watched a debate with Milo in it, and he stated that there is a "dark side to male sexuality." do you think this dark side exists?
Which debate was this? I'm interested in hearing what he had to say about that.

>or are men just lacking discipline in controlling their emotions (such as anger and lust)?
A lot of men definitely do have a strange way of processing emotions, let alone intense feelings. Though I wouldn't pin it all just on that, it seems that a lot of factors would contribute.

>>3455

I think the modeling, beauty, and entertainment industries are for more damaging, and I roll my eyes when ever "feminists" saber rattle about the EVILS OF PORN when they worship Hollywood actresses. It would be better for society for us to ban the stupid Asian idols that everyone here loves than it would be to ban porn, but I'm sure none of ya'll would be okay with that.

>>3462
Not entirely sure why we are air-quote feminists for focusing more on the porn industry, which attracts young, low-income women. Im not particularly fond of entertainment industries, but there is still an art worth preserving such as acting, dancing, singing, art through clothing, etc. While i see no positives in keeping pornography. Why do you think pornography is less damaging and worth having? (not trying to be snarky, this is a legitimate question)

>>3462
Are you referring to the behind-closed-doors prostitution that occurs in Hollywood, the modelling industry, and Asian idol agencies, or something completely different?

>>3463

I put it in air-quotes because when someone is so focused on an industry that has relatively low impact outside of its self compared to the multi billion dollar media industry that affects pretty much everyone I think you more have a grudge and aren't that interested in helping women. Porn isn't the reason eating disorders are so common. Porn isn't the reason doctors are seeing women come in with lead, mercury, and arsenic poisoning from cheap make up. Porn isn't the reason the 56 year old guy in the op of the feminism thread thinks he deserves a 25 year old. The entertainment and beauty industry and what we are sold and told every day are. On top of that, porn and eroticism have been around for as long as any of the other arts you listed, it's value is that it's something that humans as sexual creatures have an interest in.

>>3464

I'm talking about the damaging messages and ideas that these industries promote and cultivate, although yeah, if you think that regular Hollywood doesn't have a ton of sexual assault, pedophilia, drug use, nepotism, and other shitty things and it's all just limited to the porn industry you're sevelrly misinformed.

>>3465
>feminism thread
Misandry thread*
THIS is the feminism thread. Those terms aren't interchangeable.

>>3462
Yes, no doubt they are damaging, I think most of all by giving people a false impression of reality. Although as another poster mentioned these are forms of art at their base, which has traditionally had a sort of penchant for idealism. That's not to excuse anything, but you're acting as if the entertainment industry has never been attacked by feminists when it pretty much is constantly, one of the reasons being that it upholds unrealistic beauty standards. If you haven't witnessed that yet, I don't know where the hell you've been.

>It would be better for society for us to ban the stupid Asian idols that everyone here loves than it would be to ban porn,
I don't think anyone even said anything about banning porn until you did. Personally, I think that action could be counterproductive. What would be ideal is promoting a healthier way in which society can express sexuality. Porn is one of the primary ways that people do that these days, so it is relevant whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

>the stupid Asian idols that everyone here loves
Lol, you're making the assumption that everyone here likes the same things and uses this board to discuss the same topics. I could browse cc and successfully avoid weeb disdiscussion a majority of the time by not clicking those threads, and I do, because a variety of subjects are hosted here. You do the same by assuming that all feminists worship celebrities. Basically, you just started off by strawmanning and built your entire post off of that.

Are you a guy btw?

I think good things have been done, and are still being done, for society in the name of feminism but the modern movement is too tied in to furthering the goals of the sexual revolution of the 1960s for me to want to participate in it. Like for instance, I believe that zygotes have all the genetic material that would make them human, just as fetal pigs are still pigs, and that abortion is therefore morally wrong because it is intentionally ending a human life. But one of the biggest goals of modern feminism is the access to free and legal abortion, and I personally really disagree with that. There also seems to be a push for legally legitimizing polyamorous unions and I don't think that would be good for the children that are raised in these circumstances.

However, I also would like to see universal paid maternity leave in the USA which is a political goal feminists are advancing. But I think I'd rather just voice my support for specific feminist goals I agree with than get involved in the overall community.

>>3467
>and that abortion is therefore morally wrong because it is intentionally ending a human life

Probably not the right thread for it, but out of curiosity do you eat meat, and if yes, how do you rationalise the reality that your dietary preferences contribute to the mass internment, mistreatment, rape, torture and execution of billions of animals every year?
I could never quite wrap my head around people who are against terminating the development of a collection of cells that lack a central nervous system, but who are A-okay with having a fully mature, thinking, feeling pig boiled alive for the sake of a hotdog.

>>3468
While I do have compassion for animals I personally don't believe animals have the same inherent value as human lives. The lives of trees are also valuable, but so is paper. Do you think there is a contradiction between being vegan and being pro-choice?

>>3469
>the lives of trees are also valuable, but so is paper
Trees don't possess the necessary physiology to experience the agony of having their retinal cells denatured as a result of being submerged in 140° water though let's be real.

>do you think there is a contradiction between being vegan and being pro-choice?
Absolutely, given the fact that if every ant on this planet were to vanish from existence, the entire ecosystem would collapse into chaos and every species, including humans, would very shortly become extinct. If every human on this planet were to vanish from existence, the ecosystem would fall back into balance and only thrive.
As a species we are less important than ants, but you claim to be okay with inflicting incomprehensible agony on other beings whilst chastising an action that prevents further harm to our planet and the species that share it with us. You believe in this stance because of a yet-undefined sense of morality, but when you look at it objectively what you're promoting, what you endorse, is surely the work of the devil, certainly not something any kind of moral being could suppport.

Legit bot trying to neg you, but no matter how you look at it, unless you're supporting omnivorism in conjunction with being anti-abortion for misanthropic reasons, there's absolutely zero logic in it, and I want to understand.

>>3466

>THIS is the feminism thread. Those terms aren't interchangeable.

Yeah, I thinks it's pretty obvious I meant the misandry thread. Calm down lol.

>but you're acting as if the entertainment industry has never been attacked by feminists when it pretty much is constantly

I'm not saying it hasn't ever been attacked, but I've notice as the years go on it's been less of a focus and the counter-reaction has become a lot stronger.


>I don't think anyone even said anything about banning porn until you did.

And yet in almost every feminist discussion on the topic Ive seen or been a part of that's the ending most want to see.


>Lol, you're making the assumption that everyone here likes the same things and uses this board to discuss the same topics. I could browse cc and successfully avoid weeb disdiscussion a majority of the time by not clicking those threads, and I do, because a variety of subjects are hosted here. You do the same by assuming that all feminists worship celebrities. Basically, you just started off by strawmanning and built your entire post off of that.

You're reading way too much into a simple generalization. On top of that in my original posts I was specifically talking about women who both froth about the porn industry while also celebrity worship, which in my experience has been the majority.

>Are you a guy btw?

No, are you? Or are you one of those feminists that I'm talking about?

>>3471
>I'm not saying it hasn't ever been attacked, but I've notice as the years go on it's been less of a focus
It still is a big issue that feminist groups focus on. You must have heard of body positivity by now, right?

>And yet in almost every feminist discussion on the topic Ive seen or been a part of that's the ending most want to see.
>You're reading way too much into a simple generalization. On top of that in my original posts I was specifically talking about women who both froth about the porn industry while also celebrity worship, which in my experience has been the majority.
The fact of the matter is that you haven't made a single valid point relevant to the topic of conversation because you'd rather engage in straw man tactics, faulty generalizations about feminists and the users of this board, whataboutery, and ad hominem instead of directly addressing what anybody here has said on the matter. You didn't bring up any evidence in favor of society's contemporary pornographic habits being healthy, or against the claim that it has negative effects on the way habitual consumers process sexuality, and at worse develop paraphilic tendencies. You just decided to bring up something completely irrelevant,
>Well why are you guys talking about that when you should be talking about this lol hollywood and Asian idols amirite
As if individuals of a group can't have an interest in more than one issue.

In other words, you added nothing of value to the discussion, and I'm sorry that somebody had to tell you, but it's true.

>No, are you? Or are you one of those feminists that I'm talking about?
I'm neither, but your apparent lack of an ability to understand other women made me think that you're a man.

>>3470
>Legit bot trying to neg you but no matter how you look at it, unless you're supporting omnivorism in conjunction with being anti-abortion for misanthropic reasons, there's absolutely zero logic in it, and I want to understand.
I figured you were being hyperbolic when you said my opinions were the work of the devil lol. But even if you're half-trolling it sounds like your main points are that fetuses don't feel pain so abortions are more ethical compared to slaughtering an animal that can feel pain, and that human lives are less valuable than animal lives because of how we harm the ecosystem.

To address the first point, I believe that just because a human cannot feel pain, that does not make it right to intentionally end their life. If a hypothetical fully grown person could not feel pain and someone else chose to end their life, provided there were no other extenuating circumstances like fighting back in self defense, I don't think that would be right either.

As for the second point, I believe that human beings are uniquely rational beings with complex intellect and free will. (Some people don't believe in free will, we could also talk about that if you disagree there.) While animals are beautiful and amazing creatures, they cannot choose to act against their instincts. Humans as a species usually make terrible choices about how we treat our ecosystem, but we could also choose to cultivate and care for the Earth. We can also have discussions on truth, debate the existence of God, investigate quantum mechanics, and post pics of big tiddy anime girls on Ecuadorian needlepoint boards. Chickens are precious, but humans are a higher species.

>>3469
>Do you think there is a contradiction between being vegan and being pro-choice?

Different anon but there's a huge difference between cutting down a tree and keeping sentient in apalling conditions and murdering them for…what, a slice of bacon? People who are pro-choice advocate for abortion before a foetus is able to feel pain and its to better both the life of the woman and the potential child.

I'm both pro-choice and vegan and I think they go hand in hand. In order to produce milk, cows are repeatedly impregnated, have their calves taken from them and are killed when they stop producing milk. Don't you think that's a feminist issue?

1) Cows are forcibly inseminated, which is rape.
2) It's not even natural, so the cows don't have autonomy over their own bodies.
3) Only female cows are kept alive, while male cows are put to death. Female cows endure many years of agony. They're only put to death when they're no longer useful to humans. That's objectification.

I don't believe animals and humans are on the same level either because humans are lower, we're more intelligent and we actually choose to destroy our planet and get satisfaction from taking the life of other beings. Big cats kill because it's their instinct and they don't have the ability to think hard about what they're doing, humans are disgusting.

>>3474
I totally agree with you that being vegan/vegetarian is a separate issue from being pro-choice and there are many reasons why someone could hold any combination of opinions on those issues. Your argument sounds like a logical extension of your beliefs to me. I disagree though that it is necessarily better for the child to be aborted before it's able to feel pain. It's comparatively better that its life is terminated before it is able to feel pain, but the end result is ultimately still the same, that its life is taken by another. Fetuses in the very early phases of life are very vulnerable and still developing to be able to survive outside the womb, but they are still human and I think that means they are deserving of life. While humans as a species are deeply flawed, I am sure you as a person don't delight in doing things like destroying the planet and taking others' lives, and it's because we as individuals are able to make such choices that I think human lives have a special dignity. It seems we have different beliefs about the inherent value of human life though, so we may be at an impasse.

>>3475
Yeah the woman they're growing in is a human too? If it can be done without pain I don't see why you'd have a problem with it. You can't even give a reason other than you think humans are ~special~ (which leads me to believe you're a religious nut, because most intelligent people understand that we're not).

Do you honestly think it's more humane for a child to be brought up by a mother who didn't want it? For it to potentially born into poverty? For it to be born to a girl who is physically too young to carry it? For its mother to forgo her education or a career oppurtunity and forever regret her decision to keep it? For a child to grow up in a potentially abusive home? For it to grow up and know it was the product of sexual abuse or was concieved in order to keep its mother in an abusive relationship? Women don't wake up one day after months of pregnancy and decide to terminate, it's a very fucking difficult decision that people don't take lightly.

I live in a country where abortion is banned in all cases. People who are in desperate situations WILL have abortions, whether you like it or not. You cannot and will never be able to "control" others, as much as I'm sure you'd like to. The only thing banning abortion achieves is making it MORE dangerous for women. There are women in my country dying from pregnancy complications that could easily be avoided by termination. There are prepubescent CHILDREN carrying foetuses and they don't even understand what's happening to them. I've seen countless girls have to drop out of my school due to pregnancy. Have a bit of fucking respect for your fellow human beings.

>>3476
Sorry, I know I come across as really cruel in this post but it's coming from someone who has seen situations where someone's life could have been saved if their government gave a shit about them and who has seen the lives of many young girls ruined thanks to religious assholes who believe their beliefs are so important that they should dictate the lives of others. The same religious nuts who treated girls out of wedlock like slaves and had them working in sweatshops, who made a nice profit from stealing children from young mothers and selling them abroad, who killed children born out of wedlock and didn't even have the fucking respect to bury them in a grave but shoved hundreds of their little corpses into a fucking septic tank.

So yeah don't fucking lecture me on how to respect my fellow human beings when I know your kind are up to that kind of abhorrent shit.

>>3477
If we can't have a base level of respect for each other this conversation is not going to go anywhere productive, but I will say that I do think it is better to live even under abhorrent circumstances than to die. I believe it would be wrong to euthanize a fully developed human without their consent just because they were unwanted or would be put into a positive of extreme poverty and suffering, and because fetuses are human too, it's not right for another person to make the decision to end their life without their consent.

>>3478
Different Anon, but
>euthanize a fully developed human
a fetus isn't a fully developed human, that's the whole point.

>>3479
It is still a human though.

>>3478
They're not dying because they've never been alive. They don't even have the capacity to think so why would they give a shit whether they were born or not?

Pro-lifers are so fucking selfish. If I knew that I would have been a burden to my mother, or caused her financial strain, or if aborting me could have saved her from an abusive relationship or even saved her life, I would have been more than happy to make that sacrifice if I couldn't feel pain or didn't experience the world yet. Even if my mother just felt "meh I don't feel like a kid right now" I would have been happy for her to abort me. Clearly, you don't extend the same respect towards your own mother. Do you have a bad relationship with your mother? Serious question.

>>3480
You fetishise your humanity too much. Our "potential" for discussion on concepts of religion or executing quantum mechanics is worthless if we take all our potential for good and toss it away, and instead spend all our time and energy destroying our planet and recreating a vision of hell for the innocent beings we share it with.

anti-feminist women are the beta equivalent of feminist men.

>>6576
>Everyone who disagrees with me is beta
And you wonder why people don't like you

>>6579
That's not what anon said, and that comparison is very accurate. Betas suck up to women and sell themselves out to get female attention, anti-feminist women suck up to men and sell themselves out to get male attention. Both demonstrate a similar lack of self respect, they sacrifice their dignity and act as inoffensive and agreeable as possible to get on the opposite gender's good side.

Can anyone here tell me why so many feminists and activists in general seem like they only care about the representation of female characters in some specific and sometimes obscure tv shows, video games and other forms of media and fictional stories? Especially when they tend to treat real women like shit over this (mostly female fans, artists and writers)? They have a really shitty sense of priority and don't seem to understand that they're annoying almost everyone.

Oh, then i guessed right, women are the main source of this equality pseudo ideas cancer.
Man and woman cannot be equal, and will never be.
Why is it so hard to accept? To accept immutable reality is not a defeat, is just a realization.
Women are special for their very feminine traits, why would feminists abandon such traits in favor to be equalized to men and lose such special traits? Because that's where extremists pull, and extremists are just the preview of the norm, as extremist tumblrinas views are now the standard feminist views.

>>6587
Because modern feminism has derailed out of control.

>>6581
I don't feel that's fair. For one, you're assuming everyone's intentions (and that they are negative at that) and shitting on feminist allies. It may be difficult for you to believe, but not everyone does things to be contrarian or to impress the opposite gender. Especially recently, feminism in the public eye is fucking disgraceful. It's understandable not wanting to associate with that. I also would rather 1000 feminist 'beta men' than 1 MRA idiot.

>>6576
>>anti-feminist women are the beta equivalent of feminist men.

You revived this cancerous thread just to say that? Really??

>>6589
I mean is it any mystery why women would want to "be equalized to men" when femininity and all qualities deemed feminine have been mocked, belittled, and unappreciated since the beginning of time?

It's only recently that (especially traditionalist) men seem to be praising 'special traits' that women posses, because they want women to be put back into their place in the home. They want to make it sound appealing and like they know what's best for all women. It's a very clear strategy.

>>6605
Except we're already equal, just not identical because we're different. You're trying to make different things the same by either feminizing men or making women more masculine therefore defeating the ehole fucking point. Maybe the problem isn't literally everyone else, it could just be you darling.

>>6608
I never said we weren’t equal, I said that’s why we WANT to be equal. Because some women want the same opportunities to do the things that men do. If they can’t do them, then they can’t. But the opportunities are there and they should remain there.

>>6609
I suspect women have been put under unrealistic ambition by the scholarization of feminism ideals. "Become something more than a housewife or you're worth nothing as a woman", that's literally putting the same male expectation onto women.
There are women seeking ambition, of course, but i doubt the amount present today has mad their wish sprout from their own will, i suggest the influence has been external in this case.
I think this is a path of misery for both sexes in the countries this ideology spreads.

>>6610
also i'm >>6589
and >>6608 wasn't me

>>6610
I guess I have seen feminists deride motherhood and homemaking, so I understand what your point is now. Personally I don’t agree with that…at all. All I’ve ever wanted as a woman were choices and opportunities, and I’ve had those things so I feel very lucky to be alive in the time I am. But I also believe every woman should have that choice, and if they choose to be housewives or homemakers that’s no less of a valid choice than a ~career woman.~ I guess if anything modern feminism needs to really work on that. It should stand for all women imo.

My point in >>6605 was that traditional female roles have been looked at as weak or unimportant in a lot of cases, so I do believe that’s a factor why a lot of women want to go a different route. Maybe they don’t feel it’s “enough.” I’m not saying this is right, I was just offering a perspective.

>>6608
what does feminine and masculine mean? plus, i don't think it's fair to just stop feminism because the women in western first world countries are "already equal" in your eyes.

>>6610
>but i doubt the amount present today has made their wish sprout from their own will, i suggest the influence [of seeking ambitions] has been external in this case.
and women becoming housewives aren't from external influences?. no female was born thinking they want to be a housewife. if you're from a more traditional (non-feminist) country that's really the only route you got.Also, are you seriously suggesting that all women actually just want to become housewives, but because of those feminists telling little girls that they can do other things, they are being brainwashed to make "unrealistic ambitions?"

>>6613
Yes i'm suggesting that, because the alternative would be a lot more painful.
I think a woman without having the current indoctrination will naturally gravitate towards that role.

>>6614
>I think a woman without having the current indoctrination will naturally gravitate towards that role.
She likely wouldn't have a say in the matter.

>>6614
>alternative would be a lot more painful
having a job and your income is more painful? the only time i can think of where being a housewife is "less painful" (whatever that means) is if you're very wealthy.

>woman without having the current indoctrination will naturally gravitate towards that role
so having a vagina means naturally wanting to become a 50's American housewife got it.

>>6616
>having a job and your income is more painful?
Working all day is painful, and it's still better to not have a job and have an income
>so having a vagina means naturally wanting to become a 50's American housewife got it.
Wherever feminist hasn't yet striken at full force, in europe, women still aren't expected to work, and many don't. Only poverty and vices is causing them to seek money by themselves, because else they'd be provided anyways.

>>6617
Still without considering the women that are actually prone to find employment.

>>6617
all of your points are fucking stupid. women also have real ambitions and things they want to do. in this day and age -everyone- needs to work to survive, before that was the case, women had no say, but even during WWII when women were needed to work, it was gratifying for some. of course not for all of them, but for a lot of them. another thing is that despite what many men say, they actually envy women being in the home more than they fear their independence. only idiots who believe in extreme lib feminism actually are scared of women being independent, or men who feel they deserve a woman for whatever reason, neither of which are sane. however, you are just using blanket statements implying that women don't have desires related to careers -not- money which is stupid.

>>6620
>you are just using blanket statements implying that women don't have desires related to careers
Most don't, else they wouldn't have been housewives since the dawn of time, and even today with all the liberties they have. Don't call it oppression, it's just the nature of things.

>>6623

Before the late period of the industrial revolution there was no such thing as a house wife. Before that women worked the fields like men, or did whatever craft their family did if they weren't dirt poor. How is something that's been around for 200 years at most a natural state?

>>6620
I think they envy it too. Entitlement is rampant these days since parents loved to pamper their kids.

>>6615
Exactly this.

>>6623
Because being a housewife is what was societally expected for them. Now you can see we have other options and society no loner clings to that role as far as social acceptance, thus plenty of women are becoming something other than housewives.

>>6623
no one said shit about oppression, and you are dead wrong, housewives are a very recent thing, the idea is only a few centuries old. before that, a housewife like lifestyle was generally only for rich women and was much different than simply making sure everything was done. also, why haven't you been banned yet, you're clearly a robot. i am a housewife and i am not stupid enough to think what you're saying has any merit.

UGH at people who use "it's natural" to justify gender roles, then turn around and say that any unfeminine or nontraditional women are wrong or broken.

Sure there are people who are less career-inclined, but that is what feminism is about. The ability to acknowledge when systems of power are coercive and still choose. Assuming feminism is ruining things because women would be "happier" doing "easier" roles is both shitting on poor women who don't have a choice, and the women who do choose to be housewives because childcare and housemaking have been so devalued.

>>6661
Great points!

I also don't believe for a second that the men who preach these kind of things actually care about what would make women happier. They don't. They preach these things because it benefits them.

>>6665
They are the types who want to keep women down so one of them will have no choice but to marry him. They push for traditional roles and gendered careers so a woman who can't support herself will need support from him and then he can have something, right now he's a dumb shitty incel who doesn't have anything because he's too bitter to understand reality isn't anecdotes.

>>3455
>or are men just lacking discipline in controlling their emotions (such as anger and lust)?
Men are generally more prone to addictions than women. About 4/5 drug addicts and alcoholics are men, and digital fixes (pornography, video games) seem to hit guys a lot harder than girls.

I think men are more destructive, both of themselves and others. Suicide, homicide, drug addiction, violence, etc. Maybe the difference is just impulsivity, more likely it's a lot of things.

>>3373
"Feminists" who spend four hours a day fighting an internet battle with virgins and MRAs are sheer cancer. That entire ecosystem has no impact on anything at all and makes sane people angry whenever it comes to their attention.

>>6704
>and makes sane people angry whenever it comes to their attention

not only that, but it turns sane people away as well. there is nothing that i hate more than people associating me with crazy extremist idiots on the internet. i know people say to just ignore it, but it's hard to do when stuff you're trying to say is invalidated by them. even worse when your friends become indoctrinated by it as if it's important. they make me so mad!

>>6672
>They are the types who want to keep women down
Laughable, not only this whole point is not even something a man would even remotely think of, but it's wrong, keeping women out of the workforce has and is a way to increase efficiency and leave it at acceptable levels, while indirectly avoiding a lot of trouble caused by dramas, leaving competition to acceptable levels, avoid sexual exchanges in favor of career improvements and other kind of wrong situations. Most women i've seen working do a shit job, require assistance and at best lack authority when it is necessary.
>UGH at people who use "it's natural
I know you do, the whole point of feminism and the degenerative left in general is to oppose nature and invert it.
I think there's a whole genetic difference between you and normal people, and this difference grants you the inability to identify danger, in general this trait is common between the degenerative left and feminists.

>>6717
if you're so against opposing nature how about we just stop all this stupid shit like medicine, technology and tools and go back to being hairless apes, that sound good?

>>6723
Nature directly or indirectly provides those things, human ingenium is part of it after all.
What nature does provide also is punishment for being denied.
Like for someone sustaining a poison isn't poisonous while injecting it into their system.
For the degenerative left, that acted like a retrovirus for so long without brakes, nature will cause the same punishment if left untreated long enough. The punishment will consist, for the interested nation, in being weakened (first morally, then socially and intellectually), replaced (invaded) and killed, yet as i said, these individuals are unable to detect danger, so they will press straight into the abyss and won't change their mind even in the quick descent that's their fall into it. The USA is too large to fail so mercifully, its death will be slow and steady and the metaphorical rats and worms will feast on its rotting corpse still living if nothing is done to treat its illness.

>>6725
forgot my pic

>>6725
I know this place has no (you)s but you're not forced to give me one if you have no argoument.

>>6728
meant for>>6727

>>6728

Hold on, are intelligent AIs a thing now? Can I stop trying to make irl friends and relax?

>>6725
Don't you ever talk about anything else, or are you paid to derail threads with irrelevant shit?

>>6731
no not yet. kizuna ai is just a gimmick youtube channel.

>>3385

ayyyyy good to see you

also /r/Gender_critical and /r/radical_feminists have good content, there's overlap but some uniques. If OP is reading this, you might like the blog https://transgenderreality.com/

>>3380
>I don't think they should be able to give birth
Why? Do you think depressed people shouldn't be allowed to give birth too? That's pretty fucked up

isnt the idea of releasing people from gender roles somewhat ludicrous, yes some is societal but much of what determines the roles we play is biological, be it hormonal or merely the psychological effect of being bigger/smaller than the people around you. its only women who have the ability to become mothers that is a huge role that fits into our perceptions our gender rolls that wont ever really go away

>>9167
not her but the mentally ill shouldnt be entrusted with children, it isnt fair on a child who cant protect and nurture itself to be looked after by a depressive (which i sympathise with as a serious condition that requires attention bears absolutely no shame) who cant care for themselves

>>9167
nta but I am depressed (long history with meds, psychiatrist, psych ward and shit) and I do think depressed people should be allowed to have children, what are you going to do? Remove their balls and wombs? Force feed them birth control? Even criminals can birth kids so there's no reason why depressed people can't either. Also there's always the possibility an emotionally healthy person can go depressed in the future, or that a depressed person can get better.

I’d love to call myself a feminist but SJW’s make us look bad.

I've read my fair share of Beauvoir and other good authors to know feminism is in fact a great thing. Too bad it's been corrupted lately with so much bullshit.

>>3386
>>3381
>Trans people should not be part of LGBT
sorry to break it to you, but there was no LGB community alone. it never existed. trans people and LGB people have always associated together and been firmly interconnected (see: drag, which is partially gay men dressing up, partially actual trans women, but forms a cohesive culture melding the two). trans women have always been at the forefront of LGBT activism (see: stonewall)
you can't tell trans people to "stay out" of LGB communities because they didn't ever "join", they were in it from the start. learn lgbt history before trying to make some """"insightful"""""" point that makes no sense

Whenever I see women who abandon feminism and call themselves anti-feminists, I do indeed get ticked.
How can everyone forget how far we've come and that 50-60 years ago being a silent housewife was the norm "I do everything I can to support my husband" and any sexual abuse was swept under the rug?
It's more like feminism nowadays is to keep our rights and prevent them from being repealed when the political climate these days is full of extremists who go to any kind of echo chamber website and have this knee jerk reaction to the word "feminism". Echo chamber websites are basically corners of reddit, 4chan, twitter, tumblr, ect. All of them.
There are a lot of misandrists mixed into the pot nowadays which makes people want to forgo it entirely due to a loud minority. You can still be a feminist, but perhaps not a politically active one who is constantly going on about the latest hate crime.
Men and women's issues are not necessarily in opposition and what women do affects men and vice versa. MRAs have no plan for women besides shoving them back in the home when even being a housewife is a relatively new position. Before the late industrial revolution, women performed the exact same masculine, back breaking jobs as men so it's not something that has existed forever and being a housewife is really only a privilege for the wealthy families.
I do disagree however that third wave can be iffy when it comes to this representation in media biz. Women saying they hate being feminine because it "gives in to the mens" isn't a good call.

>>9228
Because not all of us hate transgender people and we honestly don't care, and a lot of us are against feminism because we want equality among men and women, which feminism has stopped advocating for and providing.
We're still feminists, it's the meaning that's changed, not us.

>>9232
Are you sure, or you are just looking at surface third wave?
The Men's Liberation Movement which is basically the sane version of MRAs coincided with feminism in the (because they understood that men's women's issues were complementary to each other) and became part of third wave feminism, which went from women-focused issues to men's and women's issues.
The way that sexism equally causes men to suffer as well as women with the expectation of female and male gendered stereotypes is part of third wave discourse.
If we take a gendered issues such as female on male rape, this includes negative expectations of men being believed to be infallibly powerful, much less they get overpowered by a guuurl and women being so weak that they are incapable of hurting men simply because they are women.
The idea that women abuse men and get away with it is not an just an anti-feminist idea.
Women sexualizing men the way men sexualize women is wrong because the women who do this aren't feminist themselves and we should strive for more awareness on making everyone feel more respected.
The reason why we don't name feminism "equal ism" is not only because it has been taken before but because it removes the historical component of women who have been taken advantage of in the past.
Feminism is like Christianity in that there are many many denominations who agree on the same "tenets" so to speak and feminists disagree with other feminists. There is no feminist hivemind.
There are feminists who hate that the gay rights movement has conflated with feminism, feminists who are fine with it as well as feminists who argue to what degree the issues that feminism poses are an issue in the first place.
Therefore, you can call yourself a feminist would marching under the banner of the loud minority, anon. But I don't blame you by being a feminist in everything but name only due to the amount of shit that gets flung at women for identifying as such.

>>9235
Feminist, in everything but name. I think that the label has become so convoluted that it's stopped meaning one particular thing, or anything at all. I am a feminist, depending on a hundred different definitions of a term, I'm not according to a hundred more.

I'll still march and advocate for equality, I just won't call myself one while the meaning is being corrupted and hijacked by groups and movements I wish to distance myself from.

>>9239
Then we can indeed agree to disagree, fellow miner.
I will continue standing by maintaining the integrity of feminism, no matter no many minority groups dilute the cause because I never want to forget our origins that created this outcry in the first place.
So many women have fought so hard to get to where we are today, while I do not agree with this vilifying of the opposite gender because we cannot blame the men of today for the sins of their fathers and grandfathers, I won't let society regress because bitter men on the Internet believe it's some sort of tug-o-war for which gender to have supremacy.

>>9240
Nta, but it sounds like you're egalitarian more than feminist.

>>9264
Not that anon either but that IS what feminism is supposed to be. Feminism still is egalitarianism, it has been egalitarianism since the beginning and the roots of the word come from the fact women needed a strong word as a symbol of power and representation. Tumblr feminism isn't feminism and I can't wait for this shit to die.

I wish robots would understand that 2014 Tumblr feminism is dead and that it doesn't represent real feminism.

>>15919
/r9k/ will turn into a feminist board by 2019

>>15944
bless this gif

>>15919
Oblivious eastern yuropian here, how gloomy is the situation really and how much is it made out into a boogeyman?
Obviously "loud minorities are loud", but how minor are they really? Even on this board I can see examples of anons mistreated by some "ebil SJWs" during social meetings.

>>16153
"West" European here. It's bad in certain circles, but you can very well avoid it and as soon as you are living a "normie" lifestyle, you pretty much will, except when the city center is fenced off because the yearly gay/fetish parade is tumbling through the streets.

I don't know what happens to the kids in school, but then again, thanks to our legislation, I never will if it can be avoided in any way 😎

There's no reason for a woman not to be a feminist. I'd imagine all the on the fence people came from 4chan and are still afraid to use the "f word" in case it scares away men (see: incels).

It depends. Too many abuse the label, and the whole scene is so divided and full of hypocrisy and double standards.
I've met so many women who insist they're just as strong as men until it's time to lift heavy, or complaining about men getting good paid jobs while saying we shouldnt have to do dangerous or dirty jobs, or talk about destroying male privilege while refusing to acknowledge the plight of women in middle eastern countries.
Double standards and hypocrites are my two biggest pet peeves and too many feminists embrace those things for me to stand with them.

Men and women are equal but we aren't the same. Like we can give birth, we're better carers but that doesn't change the fact that 90% of men are stronger than 90% of women. Or like yeah if we bang a lot of guys we're sluts but if guys don't get laid they're losers.

Plus tbh most of the hate I've gotten for wearing the wrong thing or for not conforming has been from other women, often ones who call themselves feminists and say we should all be looking out for one another.

>>35948
Why are guys losers because they don't bang any girls?

>>35950
NTA but it's implied they don't have social skills.

>>3429
You do know they fuck young boys in those countries as well?

Isn't that sign for fisting?

>>36322
True feminism is fisting men.

>>36323
based femdom anon

true miners make their fucktoys take it up the ass

I could technically describe myself as a feminist, because I believe in gender equity, but I can't sympathize with most of today's feminists. I feel that feminism already lacks clear goals so it entered a vicious cycle in which nothing is achieved and only serves as a mockery. Don't get me wrong, there are still problems that feminism can fight for, but among so many stupid things that some feminists worry about, other more important things are ignored.

It honestly depends.
First wave? Most important thing for human rights since the 13th amendment.
Second wave? Very good too, even though I'm pro-life.
Third wave? A major backward.
Fourth wave? I can't even understand it but looks extremely retarded and I blame it for giving so much space for men who pretend their women.