Feminism General Anonymous 3373
Are you a feminist? Because I am!
I'd love to hear your thoughts on feminism, how it has evolved over the years and how it will evolve in the future.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Radfeminism is also in. thanks in advance!
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Your animal comparison is completely invalid. We do a ton of shit no other animals do. We wear clothes, we medicate, we purchase shit, we give our organs, etc.
To me it seems more like you're just linking radical trans/tumblr tier 'trans' to legitimate transwomen. Nitpicking bad apples doesn't mean the whole bunch is like that. That argument can be placed in any group (see; Radfems, Antifa, etc.)
Also the Rachel Dolezal thing is a bad example. I don't feel like going into it when this video explains my thoughts a lot better on the subject.
Just say you hate trans people and that's it.
>>3392>Also the Rachel Dolezal thing is a bad example.
No it isn't. If you can accept transgenderism, why is it so hard to accept transracialism? That video is trash because it's obvious Kat Blaque didn't do any research into Dolezal at all and sets up a dumb strawman to present her arguments.
As easily as Dolezal can wash of the self tanner and be a white woman, a transwoman can wash off his makeup and be a man. Just like Kat Blaque chose her "truth" and subjects herself to transhate and shit, Dolezal stuck to her guns and made herself effectively unemployable. You see where I'm going with this?
The fact that transgenders and their supporters think that transitioning is somehow morally better than a person assuming a different race is truly delusional.
I don't hate transpeople. Transwomen will never truly be women, and transmen will never truly be men.
>>3392>gender is mental, but race is genetic
Then why do trans people try to change their sex? Clearly their own body bothers them, else they would just be a gender non-conforming person of their sex.
Maybe we should start calling Rachel Dolezal "transcultural" since culture is just a mental thing. I wonder how the black community would feel about that :^)
>>3394>Maybe we should start calling Rachel Dolezal "transcultural" since culture is just a mental thing.
People are already "transcultural" since it IS a mental thing. Any immigrant who assimilates to their new home is transcultural. If Dolezal just admitted to liking and wanting to participate in black culture she wouldn't have had the same kind of response as she has had for claiming her white ass is black. Black people don't get as mad about wiggers, for instance.
Not sure what your point is.
My point is that just because she's a wigger, she still has no right to claim she's actually black. She can't hide behind transracial/transcultural/"it's a mental thing, not genetic!" to try to make her choice seem more valid. Just as trans people have no right to claim to be the opposite sex just because they ~feel~ that way. If they identify with the opposite sex more, sure, that's fine, but they shouldn't claim to be them.
The comparison between Rachel and transpeople is totally valid.
oh so we're on the same page then
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Anonymous Moderator 3404
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".
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.
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.
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>I believe everyone deserves enough rights to be able to shape their own lives>In fact, I'd say most countries never really needed [feminism]
>>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.
>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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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.
>>3418>I don't like feminism because I'm so priviledged I think it'll prevent me from being treated like the little princess I am uwu
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you can't handle the heat, you know what to do already.
>>3429>specifically a gendered woman
A gendered one*
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?
sorry meant to reply to >>3418
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.
Where are you going? It's worse on particular boards than others, as you can imagine.
I go on /a/, but only threads about series aimed at women (and gay guys). My skin is thick enough to deal with the occasional dumbass straight male who wanders in to bitch at us.
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.
I've been trying to distance myself from 4chan lately because that place is still a shithole despite its misogynistic tendencies, and it's only gotten worse since the election in America. Though I do hate the fact that I have to go to extra lengths to word things a certain way so I can hide the fact that I'm a female if whatever I post might allude to my gender. Everyone assumes everyone's a guy anyway so it's usually not a problem, but their tone turns incredibly patronizing the minute they get the impression that I'm a female.
4chan has only served to make me more wary of men.
>>3440 the issue with 4chan is it used to be a really fun/funny place to hang out, but from like 2010 onwards it just turned into this weird shitfest of edgy boys. I kinda grew up with 4chan, if I pop in nowadays it's just depressing for me. It's like walking past a park you'd hang out in as a teenager and someones turned it into social housing or something lmao
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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)?
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.
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
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.
He says this around 58:00 minutes in (you will have to go around 46:00 for the beginning of the topic). It doesn't really have much to do with the pornography topic that i brought up, but thought it was an interesting quote. I was taken aback tbh since it seemed like he was saying that men are predisposed to committing sexual violence (?) when i think it has more to do more with society enabling it by expecting violent behavior from men (i guess this is where my brain tied it to porn) I wonder if this "dark side" idea is accepted by a majority of men. comics like Louis CK would often comments on male sexual behavior as well. >>3456>odd to see how drastically it can impact some men vs others. yeah i can definitely see how porn can be even more unhealthy for certain personalities. I remember a feminist (can't remember her name) said that pornography was like fast food. I thought this was a genius comparison, since just like fast food, there are some people who become obese and unhealthy from it, while others are able to find a balance between fast food and natural food (although people who completely cut fast food out of their lives are objectively healthier than those that eat it sometimes, which is debatable with porn)
>best friend is a porn addict and it's basically fucked his chances of ever having a successful relationship
It's sad that men are falling into porn addiction, so much that it ruins their romantic life. >>3457>Masturbation is healthy and something that shouldn't be shunned but porn is so damaging
Good point! I don't think the world needs to become prudes or to be ashamed of sex, but it's the huge industry behind these natural tendencies that are worrying.>>3458>I'm sick of all this broad gender generalizations
Same, sometimes i wonder if there even is a point in talking about men v. women difference (tbh i really don't think there is much of a difference between the two sexes, but maybe i'm too optimistic)
oops i messed up the green text, sorry bout that. my response starts from "yeah…"
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.
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)
Are you referring to the behind-closed-doors prostitution that occurs in Hollywood, the modelling industry, and Asian idol agencies, or something completely different?
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.
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.
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.
>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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Different Anon, but >euthanize a fully developed human
a fetus isn't a fully developed human, that's the whole point.
It is still a human though.
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.
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
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.
Because modern feminism has derailed out of control.
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??
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?"
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.
Still without considering the women that are actually prone to find employment.
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.
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?
I think they envy it too. Entitlement is rampant these days since parents loved to pamper their kids.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
I know this place has no (you)s but you're not forced to give me one if you have no argoument.
Hold on, are intelligent AIs a thing now? Can I stop trying to make irl friends and relax?
Don't you ever talk about anything else, or are you paid to derail threads with irrelevant shit?
no not yet. kizuna ai is just a gimmick youtube channel.
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/
man, reading some of that stuff made me physically ill. can we not like leave little boys alone in this fucking country? we already mutilate their penises at birth, but then we have these gross moms who let more drs decide they need to be further mutilated. disgusting. we need to just leave EVERYONE'S genitals alone ffs.
not everything happens exclusively in your country. let me guess, you're american?
lolno, canadafag. not everyone is american, retard.
>>6788> but then we have these gross moms who let more drs decide they need to be further mutilated
yeah, the homophobia in this culture is still stifling, particularly for effeminate little boys. It's really sad, like just let your son grow up and be gay, you don't have to convince him he's really a straight trans girl just because he's attracted to other boys.
>>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
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
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.
Isn't feminism against virgin shaming?
I thought feminism was against shaming people for their sexual choices in their lives.
I'm saying this because I have seen a lot of it ITT
It's supposed to be, anon. This thread is full of nonsense tbh.
I use to be, but realized most feminists don't give two shits about people like me so I'm not a feminist anymore.
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
Neofeminism makes me want to puke lol
the general idea of feminism seems to have taken a turn in this day and age.. da SJW's
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Nta, but it sounds like you're egalitarian more than feminist.
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.
right, but supposed to be. feminism has become a catchall term for many different movements that involve women, from the egalitarian to the extreme. many people, especially online, will identify as feminist in order to satisfy their male hate boners, which is fucking stupid, they end up being like the female version of incels, with no life experience with men and only online articles and echochambers making them rage.
i don't think that these other feminist movements will die out, so i call myself an egalitarian feminist, which i think is fair.
we can change the world for everyone, because changing things for our allied men will help them change our oppressors.
sage for type
*right, but 'supposed to be' sadly doesn't mean 'is'
This honestly any time another woman says I'm a feminist I'm so strong durr I look at her career the man she's with and her children "they never have any if feminist and if they do mom comes first :)" Their jobs are still shit regardless of being "empowered" any men they attract have pubes on their chin and open their mouth like babies all the time orbiting around them praising feminism so they can get in tubby tinas panties. Feminism makes men into better moms than women and women into useless men.
Dude, what kind of country do you even come from where you think every man who marries a feminist or supports her and other feminists for the sake of merely collecting panties in a public space for attention mongering?
Are you sure you just surf mainstream click bait articles and watch feminist cringe compilations to reassure yourself that feminists are just playing for show and entirely abandon women who don't live the way they decide?
Third wave is about letting women live the way they'd like, whether it be a feminine home maker or a career woman with no kids.
It's not stopping anyone from pursuing the trad lifestyle nor is it stopping them from abandoning their femininity entirely because that itself is anti-feminist unless she is naturally that way.
Plenty of gay men and straight camp men are feminists because they understand how other men give them shit because being feminine is praised to high hell except if you're a man.
There is nothing wrong with men exploring their feminine side and actually splitting housework fairly instead of thinking they deserve a gold metal for half-heartedly leaving washed dishes in the sink.
Or are you one of those people who call men "a nu-male mangina from twitter" when they deviate from your hyper masculine bread winning warrior stereotype?
my question is what country do they come from where they still can afford trad life, role reversal or not.
It's difficult to afford trad life because it's a privilege of wealthy families who can afford to not have dual income households.
Many immigrant workers just don't have the money to let the wife stay at home and look after the kids and house only without juggling multiple jobs to scrape by.
What's stopping traditional life is money and housing prices, which, due to immigration as well as population levels is too expensive nowadays.
Feminism is doing nothing to say that women can't become housewives if that makes them happy and I do agree that to a certain level people shame housewives as "lazy" when it's very demanding work and they should mind their own business. But these feminists aren't all feminists.
I just don't like the idea of asking my husband for money to spend for disposable income I want to own and having to go back to family if he mothballs me for something younger and prettier.
If you find a kind hearted man who is willing to go the extra mile and he has a job well paid enough to support a housewife not working and having a couple of kids, more power to you anon.
I'll probably get banned for this, but;
This whole thread is a shitshow.
unless you break the rules or bait, no
Oh. I guarantee I could get banned in seconds, and all it would take is telling you a true
fact about myself.
If it's not a "I have a penis" I'm willing to listen
Bingo. Am I allowed to comment on Feminism at all, or nah? For the record, I'm a 2nd wave feminist/egalitarian.
Or I'll just see if I'm banned for merely being born a certain way, making this place no better than any Boy's Club on the web.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
>>15022>>15063>>15066>comments on how whole thread whose last reply is from over 4 months ago is a shit show>doesn't explain what they think is flawed about replies on thread, what their opinions are on feminism, anything remotely related to the thread description, etc.>best he can come up with is sperging about muh penis on a thread about feminism
You sound educated enough, so why bother coming here to say you're male? The most important rule here is that this place is women only. You could've posted without mentioning you're a man, but no. So of course it looks like you wanted attention.
It's obvious you'd get banned. And you will get banned again, this time also for ban evading.
>I didn't start out saying "DURR, LOOKIT MUH DICK." But I was afraid to elaborate on my position earlier just to be discredited for being male.
But you did. Read your first and second post again, they haven't been deleted.
Why didn't you just share your opinion without adding the "I'm a man" part? If you think men and women are the same, why'd your gender be so relevant anyway?
And why are you so desperate you keep ban evading?
Because I know the rules;>crystal.cafe is a female-oriented community. Comments from male users are not desired. >If you state your gender in your comment or post in an otherwise identifiable manner, bait, or thirst-post, you will be banned and your comment will be deleted.
But I wanted to be part of the conversation, and the best my brain could do was; >Leave a snide comment.
I'm pleasently surprised to have been engaged by anons, though!
Oh, and I'm ban evading because fuck the matriarchy!>That was a joke.
In all seriousness; the idea of gaining freedom through voluntary segregation just blows my mind. Like "people of color" demanding to skip their own college education THEY pay for on a day, just to hit home how important diversity is. Diversity absolutely is important, but segregation and seclusion is not how you bring people together. The exchange of ideas through debate and research is. It doesn't matter what gender or race or sexuality you are to be heard or contribute. I'm not some fipshit beta-male here for all the wymyn. I'm a 30 year old man looking for intillectual stimulation on a topic I have opinions about. Who's idea was it to say such "toxic™" shit as "male comments are not desired" anyways? Reversing the role of sexism ≠ eradicating sexism.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
This is fun.
Are you having fun? I'm having fun. You gals are great.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
>>15086>TYPETYPETYPETYPE>kekekekekek this will totally show those girls
It would be fun but now you're just embarrassing yourself…
Just another reason why I'm thankful we don't allow smegsies here
Hurrdurr I'm a woman in disguise! but wait there's more! i'm actually a male i LIED!!!!
But wait you can't ban me i have like 500 vpns just so i can post in a women only forum Lelelelele
Yeah not embarrassing at all.
>How do you ladies know I'm not a woman lying about my gender specifically to prove the stupidity of misandry?
If you're a woman and you are lying, you still deserve to get banned and you're an idiot, too. Any woman who claims that she's a man will get the same consequences as a man who says he's a man on this site. It says so in the rules, which you've clearly read, kek.
>Delete the post where I made that same point, and then make it again.
>How do you ladies know I'm not a woman lying about my gender specifically to prove the stupidity of misandry?
>I promise I don't have smegma. And again, I'm not a foreveralone incel beta-male. I enjoy women. Both for their minds and bodies.
>Memes aren't arguments, friend
>Still complaining cc is sexist and petty
I suggest leaving this idiot stay for a couple hours so he can entertain us with his density. And you really don't know why this place is male free? Have you ever been on another chan?
dick or get the fuck out, dipshit
Hey little buddy, it seems like you're lost. Let me help you go back home:
what a pathetic existence
Did he get banned again or is he trying to take longer to reply on purpose now? kek
>implying /b is that much better than /r9k
Sorry. I was actually at work the first time I replied, and when I got home, I had to change the DPFE sensor on my truck. Now I'm taking the dogs out and I'll be back to chat with you guys. Even if you just slightly dirt at me the whole time, I'm enjoying hearing from people I'd have never met otherwise. Also, is EXIF data a thing here? I could share my puppies and stuff. Oh well, I guess I could just get an exif scrubber. Either way, be back momentarily.
K. You ladies (and likely hiding men) have my undivided attention…
Until my wife gets home, anyways. I will say; I like how much SLOWER the posting here goes and the increased permanence of threads. It's way more casual. I actually hope you guys DON'T become oversaturated with a huge userbase forcing servers to delete threads to make space for thousands of posts a second. It's kinda cozy here.
Show the dogs or get the fuck out
K. Lemme download a scrubber and take some pics! They're pretty cute. Be back in just a few.
This is "S" the shih-tzu. He's about 13 years old, and he loves to hold his toys in his mouth. Apparently, it means he may have been weened to early.
And this is "P" the terrier mixed mutt. Kek. She's a sweetie, but she wasn't socialized with humans or dogs as a puppy, so she basically doesn't… Know how to… Dog. It's adorably stupid.
>>15118>Weened too early.*
I don't know if that was autocorrect or me. Whoops.
If they could talk they'd tell you to stop spamming a girl board.
Seeing as I never used it; what is r9k for? I know it means Robot 9000, but I have no idea what kind of, uh, "topic" that is.
Nah. First, I'm not spamming. I'm only replying to people who spoke to me. I'm not DESUing it up or anything. And secondly, "S" wouldn't care what anyone is doing, ever, so long as he's not involved. "P" just doesn't understand the world around her. Kek.
Why don't you Google it?
Complete one of these to know if you'd be allowed there.>>>/b/8991
Oh. Hm. The only one that really seems like I'd have a chance of bingo'ing is Normalfag bingo. How exactly did
4chan become a place for incels? I don't remember it being SO filled with NEETs and trolls when I started going to it in '06 when an (ex)girlfriend introduced me to it. She was a strange one, but YLYL and original shit hooked me to it.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
Well, everyone. My wife's home. I'll check the thread from time to time, and maybe someone will engage me about the topic. Or my posts will be deleted and I'll be forced to not be silenced. Either way;
Toodle-oo.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
Kek. That's what we went with? Ohhhh k, then. Did I mention I'm having fun?
What do you ladies think of Clementine Ford?
Kek. You are too kind. I don't deserve a meme.(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
I can, and will, sit wherever I please.(Get a life. Go away.)
Could you stop derailing this fucking thread and leave? You've been banned multiple times, people are not talking with you anymore, and you're still sitting here like a cancer. Go away.
This isn't a college campus you fucking retard. I am not an SJW or feminist in the slightest but even I am aware that "freedom of speech" does not apply everywhere. This website was specifically crafted for women. It is a site dedicated to connecting women with one another because women are different than men and some things only a woman can understand and this is a space where we do not have to deal with "tits or gtfo".
This is not a place where you can stomp your feet and pout like a god damn baby about your right to be here. There are so many places that ARE dedicated to having both men and women where you can ask these questions to women and yet you come here. Are you retarded or very new to the internet?
Oooh. Why you bein' like this? I'm trying to let it go, but you just keep giving me middle fingers, Mod. If I was younger, I'd use a botnet to fuck this board up, but I don't want to do anything bad to here. No ion cannons. Or RATs. Just let me say a final piece you can ridicule endlessly when I leave.(Cool. Bye bye.)
Mods are ridiculing you, my dude. They're doing their job because you're derailing a thread and ban evading, and you're a guy. If you respect this place please go.
You say you want to respect this place and get a view of what life is like through the opposite gender and thats fine, but just don't post. Like you can read as many threads as you like and lurk, but you are specifically not welcome to post here at all. You need to respect that this image board is literally not for you. At all.
To the person higher in the thread saying that men are lazy mooches because women are taking better jobs:
>Men still make more money
>Men work longer hours
>Men work more dangerous jobs
>Men are more likely to die and get permanently injured in war
>Men are more likely to be homeless
>Men are less likely to graduate college
Society has a bias towards supporting women. It's easy to make fun of men for failing when you've gone your entire life with massive advantages.(male, ban evading)
what a faggot, coming to a girl board to whine about women.
>>15352>Men making more money doesn't prove anything
it proves that men make more money because they work longer hours, work more dangerous jobs, and have incentive to work so they can buy sex and love, the things women get for free>Men work longer hours
source: https://www.oecd.org/els/family/LMF_2_1_Usual_working_hours_gender.pdf>Their choice to work dangerous jobs
Men work those jobs because women can't. You've never seen a female construction worker on a jackhammer. You've never seen a female firefighter carry a man out of a burning building.>Only men create war
That's an obvious, childish lie. Even if it were true, men being forced into war by their government are not to blame for their death and injury. And men being shamed into war by women handing out white feathers are not to blame either.>Homeless people are trash who deserve it
Childish opinion. Are you like 17? Do you not know what an economic downturn is?>Men are less likely to graduate college
because women don't get kicked out as often by their parents, because there is no social shame for women who can live off their boyfriends, because there are programs to help women through college
>Great so men are uneducated but still make more money
>women pick gender studies or useless arts degrees and are unemployable haha while men pick engineering stem masterrace here
>women are more likely to have a degree!
>>15369>last stat was taken several years ago
Sure proved me the mens are big tough and women are all just privileged evil bitches making men do all the work
If you really believe that the vast majority of women with degrees are in gender studies or art you are delusional, I've only ever met one woman with an art degree and none in gender studies
I meant they simultaneously believe both things
and didn't mean women actually get degrees in this or that, I don't know the statistics.
Are you really trying to say that in two years time the number of female firefighters increased from about 5% all the way to 50%?
lmao, what an obvious lie
I've never seen a female construction worker, and I've never seen a female firefighter. Unless all 5% of female firefighters live where you do, I'm certain you're fudging the truth. And even if they all lived right next to you, that doesn't change the fact that men far outnumber women in both firefighting and police work.
And yes, it's true. Look up the statistics. Women are more likely to major in things like education, men are more likely to become engineers.
bruh, I also live in the South, I have literally never seen a woman standing by the road with a shovel in her hand
A 2 year old study is not outdated. Seriously, how many more female firefighters do you think were added to the population in 2 years? There is more than 30 years worth of data in that link. The number of female firefighters took more than 30 years to climb from 1% to 5%. How many more do you think were created in the last 2 years?
I didn't mock education. I pointed out the fact that women are more likely to take degrees that don't pay as much, and that pretty well explains the wage gap. I mentioned it because it was discussed above as "har har I bet they think that women take low paying degrees" and it's true, women take low paying degrees, and are less likely to study STEM degrees.
And considering that 75% of married women married up to a man in a higher social class, why do you think it is that men are driven to value status?
And you're talking as if men don't become doctors or firefighters out of compassion for their fellow human beings.
>then leave your house more
cool insult, you're still wrong
don't complain about the wage gap if women really are working fewer hours, less dangerous jobs, in careers that historically pay less
>study from 2015
literally means nothing according to you because, my god, it's a full three years old, find a less outdated source please
wow, outdated again, and besides, here in 2018 women are still less likely to study STEM
>men make more money, that's why it appears that women are marrying up
the reason why men are driven to make more money in the first place is, again, so that they can buy sex and love, the things women get for free
>some do some don't
the way that some women become teachers because they are kind, pure, angels, and others claim to be feminists while demonizing and insulting men whenever they can
hi another southernfag here. we're actually closer to gender equality because no one gives a fuck. only reason my mechanic circle has little women in it is because the women around town are already working at city hall, the police department or they own a business - aka they just don't want to. we literally don't fucking care in the south as long as you fit in with/are nice to the skew bubbas they don't care.
kind of off topic but i don't care; the north is fucking annoying because all everyone ever wants to talk about is how superior they are with their virtue signaling recognition of "we love grl power!!!!" etc and how racist and awful the south is. it's a different culture here and hard to understand sometimes if you're not used to it. in this area words and jokes aren't taken too seriously but up north you say nigga in a song and yre dead. glad i moved down here fuck the north
why can't we just recognize women and men generally want or do different things for a multitude of reasons that we can't generalize based on our own minimized world view? we're literally arguing based on anecdotal evidence (with some studies from one anon i like ur stats) that varies from person to person with different experiences partially due to regional culture. lole we can argue statistics all we want as well but the basis behind why people go into certain jobs is so up for debate - like anon #1 said, who says men aren't going into firefighting etc because of compassion? who says they aren't going into the field for money or prestige?
anecdotal so hypocritical but most people get jobs because they know people in that job/field anyway so it's like keeping it in the family in most cases lel
This tbh, I doubt MRA anon is actually from the south, there are definitely misogynists there, but not the "women can only do woman jobs!!" Type folk, its the one thing I actually like about the south
>>15399>the reason why men are driven to make more money in the first place is, again, so that they can buy sex and love, the things women get for free
Oh youre one of those people, try stating a thought that isn't formed from your echo chamber
>women are less likely to study in stem
Again, its still increasing rapidly
>the way that some women become teachers because they are kind, pure, angels, and others claim to be feminists while demonizing and insulting men whenever they can
I don't identify as a feminist, I use to be an anti fem actually until I saw how men really are, being a teacher is a great profession and it sucks a lot are underpaid, but they still do it unlike men who do things for money
I actually am from the South. Is this really the only way you guys can argue? "Nuh-uh." is basically all you're saying. "My anecdotal evidence is more real than yours." >>15410>one of those people
Can you prove me wrong? How many women do you know have paid for sex with a male prostitute? Why are there so many homeless shelters for women, but few for the men who make up the majority of the homeless population? It's because society will nurture women and throw away men.
It doesn't matter what you say, because those studies were from three years ago, a literal eternity according to you. And quite frankly, a 200% increase of 30 people is a new total of 90 people. That's not exactly impressive. Yes, the number of women in those fields is drastically increasing, but when the number as minuscule anyway, that doesn't matter much. Kind of like how female firefighters still don't make up any significant portion of the population.
>not a feminist
If you're saying men are evil and act a certain way, then don't get mad at men who say women are evil and act a certain way. You're saying there are massive differences between the sexes, and then saying "no, actually there are no important differences between men and women. Somehow magically men make more money than women." You make no sense.
>Anyone from the South would know it's pretty gender equal in even male dominated fields
You are flat out lying. 99% of all construction workers are men. More than 80% of police officers are men. About 95% of Firefighters are men. I don't know what fictional Southern town it is you live in where every single female police officer and firefighter and construction worker lives, but in reality, the vast majority of these jobs are done by men. You're lying about your experiences, either to me or yourself.
>most homeless shelters accept both genders
Again, that is a flat out lie. There are teenage boys getting rejected from shelters simply because they're not girls. And the majority of shelters are built for women.
>Why don't homeless men use their money to build homeless shelters
Are you literally retarded?
>prostitution doesn't prove anything
except that men pay for sex and women don't have to
>Not all men are evil
>Just the vast majority
Men could make the same argument about women. That's exactly what incels and those Red Pill guys do. "It doesn't matter that some girls don't like tall guys with lots of money, the vast majority do." "Sure, some women are rational, but the majority are about as smart as children."
>Most women are good
Again, that's a lie. And your anecdotal experience continues to mean nothing.
>Those sentences don't make sense
Except that they do? You're saying that the wage gap exists, because men are apparently oppressing women who want to be engineers and firefighters and enter other high paying fields. Yet even when given the opportunity to do so, women continue to choose other fields. You're asking "Why do women get paid less?" and then when someone says "It's because they choose lower paying jobs." you respond with "must be those evil men suppressing wages."
>>15419>You are flat out lying. 99% of all construction workers are men. More than 80% of police officers are men. About 95% of Firefighters are men. I don't know what fictional Southern town it is you live in where every single female police officer and firefighter and construction worker lives, but in reality, the vast majority of these jobs are done by men. You're lying about your experiences, either to me or yourself.
Those stats are outdated as well as overall, even another anon can back up that a lot of women in the south take up male jobs, quit screaming liar and listen
>Again, that is a flat out lie. There are teenage boys getting rejected from shelters simply because they're not girls. And the majority of shelters are built for women.
They ger rejected from WOMENS shelter, because its for women. The vast majority of shelters accept both genders,if you go to a womans shelter and except to get in dont cry that you dont get accepted, even when i search on google almost all shelters near me are for both gender, theres only 1 that are exclusive to women, if you ever were homeless most men can easily find homeless shelters, stop lying and playing victim just because womens shelters exist
>are you literally retarded
You brag about how men make more money but if men cry so much about not having homeless shelters built for men why dont men build homeless shelters?
Men do the vast majority of crimes, women dont, plus men, with test tend to be violent more, if women are just as bad as men, then prove me wrong, meanwhile open a history book and youd prove yourself wrong
Except that they do? You're saying that the wage gap exists, because men are apparently oppressing women who want to be engineers and firefighters and enter other high paying fields. Yet even when given the opportunity to do so, women continue to choose other fields. You're asking "Why do women get paid less?" and then when someone says "It's because they choose lower paying jobs." you respond with "must be those evil men suppressing wages."
Okay, where tf did i say wage gap exists because men are oppressing women? Are you able to argue without strawmanning?
lol what kind of universe do you leave that two anecdotal pieces of evidence outweigh statistic analysis just because the statistic analysis is more than half a second old?
Not any of the anons that have participated in this fray yet, but I wanted to leave this here since it's relevant: >Police, fire fighters under "Protective Service"https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.htm
The point was that its more of a fair m and f ratio in the SOUTH, not everywhere else
Also if you really believe the vast majority of homeless shelters only accept women you're beyond delusional
don't waste your breath on her
Because there aren't any statistics for only the south vs north? Lmfao
>men get turned away from homeless shelters for being men
Give me proof of a man being turned away from a homeless shelter soley for being a man, and something that isnt a man trying to go into a womans shelter, because homeless shelters are full of men
But but muh homeless men
If homeless shelters oppress men and reject them so much why do they make up the vast majority in homeless shelters?
Look, you can believe men have their problems, but don't pull shit out your ass like claiming homeless shelters reject men for being men
>>15435>why do they make up the vast majority in homeless shelters?
Because they are the vast majority of the homeless. They are also much less likely to have someone just go "Hey, you can stay in my guest bedroom!" because they are a man and not a woman. There are two shelters within 25 miles of my city and they are both women's shelters. I personally know of a homeless man in my city, a former biker who knows my mom. He came by to chat with her the other day and later she told me he was out on the street sleeping on cardboard more or less. It was cold as shit this winter, I really felt bad for him. Next time I saw him come by I gave him a bag of my food even though I'm broke as shit. In our society women are treasures and men need to toughen up - not in every way, but when we think broadly about the sexes this is the common view.
I'm curious what you think of the male vs female suicide rate but on second thought I don't think I want to see what kind of trash you'd write.
>men ALWAYS have shoulders to cry on and people who will blindly defend them
>only men are violent criminals who do stupid things because of stupid emotions
What about that lady in the news who drowned her four kids? What about that lady in the news who shot herself and her kid because the husband wanted a divorce? What about the woman who shot up the Youtube headquarters? Maybe there would be even more violent women like this if women were subjected to the same stresses men deal with everyday.
You're either legitimately crazy or have been a troll since the beginning.
>You need to find evidence to prove me wrong, even though I have no evidence whatsoever to believe the things I say
toppest of keks(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
Uh. Not sure if you guys confused him for me, but that wasn't me (Red the Unbannable.) They may have been male, though.
Man, what the fuck? Red the unbannable? Kek!
Yeaaaaah. They tried to ban me like 15 times. But. Bans and blocking are stupid in anyedia, in my opinion. They're almost never backed by law unless it's a 1 on 1 case of harassment. I get not harassing people, but I was just trying to talk, so I became pissed off and evaded their bans like an iceskater covered in oil.(nice one, smegsie)
>>15454>In relationships without reciprocal violence, women committed 70% of the violencehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men
Yeah, don't say that people ignore violence against women when they are far, far, far more likely to ignore violence against men. Your statement "Men need to toughen up!" is pretty indicative of that.
Also, you don't know what a straw-man is, apparently. You need to back up what you believe with sources, if you can't do that, I'm not the one responsible for building your argument. You have no argument other than "one whole other person in the thread agrees with me!" and since this is an anonymous image board, it's pretty likely that other person was you.
I get the feeling like you're a troll pretending to be a retarded woman.
>>15503>Yeah, don't say that people ignore violence against women when they are far, far, far more likely to ignore violence against menhttp://www.thehotline.org/resources/statistics/
These are the REAL statistics, not the manipulated ones, women face domestic violence more, domestic harassment and rape more and more likely to be injured, gtfo with victim complex>Your statement "Men need to toughen up!" is pretty indicative of that.
I say that in means of men playing the crazy, victim complexed activist nowadays, the amount of men that use tears or manipulate or can't take no for an answer because it hurts their feefees, I'm sorry if it hurts you but everyone, especially men need to toughen the fuck up, especially the ones running around screaming how superior men are next minute they're crying like a 14 yr old 2014 feminist
>one whole other person in the thread agrees with me!" and since this is an anonymous image board, it's pretty likely that other person was you.
Just like how you have no other evidence outside of accusing me of a samefag? Or the combined stats not north vs south?
Fuck off with that bs
>I get the feeling like you're a troll pretending to be a retarded woman.>evwryone who doesnt bawby the menz is a troll or stupid:-(
>>15503>The 1975 National Family Violence Survey found that 27.7% of IPV cases were perpetrated by men alone, 22.7% by women alone and 49.5% were bidirectional. In order to counteract claims that the reporting data was skewed, female-only surveys were conducted, asking females to self-report, resulting in almost identical data. The 1985 National Family Violence Survey found 25.9% of IPV cases perpetrated by men alone, 25.5% by women alone, and 48.6% were bidirectional. A study conducted in 2007 by Daniel J. Whitaker, Tadesse Haileyesus, Monica Swahn, and Linda S. Saltzman, of 11,370 heterosexual U.S. adults aged 18 to 28 found that 24% of all relationships had some violence. Of those relationships, 49.7% of them had reciprocal violence. In relationships without reciprocal violence, women committed 70% of all violence. However, men were more likely to inflict injury than women.
Funny how most say its about equal but magically one stat says it's 70% of women and its magically taken as facthttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
This is the actual study, not what you cherry pick from it>Reciprocal partner violence does not appear to be only comprised of self-defensive acts of violence. Several studies have found that men and women initiate violence against an intimate partner at approximately the same rate. For example, Gray and Foshee11 specifically asked adolescents about their initiation of violence and found that among the violent relationships studied, 66% were characterized by both partners initiating violence at least once. In the National Family Violence Survey, both men and women reported that violence was initiated by each partner at least 40% of the time.10 Additionally, studies of community samples found that a relatively low percentage of women endorsed self-defense as a primary motive for violence.13,14 These data suggest that self-defense cannot fully explain the reciprocal violence phenomenon.
Funny almost all the study was showing men do worse, but one part said 70% of women are the reciprocal despite it even later saying men are more likely to cause injury, and it was said several times throughout the article the perpetrators are about equal however men abuse severely, but victim complexed men cling to that 70% without even reading the rest of the article
probably aren't accurate because there is a stigma against men when it comes to reporting the violence against them caused by women, mostly because of people saying:>especially men need to toughen the fuck up
>You have no evidence of what you believe>except for all the evidence presented to you that doesn't involve another anonymous user on an image board agreeing with me
>You don't even understand the study you posted>Several studies have found that men and women initiate violence against an intimate partner at approximately the same rate.
That is for reciprocal violence. That means that in relationships where both partners are committing violence, men and women commit violence at the same rate.
>non reciprocal violence
In relationships where only one partner is committing violence, it's the woman 70% of the time. Meaning that men, despite you saying that they are violent beasts, are less likely to attack back when attacked
>Why do men do more damage despite women being just as violent??
Because they are bigger and stronger, derrrrrrr(YOU CAN'T SIT WITH US)
>>15511>probably aren't accurate because there is a stigma against men when it comes to reporting the violence against them caused by women, mostly because of people saying:
But yours are when it victimizes men especially since men in 2018 are massive pussies and always want attention and to be victim, if a regular 2018 man was actually abused you and i know damn well he would milk it to hell and back and everyone would use it to prove how evil women are, like what nicole arbors ex did
>In relationships where only one partner is committing violence, it's the woman 70% of the time. Meaning that men, despite you saying that they are violent beasts, are less likely to attack back when attacked
For all we know it could have meant barely tapping them, despite women supposedly doing it more it also aint women sending men to the hospital>Because they are bigger and stronger, derrrrrrr
As it was already said, if someone who is tiny barely hits you and you send them to the hospital for it you have issues, if a little guy hit me I'd laugh and hit him back with the same effort, not break his skull open
Video related, an example of a typical "woman commiting violence against men" type shit, she barely hit him and he beat the shit out of her in front of her kid despite him cornering her and knocking down shit around her and screaming in her face, this is what I mean, and ofc mgtow comes in screaming how women should be beat up or have their rights taken away, how she deserved it etc etc
real stigma is the abuse women face. being bruised and battered, no economic independence, sexually assaulted in your own home, police officers not believing you, police officers raping women who go to them for help, etc.
men who complain about being abused are just men who try to abuse their girlfriends/wives but their gfs put them in their place.
stigma =/= not crying uwuwuwuwuwu
stigma =/= too scared to call the police because they'll make fun of you
stigma =/= im not the alpha male so i must be an abused man
>men have to pull the what about me card
Because literally nobody talks about the problems facing men. Men bring it up in "women's discussions" because it's galling to hear someone cry about "manspreading" when you've got the knowledge that at any moment you could be sent to war, made homeless, or die, and that people would not only not care, but laugh at you for it.
>who cares that women hit men more often, if men do more damage
My brother got punched in the face by his girlfriend and she broke her wrist. What kind of argument is this? "It's okay for women to be violent, they don't need to control themselves because they're weak."
This is seriously pathetic.(Go away)
>>15552>and that people would not only not care, but laugh at you for it.
Huh? What world are you from that people laugh at men who become homeless or are sent to war? Only psychos would laugh at that, probably the same kind who'd laugh at violence towards women too. What you're saying isn't realistic at all.
oh god, what happened? context please. these people seem so fucking awful.
do you even know what you're saying? manspreading means men who take up too much space by spreading their legs open wide
that's horrible, shit. I'm horrified but not surprised, sadly. Thank you anon >>15559
>>15555>give me one example of people ever reacting like this to a man going missing
Never, because nobody ever gives a shit about men going missing. There was a huge campaign to "Bring Back Our Girls" when that African warlord kidnapped a bunch of daughters. Nobody gave a single shit about that African warlord until he started kidnapping women. Before that he would slaughter all the boys of any village he came across. But nobody cared because no girls were involved. >>15560
Yeah, derrr, I know what it is. I'm saying it's annoying that it's a topic of conversation for lots of feminists when there are actual problems facing men that get ignored.>>15554>It's not realistic to say that men get laughed at for receiving violence
Look higher up in the thread. What do you see?>"Men need to toughen up"
>"There is a stigma against men reporting violence.">"pooor bbbyb wuwuwuwu."
>"Men who complain about abuse just want to abuse their girlfriends"
Like what the fuck are you talking about, you can see this kind of shit in this very thread.
>>15570>Never, because nobody ever gives a shit about men going missing. There was a huge campaign to "Bring Back Our Girls" when that African warlord kidnapped a bunch of daughters. Nobody gave a single shit about that African warlord until he started kidnapping women. Before that he would slaughter all the boys of any village he came across. But nobody cared because no girls were involved
Yeah just ignore the countless articles on it, because totally no one gave a shithttps://reliefweb.int/report/liberia/liberiasierra-leone-warlords-reap-childrens-war
If you care so much what did YOU do for it? Oh right nothing, because as harsh as it may sound most people don't give a shit whats happening in other countries
Even then, no one "laughed and mocked" it like you claim people do when men face violence, I'd much rather be ignored than to have people screeching and laughing about how i deserve it, i think the fact you think an african warlord not getting attention for killing men is remotely close to people wishing death on women, jumping through hoops to justify why they deserved it, saying things as sick as someone would rather their daughter dead than to "be fucked by thousands of men"
Again, who the fuck is doing this to men? Even when men molest children people still praise him for dying
bring back our girls is for sex trafficking and slavery you fucking brain dead male. most girls would rather die than live that life. oh i forgot that's our feeeeeeeemale privilege.
Nobody cares about the little boys getting murdered, are you serious? UK anon here and when the Kony stuff happened people were changing their fb pics in support of it and shit
>>15597>people were changing their fb pics in support of it and shit
Yes. Real activism. Kek.
Nobody takes MRAs seriously.
>feminism is mostly demonized by the media
>therefore, people are unaware of the issues of women
>therefore, when women speak up of them, they get demonized
It's a vicious cycle
>yea but what about the sexually frustrated 4chan trenchcoat-wearing neets
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the oh-so-dreaded robots are a minority and most people (otherwise why are there so many women getting involved with the movement?) think they're doing some sort of a service to society. Either that or they fell for the rational/skeptic memetubers (speaking of shoe or karen, how many mras really "mock and ignore them" as you say?) and they want to pose as "enlightened by their own intelligence".
stop killing us and stop masturbating to our sexual degradation and then MAYBE we'll show some compassion
men are oppressed by other men. men being homeless is a product of patriarchial capitalism anyways, so go talk to other men about how terrible other men are for doing this to their brothers and allowing for unregulated capitalism
The issues weren't debunked at all. All they said was "homeless people were trash" and that one study doesn't count because it is older than 30 seconds, which has been their argument throughout this entire thread despite once linking to studies older than mine.>>15637
Men are oppressed by women as well. How many times have I heard a woman use "faggot" as an insult towards a man because he's gay? Women are just as oppressive as men are, it's childish you people are seriously saying "Only men use toxic gender norms against men!"
This is what feminism is to you people:>Most homeless people are trash >Men don't have problems because I refuse to acknowledge even the possibility of that>Lol, all men are violent retards, all they do is jerk off to sexually degraded women, men are literally worse than animals, I'm proud do be feminist, wait why do they say we don't take them seriously???
>>15648>Men are oppressed by women as well. How many times have I heard a woman use "faggot" as an insult towards a man because he's gay?
>Being called a faggot>Oppressed
Are you even trying? Also do you know men call each other faggots all the time, right?
So being called a lesbo and a dyke by men also counts as oppression? Cool, more reasons why we're oppressed by men.
>only men can be homophobic
>only men can be rapists
That was 1 anon who said homeless people are trash, definitely not the majority. And sure feminism is cancer, robot. You think Tumblr feminism is feminism, holy shit.
You say that as if the board moved fast when there are probably tree or four people talking in this thread. People focused on other things the post mentioned. Stop reaching.
Ah yes just ignore the data i posted i guess all men are little victims now and the reason why they die more in the workplace is because of matriarchy, totally no other reason at all, must be the big bad oppressive womyns killing you and forcing you to work dangerous jobs>>15663
This, he wonders why no one pays attention to mens issues but uses no one stepping in when I said homeless are trash to prove feminism is shit despite me saying several times I wasnt a feminist >>15659>more men, statisically, are homophobes and rapists
what you read:ALL MEN ARE HOMOPHOBES AND RAPISTS NOW WE USE THIS 1 SHITTY ONE TO PROVE YOU WRONG!!!
Again, are you capiable of arguing without using a strawman?
>>15658>using 1 anon who said several times she wasnt a feminist to represent feminism
Okay>homeless people are trash
That has nothing to do with feminism, most of the time both homeless men and women are trash who put themselves in that position, again, coming from someone who has bee- actually no I'm not a broken record, Im not gonna waste my time and repeat myself a million times just because you can't read and only strawman>men can literally never be victims
I acknowleged several times men can be victims, but shit like "women calling men faggots" is not one of those issues, neither are twisted stats, like how men walk out and want nothing to do with their kids and so when they get divorced they have to pay child support, and fucking up stats to make men look like victims when men CAN get child custody, most just dont want to, its pathetic you use that to make men out to be victims over that>only men are ever racist or pedophiles
Umm, who tf brought racism and pedophilia into it? You're only proving my point, dont expect to be taken seriously if all you can do is strawman>if a study is more than 30 seconds old than it is outdated, unless I am using an older study as a counterpoint
Again with the strawman, apparantly saying you shouldn't use a study thats over a decade old means you cant use a study thats more than 30 seconds old
There was data but if you wanna ignore it just to scream sexist then okay>they didn't explain anything, they made a wild, sexist assumption, there is no data to say that men are less likely to read safety precautions and use them
>there is data saying that men are more likely to be police officers, firefighters, and construction workers, dangerous jobs, because very few women want to do them
And that is changing as well, more women want to do those things and men nowadays are very lazy and just wanna play victim, the reason why stats say that is because men, historically liked doing those things, and nowadays men are becoming whiney pussies sorry if it hurts your feefees, but a lot of those dangerous jobs are taken by older men, its rare to see a younger man who wants or is doing those things
A lot of the times these jobs have safety precautions to avoid death, and men tend to have more risky behavior as the study I posted hours ago, which is why that is
Go away, man. You have countless imageboards where you can discuss feminism and you choose the one where comments from men aren't welcome and where you will be banned. GTFO.
Kek, because women CHOOSE to be single mothers the vast majority of the time /s
but if you're saying that women are oppressed by men and make less money, wouldn't that also mean you'd expect to find more homeless women? Because they are more likely to be poor? Except they don't make up most of the homeless population? Because society is far more likely to coddle women? And they usually never have to experience homelessness?
Making less doesnt mean homeless lmfao,men make more because they get higher wages however despite men making more they also get themselves homeless more, please tell me where this coddling of women happened when I ran away from my abusive home
>It's important to delete facts that damage the echo chamber
The "facts" proved nothing lmfao,sorry women arent gonna coddle and baby you and treat you like victims here, go to incel forums if you wanna cry about male oppression
>>15695>facts prove nothing if I ignore them hard enough
nta but your posts get deleted because you're a male on a WOMEN ONLY imageboard
also are you guys fighting 24/7 or what? the answers were so prompt it's scary
have you read the rules, you fucking idiot?
I'm not involved in this discussion, just watching the dumpster fire.
The first time around this thread was kind of a shit show, and then dude had to come and stir the pot again.
This is purely a website for females, not some sort of a conspiracy against the other sex where we can badmouth "the other side" without repercussions and by ignoring facts.
Statistics are interpretable and it's obvious you're not gonna reach any agreement about their interpretation because both of you are too busy trying to counter each other's points instead of listening.
Not as if she's obliged to listen to a trespassing male anyways
I wish robots would understand that 2014 Tumblr feminism is dead and that it doesn't represent real feminism.
But those 16 year old bloggers have real power, guys!
/r9k/ will turn into a feminist board by 2019
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.
"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 😎
I don't need feminism because I'm an independent freethinker. I'm more like this girl she is so intelligent she really breaks it down here.
Holy shit why did youtube even recommend me this stupid bitch?? Her entire channel is ragging on women for not being traditional.
Oh, this is why she hates and criticizes women so much. Listening to first one it's sounding like she has abandonment mommy issues. It's a complex.
Sage for triple posting
All feminism does is tear families apart. Thankfully the movement is dying pretty fast thank to the modern SJWs.
Unless you're talking about sjws, feminists never tried to destroy families. I don't know what you're talking about.
That only means that your cognitive capabilities are low.
Traditional families are incompatible with modern civilisation. Praise unabomber.
Then why scapegoat feminism?
At least feminism gives women an opportunity to be something more than mother/wife.
>capitalism slowly wrecks families
>capitalism slowly kills spirituality
>capitalism thrives off 3rd world immigration
>it's the queers and the ess jay doubleyas I tell you
Capitalism is inherently anti-women imho. You strike a good note with 3rd world immigration but the economy doesn't care where the children come from - as long as they come.
Western women win enough rights to not be living inside a breeding mill? Just offload it to the 3rd world! No birth control pills, legal spousal rape, and those who immigrate from there are anti-feminist too by virtue of being steeped in the culture. What else would make the owners of capital happy?
>>28717>You strike a good note with 3rd world immigration but the economy doesn't care where the children come from - as long as they come.
Western women win enough rights to not be living inside a breeding mill? Just offload it to the 3rd world!
There's that but also the fact that an immigrant is more likely to accept low pay and poor labor conditions as it's still an upgrade. This gets exploited to keep wages low but also gets used as a patriotic shaming, "She is grateful to work 2 jobs for minimum wage, you should be grateful life in America is so good!" or "They do the jobs you won't do!".
And then racists and reactionaries blame leftists and feminism for "white genocide" because we're sympathetic/tolerant when capitalism itself is to blame for multiculturalism.
>>3373>Are you a Feminist?
No, Communism is stupid.
Feminists about Conservatives >they want to mass import immigrants to exploit them!
Also Feminists about Conservatives >they want to stop all immigration because they’re racists!
The capitalist overlords desire immigration, the racist conservative underclass peons point fingers at the wrong people.
You're either trolling or terrible at comprehending the point being made that the top 1% of earners are a distinct political entity from a reactionary voting blue collar worker or college student, who you combined into a single unit called conservatives in order to accuse me of double think when I never contradicted myself.
But anti-feminist rightwingers are fucking morons so it's not surprising.
I am perfectly aware that your attempt to simplify the complexities of life by reducing everything to a Materialist basis where all dynamics are class-based has resulted in you being unable to truly understand nuance. Instead all who disagree with you must be divided into oppressors or the ignorant/misled. As a Materialist this makes it easy - people who disagree of a higher “class” than you must
be oppressors and people of your own “class” or lower must
be fools or evil. Or both.
It is very likely this tendency is exacerbated; the vast majority of Westerm Communist Feminists are from middle- to upper-middle-class backgrounds who are over-educated & under-skilled. As secular Materialists they thus view those of higher “class” with envy and those of lower “class” with scorn. That’s why you’re not going to see a Communist Feminist working a 10 hour shift in the factory, stopping in the way home for a cheap beer in a place that plays country music, then going home to a meal of spam & processed cheese on wonder bread. She may like the idea of the Proletariat rising up, but she certainly wouldn’t hang out with the Proletariat. Too low class.
Trust me - I get you
>>28837>you're a dumdum for generalizing in a discussion of general trends>#notall1%s>you're just a sheltered commie who doesn't know the REAL WOMAN'S of HARD LABOR IN HARD FACTORIES
did I mistype and land on fox the imageboard
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).
Your original point was that I was committing double-think about a nebelous group called "conservatives" when I wasn't, I was talking about two distinct groups one of which thrives on immigration and one that doesn't. Labor parties were anti-immigration, not in a racist manner but from a working class standpoint, until a massive psyops that got them to see cheap importation of labor as a leftist ideal. Even fascists agreed that the nation or ethnicity meant nothing to the international hyena superclass, the distinction being we don't mind multiethnic society on racial grounds.
>the vast majority of Westerm Communist Feminists are from middle- to upper-middle-class backgrounds who are over-educated & under-skilled.
I am from a white trash family where even my mom did manual labor. None of us have been to college. I will be doing a blue collar apprenticeship in a male dominated field. Don't try to cast me into a position of privilege in order to knock me down, I am not a champagne socialist.
You're right though I'd never eat spam, processed cheese and wonder bread. I'd cook potatoes or rice which is cheaper and not disgusting.
I don't identify with the label because the harassment that pro-life groups faced during the Women's March on Washington made it clear to me they don't want pro-life women in the movement.
You're welcome to do that, just remember that feminism is no hivemind and feminists disagree with other feminists and whatever subsection is just as valid as you believe it to be, anon.
You're a blind ideologue or just dumb if you think evil scheming capitalists are behind mass immigration, or even a major force behind it.
>>28854>Imma keep defining people by class, ignoringbthe vast differences in Real Life because Marxism defines my life
You keep agreeing with me without knowing it
That, plus it seems to be a feminist I am not allowed to do certain things
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.
Why are guys losers because they don't bang any girls?
NTA but it's implied they don't have social skills.
Reproductive rights are the crux of women's freedom and socioeconomic advancement so no shit feminists widely disavow pro-lifers. Women aren't exempt from holding strong anti-feminist beliefs and therefore not having a place in the feminist movement.
Being likeable isn't just a set of skills
What do you think pro-lifers are saying about women who get abortions? They may clean up the rhetoric in a public forum, but it is misogyny. >buh muh personal responsibility
Tell that to the girls in other countries being sent to prison over a miscarriage.
I've always hovered somewhere around the middle but this perspective really makes abortion sound like baby murder. I'll still use plan-b but late term abortion sounds abhorrent.
If you resent being born with a womb you can always sterilize yourself, otherwise you can use contraception. Abortion is not a woman's right because human rights come before any other, not to mention the majority of the babies aborted in the world are female and feminists don't really seem to care about their rights.
Doctors will rarely agree to sterilize a female that's of child bearing age. Go on the childfree thread on here to see anons struggling with this. Try again anon.
If you really disagree with abortions, don't get one yourself. Moral-fagging is a selfish practice.
It's not selfish to warn someone that murder is a terrible choice that will give you a lifetime of pain and regret. I had a self induced abortion from punching myself in the stomach, belly flopping on concrete, and drinking a ton of vitamin C. I will never get the child I murdered back.
>>36060>lol if you think killing people is wrong just don't kill people yourself. Moral-fagging is a selfish practice.
Do you read a lot of Ayn Rand?
Your own experience of inducing an abortion shouldn’t strip other women of the right to legally and safely obtain an abortion.
You beating the shit out of yourself doesn’t change that women who go in for sterile easy abortion procedures overwhelmingly feel completely fine and relieved about it. Look up stats about women’s actual normal feelings after medical abortions and keep your guilt to yourself.
You do know they fuck young boys in those countries as well?
>>36089>>keep your guilt to yourself
"Your experience doesn't fit my mental narrative, so hush!"
Isn't that sign for fisting?
True feminism is fisting men.
based femdom anon
true miners make their fucktoys take it up the ass
>>3413>persistent subjugation and servitude of over 50% of this planet's human population
Yeah right, because the wives, mothers and daughters of the king or noblemen or a billionaire were so opressed compared to the starving subsistent farmer millions. This is historical illiteracy/demagogery of the highest order. Women ALWAYS belonged to the powerful classes of society too and those women in question were way better off than men of the lower classes.
you can be better off but still be oppressed. animals in zoos are "better off" being fed and sheltered than animals in the wild, but theyre still locked in cages
and a minority of rich women does not invalidate the women of the lower classes. who had it worse than the men of the lower classes and who there were just as many of
>>6768>man takes female hormones >turn into retard who can't drive, can't think logically and can't manage money, etc.
top fucking kek, trannies are on a whole new level of banter
what, you don't like transgender people? what about ftm?
>>37126>who had it worse than the men of the lower classes
by having the negative of being lower class (oppressed by the rich) and the negative of being a woman (oppressed by men)
>and the negative of being a woman (oppressed by men)
is this bait???>unable to own land>unable to vote >unable to work >treated as property >expected to serve men and bare children and nothing else>raped by their fathers>raped by their husbands>raped by nobles>gang raped and murdered by soldiers >gang raped and murdered by soldiers even as children >executed for non conformity under the excuse of being a witch >ignored and not respected >no chance for social mobility
I could go on…
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.
What period of history are we talking about and where?
>>37180>unable to vote
Democracy is a recent concept. In ancient athens only 30,000 men would vote. Athenian men by birthright and owners of land. In most of history no one was able to vote. >unable to work
In most of history women would work. Only in industrialized service society of 20th and 21st centuries, did the majority of women in the west stopped working. In the majority of the globe women have never stopped working.>treated as property
That was never the case in the west, not even in ancient greece and rome. You are neck-deep in propaganda.>expected to serve men and bare children and nothing else
That was never the case. People had to fulfill their roles in order to survive and lead stable lives. Women were unable to sustain themselves through labor until extremely recently. No service jobs in the 15th century, sorry.>raped by their fathers
You are a retard.>raped by their husbands
You are an imbecile>raped by nobles
You are reaching.>gang raped and murdered by soldiers
Yes, war is hell and women are a commodity, tactical objective in wars. Men die to protect their women, just like men rape women. What's your solution? Demonize your protectors? Conflate your protectors with your aggressors? Reductionist logic, used to prime and brainwash. They did a number on ya.>gang raped and murdered by soldiers even as children
see above>executed for non conformity under the excuse of being a witch
Men were being tried and executed just as much. Being a heretic was not gender-exclusive. Crack open a book.>ignored and not respected
aphorism. That's an assertion, not an argument. People are judged on their merit and their character. You are clamoring for equality of outcome. It's working splendidly.>no chance for social mobility
Meritocracies cannot, axiomatically, preclude anyone from climbing up. In a free market economy there is no gender, there is only profit. Look inwards.
I am sorry you had to live through feudal middle ages, but we are talking about 2019. Which of those things is a thing for you currently? which laws prevent you from doing any of those things? doesn`t seem to be any of the sort even in the third world
I sometimes get the feeling that CC-Style feminism is solely build around:
>Men hurt women baaaad in [specific time period] as in my [extremely questionable source] so I shall righteously piss them off forever because for some reason that makes me oppressed.
Its like I would hate all descendants of Carthage in modern times because I have some roman ancestry and we still haven't sorted out that Hannibal thing.
That's not what I signed up for when I wanted to be equal.
>>37427>even in the third world
i'm not the person you're replying to but have you heard of the middle east? or parts of asia/africa?
And yet all the efforts and activism is to somehow directed against the west and its own system and not focused at all towards those places who have nothing resembling a liberal democracy.
we were specifically talking about in history, can you read?>>37419>voting
women got the vote much later >treated as property never been the case
this is outright false>only argument against rape is calling me retarded
youre retarded, rape has been common place through out history. women were raped by their family, husbands and strangers and it was socially acceptable. that is fact>raped by nobles a stretch
it is a fact. nobles had the "right" to rape low class women >war
being raped and murdered is worse than dying in a war>women not being respected and not having social mobility
we dont live in a meritocracy we live in a patriarchy. Im not talking about equality of outcome Im talking about not having artificially increased difficulty for women causing unfair outcomes
dont you have a jordan peterson video to watch you fucking spastic
>>37419>aphorism. That's an assertion, not an argument. People are judged on their merit and their character. You are clamoring for equality of outcome. It's working splendidly.>Meritocracies cannot, axiomatically, preclude anyone from climbing up. In a free market economy there is no gender, there is only profit. Look inwards.
youre delusional. do you actually believe this horse shit? do you think youre living in some fictional libertarian utopia? get your head out of your ass
>>37455>feminism is against/harming "the west"
go back to 4chan
Very amusing seeing a commie accusing anyone of being dellusional
>yadah yadah not real socialism, yadah yadah , the gazillionth time is the charm capitalism bad even though i have it better than at any point ever in history
Im not a socialist, nothing I wrote remotely suggests that I am. if anyone is anti "free market" its you. youre the one claiming you love the system we have/had which is stacked in mens favour, not free in the slightest
>>37456>treated as property never been the case>this is outright false>youre retarded, rape has been common place through out history. women were raped by their family, husbands and strangers and it was socially acceptable. that is fact
If women were men's property, men wouldn't like to have their property spoiled (i.e. raped) by other men, would they? So it wouldn't have been socially acceptable.
You're contradicting yourself.>>37507
Could you give an example?
>>37518>If women were men's property, men wouldn't like to have their property spoiled (i.e. raped) by other men, would they? So it wouldn't have been socially acceptable.
ridiculous non-argument. its obviously historically wrong, but also nonsense "logic". your mixing up men as a group and men as individuals. men at large dont care about women as a group being raped and rape women, individual men might not want to see their "property spoiled" but this says nothing about men in general. and a man raping his wife and that being acceptable shows men view their wives as property, and that they view other women as the property of their respective husbands
>Could you give an example?
you dont need an example, you can see larger trends and use your common sense. men hold positions of power. men have an anti female agenda. men use their power to hinder women. this isnt some orchestrated plot by the secret society of men, before you try and call me a crazy feminazi for suggesting that, its simply an ingrained, unsubstantiated bias society has
Just so you know, me, the original poster you argued with, has not bothered to engage with you even once.
You are indoctrinated and neurotic, it would be a waste of time and an exercise in futility.
You've been arguing with other people.
I dont care about you I care about points made. youre the one who indoctrinated. youre a woman who hates women and have been indoctrinated by 4chan/antisjwism
She didn't call you an incel, lmao. Telling on yourself.
You forgot "man", which is what you probably are.
I didnt call you an incel, or anthing for that matter. as I said, I dont care about you, I care about points. I have no need for calling you anything
>>37519>obviously historically wrong>use your common sence
Sorry, these aren't very convincing arguments. >>37524>I dont care about you I care about points made
Oh, so that's why you didn't make any. I see now.