Why do you dislike feminism??

[NatiaCutie]

Ok, so I was talking to some girls a few days ago, and I briefly told them about my experience here. I tried to be objective about things, and they me stuff that I probably skipped, like "You say they were all squinny, but you were probably a bit like that yourself too".

So I'm thinking that I may need, like a sort of reset, to try to explain myself better when talking about feminism.

And I learnt that in education, you need to ask people what their preconceptions are, so you can work better from there.


So, explain to me why you don't like feminism please :)
I want to understand you.

Feminism is here to help all of society get more equality, and more opportunities. Why do you oppose that?

[armenianbodyhair]

I don't like what it has become for some people: exclusionary instead of inclusionary. I fully support first wave and I believe people should have equal rights regardless of identity.

[Porpolita]

I only really dislike the radical ones. The ones who truly believe in gender equality and nothing more extreme are fine. I'd even say I agree with those forms of feminism.

[Mark]

I don't have much against it except for the more militant and fanatical approaches. But I am against most displays of radical and overly sanctimonious behavior.

[Unome]

Feminism is inequality, the push for women to have more than 50% of the pie, but now 80 or 90% of the pie.

For example feminists demand "equal wages for equal work". But why are women working in the first place? In the 1950s and before, a man earned the wage for the family, and could sustain wife and children. Feminists took the wife out of the home, put the children in marxist education camps (publik schools), and cut the husband's pay in half. Now the man and woman earn "equal pay". And the capitalist gets twice the work force with no extra salary.

Also it's false to presume that men and women are equal. A womb is not the same price as sperm. Sperm is cheap. The womb is expensive. What is the oldest profession in human history? Prostitution. Do men get paid for sex? No, women do. So women don't need money. Let me repeat that, since I know you (Natia) are incapable of listening to reason, and are a typical close-minded liberal… women don't need money!!! Again??? Women don't need money! Because women historically, always, have traded sex for money/security (marriage) since the beginning of time.

Was that enough for "feminists"? No, now women want the money and the womb together. This has priced most men (90%) out of the market. The average man has nothing of value or interest to the average woman.

This leads to the "DOM/INCEL" anti-feminist theory. One guy fucks 99% of the women. While 99% of the men compete for the bottom-of-the-barrel, lowest 1% of women.

[Carignan]

Natia, what is your opinion on the Femens? Do you think they are demonizing the Feminist movement by giving a negative and extremist portrayal of the issue?

[Tooting Carmen]

I only really dislike the radical ones. The ones who truly believe in gender equality and nothing more extreme are fine. I'd even say I agree with those forms of feminism.

+1. Those who campaign for equal pay and equality of opportunity I fully support. Those who have attitudes towards sex and the human body barely distinguishable from the Taliban are the ones I cannot stand - I am thinking of people like Julie Bindel, Catharine McKinnon and the late Andrea Dworkin.

[Unome]

Women should make 10-25% of what a man makes, for the same job.

In fact if it were up to me then I'd just straight-out make it illegal for most women to work at all. Or to be in the army.

I support gender inequality (traditionalism).

[armenianbodyhair]

Feminism is inequality, the push for women to have more than 50% of the pie, but now 80 or 90% of the pie.

For example feminists demand "equal wages for equal work". But why are women working in the first place? In the 1950s and before, a man earned the wage for the family, and could sustain wife and children. Feminists took the wife out of the home, put the children in marxist education camps (publik schools), and cut the husband's pay in half. Now the man and woman earn "equal pay". And the capitalist gets twice the work force with no extra salary.

Also it's false to presume that men and women are equal. A womb is not the same price as sperm. Sperm is cheap. The womb is expensive. What is the oldest profession in human history? Prostitution. Do men get paid for sex? No, women do. So women don't need money. Let me repeat that, since I know you (Natia) are incapable of listening to reason, and are a typical close-minded liberal… women don't need money!!! Again??? Women don't need money! Because women historically, always, have traded sex for money/security (marriage) since the beginning of time.

Was that enough for "feminists"? No, now women want the money and the womb together. This has priced most men (90%) out of the market. The average man has nothing of value or interest to the average woman.

This leads to the "DOM/INCEL" anti-feminist theory. One guy fucks 99% of the women. While 99% of the men compete for the bottom-of-the-barrel, lowest 1% of women.
Part of the reason why more women are becomming professionals is because they need to do so to support themselves. But wouldn't you want the person who best at a job to do it? what if it's a woman? There are some qualities that can't or are hard to be picked up and what if the person who has those qualities is a woman and not a man?

[Unome]

Part of the reason why more women are becomming professionals is because they need to do so to support themselves. But wouldn't you want the person who best at a job to do it? what if it's a woman? There are some qualities that can't or are hard to be picked up and what if the person who has those qualities is a woman and not a man?
A society that promotes women "supporting themselves" is an anti-social society. Women comprise society. And so individualistic women push men away rather than seeking-out meaningful relationships, marriages, family building, etc.

The career woman is just a complete travesty, a waste of a lifetime.


Men specifically, traditionally work so that women don't have to. The idea of "wanting to work" is just pro-capitalist overlord ideology. It's like saying a slave (to your CEO) is the greatest meaning of life.

Capitalism has transplated women out of the "home" into the corporation. The corporation, the state, the liberal government, is the "new home". And you will work until you die.

[Iltirbas]

Genuine equality is an illusion: women and men are quite different and will always be due to this distinction being essentially biological. Anyways, seems like modern feminism isn't about trying to achieve a so-called egalitarian society anymore but about overcompensating women by gifting them seats at boards of directors or parliaments just for the sake of belonging to another gender. It's like if feminists themselves do not realise that these measures make a fool of their movement and are rather humiliating since they showcase that, on average, women don't stand a chance against men in a fair dispute for a qualified position.

[NatiaCutie]

I don't like what it has become for some people: exclusionary instead of inclusionary. I fully support first wave and I believe people should have equal rights regardless of identity.

Who do you feel it's excluded in feminism?
The whole point of it is precisely so that all social messages and beliefs no longer become a problem for girls like you and me, when we have to live our independent lives, compete for jobs, or defend ourselves from men (who naturally have a strength) that try to harass us.

Men that comply with laws and are civil, are brilliant. I have nothing but sympathy for them :)

[armenianbodyhair]

A society that promotes women "supporting themselves" is an anti-social society. Women comprise society. And so individualistic women push men away rather than seeking-out meaningful relationships, marriages, family building, etc.

The career woman is just a complete travesty, a waste of a lifetime.


Men specifically, traditionally work so that women don't have to. The idea of "wanting to work" is just pro-capitalist overlord ideology. It's like saying a slave (to your CEO) is the greatest meaning of life.

Capitalism has transplated women out of the "home" into the corporation. The corporation, the state, the liberal government, is the "new home". And you will work until you die.

Well I definitely agree that if a woman has kids they should be her first priority. Family always should. But I think you are right that capitalism is part of the issue. The thing is with longer lifespans people are marrying later so women who are single will need to work to support themselves for a bit. Meeting someone isn't all that easy, I've seen some of my friends struggle with it. So I think that is a problem too, and I think it's getting worse because everyone uses dating sites now and like to sleep around rather than have a relationship.

[alfieb]

Reverse racism is still racism. Reverse sexism is still sexism. I support equal opportunity for women but not a political movement. I'm not a fan of -ism's in general.

So you try to convince people "oh, you support women's equality? Then guess what... you're a feminist!", but the truth is those womens movements are about abortion rights and free healthcare and all sorts of shit I'm not looking to sign on for. I believe a woman should be treated equally under the law and should be paid the same as a man. Everything after that, you guys are on your own. No quota system, and I don't believe in paid maternity leave separate from your regular vacation time or sick leave.

[Ballist]

There's no need for feminism. A lot of women feel less because we males still act charming. Women aren't less, but if everything was equal and males were treated equally then females would be pissed off. No more lifting things for you, no more holding the door for you. If you get pissed off and punch me for no reason, I'll hit you back. Do you like that? Currently the bar is higher for females than males. You feminists have what you want, be happy. :)

[Dandelion]

I dislike or rather pity the anti-sex feminists, but they aren't that common anyway. Otherwise you also have some irrational feminists who live on drama. For the rest I think nothing is wrong with feminism. Some people say 'call it egalitarianism instead'. Well, men and women are different and always will be, it's only obvious that it remains being called feminism.

Anyway, I do think people tend to be so irrational whenever they hear the word 'feminist' and strawman it as being the radical variant only. Whenever people talk about 'the' feminists it's hard to take them seriously.

[armenianbodyhair]

Who do you feel it's excluded in feminism?
The whole point of it is precisely so that all social messages and beliefs no longer become a problem for girls like you and me, when we have to live our independent lives, compete for jobs, or defend ourselves from men (who naturally have a strength) that try to harass us.

Men that comply with laws and are civil, are brilliant. I have nothing but sympathy for them :)

It's not all feminism it's the extremists is what I meant to say. At my school it seemed like all the women's study majors were upper middle class white women, the vocab was exclusive in nature, and a lot of them discriminated against men on the basis of identity, especially white men and even moreso white middle or upper class men. Now I can see why they'd be angry at them but discriminating against them or straight people or others based on lifestyle or identity is wrong and extremist. They also wouldn't listen to me when I tried to discuss with them even though I was always very civil and understanding. My mom considers herself a feminist but it means something different to her than it does to those people. She's like you and me she want equality, and she's also 60 so she's lived through earlier waves. She wasnt able to participate in them though.

[TheBlondeSalad]

I say that I'm against feminism, but I'm not against equality. It's just a shame that so many feminists don't want equality, they just want women to have more rights, and completely forget about men. They whine about mundane things like societal pressures on women and treat them as if they're the worst thing in the world; men have to deal with them too though (I'm not encouraging it but at least women can vote and you know we're not really raped on a daily basis because we're seen as less important, I appreciate the fact that in the Western world at least we're all pretty much equal).

You see the radical feminists and they take most of the spotlight - they're basically man haters. Of course this isn't what feminism should be, but the people with the extreme views get much more attention, therefore kind of stealing the definition of feminism to be just man haters, which is what people are against.

Personally, I don't think feminism is needed in the Western world. I guess in certain situations things are not fair towards one gender, but they tend to balance out. What feminists should be doing is focusing on the countries where women are still seen as inferior to men and are treated dreadfully badly, which is in no way what women are treated like in the West.

[Trun]

https://i.imgflip.com/hkm2d.jpg

[NatiaCutie]

Natia, what is your opinion on the Femens? Do you think they are demonizing the Feminist movement by giving a negative and extremist portrayal of the issue?

I don't like them.
They contribute to the objectification of women, like, we can't make a point without showing our breasts?
The world already thinks that women, are like this giant toys that are too dumb and uncapable of performing in the workplace like men. Going around shouting half-naked isn't helping.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

Ok, so I was talking to some girls a few days ago, and I briefly told them about my experience here. I tried to be objective about things, and they me stuff that I probably skipped, like "You say they were all squinny, but you were probably a bit like that yourself too".

So I'm thinking that I may need, like a sort of reset, to try to explain myself better when talking about feminism.

And I learnt that in education, you need to ask people what their preconceptions are, so you can work better from there.


So, explain to me why you don't like feminism please :)
I want to understand you.

Feminism is here to help all of society get more equality, and more opportunities. Why do you oppose that?

'You learnt that in education' ?, Ah, I see schools, which are dominated by leftists in the West, are more concerned with filling your head ideological propaganda, like feminism, than with teaching you real education like proper spelling/grammar.

There are many reasons why I hate feminism but the main reason is because I value freedom. There is a big problem with buying into the politically-correct nonsense in which men and women are said to be 'equal'. What this idiotic doctrine has done is to provide a rationale for feminizing men, thus making them weaker and less aggressive in protecting their own and their family's freedom, and making them more easily manipulated by government bureaucrats.

Therefore, I must oppose it.

I say the idea that men and women are equal is idiotic because men are obviously mentally and physically superior. I don't think I need to elaborate to prove that men are physically superior. In terms of mental superiority : women may get more college degrees than men but women tend to get college degrees in subjects that don't require alot of intelligence. For instance, men still dominate the most intellectually demanding fields in academia such as mathematics, physics, computer science and engineering etc.. or the STEM fields. There has never been a mathematics fields medal winner that was a woman nor has there ever been a woman who has won the Turing award. Also, the vast majority of nobel prize winners, in intellectually demanding fields, have been men. I was also into the computer hacking scene, I still am somewhat, and there has never been a woman who was an elite hacker. Now, you may say that it is not due to intellectual inferiority but because of cultural reasons but that is bullshit and will never change for the bulk of women. For elite woman it might change thanks to unnatural enhancements through science and technology. However, elite men will also be enhanced so they will probably retain their intellectual superiority.

In short : women are mentally and physically inferior to men.

[armenianbodyhair]

I also think the name is problematic at least in the west with the situation the way it is now, women's rights movement would be better. Feminism sounds a bit aggressive.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

oops, I hate a lot of mistakes, in my post above, but I edited it and now it is much better. I was in a hurry to post it, hence the mistakes, because I don't have a lot of free time and I really shouldn't be posting on this forum, right now, because I have a lot of work to do.

[NatiaCutie]

Personally, I don't think feminism is needed in the Western world. I guess in certain situations things are not fair towards one gender, but they tend to balance out. What feminists should be doing is focusing on the countries where women are still seen as inferior to men and are treated dreadfully badly, which is in no way what women are treated like in the West.

I agree that feminism needs to go out of the usual countries.
That's sort of the thing I started learning a short while ago, when our lectures changed from the British focus and started including other European countries. I know for instance, that the Balkans can be pretty rough for a girl. Archaic things, sometimes mixed with Islam make it so that women aren't respected nearly as much as they should.

The same should happen in Arab countries. You hear of David Cameron going on to those muslim countries and selling guns and buying oil, but he never cares for women rights!!! Wtf?!

Progress and better social policy need to be 'exported' I think, cuz some countries simply can't do it on their own.

But I don't agree with you saying that feminism isn't needed in the West. It is. Domestic violence, revenge porn, media going about how wearing miniskirts means the victim is responsible for getting raped and nonsense religious figures complaining about abortion, or discriminating the LGBT community are a menace. Think of those awful Muslim priests that go around telling people that it's ok to force women to wear veils and banning smoking, cuz of their Shariah beliefs. And it happens here in British cities.

Feminism is very important and we need it more than ever. :)

[oh-nahhh]

http://i.imgur.com/zaOqM.jpg

[Nathaniel P. Banks]

Feminism is largely to blame for the demise of the West.

[Cristiano viejo]

For the same reason you hate machismo.

[NatiaCutie]

Reverse racism is still racism. Reverse sexism is still sexism. I support equal opportunity for women but not a political movement. I'm not a fan of -ism's in general.

So you try to convince people "oh, you support women's equality? Then guess what... you're a feminist!", but the truth is those womens movements are about abortion rights and free healthcare and all sorts of shit I'm not looking to sign on for. I believe a woman should be treated equally under the law and should be paid the same as a man. Everything after that, you guys are on your own. No quota system, and I don't believe in paid maternity leave separate from your regular vacation time or sick leave.

Abortion is a part of a woman's freedom. You can't impose to us when we should be mothers.

And how can you say that maternity leave shouldn't exist? wtf?!
Having a baby is very difficult work, and no man will ever understand that. How can you compare giving birth to a whole new person, to simply catching a cold? Ludicrous.

Quotas are useful at first. Like, women can't just enter a male-centric environment like politics or business without some help, but I think that after a while they could dissapear cuz society and people already allow them in, not just because of quotas.

[armenianbodyhair]

I don't like them.
They contribute to the objectification of women, like, we can't make a point without showing our breasts?
The world already thinks that women, are like this giant toys that are too dumb and uncapable of performing in the workplace like men. Going around shouting half-naked isn't helping.
I'd be interested to know what you think about the bra-burning phase of feminism for the reasons that you mentioned you dislike femen. I agree with you there are way better ways to make their point and I don't consider these two things equivalent don't worry I know they're very different but I would like to know what you think of the tactics that were used. Not an attack on your argument, just genuinely interested.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

Saturday, August 27, 2005
The human brain.

In a study accepted for publication by the British Journal of Psychology, Dr. Paul Irwing (Manchester Business School, Senior Lecturer in Organizational Psychology) and Prof. Richard Lynn (University of Ulster, Professor Emeritus) conclude that men are on average five points ahead on IQ tests. The study also found that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rise. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, a level typical for people with first-class degrees. When scores rose to 155, a level associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman.

...

"



https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/UK_study_claims_men_have_higher_average_I.Q._than_ women


Men Smarter than Women, Scientist Claims

by Jeanna Bryner, Live Science Managing Editor

September 08, 2006
Men are smarter than women, according to a controversial new study that adds another cinder to the fiery debate over whether gender impacts general intelligence.

"For 100 years there's been a consensus among psychologists that there is no sex difference in intelligence," said J. Philippe Rushton, a psychologist at the University of Western Ontario, Canada.

Recent studies, however, have raised questions about the validity of this claim, he said. One such study showed that men have larger brains than women, a 100 gram difference after correcting for body size. Rushton found similar results in a study of gender and brain size.

To determine if there was a link between gender and intelligence, and perhaps between brain size and intelligence, Rushton and a colleague analyzed the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores from 100,000 17- and 18-year-olds.

G-factor

When Rushton and colleagues weighted each SAT question by an established general intelligence factor called the g-factor, they discovered that males surpassed females by an average of 3.6 IQ points.

The g-factor works like this. "If I tell you the last four digits of my telephone number and ask you to repeat them back to me, that's a low g-loaded memory test," Rushton explained. "But if I then ask you to repeat them back to me in the reverse order, that suddenly requires a tremendous amount more cognitive processing. It is a very high loaded g-item.”

So the g-factor "is really the active ingredient of the test," Rushton said. "It's the single best, most predictive part of the test."

Rushton suspects that the results are due to males having more brain tissue than females on average. "It's a very reasonable hypothesis that you just need more brain tissue dedicated to processing high ‘g' information," Rushton said.

The study, which Rushton co-wrote with Douglas Jackson, also of the University of Western Ontario, is detailed in the current issue of the journal Intelligence.

...

"


http://www.livescience.com/7154-men-smarter-women-scientist-claims.html


Sorry, men ARE more brainy than women (and more stupid too!) It's a simple scientific fact, says one of Britain's top dons

by richard lynn

Baroness Susan Greenfield is one of Britain's best-known female scientists; she's a professor of neurophysiology at the University of Oxford, a former director of the Royal Institution and an accomplished writer and broadcaster on scientific matters.

So when she very publicly bemoans the lack of women reaching the higher echelons of the scientific establishment, people tend to sit up and take notice.

In a newspaper article last month, she expressed her concern that only ten per cent of science professors in this country are women.

Her comments struck a chord, attracting a host of comments agreeing that women scientists were generally getting a raw deal.

This raises an important and controversial question. Is there really a glass ceiling holding back the careers of talented female scientists? Have decades of anti-sexual discrimination legislation really counted for nothing in the laboratories of Britain?

Or might there be another explanation for why we find such a marked shortage of women, not just in the highest levels of science but in big business, the professions, and politics, too?

It is my contention - based on a lifetime of academic research - that there is an explanation and I advance it all too aware of the howls of feminist outrage I am about to unleash.

So, here goes: one of the main reasons why there are not more female science professors or chief executives or Cabinet ministers is that, on average, men are more intelligent than women.

Nor do the shocks to the noisy advocates of equal opportunities stop there, I'm afraid.

For not only is the average man more intelligent than the average woman but also a clear and rather startling imbalance emerges between the sexes at the high levels of intelligence that the most demanding jobs require.

For instance, at the near-genius level (an IQ of 145), brilliant men outnumber brilliant women by 8 to one. That's statistics, not sexism.

In this context, Professor Greenfield's indignation that only one in ten science professors is female doesn't seem all that bad. It also goes some way to explaining why, in almost 110 years of Nobel Prize history, only two women have ever won the Prize for physics, only four have won the Prize for chemistry and why no women at all have ever won the coveted Fields Medal for mathematics in eight decades of trying.

In recent years, the forces of political correctness have made the reporting of this sort of statistic virtually impossible.

Yet as a psychologist who has dedicated his career to the study of intelligence - and, in particular, to how it differs between the sexes - I can tell you that in my academic circles these IQ figures are barely disputed.

Ever since the Frenchman Alfred Binet devised the first intelligence test in 1905, study after study has confirmed the same result. When it comes to IQ, men and women - at least once they've gained adulthood - simply are not equal.

Boys and girls may start out with the same IQ but by 16 or so boys are starting to inch ahead. The ever-growing success of girls at GCSE, A-level and now at university would seem to refute this - but the blame lies with our exam system, with its emphasis on coursework, which rewards diligence more than it does intelligence.

The undeniable, easily measurable fact remains that, by the time both sexes reach 21, men, on average, score five IQ points higher than women.

Before discussing how and why this might be, I ought to explain what psychologists mean by intelligence. It's made up of a range of cognitive abilities that include reasoning, problem-solving, spatial ability, general knowledge and memory.

In all of these, men outperform women - although women hold their own when it comes to verbal reasoning and have a definite edge in foreign language skills and spelling.

We must look to the field of evolutionary psychology for an explanation of why men have emerged as the more intelligent sex.

As the hunter part of a hunter-gatherer society, men were faced with complex, life-threatening problems that needed solving on a daily basis. For example, how to kill that elusive deer?

The hunters that used all their mental capabilities to come up with the answers, successfully killing animals day after day, were clearly the most intelligent.

They were the high-status males of their day and - provocative as it is to say so - must have possessed far sharper minds than those of women engaged in the relatively simple tasks of gathering berries and raising children.
The difference in intelligence between boys and girls starts to emerge at school

The difference in intelligence between boys and girls starts to emerge at school

These high-status males would also have been the most eligible mates, and it would be their genes - chief among which would be those controlling male brain size - that would be passed on to the next generation.

The result is that men today still have physically bigger brains than women, even after adjustments for their different-body size. Might this underpin the five-point difference in IQ between the sexes?

Of course, in normal daily life, there's not much real difference between a man with an IQ of 105 and a woman with an IQ of

100. The real difference only emerges as we rise up the IQ scale to the sort of level that the really top jobs require and as we drop lower down the scale - because men, as it turns out, have a much wider range of intelligence than women.

As a result, there are not only far more men with high IQs than there are women, but there are also, as I'm sure any woman would tell you, far more stupid men around than there are stupid women.

There is, as yet, no simple or, indeed, totally convincing explanation as to why this is, but while the abundance of stupid men has always caused social problems, it is the relative abundance of highly intelligent men that has caused problems for several generations of emancipated, liberated, ambitious women.

As a result, when these women get close to the top, they are simply out-numbered by highly intelligent and often ruthlessly ambitious men.

As our hunter-gatherer example has already suggested, men and women have also evolved different kinds of intelligence.

The demands of hunting - devising tactics and strategies, anticipating likely outcomes - favoured the development of reasoning, together with mathematical and spatial abilities, which is why, thousands of years later, men continue to be overrepresented in fields such as maths and physics.

However, when it comes to verbal intelligence, women match men because, in our hunter-gatherer past, women needed verbal abilities to negotiate their relationships with both men and women and to teach and socialise their children.

This explains why they are every bit as successful as men at writing novels, say, or even newspaper columns. Their superior foreign language skills explain why if you walk into a university language lecture theatre, you won't find many men.

But there's another reason why, at the very highest and most demanding of levels in society, men have a natural advantage - and it's one we've seen in countless natural history TV documentaries.

Take, for example, the case of rutting stags or fighting chimps and you get the generally aggressive idea. Thanks to high levels of the male sex hormone testosterone, men are far more competitive and motivated for success than women.

For a man - at least as far as his hormone system is concerned - succeeding, competing and beating his rivals is very much still a matter of life and death.

Consequently, ambitious, high-achieving men typically work harder, compete more aggressively and become totally immersed in their careers, while even the most high-achieving women will often admit to finding themselves distracted by their genetically preconditioned aptitude for nurture and support.

For them, it is often a question of what to get for supper, or whether the children have got clean shirts for school. These are small distractions, admittedly, but at the very highest level they have an effect.

As an academic, it's my job to tell the truth, to explain the scientific evidence before us, irrespective of how unfashionable my conclusions are.

Big ideas such as Galileo's theory that Earth revolved around the Sun, rather than vice versa, or Darwin's theory of evolution, met with vociferous opposition when first advanced.

And, certainly, the ideas I've laid out here have already got some highly respected people into very serious trouble.
Lawrence Summers

Economist Lawrence Summers was forced to resign after saying men are better than women at certain jobs

In 2005, the distinguished economist Lawrence Summers was forced to resign as President of Harvard University after expressing the view, at a seminar on diversity in the academic workplace, that in some fields the innate cognitive differences between the sexes might make the search for a perfect 50:50 gender balance impossible.

He didn't accept that the lack of women at senior level was all due to glass ceilings, anti-social hours or lack of opportunity and encouragement.

Instead, he went with what the science is clearly telling us - that at the really top level in maths and science, when we're not dealing with average intelligence but near genius, there are simply more men around who can do the job.

For that simple statement of truth, he was eventually forced out of his post.I take some comfort from the fact that Lawrence Summers' hormonally-driven male competitive instincts kicked in and he has now bounced back to become a senior economic adviser to President Obama.

But what if he and I are right - as I am 100 per cent convinced we are? If men are innately better at certain subjects than women, then why should society struggle so hard - and so expensively - to try to engineer a perfect balance between the sexes?

By all means, take steps to ensure that boys and girls get the same opportunities in education, but let's also accept that those same opportunities will not produce the same outcomes. Men will always outnumber women in certain fields and vice versa.

My argument isn't based on crude chauvinist doctrine (although I'm quite sure my opponents will disagree) but on decades of research, relatively simple statistics and an understanding of the law of averages.

Of course, just because men, on average, are more intelligent then women, doesn't mean there are no individually brilliant women around.

If I'm right, it doesn't mean there will be no female professors of physics; it just means we should accept that there will be fewer of them. Nor does it mean that a woman will never win the Fields Medal for mathematics; it just means that we live in a world where such an event is very, very unlikely.

I realise my views are unfashionable, just as I realise the juggernaut of sexual equality and political correctness will take an awful lot of stopping.

But I say to the social engineers who dream up ever-more-ingenious ways of getting more women into top positions; don't be surprised if you find your nobly motivated ambitions foundering on the immovable rock of human nature.

• Professor Richard Lynn is Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1274952/Men-ARE-brainy-women-says-scientist-Professor-Richard-Lynn.html

[Aviator]

Because it actively discourages and shames women who want to homemakers. As a member here, Marina, put it: A small fringe portion of women (feminists) have completely destroyed the complimentary relationships that men and women had, which the vast majority of both genders enjoyed. Feminists deny motherhood and the family as the most important aspect of a society. Mothers should be regarded in the highest esteem, as the guardians of future prosperity.

While Feminism might make you and a few of your friends feel empowered and like you're helping the world, it has done nothing but contributed to our rapidly degenerating societies. Fewer men and women are happier now than ever.

[armenianbodyhair]

So you try to convince people "oh, you support women's equality? Then guess what... you're a feminist!"

Also this, I hate this, but for a different reason than alfieb. I already said why I don't like the name and why I don't identify as it, but its like this: don't label me for my beliefs. I say I'm for equal rights and thats it because I don't like the name and its my right to be for equal rights and not identify as a feminist if I have a problem with the term. I understand I have beliefs that you would consider feminist in nature though. (also I don't mean you as in you natia, I mean the people who have done this to me.) Also I don't consider myself a feminist because I'm not really sure what I think about abortion. It's a woman's right to choose and I respect that but I also find it vile and would never get one, and it is really fucked up if the infant can feel pain, and just in general the concept of it is a little spooky. If you are pregnant and you can't or don't want to carry the baby to term...that's kinda something you should know and make up your mind quickly about. Also women that have multiple abortions because they can't be responsible is kind of reprehensible. People need to learn that their actions have consequences. On the surface abortion is cut and dry but the more I think about it the more conflicted I become. I still support women's right to choose because its correlated with a reduction in crime and most people live irresponsibly, we don't need more people living irresponsibly using up resources and destroying the environment (although in europe the population decline is not something I like to see because I think cultural preservation is an important part of human history).

[NatiaCutie]

I'd be interested to know what you think about the bra-burning phase of feminism for the reasons that you mentioned you dislike femen. I agree with you there are way better ways to make their point and I don't consider these two things equivalent don't worry I know they're very different but I would like to know what you think of the tactics that were used. Not an attack on your argument, just genuinely interested.

I think it was very revolutionary and creative at the time, but don't think it'd work today.
You know, I guess the first women who decided to burn their bras did so to complain against beauty pageants and that kind of, socially accepted objectification, and since the media wasn't as easy to use as it is today, pulling a stunt like that was useful to get the message out.

Nowadays, women are more educated, and can defend themselves better. And like, it's possible to share what you're thinking through a blog, or attending a flashmob, or just having tv and radio channels for other feminists. So, no need.

I guess a short answer would be that I think it was good at the time. lol, sorry for rambling so much before answering :lol:

[armenianbodyhair]

I think it was very revolutionary and creative at the time, but don't think it'd work today.
You know, I guess the first women who decided to burn their bras did so to complain against beauty pageants and that kind of, socially accepted objectification, and since the media wasn't as easy to use as it is today, pulling a stunt like that was useful to get the message out.

Nowadays, women are more educated, and can defend themselves better. And like, it's possible to share what you're thinking through a blog, or attending a flashmob, or just having tv and radio channels for other feminists. So, no need.

I guess a short answer would be that I think it was good at the time. lol, sorry for rambling so much before answering :lol:
Interesting. do you think pageants shouldn't exist or just that they should change the way the are conducted? I don't think there is wrong with appreciating good looks and the human form, but I don't like when people are treated like a slab of meat (I don't like street harassment either its extremely uncomfortable).

Sorry for all the questions. I don't get to talk to feminists very much in a productive way once they realize I'm a right-libertarian.

[Feral]

I don't like any kind of victimistic idiosyncrasy. Which is nowadays the most popularized kind of neofeminism (marxist), even though feminism it's more fractioned than leftism. :P There are other types of feminism postures which I might agree with in some extent as they don't victimize women nor demonize femininity as an oppressive fabrication of 'patriarchy' but revindicates it as a powerful potential of women's nature. For example, at some extent I like modern feminists like Camille Plagia. It's a new topic to me, though, so I'm still inquiring about it.

[NatiaCutie]

Because it actively discourages and shames women who want to homemakers. As a member here, Marina, put it: A small fringe portion of women (feminists) have completely destroyed the complimentary relationships that men and women had, which the vast majority of both genders enjoyed. Feminists deny motherhood and the family as the most important aspect of a society. Mothers should be regarded in the highest esteem, as the guardians of future prosperity.

While Feminism might make you and a few of your friends feel empowered and like you're helping the world, it has done nothing but contributed to our rapidly degenerating societies. Fewer men and women are happier now than ever.

Then why do we have more literacy, better health, higher life expectancy, more access to higher education today than in the past?
Right-wing people usually go on how awful the world is, and how great the past was, like having 10 children because there was no contraception, half of which died of tuberculosis was such a great thing.

It's just looney...

[Aviator]

Then why do we have more literacy, better health, higher life expectancy, more access to higher education today than in the past?
Right-wing people usually go on how awful the world is, and how great the past was, like having 10 children because there was no contraception, half of which died of tuberculosis was such a great thing.

It's just looney...

All of what you have listed are direct results of advancements in technology... Ironically, the major advancements in education and healthcare that you and I are so fond of came about during the the most "Right-Wing" society of the modern age.

[Ballist]

Then why do we have more literacy, better health, higher life expectancy, more access to higher education today than in the past?
Right-wing people usually go on how awful the world is, and how great the past was, like having 10 children because there was no contraception, half of which died of tuberculosis was such a great thing.

It's just looney...

Because men take care of your ass while you're cooking. You don't go outside and cut wood or got to do dangerous work, or at least not usually for women. Yeah, and leftists try to change everything and fuck it up, but you have to remember to look at the past to move forward.

[NatiaCutie]

Because men take care of your ass while you're cooking. You don't go outside and cut wood or got to do dangerous work, or at least not usually for women. Yeah, and leftists try to change everything and fuck it up, but you have to remember to look at the past to move forward.

Mind your tone with me.
I have never given you any reason to think that using shit language around me is ok.

[Aviator]

Because men take care of your ass while you're cooking. You don't go outside and cut wood or got to do dangerous work, or at least not usually for women. Yeah, and leftists try to change everything and fuck it up, but you have to remember to look at the past to move forward.

Well those aren't really reasons for increases in literacy and life expectancy... Wrong attitude to have.

[Ballist]

Keep disliking, I don't give a fuckuckity fuck fuck. Leftist ideologies never work and so don't extreme right ones. :)

[NatiaCutie]

All of what you have listed are direct results of advancements in technology... Ironically, the major advancements in education and healthcare that you and I are so fond of came about during the the most "Right-Wing" society of the modern age.

Science isn't right-wing or left-wing, wtf?!

Most cures and vaccines for horrible illnesses, and electronics like computers and new helpful tools like mobiles are all very recent, created like in the last 50 years or so I think. Britain has had more Labour left governments since the 60s than Tory-right wing, and we've done pretty well since then.

[Ballist]

Mind your tone with me.
I have never given you any reason to think that using shit language around me is ok.

LOL Harassing men with your ideology isn't going to tick me off? K den... But you want respect back? Exactly why you are a feminist.

[Ballist]

Well those aren't really reasons for increases in literacy and life expectancy... Wrong attitude to have.

They are only partial. And I am not in the best mood.

[NatiaCutie]

Interesting. do you think pageants shouldn't exist or just that they should change the way the are conducted? I don't think there is wrong with appreciating good looks and the human form, but I don't like when people are treated like a slab of meat (I don't like street harassment either its extremely uncomfortable).

Sorry for all the questions. I don't get to talk to feminists very much in a productive way once they realize I'm a right-libertarian.

I think they should be discouraged but not banned.
Like, put on hefty taxes on those contests and make sure that they don't as much publicity as they do today.

You're right yes, they treat women like meatbags to be displayed and rated by the male audience; that's just awful and the fact so many people are accepting of it, makes me realise feminism still has a long way to go.

No, don't be sorry. I like talking to other girls who care about social society and public problems :)
You don't look like a right-wing, at least not what I normally hear from that sort of people around here. You're very friendly, thanks for that :D

[NatiaCutie]

LOL Harassing men with your ideology isn't going to tick me off? K den... But you want respect back? Exactly why you are a feminist.

I have never addressed you inappropriately, since I believe in personal manners.
Learn to behave in a civil way or don't speak at all. I'm not that kind of pushover that you can insult like it was normal.

[Aviator]

Science isn't right-wing or left-wing, wtf?!

Most cures and vaccines for horrible illnesses, and electronics like computers and new helpful tools like mobiles are all very recent, created like in the last 50 years or so I think. Britain has had more Labour left governments since the 60s than Tory-right wing, and we've done pretty well since then.

I didn't say it was.

I said that the last major scientific advancements took place in a society that you would call Right-wing (although I would not call it that.) A vast amount of medical data was collected from this society's studies, and it developed the basis for the electronic systems you refer to. Your concept of left and right is skewed and not applicable to everything under the sun.

By the way, in terms of Economics (to avoid the subjectivity of discussing degeneracy), things are looking pretty grim for Britain, as well as most other Western nations.

[Ballist]

I have never addressed you inappropriately, since I believe in personal manners.
Learn to behave in a civil way or don't speak at all. I'm not that kind of pushover that you can insult like it was normal.

Lmao you are hilarious, hon (sorry, does that offend you?). And hey, at least I tried. Sometimes when the wood ain't good, you gotta put down the axe and walk away. :)

[NatiaCutie]

I didn't say it was.

I said that the last major scientific advancements took place in a society that you would call Right-wing (although I would not call it that.) A vast amount of medical data was collected from this society's studies, and it developed the basis for the electronic systems you refer to. Your concept of left and right is skewed and not applicable to everything under the sun.

By the way, in terms of Economics (to avoid the subjectivity of discussing degeneracy), things are looking pretty grim for Britain, as well as most other Western nations.

So?
Everybody learns from everybody else. I mean, nobody invented the wheel on their own, or learnt how to print books independently, or invented the steam engine by being separate.

I could say that without the British industrial revoltuion, nothing would have happened, but what's the point really? Humans learn from each other and then improve on what's built already. We are all people who can learn :)

I suspect you're like, making this another great praise of the nazis or whatev, but even if some designs and information was taken from them, it doesn't mean that it wasn't greatly expanded on independently by other new scientists and smart people. It doesn't decrese the merits of more recent generations

[Nathaniel P. Banks]

Women should be raising the next generation not pursuing careers. This arrangement, key to the health and stability of any society, was abandoned in the West and we are witnessing the consequences.

[Methmatician]

I don't have any problems with feminism AFAIK, but I have a problem with people who use it as an outlet for their man-hating views. I haven't heard of any such people in Australia though. Might be more of an American thing.

[Chaya]

disgusting. feminists trying to be above men. it's discrimination against the opposite sex. and they claim equality but they want more then that! and yes Men and women are equal but does not mean that their duties and responsibilities are the same.
[equality does not mean exactly the same. women are not men and we don't need to become like men!]

[Unome]

I mean, nobody invented the wheel on their own,
Males comprise the disproportionate (99 to 1?) amount of inventors, discoverers, and explorers compared to females. Why is this? Nature. Another big problem with this "feminist movement" is that it attempts to overturn, ignore, or redefine nature in a very liberal manner. Censoring the truth doesn't make it go away, Natia, only hides it and delays the inevitable.

Why do men invent? So women don't have to. Why do men explore? So women don't have to. Why do men work? So women don't have to. When you act as Marxist, and attempt to defy nature (impossibly by definition), then you need to address what is already innate. Women don't need to invent, don't need to explore, don't need to work, don't need to compete, don't need to murder each-other, don't need to commit crime, etc. etc. etc.

Young liberals such as yourself eventually learn with age, maturity, and experience, that women are "out-of-place" in elite parts of (male-dominated) society. Why do women want to impose themselves/yourselves in male-dominated realms of society? Because you want to be in the presence of the best types of men. You want in the "men's only clubs". I have hypotheses about this which I'll get into another day.


But here's the bottom-line. Men work because we need to. Women work because you want to. For 99% of males, it is not a choice, and not something enjoyable (industrial work, mining, plumbing shit out of toilets, etc. all jobs attractive women ignore), unless a guy is born to a rich family. Even then his father will force him to work and threaten to cut his inheritance if he doesn't work "on his own". Now here's the important part, Natia, so listen up. A woman, such as yourself, wants to work to feel equal to men. And that's what "feminist" means to most people. It is driven by an inferiority-complex, a sense of "I'm of less worth than Person X". But you feminists have this backward. Only in a strictly capitalistic society (such as US) is it seen as "good", moral, or honorable to work, as a slave or peasant would. This is due to the Protestant religious and racial composition of the US. Indolence is still seen as a vice instead of a virtue; although this is changing.


A final point, since I probably overloaded you. This idea of "feminist" is misleading and dishonest as many females here spoke about. It's like manufacturing a cyanide-poison pill and calling it "healthy delicious chocolate candy that cures you" pills. Just because you wrap garbage up in a pretty package, doesn't mean its other than its essence. It's garbage, this ideology you push without fully understanding it yourself.

You've been duped, tricked, into forcing bad things to people who will gain no positive benefits for doing so.

For example, you've ignored how I mentioned Feminism originally was a capitalistic tool, specifically designed and used to pull women out of the home, into the factory, cut half the wage of her husband, reassign that to her, and now a factory has two employees (slaves) instead of one (traditionally the man). Why do you ignore this point, Natia??? It's obvious. Because you have nothing valid to say or retort in defense of yourself.

However I do like your right-wing style, demeanor, and approach Natia, your saving grace and redeeming value. At least we have something in common.

[Sarmatian]

Well, where do we start? Lets look at your own rhetoric first:


...we have to live our independent lives...

A woman (and any person in general) seeking independence is unable to build a successful lasting relationship. Simply because any relationship is all about being mutually emotionally dependent on each other.


The world already thinks that women, are like this...

Unjustified generalization. People are different and tend to have various, often mutually hostile, opinions even on seemingly simple basic matters. However


...like this giant toys that are too dumb and uncapable of performing in the workplace like men.

When you just joined the forum you were talking in a way 'We must do like this, we must do that, everyone should follow these rules' etc. I've asked you what needs to be done with those refusing to follow and you answered 'They have to be forced'. Then I've asked 'Are you willing to go out and back your words with action, are you willing to enforce your position?' and you answer was 'No, someone else will have to do that because I'm too weak'. In other words you admitted you are incapable of performing at this specific workplace like a man. And there are hundrends if not thousands of jobs where women will never perform as good as men do. But only an idiot will suggest it's because women are too dumb. It's an objective reality of our physiological and mental differences.


I agree that feminism needs to go out of the usual countries.
...
The same should happen in Arab countries.
...
Progress and better social policy need to be 'exported' I think, cuz some countries simply can't do it on their own.

Do you realize some societies developing slower than others? It took Western countries centuries to get where they are and that means some other countries are centuries behind in their social development. Forcing specific controversial elements of Western society on these will create massive social backlash and there very likely will be blood, a lot of it.


Having a baby is very difficult work, and no man will ever understand that.

Here we have a subtle way of saying 'All men are insensitive bastards incapable of empathy'. A baseless generalisation again and this time quite offensive one I should say.


Nowadays, women are more educated, and can defend themselves better.

Over and over I can see such expression in your posts. It's like you have that everlasting sense of danger and persistent need to defend yourself from all men around. Why do you feel so threatened? Was your father aggressive towards you or your mother? Didn't he loved you enough? Has he ever hugged you when you were little girl?

[alfieb]

Abortion is a part of a woman's freedom. You can't impose to us when we should be mothers.
But you can impose to us when we should be fathers? Men have no abortion rights.

A woman can use the morning after pill, a woman can use birth control before having sex, and there are a variety of other birth control options. A woman can refuse to have sex with men who don't wear condoms, for that matter.

By the time a woman is pregnant, she has already discarded several opportunities to avoid getting to the position she is in. I have zero sympathy for women who were not raped who accidentally get pregnant, just as I lack sympathy for the men who are accidental fathers and don't wish to be.



And how can you say that maternity leave shouldn't exist? wtf?!
Having a baby is very difficult work, and no man will ever understand that. How can you compare giving birth to a whole new person, to simply catching a cold? Ludicrous.
Paid maternity leave should exist, but it should come from your existing sick leave or vacation time. Otherwise you should be on unpaid leave. The concept that you are entitled to steal money from your employer simply because you got knocked up is what is ludicrous. What did you do to earn that vacation from work? What are you doing for your employer while you are away? You are at a productivity rate of zero. I don't support paternity leave for the same reasons. It has little to do with being against women and everything to do with being against theft.

If I were the employer, I would not give paternity leave or maternity leave separate from your sick leave and your vacation time. If you choose to use either of them, that is fine. If you don't have either of them and you need time off, that is also fine, but you will not be paid for the time you are away - nor should you. The office did not make you pregnant, and your offspring will not belong to the company, but to you as an individual person. If anything, your child will make you less productive as a worker. So it is counterproductive for the office to pay you to have a kid.


Quotas are useful at first. Like, women can't just enter a male-centric environment like politics or business without some help, but I think that after a while they could dissapear cuz society and people already allow them in, not just because of quotas.
Quotas can be useful, but useful or not they are racist or sexist and you can't fight evil by doing evil. You can't fight crime with crime. That is why Batman and Robin Hood exist in the realm of fantasy.

[Musso]

Ok, so I was talking to some girls a few days ago, and I briefly told them about my experience here. I tried to be objective about things, and they me stuff that I probably skipped, like "You say they were all squinny, but you were probably a bit like that yourself too".

So I'm thinking that I may need, like a sort of reset, to try to explain myself better when talking about feminism.

And I learnt that in education, you need to ask people what their preconceptions are, so you can work better from there.


So, explain to me why you don't like feminism please :)
I want to understand you.

Feminism is here to help all of society get more equality, and more opportunities. Why do you oppose that?

If you were 3/4 Georgian, maybe you wouldn't think this.

MEN AND WOMEN ARE NOT EQUAL. That is a biological reality that can't be changed. Hence, Feminism is not only a movement towards something illogical and unnatural it also aims to forcibly change traditional constructs of the family, and furthermore demonize anybody who is not a feminist as "oppressing women".

[Stimpy]

Modern western Feminism has pretty much been hijacked by illogical radicals that often fight for unimportant subjective causes and symbolic opression which they view as the objective truth. Anyone who opposes them is immediatly branded a sexist.

I'd say maybe 1/3rd-1/4th of all western women would identify as feminists, however 99% of them aren't actually involved in any way at all in the feminist movement. The ones who are, are usually the radicals.
Especially the people who see ''feminism'' as their main political ideology. They're almost always horrible, illogical people IMO and experience.

Modern feminism in countries that are already relatively equal just fights it's own cause. It further increases the ''we and them'' mentality between men and women and divides them.

[alfieb]

MEN AND WOMEN ARE NOT EQUAL.

In strength perhaps no, but equality of opportunity should be provided to boys and girls in any civilized society, otherwise you're no better than the backwards despots of the world.

Without a mother to carry you, nurture you and help to raise you into the man you will eventually become, you are nothing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKEZe_2PMuE

[Musso]

In strength perhaps no, but equality of opportunity should be provided to boys and girls in any civilized society, otherwise you're no better than the backwards despots of the world.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKEZe_2PMuE

Equality of opportunity should not be forced. For example, some jobs men are more skilled than women, and vice versa. If a woman wants to marry early and stay at home, it should be perfectly fine. If she wants to get an education at university, that also should be attainable. But the notion that women and men are equal is laughable. Men and women think very differently for many biological and historic reasons.

[Manifest Destiny]

Ok, so I was talking to some girls a few days ago, and I briefly told them about my experience here. I tried to be objective about things, and they me stuff that I probably skipped, like "You say they were all squinny, but you were probably a bit like that yourself too".

So I'm thinking that I may need, like a sort of reset, to try to explain myself better when talking about feminism.

And I learnt that in education, you need to ask people what their preconceptions are, so you can work better from there.


So, explain to me why you don't like feminism please :)
I want to understand you.

Feminism is here to help all of society get more equality, and more opportunities. Why do you oppose that?

I support equal rights for women, equal pay for equal employees, blah, blah, blah. But feminism really isn't about that any more. You've advocated forced chemical castration of men who've committed no crimes and expressed a desire to pretend to be an expensive escort so you could kill rich men and steal their credit cards. Is that feminism?

[Manifest Destiny]

Abortion is a part of a woman's freedom. You can't impose to us when we should be mothers.

And how can you say that maternity leave shouldn't exist? wtf?!
Having a baby is very difficult work, and no man will ever understand that. How can you compare giving birth to a whole new person, to simply catching a cold? Ludicrous.

Quotas are useful at first. Like, women can't just enter a male-centric environment like politics or business without some help, but I think that after a while they could dissapear cuz society and people already allow them in, not just because of quotas.

You get to choose when to be mothers, but you shouldn't be able to force others to pay for your choices.

[alfieb]

Equality of opportunity should not be forced. For example, some jobs men are more skilled than women, and vice versa.
If a woman is a bodybuilder, and she is very muscular, and she wishes to be a firefighter, who is to say she shouldn't be, simply because of her sex?


If a woman wants to marry early and stay at home, it should be perfectly fine.
There is no country on Earth where this is illegal.


If she wants to get an education at university, that also should be attainable. But the notion that women and men are equal is laughable. Men and women think very differently for many biological and historic reasons.
So what if they think differently? You and I think differently, we are both men.

If I have a daughter I will tell her the same as a son, she can become anything in the world if she has the talent, intelligence and willpower to make it happen.

[Manifest Destiny]

If a woman is a bodybuilder, and she is very muscular, and she wishes to be a firefighter, who is to say she shouldn't be, simply because of her sex?

I agree. The problem is that equality of opportunity will be replaced with equality of outcomes if all those female bodybuilders still can't outperform men when competing for jobs at the local fire department.

[alfieb]

I agree. The problem is that equality of opportunity will be replaced with equality of outcomes if all those female bodybuilders still can't outperform men when competing for jobs at the local fire department.

And while feminists may be advocating equality of outcome (quota system), I would stand against that just as I stand against people treating women as inferior.

[Raven_]

Also this, I hate this, but for a different reason than alfieb. I already said why I don't like the name and why I don't identify as it, but its like this: don't label me for my beliefs. I say I'm for equal rights and thats it because I don't like the name and its my right to be for equal rights and not identify as a feminist if I have a problem with the term. I understand I have beliefs that you would consider feminist in nature though. (also I don't mean you as in you natia, I mean the people who have done this to me.) Also I don't consider myself a feminist because I'm not really sure what I think about abortion. It's a woman's right to choose and I respect that but I also find it vile and would never get one, and it is really fucked up if the infant can feel pain, and just in general the concept of it is a little spooky. If you are pregnant and you can't or don't want to carry the baby to term...that's kinda something you should know and make up your mind quickly about. Also women that have multiple abortions because they can't be responsible is kind of reprehensible. People need to learn that their actions have consequences. On the surface abortion is cut and dry but the more I think about it the more conflicted I become. I still support women's right to choose because its correlated with a reduction in crime and most people live irresponsibly, we don't need more people living irresponsibly using up resources and destroying the environment (although in europe the population decline is not something I like to see because I think cultural preservation is an important part of human history).

Blklady2013 (too bad she isn't around anymore) once said crime rates among black Americans are relatively high because many blacks grow in single-parent homes. I looked up for stats I found something that confirms her words. (http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2012/12/the-real-complex-connection-between-single-parent-families-and-crime/265860/) She blamed benefits available for single (black?) single parents, not feminism. However, both result in pretty much the same. (Although it may be expressed sharper in poor groups / groups where it is easier to get involved in criminal activities).

That and pro-abortion stance make me think feminism is not children-friendly (EDIT). What is best for children is not necessarily the best for parents or women/men, obviously (I mean desires and needs of each group). Choosing one group over all others to an extreme does not benefit humans and is simply cruel. Dealing with other humans always require compromising. Abortion is not compromising, it is literally removing someone out of your life. That is an extreme.

And all those discussions about what fetuses can or can not feel are futile, IMO. There are ways to kill already born human beings (which does not give you a right to kill them) without pain and one day there may be developed painless ways to kill fetuses as well. Ultimately it's a woman who decides she needs an abortion because having a child may go against what she imagines is good to her. That doesn't and won't go away.

[Anthropos]

Abortion is a part of a woman's freedom. You can't impose to us when we should be mothers.

Alfieb already debunked that but anyway noone imposes motherhood on you except possibly a rapist. Right to abortion is a have-your-cake-and-eat-it thing. I oppose it because it's uncivilized.


And speaking of feminism:


Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women. Abortion masks the unmet needs of women in the workplace, schools, home, and society. In society — the poor, the working poor, women in difficult and often abusive relationships, and students and women in the workplace whose basic needs are ignored.

Feminists for Life is dedicated to systematically eliminating the root causes that drive women to abortion — primarily, the lack of practical resources and support — through holistic, woman-centered solutions. Women deserve better than abortion.

Women have sought real solutions since entering the workforce. Women want — and deserve — equal opportunities for pay and position in the work place. Flex time, job sharing, and telecommuting. Comprehensive health care. Maternity benefits and parental leave. Affordable, quality child care. Shared parental responsibility. Child support.

Feminists for Life has been leading a similar revolution with students, administrators, and professors on college campuses. Both students and faculty want more resources. Affordable housing. Financial aid and scholarship security. Maternity coverage in student health plans. Accessible child care. Flexible class scheduling. Publicized policies that support pregnant women and parents. Students and staff need a central place on campus to coordinate these services.

No woman should be forced to choose between sacrificing her education or career plans and suffering through a humiliating, invasive procedure and sacrificing her child. We refuse to choose®.

Abortion represents a failure to listen and respond to the unmet needs of women. Why perpetuate failure?

Pro-life feminists recognize abortion as a symptom of, not a solution to, the continuing struggles women face in the workplace, on campus, at home, and in the world at large.


http://www.feministsforlife.org/question-abortion/

Front page: http://www.feministsforlife.org/

[Incal]

I just dislike fanatics in general.

[Drakoblare]

Feminism is a bullshit movement that never accomplished anything. Factories needed more workers, thus women got out of the house, thus they joined the work force, thus they got more involved in society. After all that, it has only contributed to the degeneration of society and destruction of family values.

I obviously support that women should have rights and that they shouldn't be owned by their father/husband, but their role in society/family should be different than the male one.

[Tchek]

Good thread. At least, you're trying to understand.

My answer would be a long one so I won't type it for now and try to be concise. I could write a book about this. :cool:


Who do you feel it's excluded in feminism?
The whole point of it is precisely so that all social messages and beliefs no longer become a problem for girls like you and me, when we have to live our independent lives, compete for jobs, or defend ourselves from men (who naturally have a strength) that try to harass us.

Men that comply with laws and are civil, are brilliant. I have nothing but sympathy for them :)

I always considered Feminism to be a tool for neoliberalism and capitalism.

You used the words "Compete for jobs", "defend ourselves" and "independant lives"; the fact that you consider men as people to compete against and to defend yourself from is telling and a bit sad. Men and women, traditionally, are partners, not competitors or mutual predators.

Neoliberalism forced every individuals to compete against each others and destroyed traditional communities; or like Marx said has "drown humans in the icy waters of egotistical calculation.".
Feminists fighting "patriarchy" are a tool toward this. They are just substituting the perceived authority of the "husband" for the authority of the boss. Swapping one alienation for another. A lot of people were baffled that big corporations like Verizon introduced feminist rhetorics in their ads.

Actually, Women working are not a product of "Progressism" (nor necesseraly of regressism/declinism), but inherent to the expansion of the tertiary sector after the war. The system needed women to fill these new jobs; all the while the first and secondary sector started to be outsourced and/or mechanized (and a lot of people, men, thrown in poverty). This has been hailed as a "social progress" against past "obscurantism" (the usual Progressist reasoning), while it was simple conjuncture.

If you look up at gender statistics for the more traditional Primary and Secondary sectors (which are about raw material extractions, agriculture and construction/mechanics/engineers...), they are roughly the same today as it ever was. No "progress" whatsoever. Overwhelming majority is male.

So, the eagerness of Feminists to fight "patriarchy" forced them to validate all the codes of neoliberal capitalism. Whining about wage equality and gender representation are akin to beg for a wage raise and a social promotion to your boss. Not very liberating.

I could go on and on (for example, the real meaning of "equality" and social constructivism etc...) but will stop for now

[Trogdor]

I don't dislike it, but I think different people define it in different ways. I merely believe that women should hold jobs and have opportunities that men can have equally.

[Cleitus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RMkBQfKvt0

[Beit El]

Why do you use two question marks? It looks untidy.

[Herr Abubu]

My opinion of feminism is that it is a disease which only bullets can cure. The only few people who benefit from it are the ignoble, useless and wicked plutocrats. Otherwise it is completely ruinous, one of the most dangerous ideas of the modern-postmodern zeitgeist.

[Unome]

When it comes to working, feminism seems very unintelligent and stupid compared to traditionalism. Here's the unanswered question: why do women claim to "want to work"? Wouldn't it be better and easier to live life without working, staying at home? Imagine if there was a true role-reversal, and not this fake bullshit being output in the name of equality… imagine women working 40-60 hours per week while men stayed home and raised children. Women claim "oh it's so hard!" Bullshit, raising children is easy and simple. Anybody can do it, which is part of the larger problem of the world.

If feminazis really wanted true "gender equality", which they don't and it's an obvious lie, then women would campaign to work 40-60 hours a week, men stay at home, women take all the dangerous and shit jobs, men can divorce a woman and take half her assets (that she's worked a lifetime for). After all this, after true "Equality", then and only then can anybody talk about that issue.

Western feminists should walk-the-walk, not talk-the-talk.


Here is a challenge for Natiacutie, otherwise people can write you off as a liar.

You fight for justice and gender equality? Marry a man. Work 40-60 hours per week at a physically demanding, dangerous, unfulfilling, unredeeming job. Break your back for your career. Your husband stays at home. During your first pregnancy, your husband chooses for you to have an abortion. You have no say, no opinion in the matter. His decision stands and trumps yours. A decade later, you're pregnant again. This time your husband chooses for you to have children and you do. After 20 years of marriage, 5 children, your husband decides to divorce you. He keeps the house, the car, the children, all that you've worked for. He remarries quickly, leaving you with nothing.


After all this, then come back, talk about feminism, equality, justice, or whatever. Because before that, you're spewing bullshit, not worth listening to.

Prove this "gender equality", feminists, prove it.


EDIT: I almost forgot the most important part. And never, not once, Natia are you allowed to complain. Or you'll be deemed "less of a woman".

EDIT: Another quick note, women will also be drafted into wars, while men stay-at-home and will not be expected to fight. All in the name of "gender equality" of course.

[Leo Iscariot]

I like and fully support Equity Feminism and Equity Feminists like Christina Hoff Sommers, and Camille Paglia.

It's RadFems like Andrea Dworkin and Pop-Feminists like Anita Sarkeesian that I lothe.

[Stimpy]

Personally, I don't think feminism is needed in the Western world. I guess in certain situations things are not fair towards one gender, but they tend to balance out. What feminists should be doing is focusing on the countries where women are still seen as inferior to men and are treated dreadfully badly, which is in no way what women are treated like in the West.

I agree.

Something extremely hypocritcal IMO is that many people who identify as feminists for some incomprehensible reason never criticize muslims/Islam. Sometimes even defending it throwing around terms like ''Islamophobia'' etc. Which I've always thought was extremely weird since they're literally at the complete opposites of the spectrum. They should fucking hate eachother.

Yet I always see the term ''white male'' used as something extremely negative in feminists blogs, forums etc. It's often used with disgust or to mock/ridicule.

[Grenzland]

Modern feminists are just annoying. They represent maybe about 10% of all Western women and cry as loud as they would represent all of them.

I usually just ignore them. This "all genders are completely the same" bullshit isn't even worth to talk about. Let them cry, I doesn't affect me.

[Graham]

Some parts of it I admire other I see as a waste of energy.

I feel feminism sometimes concentrates on silly small things, when it should be aiming to get more women in to politics and asking why many women don't even vote.

[Musso]

If a woman is a bodybuilder, and she is very muscular, and she wishes to be a firefighter, who is to say she shouldn't be, simply because of her sex?


There is no country on Earth where this is illegal.


So what if they think differently? You and I think differently, we are both men.

If I have a daughter I will tell her the same as a son, she can become anything in the world if she has the talent, intelligence and willpower to make it happen.

She can be firefighter if she wants, but being surrounded by men in those environments is not the ideal working environment. The point of firefighters is too put out fires and save lives, and if the sex of a worker is going to impede that process, then yes they should discriminate based on sex, because saving lives is more important than some gender equality BS.

Well sure, but I will also tell daughter that while it is important for a woman to be educated and have the ability to work in society, she should also be prepared to raise a family, and be a good mother and wife first. And I will be more strict with my girl than my boy in many things.

[Tchek]

Feminism is here to help all of society get more equality, and more opportunities. Why do you oppose that?
The main problem with social justice warriors is that they are driven by meaningless slogans which no one can argue against.
How can anyone argue against "Equality", against "Peace", against "Anti-racism"?
Obviously, it's a way to manufacture consent for dubious ideologies. The road to hell is paved with good intentions


Problem is, between "uniformisation", "balance", "equivalence"... the word "Equality" is a meaningless word.

If by equality you mean "Men and women are different and complementary, and in spite of their differences they are of equal worth", then ok I'm egalitarian.

If by equality you mean "Men and women are exactly the same and their perceived biological differences are due to a social construct that we should abolish; thus, any inequality of representation (which doesn't fit the fifty/fifty ratio) in any field (in science, mathematics...) is *undoubtedly* due to gender discrimination, it CANNOT BE because of a different biological aspiration, disposition or tendancy." then I'm not.

Unfortunately the whole ideological paradigm of modern feminism is based on the latter, which is radical social-constructivism. Pseudo-science wrapped in feel-good slogans.

Where do you place yourself?

[Antimage]

Crazy feminist decided to abort a baby because it was a boy

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/feminist-woman-defends-decision-abort-baby-because-it-was-boy

I dislike idiots like her

[Desaix DeBurgh]

I dedicate this song to NatiaCutie and all the other feminists on the forum, this song is for you dolls ! :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYYTLJ8YHi4


Under my thumb
The girl who once had me down
Under my thumb
The girl who once pushed me around

It's down to me
The difference in the clothes she wears
Down to me, the change has come,
She's under my thumb

Ain't it the truth babe?

Under my thumb
The squirmin' dog who's just had her day
Under my thumb
A girl who has just changed her ways

It's down to me, yes it is
The way she does just what she's told
Down to me, the change has come
She's under my thumb
Ah, ah, say it's alright

Under my thumb
A Siamese cat of a girl
Under my thumb
She's the sweetest, hmmm, pet in the world

It's down to me
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come,
She's under my thumb
Ah, take it easy babe
Yeah

It's down to me, oh yeah
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come,
She's under my thumb
Yeah, it feels alright

Under my thumb
Her eyes are just kept to herself
Under my thumb, well I
I can still look at someone else

It's down to me, oh that's what I said
The way she talks when she's spoken to
Down to me, the change has come,
She's under my thumb
Say, it's alright.

Say it's all
Say it's all

Take it easy babe
Take it easy babe
Feels alright
Take it, take it easy babe.

[Hithaeglir]

It's because of feminism that i enjoy the right to be a free citizen and make life choices,so i definitely don't dislike the movement.If it wasn't for these women,who fought back then,things would be different nowadays.
Though I don't agree with the radical expression of feminism,as i don't agree with anything radical in general.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

It's because of feminism that i enjoy the right to be a free citizen and make life choices,so i definitely don't dislike the movement.If it wasn't for these women,who fought back then,things would be different nowadays.
Though I don't agree with the radical expression of feminism,as i don't agree with anything radical in general.

Yeah, things would be different , nowadays, like there would be more stable families and kids would get a better education. You see when women had their outlooks constricted to things like nursing, teaching and housewife the high IQ women went into teaching because they couldn't go into high IQ traditional male jobs Now high IQ women tend to go into other work areas. I mean who cares if the Western nations, like America, cannot compete against other nations in things like math and science so instead we import third world H1B immigrants to do our jobs thus making the West less white and furthering degenerating it ? No you stupid selfish bitches are myopic and only care about what is in front of your face etc.. that is one of the fundamental flaws of women : they are myopic, like yourself. Fuck the the nation's future in the form of kids because at least you can theoretically become a corporate executive right ?

[Sikeliot]

Feminism should focus less on petty things ("OMG I can't wear a skirt without men making comments, I'm so0o0o0o0o oppressed omg respect my special snowflake syndrome or you're oppressing me") and more on the fact that women in South Asia get acid thrown on their faces, that minority women in the US earn less than white women, and that Saudi women cannot drive.

[King Claus]

feminism is more of a mental disease than reality in the west ;) You feminazi's should fuck off to the middle east and help your muslim sisters against the sexist oppressors from there :P

[NatiaCutie]

feminism is more of a mental disease than reality in the west ;) You feminazi's should fuck off to the middle east and help your muslim sisters against the sexist oppressors from there :P

Hilarious to see a racist dinlo telling people they are crazy. I've seen it all.

[StonyArabia]

I have nothing against it in fact I like it.

[Chad Thundercock]

In a feminist world, a sub8 male looking at a female counts as sexual harassment.

[NatiaCutie]

In a feminist world, a sub8 male looking at a female counts as sexual harassment.

:picard2:

[King Claus]

Hilarious to see a racist dinlo telling people they are crazy. I've seen it all.
haha downie. who taught you that gypsie language? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dinlo all I can say to you is : fuck off to the middle east, take inquiring mind with you, and never return.

[NatiaCutie]

haha downie. who taught you that gypsie language? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dinlo all I can say to you is : fuck off to the middle east, take inquiring mind with you, and never return.

First, learn to use a dictionary. There are different meanings for a reason.
From your link:


2
dinlo`

Dinlo is a term used in the Portsmouth area for someone who is thick or stupid, perhaps of naval origin. Derivatives: Dinney
"Shut your face you dinlo", "When I said that they all looked at me as if I was being dinney"`

Second, I live in my country, and you are just a sad racist foreigner who has nothing here, and no legitimacy to say anything.
You are 0% British :)

[King Claus]

First, learn to use a dictionary. There are different meanings for a reason.
From your link:



Second, I live in my country, and you are just a sad racist foreigner who has nothing here, and no legitimacy to say anything.
You are 0% British :):laugh: doesn't take away the fact that you use gypsie language and feminazi logic to "win" your arguments :puke: you're still a gypsie , and your passport should be burned.

[Aodhan]

I dislike because:
https://ebrael.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/protesto-de-vadias-feministas-quebram-imagens-sacras-e-ultrajam-cristc3a3os.jpg?w=658&h=658&crop=1
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2LTT_4NYcMA/UfRQfhGtBPI/AAAAAAAAAec/S2tPXBIl5hg/s1600/25.jpg

*Brazilian feminists*

[NatiaCutie]

:laugh: doesn't take away the fact that you use gypsie language and feminazi logic to "win" your arguments :puke: you're still a gypsie , and your passport should be burned.

English is my language, and I use a lot of Portsmouth slang since I like my city.
It is not your language, so it explains why you're so easily confused about the words :)

Just as I don't go out to tell you how to speak your atrocious Dutch language,don't dare try to tell me how to speak English. I speak it natively, you don't.

Your opinion doesn't matter. You're not British, it is not your place to comment.
I am a British person and that is the end of it.

[King Claus]

English is my language, and I use a lot of Portsmouth slang since I like my city.
It is not your language, so it explains why you're so easily confused about the words :)

Just as I don't go out to tell you how to speak your atrocious Dutch language,don't dare try to tell me how to speak English. I speak it natively, you don't.

Your opinion doesn't matter. You're not British, it is not your place to comment.
I am a British person and that is the end of it.
Who said that it was about brittain, anyway? Brittain means nothing to me, and it never will. I never was trying to teach you your own language, and your definition of the word dinlo has basically the same meaning as the link I have provided you with:picard1:You're probably just having a psychotic epsiode and you should there for visit your psycho-therapist, dear. I'd add to that they I firmly believe that your passport should be burned by any means necessary. You are not only a danger to the native population of brittain, but also to your self.

[NatiaCutie]

Who said that it was about brittain, anyway? Brittain means nothing to me, and it never will. I never was trying to teach you your own language, and your definition of the word dinlo has basically the same meaning as the link I have provided you with:picard1:You're probably just having a psychotic epsiode and you should there for visit your psycho-therapist, dear. I'd add to that they I firmly believe that your passport should be burned by any means necessary. You are not only a danger to the native population of brittain, but also to your self.

You can't even write properly.
It's Britain by the way, not Brittain.

If you don't care for the UK, why do you come here to tell me to leave it? It's my birth country and the place where I've always lived. I do care for it :)

[Mortimer]

I dont dislike feminism, its a good idea

[King Claus]

You can't even write properly.
It's Britain by the way, not Brittain.

If you don't care for the UK, why do you come here to tell me to leave it? It's my birth country and the place where I've always lived. I do care for it :)
Lol. I told you to leave europe to fight for your islamic sisters in the middle east, which you apparantly don't give a fuck about ;) seriously, why can't you just leave us normal folks alone and do something usefull like fighting for the rights of muslim women instead? I'd love to see you run your filthy mouth to a big bearded muslim , though :laugh:

[Anthony PV]

@NadiaCutie: I don't know much about feminism, I'm not really affected by its effects so I don't have an opinion on the subject. But after browsing this thread and reading your posts, I think the number one reason why people dislike feminists (and members of other 'victim groups') is because they behave like 'insufferable prima-donnas': 'WAH! WAH! WAH! My boo-boo is the only boo-boo that hurts! My pain is the only pain that matters! My suffering is the only suffering that exists! Because I was (supposedly) exploited/oppressed/persecuted, the world has to revolve around me and cater to my every whim!' :p

No wonder why people dislike them... :p

[Oneeye]

What can feminism do for me?

[Collide]

What can feminism do for me?

Absolutely nothing.

[rhiannon]

I don't like what it has become for some people: exclusionary instead of inclusionary. I fully support first wave and I believe people should have equal rights regardless of identity.


I don't have much against it except for the more militant and fanatical approaches. But I am against most displays of radical and overly sanctimonious behavior.


Part of the reason why more women are becomming professionals is because they need to do so to support themselves. But wouldn't you want the person who best at a job to do it? what if it's a woman? There are some qualities that can't or are hard to be picked up and what if the person who has those qualities is a woman and not a man?

All of these.

As officially, the oldest broad posting in this forum, I remember shit most of the other women won't. At least the Americans won't.

As a young girl, my next door neighbor once posed this riddle (http://www.bu.edu/today/2014/bu-research-riddle-reveals-the-depth-of-gender-bias/) for me to solve.

I couldn't come to the correct conclusion.

That's how shit used to be, and I have NO wish to ever see us return to those days. I don't even remember all of how bad things really used to be for women in all honesty, but I do remember enough.

The generation just before mine fought like hell to enable equal rights for women. That there are those young women out there today, all who've taken those equal rights for granted, who would see those rights diminished, or perhaps even eradicated?

It's a damn slap in the face to their female predecessors who risked their lives fighting for those very rights.

[Melina]

But only an idiot will suggest it's because women are too dumb. It's an objective reality of our physiological and mental differences.

Exactly. I don't believe in feminism like I don't believe in machismo. Both are a waste of time and are unsustainable in this world. All these ideologies will do is put one gender above the other. It is belittling one genders role in society. No gender is superior to the other one. We are just different.




Do you realize some societies developing slower than others? It took Western countries centuries to get where they are and that means some other countries are centuries behind in their social development. Forcing specific controversial elements of Western society on these will create massive social backlash and there very likely will be blood, a lot of it.
Most progressives don't see it that way. Take in account that most people that talk about imposing this type of belief towards other countries seem to not have a clue of what is going on around them. Look at what just happened in Denmark yesterday. European progressives imposing their views to these countries will only fuel more attacks in European soil.




Here we have a subtle way of saying 'All men are insensitive bastards incapable of empathy'. A baseless generalization again and this time quite offensive one I should say.
Yes sir. But that is part of the male bashing culture.

[Collide]

“The feminist movement was created to allow ugly women access to the mainstream of society” - Rush Limbaugh

[Hong Key]

Emma Watson’s Banal Feminist Hypocrisy (https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/emma-watsons-banal-feminist-hypocrisy/)
September 25, 2014 by CH

Feminists… they just can’t keep their stories straight. Here’s Emma Watson, quoted at two different times, contradicting herself with an assurance that makes one wonder if she has an evil twin.

https://heartiste.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/emma.jpg?w=703&h=180

The first quote, from this past Tuesday’s gender equality speech (guffaw), reads “If men don’t have to be aggressive in order to be accepted, women won’t feel compelled to be submissive.”

(Never mind that this assertion makes absolutely no sense if you think about it for longer than a second.)

The second attribution, from two years ago, reads “But now Emma Watson has said she doubts she will date a British man ever again – because they are too shy. […] Instead an American will come up to her straight away and suggest a date – a boldness she finds attractive.”

#HeForShe? More like #HeForHeadCases.

Feminism long ago abandoned any pretense to logic or internal consistency. It’s nothing but feels all day, every day, with an extra helping of feels. Watson’s rationalization hamster, like most rodents residing in the brains of her callow ilk, is 700% thigh and 800% glutes. A swole spinner on the wheel of ego-masturbation.

Not that more evidence was needed, but once more, from the top and with throat cleared:

DON’T LISTEN TO WHAT WOMEN SAY, WATCH WHAT THEY DO.

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/emma-watsons-banal-feminist-hypocrisy/

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.608016070756074040&pid=15.1&P=0
Confused women flashes Eye of Horus

[Grenzland]

I dont dislike feminism, its a good idea

Is it hard to see the discrimination of women every day in this oppressive country called Austria?

[Jarla87]

Is it hard to see the discrimination of women every day in this oppressive country called Austria?

I'm in Austria at the Moment and would like to give you an example of the oppression that`s taking place. If you take a look at the children's textbooks in School you will read the following:

"Schülerinnen und Schüler"
"Leserinnen und Leser"
" Mechanikerinnen und Mechaniker"
"Schweißerinnen und Schweißer"

usw.

XD ... weil es ja so viele Mechanikerinnen und Schweißerinnen gibt.

So ein Gender- Brainwash-Quark!

I did not read newer German textbooks but I wouldn't wonder if they are the same.
What Comes next? I mean it`s pretty discriminating for inter-, trans- and whateversexuals to differ only between two genders.

[Grenzland]

Mit TheBrownBear/Gigolo wirst du noch viel Spaß haben, der fühlt sich öfter mal diskriminiert obwohl es dafür einfach keinen Grund gibt. :D

[Kazimiera]

I think before one can made a judgement and say they like or dislike feminism, you have to go into history.

First wave feminism, which started in the early 1800's and went through to the 1920's, focused mainly on suffrage and voting rights for women. It also focused on allowing women to be an independent legal entity and allowing her to manage her own financial affairs. Women became able to initiate divorce proceedings. It was the beginning of equal schooling and the first female doctor came from this time period. It also managed to do away with practices like Chinese foot binding (which was outlawed in 1902).

Second wave feminism's foucus, starting in the 1960's, was on allowing women equal entry into the workforce, equal pay and ending sex discrimination within the workplace. Reproductive rights formed a large part of the second-wave with the advent of the Pill. Domestic violence and rape within marriage were also core issues which were addressed by this movement.

Third wave feminism, which we have today, somehow seems to lack a goal. Yes, it does seem to gravitate to marginalized issues like gender-queerness and racial equality but I get the feeling that third-wave feminists themselves don't know what they want. Whereas the first two movements had a clear goal, the third wave just seems to flop about like a fish out of water, making a big noise and achieving very little. Also, I feel that many of the so-called "feminists" today don't know what they want and call themselves "feminists" because of the controversy and shock-factor around it. Whatever goals the movement may have (or had) are being undermined by the so-called feminists themselves. Instead of looking to within the movement and bringing forth issues as a focused group (as the first two movements did), they randomly grab at issues on the outside and in doing so undermine their own credibility. In other words, third-movement feminists are their own worst enemy.

[Musso]

I'm in Austria at the Moment and would like to give you an example of the oppression that`s taking place. If you take a look at the children's textbooks in School you will read the following:

"Schülerinnen und Schüler"
"Leserinnen und Leser"
" Mechanikerinnen und Mechaniker"
"Schweißerinnen und Schweißer"

usw.

XD ... weil es ja so viele Mechanikerinnen und Schweißerinnen gibt.

So ein Gender- Brainwash-Quark!

I did not read newer German textbooks but I wouldn't wonder if they are the same.
What Comes next? I mean it`s pretty discriminating for inter-, trans- and whateversexuals to differ only between two genders.

"oppression" ? Give me a break. The oppression comes from gender equality fanatics that try to impose their contoured, radical views of social justice on society.

[Unome]

Feminism:

Cut the wage of a man in half. Give it to his wife. Now both husband and wife work in the factory, for the same wage.

2 workers for the price of 1.

The factory will then bring the husband and wife's children into the "publik school", who teaches the child how to be wage slaves, just like daddy and mommy.

The "pro-feminists" are also "pro-capitalists". You will know this immediately by everybody who wants or approves of "equal pay".


Equal pay is equal slavery.

[Linebacker]

I don't really have any problem with feminism.I haven't met all the feminists in the world thats for sure,but I do know a few,including one specific woman,around 10 years older than me,which I am in very good terms with(I haven't slept with her).

The thing is that these kind of women don't really hate every man like it is perceived.They have a lot of respect for men who know how to be men.They only dislike a certain type of men,like this woman explained to me, - slobs,unhandy,that like to do nothing more than come back from work and sit on the sofa with some alcohol and expect a woman to tend to their useless asses,and use them as a maid and cook rather than their partner.

When you think about it the issue is really solid one.Lots of men in today's society are useless slobs who don't know how to wash their own socks and do their own laundry,put their shit in order as I would say it.Self-efficiency is the word here.The ability to be able to tend after yourself and do your own doing,not expecting somebody to do it for you(In this case,your woman),when its you who have to do it.

[just]

Because Feminism is not for the equal opportunity, but for the making a society as a mass.

[robar]

http://www.theduluthmodel.org/pdf/NIJ%20Practical%20Implications.pdf

PAGE 15:

"SPECIAL REPORT / JUNE 09
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF CURRENT DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE RESEARCH
13
NIJ
Numerous studies confirm that a large proportion of abusers flee the scene.
Only one study has
looked at differences in records of those who fled the scene and those who didn‟t.)
2.12
Who is the primary/predominant aggressor?
A substantial percentage of victims of domestic violence hit their perpetrators back. [
72
] In
Massachusetts, 37.3 percent of the female victims fought back in the incident in which their
male abuser was arrested. However, most (
59
.1 percent) of those females who fought back
found that this made their abuser more violent. [
23
] A substantial number of victims will not self
-
disclose their victimization. [
93
] Consequently, determination of primary or predominant
aggressor may not be self
-
evident. Nonetheless, data on police actio
n in 2,819 jurisdictions in
19 states reveal that only 1.9 percent of incidents resulted in dual arrests for intimate partner
violence and intimidation. In other words, less than 4 percent of all intimate partner arrests were
dual arrests in which law enfo
rcement could not determine a primary or predominant aggressor.
[
117
]
Studies suggest that officers‟ determination of primary or predominant aggressor is particular
ly
problematic when the intimate partner violence occurs between same
-
sex couples.
Although
police are equally likely to make arrests in same
-
sex as in heterosexual partner abuse cases, a
study of more than 1,000 same
-
sex intimate partner violence reports
from departments across
the country found that officers were substantially more likely to arrest both parties in same
-
sex
cases. Specifically, 26.1 percent of female same
-
sex cases and 27.3 percent of male same
-
sex
cases resulted in dual arrests, compared
to only 0.8 percent with male offenders and female
victims, and 3 percent with female offenders and male victims. [
175
]
Research on the impact of primary aggressor policies, either mandated by state statute or by
individual law
enforcement agencies, reveals that such policies significantly reduce the
percentage of dual arrests from an average of 9 percent to 2 percent of domestic violence
arrests. [
117
]
Implications for
Law Enforcement
If the rate of dual arrests exceeds that found on average across the country, law enforcement
departments should develop and implement specific primary aggressor policies and protocols.
(Research basis: The most significant dual
-
arrest stu
dy was based on examination of all assault
and intimidation cases in the 2000 National Incident
-
Based Reporting System (NIBRS)
database as well as more detailed examination of these data from 25 diverse police
departments across the country.)
Implications
for Prosecutors
If presented with a dual
-
arrest case, prosecutors should conduct an independent analysis to
determine the predominant aggressor and proceed against that suspect alone. Determination of
primary/predominant aggressor is briefly described by t
he American Prosecutors Research
Institute on its Web site:
http://www.ndaa.org/apri/programs/vawa/dv_101.html
. (Research
basis:
The most significant dual
-
arrest study documenting its rari
ty was based on examination of
all assault and intimidation cases in the 2000 NIBRS database as well as more detailed
examination of these data from 25 diverse police departments across the country.)
Implications for Judges
In dual
-
arrest cases, judges sho
uld insist
that
prosecutors provide evidence that one of the
parties was the primary or predominant aggressor and the other the victim. This may be
SPECIAL REPORT / JUNE 09
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF CURRENT DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE RESEARCH
14
NIJ
particularly important
,
as advocates caution that female victims who are arrested along with
their abusers m
ay nonetheless plead guilty in order to be able to return home to care for minor
children. Furthermore, it appears that law enforcement finds it particularly challenging to
determine the primary/predominant aggressor with same
-
sex couples. (Research basis:
The
most significant dual
-
arrest study was based on examination of all assault and intimidation
cases in the 2000 NIBRS database as well as more detailed examination of these data from 25
diverse police departments across the country.)
SPECIAL REPORT / JUNE 09
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF CURRENT DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE RESEARCH
15
NIJ
3.
Perpetrator Ch
aracteristics
3.1
What is their gender?
Although some
sociological research [
202
] based on self
-
reporting finds equal rates of male and
female partner
conflict
(including mostly minor physical assaults), behavior that is likel
y to
violate most state and federal criminal and civil (protective order) statutes is
typically
perpetrated by males. [
153
]
Perpetrators that come to the attention of the criminal justice system are overwhelmingly male.
For
example, 86 percent of abusers brought to court for restraining orders in Massachusetts
were male, [
2
] as were those arrested for domestic violence in California [
228
] and Charlotte,
N.C. (as much a
s 97.4 percent for the most serious cases). [
68
] In Rhode Island, 92 percent of
abusers placed on probation for domestic violence were male. [
68
,
141
] A Cincinnati cour
t study
found 86.5 percent of 2,670 misdemeanor domestic
violence court defendants to be male. [
11
]
The overwhelming majority of their victims were women: 84 percent in both Charlotte, N.C., [
68
]
an
d Berkeley, Calif. [
228
] The 2000 NIBRS multistate study found that 81 percent of the
suspects were male and their victims were female. [
117
]
Jurisdictions with high
er numbers of female suspects and male victims usually include higher
numbers of non
-
intimate family
violence cases. [
139
,
196
] The latter typically involve older
victims and their adult children
perpetrators. A study of elder abuse across the state of Rhode
Island, for example, found that two
-
thirds of elder female victims were abused by family
members as opposed to intimate partners, including 46.2 percent by adult sons and 26.9
percent by adult
daughters, 8.6 percent by grandsons and 1.6 percent by granddaughters. [
139
]
Implications for Law Enforcement
If the ratio of male to female suspects and victims differs substantially from those found above,
departments should
be alert to potential gender bias in their response to domestic violence.
Ongoing training and supervision can address overrepresentation of female versus male
arrests. (Research basis:
Multiple studies of abusers and their victims brought to the attentio
n of
the criminal justice system
[
including civil protective orders
]
confirm the gender ratio as opposed
to studies focusing on non
-
intimate and family conflict.)
Implications for Prosecutors
Prosecutors should be alert to gender bias in the response of l
ocal law enforcement agencies
and re
-
screen cases if the percentage of female suspects accused of abusing male victims
exceeds that commonly found across the nation. (Research basis: Multiple studies of abusers
and their victims brought to the attention of
the criminal justice system
[
including civil protective
orders
]
confirm the gender ratio as opposed to studies focusing on non
-
intimate and family
conflict.)
Implications for Judges
If
,
upon reviewing domestic
violence dockets, judges find much higher rat
es of female
-
on
-
male
abuse cases than those typically found across the country as a whole, they should be alert to
potential gender bias on the part of police and/or prosecutors and ensure that they are
presented with sufficient evidence to confirm the cor
rect designation of victims and their
abusers. (Research basis:
Multiple studies of abusers and their victims brought to the attention "

[Mortimer]

Mit TheBrownBear/Gigolo wirst du noch viel Spaß haben, der fühlt sich öfter mal diskriminiert obwohl es dafür einfach keinen Grund gibt. :D

i didnt said austria opresses females or anyone else, i just said feminism is a good idea i spoke generally.

[Grenzland]

And why? What will modern feminism change?

[NatiaCutie]

I don't really have any problem with feminism.I haven't met all the feminists in the world thats for sure,but I do know a few,including one specific woman,around 10 years older than me,which I am in very good terms with(I haven't slept with her).

The thing is that these kind of women don't really hate every man like it is perceived.They have a lot of respect for men who know how to be men.They only dislike a certain type of men,like this woman explained to me, - slobs,unhandy,that like to do nothing more than come back from work and sit on the sofa with some alcohol and expect a woman to tend to their useless asses,and use them as a maid and cook rather than their partner.

When you think about it the issue is really solid one.Lots of men in today's society are useless slobs who don't know how to wash their own socks and do their own laundry,put their shit in order as I would say it.Self-efficiency is the word here.The ability to be able to tend after yourself and do your own doing,not expecting somebody to do it for you(In this case,your woman),when its you who have to do it.

It's so nice to be able to read a man like you :)

[NatiaCutie]

And why? What will modern feminism change?

Banning street harassment (see my signature)
Taxing heavily and discouraging the objectification of women's bodies, in beauty pageants and in advertisement.
Having women occupy more political positions and manager positions in their workplace, so they can be leaders as well.
Fighting discrimination against the LGBT community, so they can openly live their sexuality, without fear of being discriminated. They would have all the rights like the rest of us have, marriage and adoption included.

[FeederOfRavens]

Banning street harassment (see my signature)

Already happened. All the Women has to do is complain and there's consequences abound.



Taxing heavily and discouraging the objectification of women's bodies, in beauty pageants and in advertisement.

Limiting freedom of expression.


Having women occupy more political positions and manager positions in their workplace, so they can be leaders as well.

What if women aren't interested in being forced too compete with males at every level? Anyways, history has consistently shown the vast majority of leaders to be male.

[Grenzland]

Banning street harassment (see my signature)
Taxing heavily and discouraging the objectification of women's bodies, in beauty pageants and in advertisement.
Having women occupy more political positions and manager positions in their workplace, so they can be leaders as well.
Fighting discrimination against the LGBT community, so they can openly live their sexuality, without fear of being discriminated. They would have all the rights like the rest of us have, marriage and adoption included.

Think whatever you want, the biggest problem of modern Feminism is that it's mostly followed by weak personalities.

[NatiaCutie]

Think whatever you want, the biggest problem of modern Feminism is that it's mostly followed by weak personalities.

Kind of ironic coming from a nazi character that worships a lunatic man like Hitler, like he was a God. Obeying, and obeying. Strong personalities, yeah.

[Grenzland]

Kind of ironic coming from a nazi character that worships a lunatic man like Hitler, like he was a God. Obeying, and obeying. Strong personalities, yeah.

:lol:

Haha I almost forgot your kind doesn't discuss. What's next? Calling me racist and sexist and you think you won this discussion? :lol:

So why do you know I worship Hitler? Or don't you have any arguments and you just try to make me look bad? :D

[NatiaCutie]

:lol:

Haha I almost forgot your kind doesn't discuss. What's next? Calling me racist and sexist and you think you won this discussion? :lol:

So why do you know I worship Hitler? Or don't you have any arguments and you just try to make me look bad? :D

You are not only racist, but you are also a murder apologist, seeing as you thumbed up a post that called for the murder of a woman who has done nothing wrong in her life. The fact you believe normal people would take you seriously after that kind of lunatic thing, is just mind-boggling.

For one, your politics tab says you support nationalist socialism, that's simply the long name of nazis. Last I heard, the law in Germany doesn't take too kindly for people worshipping the fascist relics of the past.

[Grenzland]

You are not only racist, but you are also a murder apologist, seeing as you thumbed up a post that called for the murder of a woman who has done nothing wrong in her life. The fact you believe normal people would take you seriously after that kind of lunatic thing, is just mind-boggling.

For one, your politics tab says you support nationalist socialism, that's simply the long name of nazis. Last I heard, the law in Germany doesn't take too kindly for people worshipping the fascist relics of the past.

So you following the libtard pattern. 0 arguments just accusations. :D

Yes, I thumbed up Vasas comment. Because it was meant to offend you and it worked. Because jumping every time someone wants you to do so. :)
And hey, we aren't stuffy, you know. :D (You are by the way)

A combination of Socialism and Nationalism isn't necessary National Socialism. But hey, how should you know that? And maybe the better question: Why should you know that?
You don't use or need arguments. Just try to say I'm a racist and it feels good for you. :)

[Alessio]

Because it's a sign of them feeling oppressed.

[NatiaCutie]

If I work all day and she only works at home (house work is the easiest work) I'm not lifting a finger around the house. If I'm the one bringing in the money that puts a roof over her head and food in her belly I'm going to chill out from the grind. If both work outside the home then I can understand splitting house responsibilities down the middle but I'll laugh in a woman's face if she's home all day doing at best four hours of work while watching TV and expects me to help out. Shut your mouth. I'm tired (not you, Hunter, but to my hypothetical nagging wife).

Your marriage will probably not last very long if you talk to her like that :)

[Dandelion]

Your marriage will probably not last very long if you talk to her like that :)

And while at it, she must prepare his lunchbox for his next day at work. :rolleyes:

[The Happy Warrior]

I don't dislike feminism, however I do dislike the fact that supporting legalized abortion on demand has become a litmus test for feminism and the radical feminists who've made the term synonymous with the likes of Andrea Dworkin.

[Tchek]

Banning street harassment (see my signature)
Inapplicable. The concept of "street harassement" is arbritrary and is up to the "victim"'s own perception of private space, which also depends on her mood. A law should be precise.
Abstract and arbitrary laws are the open door for fake accusation, double standards, diffamations and plain reduction of basic freedom.

Taxing heavily and discouraging the objectification of women's bodies, in beauty pageants and in advertisement.
Not that I disagree (or not) but the objectification of women's bodies is an issue of neoliberal capitalism, not of patriarchy. Feminists tend to not get that.
The irony is that the family is a protection from this capitalist objectification (the lone "homo-economicus" being its most vulnerable victim); that's why Muslims agree with your point here.

Having women occupy more political positions and manager positions in their workplace, so they can be leaders as well.
How would you achieve that? Women occupying political/manager positions is up to their own will and ability to do it. You don't think so? Why do you think there are less women in those positions? (Genuine question)

Fighting discrimination against the LGBT community, so they can openly live their sexuality, without fear of being discriminated. They would have all the rights like the rest of us have, marriage and adoption included.
This pseudo "LGTB" community (fake category to divide society further) can openly live their sexuality. However they shouldn't be able to adopt. Adoption should be effective under very strict rules (a man and a woman, without criminal records and financially able to raise the kid).
If you remove every moral criteria for adoption (the only factor left being money), you turn adoption into a MARKET (same with abortion BTW or anything else). The objectification of women's bodies shouldn't compensated with the objectification of babies.

Besides, an issue with homosexuality is that it is unprovable. It's so intimate a characteristic that if you claim to be homosexual, no one could prove you right or wrong. What would prevent two pedophiles to pretend to be homosexuals, and adopt?

[Fortis in Arduis]

Ok... I know a man who has married into a Zambian family. Very traditional, religious Christian, and also indigenous Bemba practises.

Men are not allowed to lift a finger in the home in their culture. Women wash, shave and dress their men, and this is perfect for him.

Men often possess a creative genius that is rarely found in a woman. Alongside that, there is a need, sometimes, to be looked after.

Of course, I support equal rights for women, and, women must be paid equally for equal effort and skill.

What disturbs me is the symbiotic-parasitical relationship between women's position in the workplace, and their induction into wage and debt slavery culture. If this is the most significant achievement in making women equal to men, then feminism has failed, and it was a nasty cynical piece of social engineering.

We know that women are strong, more emotionally resilient, and just as capable as men in many roles, but the woman's unique role in parenting has been overlooked, and I suppose what I am saying is that feminists need to be more radical.

Some cultures are naturally more matriarchal. Irish culture against Anglo culture is a good example of this, but matriarchy and patriarchy are one, just as we, humans, are all things good and bad.

Women suckered into living consumerist and materialist roles is an appalling social trend, and an equality that society does not need.

[robar]

Banning street harassment

Banning street harrament would be against freedom of expression or freedom of speech.If i see a nice butt in the street I usually shout nice ass baby to share my viewpoint to everyone, and neither the state nor anyone else should have the rights to stop me, because then there is no freedom os speech.

[щрбл]

I support feminism when it comes to work opportunities and equal salaries, workers rights, etc. That is already the case as there is a certain number of laws taking care of it.

However trying to regulate people's behaviour in their private lives is plain idiotic.

[NatiaCutie]

Banning street harrament would be against freedom of expression or freedom of speech.If i see a nice butt in the street I usually shout nice ass baby to share my viewpoint to everyone, and neither the state nor anyone else should have the rights to stop me, because then there is no freedom os speech.

Freedom of speech isn't absolute, and it isn't a placeholder excuse to behave like a tosser. :)

[wvwvw]

http://img0.joyreactor.cc/pics/post/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BC%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B7%D 0%BC-%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D 0%B7%D0%BC-%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D 0%B3%D0%B8%D1%8F-276347.jpeg

[robar]

Freedom of speech isn't absolute, and it isn't a placeholder excuse to behave like a tosser. :)

So in your opinion those caricaturists that made those caricatures about the prophet , should not have the right to do it?Remember they caused emotional disstress to many muslim believers. So what is your opinion freedom of speech is absolute or not?

[wvwvw]

So in your opinion those caricaturists that made those caricatures about the prophet , should not have the right to do it?Remember they caused emotional disstress to many muslim believers. So what is your opinion freedom of speech is absolute or not?

Sexual harassment is mobbing, making fun of beliefs is not. You are free to express your misogyny but you are not free to harass people. Just like it is not ok to harass Muslims on the streets but it is ok to criticize or mock their beliefs. Can you undestand the difference?

[NatiaCutie]

So in your opinion those caricaturists that made those caricatures about the prophet , should not have the right to do it?Remember they caused emotional disstress to many muslim believers. So what is your opinion freedom of speech is absolute or not?

No, it isn't absolute. Of course it isn't. Silly.

[Aviator]

No, it isn't absolute. Of course it isn't. Silly.

Perfect. No free speech for Feminists then?

[NatiaCutie]

Perfect. No free speech for Feminists then?

Feminists don't harm anyone with their demonstrations and their social activities :)
Nobody is hated for who they are, only discrimination and hate are fought.

Only hateful ideas that want to harm people, like racism or Islamic fundamentalism should be banned. People who have a different skin tone, or who are atheist or part of the LGBT community could end up suffering because of them. Protecting them is more important than freedom of speech in this case.

[Unome]

Feminists don't harm anyone with their demonstrations and their social activities :)
Nobody is hated for who they are, only discrimination and hate are fought.

Only hateful ideas that want to harm people, like racism or Islamic fundamentalism should be banned. People who have a different skin tone, or who are atheist or part of the LGBT community could end up suffering because of them. Protecting them is more important than freedom of speech in this case.
Don't be a hypocrite Natia, the very idea of "feminism" discriminates based on gender.

Your existence is a discrimination against men.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

Sexual harassment is mobbing, making fun of beliefs is not. You are free to express your misogyny but you are not free to harass people. Just like it is not ok to harass Muslims on the streets but it is ok to criticize or mock their beliefs. Can you undestand the difference?

I know your post was not in response to me but, whatever, it is not like we are at a place of employment or something so I'll speak to women, here, how I want within reason. Sexual harassment only makes sense within the confines of places like work and school. As far as speaking to women how I want : why don't you drop your pants and panties and then lay over my knees so I can spank you proper ? :dev

I actually don't even know what you look like -- you could be a hideous beast for all I know but I'll take that gamble anyway feminists need a good spanking.

[Desaix DeBurgh]

Feminists don't harm anyone with their demonstrations and their social activities :)
Nobody is hated for who they are, only discrimination and hate are fought.

Here are some definitions for you :

Only hateful ideas that want to harm people, like racism or Islamic fundamentalism should be banned. People who have a different skin tone, or who are atheist or part of the LGBT community could end up suffering because of them. Protecting them is more important than freedom of speech in this case.


Feminist: A man-eating tigress; a female with all the vices of women and none of the virtues; a woman who couldn't find a man and couldn't even get work as a whore.

Free speech: Offensive speech.

Racial slur: An unpleasant truth.

Racism: The desire to live, work, marry and mingle with one's own kind: A nearly-universal desire and virtual law of nature, often expressed as 'Birds of a feather flock together', and denied only by liberals who live and work in areas much too expensive to have any more than a token number of minorities. Racism is so ingrained and universal that it is reflected not once but twice in our language: The word kind (type) and kind (nice) have the same origin, as does the word like (similar) and like (appreciate), from which we infer that we like those whom we are like, and we are kind to those of our own kind.

Discrimination: (1) Preferring the desirable to the undesirable; (2) A policy insufficient to prevent the success of immigrants such as Jews, Asians and Irish, just as affirmative action is a policy insufficient to prevent the failure of blacks.

[Porpolita]

I'm really sorry, but ...

How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?

Who needs a light when you have a glass ceiling

[NatiaCutie]

Your existence is a discrimination against men.

LOL
Stop drinking moosh.

[NatiaCutie]

I'm really sorry, but ...

How many feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?

Who needs a light when you have a glass ceiling

Sure, funny joke. I guess the fact women earn less all the time is also me being crazy.

[Grenzland]

Sure, funny joke. I guess the fact women earn less all the time is also me being crazy.

Exactly. At least in Germany. :)

[Unome]

LOL
Stop drinking moosh.
C'mon Natia, I know you can do much better than this!

Show me the Equality!

[Grenzland]

Yeah dance for us! :D

[NatiaCutie]

Yeah dance for us! :D

I am not interested in you, even if you are interested in me.

[Grenzland]

I am not interested in you, even if you are interested in me.

Oh you do sweetheart, you do all the time! :lol:

What will be your next great argument? Am I harassing you sexually because I called you sweetheart? Or am I an eternal depressed virgin?

Oh I'm so excited :D

[NatiaCutie]

Oh you do sweetheart, you do all the time! :lol:

What will be your next great argument? Am I harassing you sexually because I called you sweetheart? Or am I an eternal depressed virgin?

Oh I'm so excited :D

Dunno. I don't care enough to know someone like you.
Maybe you truly are and that's why you suggest it openly.

[Sarmatian]

Feminists don't harm anyone with their demonstrations and their social activities :)
Nobody is hated for who they are, only discrimination and hate are fought.

Maybe feminists as individuals don't harm anyone but feminism as a social process does a lot of harm. It's lagerly to blame for crisis of family institute in last decade.


Only hateful ideas that want to harm people, like racism or Islamic fundamentalism should be banned.

Ever heard of female chauvinism? Feminism can be radicalised exactly the same way patriotism and moderate nationalism taken to extreme ends up with racism and nazism. That's what we see today more and more often. Those female chauvinists could be few but they are loud and highly visible. They alter the image of the whole feminism in an ugly repulsive way.

To be honest you express some elements of female chauvinist yourself. The moment someone stepping out of your very own frame of acceptable norm you start spewing derogatory labels towards that person in an obvious attempt to degrade him and present your position as superior. At the end it doesn't matter how well-intended you are but the image you creating yourself that form people's opinions.

As far as I can see your goal here is not to find the truth but to prove your point.

[robar]

Sexual harassment is mobbing, making fun of beliefs is not. You are free to express your misogyny but you are not free to harass people. Just like it is not ok to harass Muslims on the streets but it is ok to criticize or mock their beliefs. Can you undestand the difference?

Thats not a misogyny but simply sharing my observation, that what that neewspaper did was harrassing muslims, not just mocking their beliefs.

[щрбл]

I have talked to a number of engaged feminists and none of them had children. All of them had well-paid non-manual jobs. Without exceptions. I think they simply detest their biological laying hen function. I wonder what causes this kind of self hate.

[Hong Key]

I have talked to a number of engaged feminists and none of them had children. All of them had well-paid non-manual jobs. Without exceptions. I think they simply detest their biological laying hen function. I wonder what causes this kind of self hate.

social justice is poisonous

They make people hate themselves

White kids are sorry for being white

Straight people feel guilty for being straight

Cis persons feel bad for not have dysphoria

You have people thinking their sexual assaults didn’t count because they were not as bad as others

Thin people are told their experiences with bullying don’t count and they can’t be hurt

And so forth

I felt rage and guilt for being with a white man rather than supporting men of color. And as one can tell, I have one foot in each world

Shit like this needs to stop

Feminists, radfems, sjws,haes supporters, (Anti-Whites) people who support this shit need to stop

http://takingofforionsbelt.tumblr.com/post/107839433557/tumblr-social-justice-is-poisonous

[Shepherd]

because this is how life goes in a feminist society

http://i.imgur.com/BqfZL6Y.png

[Velda]

I have talked to a number of engaged feminists and none of them had children. All of them had well-paid non-manual jobs. Without exceptions. I think they simply detest their biological laying hen function. I wonder what causes this kind of self hate.

They have a problem with the concept "mother" because of their own mothers. In feminist's eyes there always is one strong and one weak part. They consider the females to be the weak part, when being a mother, because their own mothers were too kind and friendly and shortchanged. Not willing to be like that, the feminists daughter trys the best to be superior. She knows, that motherhood could change her live, and as she wants to stay independant, she looks down on mothers in general.
I dont like feminists, because they and their theories won't help me: As a mom of four kinds, I won't leave my husband, even if he tells me every single day, that he does not like the meals I cook. A feminist would not understand that, she would say: "Leave him, get a divorce, let him pay for the kids." She can talk like that, because she has no kids. She does not like me anyway, the feminist woman, if she tells me: "Get a divorce." - she truely wants me to be as lonly as she is herself and having lot's of trouble, so that she could think: "Oh, I myself, I got the right decision being childless." finfing joy in my misfortune.
So a feminist woman is not my friend. She behaves as a man. I don't need a woman to behave like that towards me.

[щрбл]

They have a problem with the concept "mother" because of their own mothers. In feminist's eyes there always is one strong and one weak part. they consider the females to be the weak part, when being a mother, because their mothers were too kind and friendly and shortchanged. Not willing to be like that, the feminists daughter trys the best to be superior. She knows, that motherhood could change her live, and as she wants to stay independant, she looks down on mothers.
I dont like feminists, because they and their theories won't help me: As a mom of four kinds, I won't leave my husband, even if he tells me every single day, that he does not like the meals I cook. A feminist would not understand that, she would say: "Leave him, get a divorce, let him pay for the kids." She can talk like that, because she has no kids. She does not like me anyway, the feminist woman, if she tells me: "Get a divorce." - she truely wants me to be as lonly as she herself is and having all die trouble, so that she thinks: "Oh, I got the right decision being childless." finfing joy in my misfortune.
So a feminist woman is not my friend. She behaves as a man. I don't need a woman to behave like that towards me.

I was merely pointing out that engaged feminists do not understand the normal people's every day issues. Having spent my teenage years with my mum only, I'd say a divorce is a good option. xD

[Velda]

I was merely pointing out that engaged feminists do not understand the normal people's every day issues.
That's true, because they don't have them - normal every day issues.
I don't like feminists, because they think, that they are the best (in her opinion), and no man is good enough for them.
So probably their perfect alpha-female-genes will evenish from this planet. Evolution will do the rest.:whistle::

[robar]

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/two-kids-sex-boy-goes-jail-becomes-sex-offender-girl-goes-free/

[NatiaCutie]

Maybe feminists as individuals don't harm anyone but feminism as a social process does a lot of harm. It's lagerly to blame for crisis of family institute in last decade.


Ever heard of female chauvinism? Feminism can be radicalised exactly the same way patriotism and moderate nationalism taken to extreme ends up with racism and nazism. That's what we see today more and more often. Those female chauvinists could be few but they are loud and highly visible. They alter the image of the whole feminism in an ugly repulsive way.

To be honest you express some elements of female chauvinist yourself. The moment someone stepping out of your very own frame of acceptable norm you start spewing derogatory labels towards that person in an obvious attempt to degrade him and present your position as superior. At the end it doesn't matter how well-intended you are but the image you creating yourself that form people's opinions.

As far as I can see your goal here is not to find the truth but to prove your point.

What family crisis are you talking about?
The only 'crisis' I see, is of oppressive structures that are against the interests of both women (who are now breaking free of the household breeder role they had), and those of the LGBT community (who were forced to hide their real feelings for fear of being discriminated).

Children are still born, people still marry, everybody falls in loves, falls out of love, and they live normally. Nothing bad is happening.

[NatiaCutie]

Thats not a misogyny but simply sharing my observation, that what that neewspaper did was harrassing muslims, not just mocking their beliefs.

You're not "sharing an observation" when you do street harassment on a woman. You're simply harassing.
Just like you cannot write in a journal "This bloke is a wanker" since it'd be defamation.

[Gustave H]

Modern feminists are an insult to real feminists. 'nuff said

[NatiaCutie]

Modern feminists are an insult to real feminists. 'nuff said

And what is the difference between the two??

[Gustave H]

And what is the difference between the two??

Real feminists advocate women's rights. You people are fucking feminazis. To you White men are subhuman, colored men are almost subhuman, and you want to rule the world with your evil ideas. Fuck off.

[NatiaCutie]

Real feminists advocate women's rights. You people are fucking feminazis. To you White men are subhuman, colored men are almost subhuman, and you want to rule the world with your evil ideas. Fuck off.

Ehmm... what?
I don't hate men, I make no distinction between white men and 'coloured' (not a polite term) men.
And I don't want to rule the world, I'm not made for that. I just want to contribute from my place to creating a better society :)

[Drakoblare]

Ehmm... what?
I don't hate men, I make no distinction between white men and 'coloured' (not a polite term) men.
And I don't want to rule the world, I'm not made for that. I just want to contribute from my place to creating a better society :)

You just need better dick.