Jump to content

Feminista's Vs Feminists.


Frank Todd
 Share

Recommended Posts

LOL. Yes. To be fair, you haven't given me any other impression of you, I know you like guns  ^_^

 

 

Lol, did you just call me an idiot? Don't you see how ridiculous this topic and your discussion is? You and like 4 other guys are the only ones on this thread. 

 

This is literally the stupidest discussion, and the way you are so mad about me telling you how stupid this topic is suggests you are way over invested into this hand job orgy. Y'all should just finish, wash your hands, and go back to having a real discussion on something that matters. 

 

If you want what you describe as the "circlejerk" to end, you could always you know, provide an opposing view, and involve yourself in the discussion. Otherwise, stop whining. All I hear is "wah wah these forums are a circlejerk everyone agrees wah wah", yet the people who complain about it don't contribute anything besides whining about that.

 

At least Aisha Greyjoy is actually trying to contribute to the discussion. You complain about this forum thread being an echo chamber yet you do nothing to solve the issue. I can't control the actions of other people, but I for one welcome people to disagree with me, as long as they can keep it civil and refrain from petty attacks on character, or not so subtle implications. Once that starts, I'll be the first to get into the mud and sling shit right back at you.

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think feminism "teach boys not to rape" is weaksauce.  Feminism should be about female empowerment.  So it should be "teach girls how to cut off a boy's nuts if he's trying to rape them" or "teach girls what do if they get raped" and "help make a society that will believe girls".

it took like 2 dozen women coming forward before people believed Bill Cosby was a rapist.  It took actual recordings of Gretchen Carlson and Roger Ailes before people would believe he was acting inappropriately.  We just don't believe women.  You even don't, when you claim "90% or 2% could be valid, we don't know".   Likewise, we can't just assume 100% of accusations are true.  When women come forward, like trump's many sexual assault accusers, they are attacked as lying sluts and whores.  That's why only 1 in 6 rapes ever gets reported.  Its generally not worth it for a women to report.  She can heal, pay for expensive therapy, and hope she never sees the rapist again, or she can report, be called a lying !@#$ whore !@#$ man-hater and have every aspect of her life torn apart in the quest for "reasonable doubt", and then, 3 years later, maybe start healing and moving on.

 

If you think there's another vehicle to advance sexual assault prevention and addressing how to respond when it does happen, I welcome hearing about it.  

 

Anyway, the caecus guy distracted me, time to get back on topic.

 

I agree with your first sentence. Unfortunately that isn't the case, feminism *SHOULD* be encouraging women to learn self-defense if they want to actually prevent rape, but they consider it to be "victim-blaming". It is obviously not the fault of the victim if they are raped, this doesn't change the fact that taking personal responsibility for your own safety is a good thing and people should do so when possible.

 

As for the Bill Cosby case, I disagree with your statement "It took 2 dozen women coming forward to convince people he was a rapist". That is not a good thing. The amount of women accusing him of rape does not matter. People *should* neither believe he is or believe he is not a rapist until he is convicted of it. Period. Anything else is speculation. Personally, I suspect he likely did rape some or all of those women., but that is pure speculation. It is not my place to assume whether he did or did not rape anyone. I haven't been following the case for awhile, so if hes already been convicted than my bad lol.

 

"We just don't believe women.  You even don't, when you claim "90% or 2% could be valid, we don't know"

 

I can't control the actions of other people. For me personally, I neither believe the person is guilty nor innocent. I can speculate all I like, but at the end of the day I don't know shit. For example, I suspect that Bill Cosby did indeed rape those women, as I said above. I also suspect the allegations against Trump are false, the timing and circumstances are too suspect. What I assume is very different from what I believe. I don't know the facts, therefore I won't make any judgements.

 

 

When women come forward, like trump's many sexual assault accusers, they are attacked as lying sluts and whores.

 

In the case of trump, and others like Bill Cosby and Roger Ailes(I'm not familiar with this case so correct me if I'm wrong), I don't think this has anything to do with "rape culture".

 

The issue is celebrity culture, and the media in general,  the unwillingness for people to accept that their favorite celebrities or politicians they support are bad people, whether it be rape or anything else. The other issue is that in cases like these, people aren't willing to wait, they take out the pitchforks and pull that person into a trial in the court of public opinion. This is not exclusive to victims of rape either, people accused of rape often face the same shit, even when they are later proven innocent. Rape cases that make it into the news, even with non-celebrities involved generally play out in a similar way.

 

The issue with a movement like Feminism dealing with Rape/Sexual Assault, is that Feminism handles sexism and womens issues almost exclusively. So they put on their sexism-tinted glasses and approach the issue from that viewpoint.

 

I'm gonna make a bold claim here, but the I don't think Rape/Sexual Assault is actually a sexism/gender issue. Rapists are criminals, their gender isn't relevant. Are there sexists, who automatically assume a woman is lying? Yes. Are there sexists who automatically assume a man is guilty of rape even if no proof yet exists? Yes. Sexism exists, and in certain ways it does effect the process, but ultimately the core issue is far more complicated than just sexism, and Feminism waters down the entire issue into sexism then blames it on men. 

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta say, I'm just a little bit extremely disappointed I didn't get a response to my thing about broadness and defining stuff, cause I don't really think this debate has been framed well thus far. But look thats a minor issue, and I'm going to go on a bit of a tangent cause of who I am as a person but its kinda related.

 

One of the debates in (post?) modern feminism is around the aims of the "third wave" which began in the 1990s, however some also argue we're now in a 4th wave. So one of the main things that has been touched on here is that things are pretty good for women in western countries. Can vote, lots of legal barriers down etc. All well and good right? Some disagree and say hey the movement needs to be less about upper middle class white women and more about the experience of all women. How does feminism combat say, the combination of racism and sexism? How does it address how gender roles affect men? Going off a stat I half remember hearing today is 70% of homeless people are men (in aus) but one of the highest reasons for homelessness is domestic violence.

So on one side you've got the third wave talking about intersectionality and stuff, and on the other side you've got the post-feminists, and they argue that the 2nd wave basically achieved its goals and are critical of the goals of the third wave and more generally the need for feminism in todays society. But then you've also got a lot of smaller groups like African feminism cause there's a need for stuff there (along with economic development, though africa is growing at the same rate or faster than asia iirc, gotta love the rubber band effect from skipping obsolete tech and stuff).

 

So what's my two cents? Well first I'll mention another viewpoint of a marxist friend of mine. She doesn't care that more women aren't in boardrooms, she's concerned that more of those boardrooms are not on fire (marxism hates identity policies cause like 90% of the time its really just classes and capitalism at it again, but i digress). My viewpoint is that feminism is still needed in western nations, just its not going to play as a large a role. Things still need to be done, especially with domestic violence in australia, for men and for women. Whether this and wider problems are fixed by mens rght activists, feminists, religious groups, migrant groups, lgbt groups etc, doesn't really matter as long as we all keep working towards some kind of wider objective of equality and not get too caught up on insignificant issues. I don't really care if a well paid ceo gets 400k or 500k, I care more about the regressive impact GST on menstrual products has on poorer women, and I care even more about the economic and social liberation of all people in developing countries.

idk I think I made some kind of point

As you sow, so shall you reap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta say, I'm just a little bit extremely disappointed I didn't get a response to my thing about broadness and defining stuff, cause I don't really think this debate has been framed well thus far. But look thats a minor issue, and I'm going to go on a bit of a tangent cause of who I am as a person but its kinda related.

 

One of the debates in (post?) modern feminism is around the aims of the "third wave" which began in the 1990s, however some also argue we're now in a 4th wave. So one of the main things that has been touched on here is that things are pretty good for women in western countries. Can vote, lots of legal barriers down etc. All well and good right? Some disagree and say hey the movement needs to be less about upper middle class white women and more about the experience of all women. How does feminism combat say, the combination of racism and sexism? How does it address how gender roles affect men? Going off a stat I half remember hearing today is 70% of homeless people are men (in aus) but one of the highest reasons for homelessness is domestic violence.

So on one side you've got the third wave talking about intersectionality and stuff, and on the other side you've got the post-feminists, and they argue that the 2nd wave basically achieved its goals and are critical of the goals of the third wave and more generally the need for feminism in todays society. But then you've also got a lot of smaller groups like African feminism cause there's a need for stuff there (along with economic development, though africa is growing at the same rate or faster than asia iirc, gotta love the rubber band effect from skipping obsolete tech and stuff).

 

So what's my two cents? Well first I'll mention another viewpoint of a marxist friend of mine. She doesn't care that more women aren't in boardrooms, she's concerned that more of those boardrooms are not on fire (marxism hates identity policies cause like 90% of the time its really just classes and capitalism at it again, but i digress). My viewpoint is that feminism is still needed in western nations, just its not going to play as a large a role. Things still need to be done, especially with domestic violence in australia, for men and for women. Whether this and wider problems are fixed by mens rght activists, feminists, religious groups, migrant groups, lgbt groups etc, doesn't really matter as long as we all keep working towards some kind of wider objective of equality and not get too caught up on insignificant issues. I don't really care if a well paid ceo gets 400k or 500k, I care more about the regressive impact GST on menstrual products has on poorer women, and I care even more about the economic and social liberation of all people in developing countries.

idk I think I made some kind of point

 

This is a fairly accurate assessment I would say. The main issue with Feminism today is they've already achieved equality of opportunity, and now feminists are pushing for equality of outcome.

 

I do think there is a place for feminism, but it needs to shift its focus and reform. People have pointed out plenty of things in this thread feminism should be focused on solving but the reality is they aren't.

 

When some of their biggest issues are "manspreading" and "catcalling" you know the movement needs to refocus itself. 

Edited by Sketchy
  • Upvote 3

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The issue is celebrity culture, and the media in general,  the unwillingness for people to accept that their favorite celebrities or politicians they support are bad people, whether it be rape or anything else.

Its interesting that Hillary supporters largely dismissed Paula Jones, but believed Trump's accusers, which reinforces your point.

Duke of House Greyjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its interesting that Hillary supporters largely dismissed Paula Jones, but believed Trump's accusers, which reinforces your point.

Don't get me wrong, there is definitely a portion of people who base their views on these cases because of sexism, I just think it's ignorant to relegate the whole issue to sexism alone.

 

I find it's the primary issue with SJW progressive types in general, sometimes bigotry is part of the problem, sometimes it's not part of the problem, but they always treat it as the ONLY problem and it shifts the focus away from real solutions.

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you blaming liberals for letting Roger Ailes, chairman of Fox News, sexually harass many of the women he hired?  

That would be high status, power position. Should we move the subject onto the leftist pedophile rings. 

I didn't say liberals either since I'm a liberal, leftists. 

IpHGyGc.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be high status, power position. Should we move the subject onto the leftist pedophile rings. 

I didn't say liberals either since I'm a liberal, leftists. 

 

Damn it, now I'm hungry for pizza. 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Sketchy's profile picture suggests he's never really thought about women outside of "YOLO" and "SWAG."

>Considers himself an authority figure on the feminist movement

I really am a Great Old One.

I really do fight Elder Gods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really am a Great Old One.

I really do fight Elder Gods.

 

It's what your profile picture says about you. If that was the standard, I would have thought sketchy was a giant ass. Wait...

 

Hmmmm, I would say that your profile picture suggests you have a god-complex. Megalomania really does make you look good doesn't it? 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's what your profile picture says about you. If that was the standard, I would have thought sketchy was a giant ass. Wait...

 

Hmmmm, I would say that your profile picture suggests you have a god-complex. Megalomania really does make you look good doesn't it? 

Well, my previous avatars were Spock, Lo Pan and Darkness from Legend. I could also just be a Lovecraft/Chambers/Sci-fi/Fantasy geek as well but a megalomaniac-al, evil poster is fine too.

 

I assume glasses and a suit on your avatar/character gives off the impression of education/scholarship?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my previous avatars were Spock, Lo Pan and Darkness from Legend. I could also just be a Lovecraft/Chambers/Sci-fi/Fantasy geek as well but a megalomaniac-al, evil poster is fine too.

 

I assume glasses and a suit on your avatar/character gives off the impression of education/scholarship?

 

EVIIILLLLL! HISSSSSS. 

 

:P

 

Nope! My picture is just the best representation of Appius Claudius Caecus without actually using some block of stone like Octavius does. 

  • Upvote 1

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you like walnut sauce on it? 

 

Idk, I generally don't take well to the delivery guy showing up in a gas mask and an AR-15. 

It's a useful mental exercise. Through the years, many thinkers have been fascinated by it. But I don't enjoy playing. It was a game that was born during a brutal age when life counted for little. Everyone believed that some people were worth more than others. Kings. Pawns. I don't think that anyone is worth more than anyone else. Chess is just a game. Real people are not pieces. You can't assign more value to some of them and not others. Not to me. Not to anyone. People are not a thing that you can sacrifice. The lesson is, if anyone who looks on to the world as if it was a game of chess, deserves to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Idk, I generally don't take well to the delivery guy showing up in a gas mask and an AR-15. 

But I don't have an AR-15. I have a M1A and just ordered a Tavor B16.  ;)

 

LOL. Yes. To be fair, you haven't given me any other impression of you, I know you like guns  ^_^

Would be lying if i said no.

Heres how i picture you

-snip-

Just saw these. I promise I'm normal(ish). I only wear my gas mask on work trips to scare my co-workers. (Being a chemical engineer among other non-chemical engineers is fun.) :P

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

So lemme ask you, do you think Feminism has turned an ugly course in terms of what it was meant for?

Feminism has been blamed with "taking an ugly course" and "rooting for women supremacy" since the very first time a woman took a pencil to write about women's rights. So I generally dismiss those accusations a I have been hearing them for decades.

 

But one thing is Feminism (looking to achieve gender equality for women) and other thing are urban tribes who base their identity on being a woman. The difference among one and the other can be summarized quoting Susan Sarandon: "I wont vote for HER because I dont vote with my vagina".

 

It happens to every other ideology. I wonder if urban tribalism based on woman identity will manage to take over the "feminist" tag. Much like I stopped long ago from labeling myself as a "communist" because the term was taken over by urban tribes more concerned with keeping their tribal identity than on social equality.

Edited by Ivan the Red
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feminism's goal of achieving equality of the sexes has been a success in the West. The virtues of liberty with the feminist movement has caused pretty much everyone in the West to be a feminist. You're going to be very hard pressed to find anyone who believes that women shouldn't have the right to vote, the right to drive, the right to own property, and so forth.

 

Modern Tumblr SJWs are not feminists and what they push is not feminism. They have just hijacked the feminist movement and stolen it's name.

  • Upvote 2

new_forum_sig_2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone in this thread read up on the differences between first-wave, second-wave, and third-wave feminism?

  • First-wave: giving women voting rights, property rights, etc.   :)
  • Second-wave: ERA issues, centered on social roles of men and women  :) and  :mellow:
  • Third-wave: the "wage gap", "stare-raping", "ONE MAN RAPED ME SO THEREFORE ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS" movement   :angry:

Feminists proclaim that they are advocating for "equal rights", whereas they are not.  

 

They have run out of things to argue about, and are using their once great and powerful platform to ... well, do whatever they are doing now.

 

We live in a society where women are actually the majority, and where it is possible for them to do anything that a man can do.

 

But this isn't good enough, right?  Let's invent some complete BS and convince ourselves that we are being oppressed and discriminated against.  

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1w7iw2/97_of_rapists_dont_spend_a_day_in_jail_why_this/

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/harvard-prof.-takes-down-gender-wage-gap-myth/article/2580405

 

Somehow these are the same SJWs that are perfectly satisfied with the treatment of women and others in Muslim nations because we shouldn't be "Islamophobic".

 

--

 

Now onto the issue of Trump's comments, and I'm not going to suck his you-know-what and defend him on this.  

 

He acknowledged the mistake, and apologized for it (something which he doesn't do for things he considers trivial).

 

Unfortunately, comments like these are prevalent in society (yes, locker room talk) and we shouldn't completely disregard them.

 

But this doesn't make me switch my support to a scandalous, lying, elitist and unlikeable opportunist who received donations from nations who oppress women.

 

The sexual abuse allegations are completely false.  If so many women were groped and raped by Trump in the 1980s and 90s, how come all of them have just suddenly come out with their stories a week before the election?  Some of them have been proven false already.  Nothing registered in court.

 

I can understand if you don't like or support Trump, but don't be enough of a moron to argue about the assault allegations. 

It just makes you look even worse than a modern feminist.

  • Upvote 5

MAKE ORBIS GREAT AGAIN !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.