Society/Culture Feminism part 1 - continued in part 2

[scon]

More than anyone else on this site, tesseract is the classic example of a disaffected young male who has been radicalised by the internet and hate preachers (eg Paul Elam)

Sure it's not just a dickhead??

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Sure it's not just a dickhead??

fair point, well made

 

[Raz0r6ack]

Not quite the right thread but all the others were closed
http://herself.com/caitlin/
(Nsfw)

Herself.com - A feminist website full of naked women.

What a great idea. A win-win for all parties.

 

[Tim Whatley]

Not quite the right thread but all the others were closed
http://herself.com/caitlin/
(Nsfw)

wow! she's so empowered!

 

[smokingjacket]

It's the radical feminists which control the feminist movement. These feminists are judges, lawyers, academics/professors and politicians. The average feminist has no say as to what feminism actually is. It's those with the power, and hence influence, which dictates what feminism is.

You say that there's no such thing as 'the patriarchy' and then create your own version of 'the matriarchy' or sisterhood oppressing men. Conspiracies only exist when I'm being oppressed?

Some MRA's do hate women. Some men who've been hurt by women initially go through a phase of anger. Where, though, do you see those in places of leadership in the MRM spout their hatred for women and making it part of the narrative, like it is in feminism? Patriarchy theory implies that all men are irredeemable psychopaths. That's the difference. Feminism is built upon the hatred of men. Not so with the MRM. I've provided quotes from Feminism's global leadership on a few occasions to show this.

Why not say, "hurt by a woman?" The problem with your MRA logic is that you want to see women as a one large mass, just as you accuse feminists of doing the same to men. The sites that espouse this stuff are riven with ridiculous contradictions that undermine anything you're saying. It's just one large gripe about modernity and confusion about masculinity. Unfortunately for you some men enjoy the new paradigm tesseract and it's as much self interest as ethical. If you've adapted to the new rules it's a golden age of ****ing, moving towards a society of mutual objectification. I've said to you before you don't have to be part of it if you don't wish too. It's a liberal society with space for many views and lifestyles. There are plenty of women out there who aren't feminists. Find a nice church going lass at the local evangelical and report back. Some women want to go out, get drunk, party, hook up all the while feeling safe from being sexually assaulted. It's not that hard to understand. Stop trying to **** it up for the rest of us.

 

[Raz0r6ack]

Unfortunately for you some men enjoy the new paradigm tesseract and it's as much self interest as ethical. If you've adapted to the new rules it's a golden age of *******, moving towards a society of mutual objectification. I've said to you before you don't have to be part of it if you don't wish too. It's a liberal society with space for many views and lifestyles. There are plenty of women out there who aren't feminists. Find a nice church going lass at the local evangelical and report back. Some women want to go out, get drunk, party, hook up all the while feeling safe from being sexually assaulted. It's not that hard to understand. Stop trying to **** it up for the rest of us.

I can understand the gist of what you're trying to say here but there are always going to be creeps out there man. Feminism nor any other movement is not going to stop this. I'm sure everyone would love the luxury of not having to worry about locking their doors at night, so that they don't get robbed, but it's just not going to happen.

 

[scon]

Never lock my doors at night.
MonoTone the Mythmaker

 

[smokingjacket]

I can understand the gist of what you're trying to say here but there are always going to be creeps out there man. Feminism nor any other movement is not going to stop this. I'm sure everyone would love the luxury of not having to worry about locking their doors at night, so that they don't get robbed, but it's just not going to happen.

The problem is that what you call being a creep is a legitimate form of enforcing morality in some countries. There are many factors but cultural norms play a big part in changing the behaviour of people in regards to sexual assault just as they do in theft and other crime that might force one to lock their doors. Japan is a modern, democratic, developed nation where theft is virtually unheard of compared to Australia, primarily because of cultural reasons. These things can change...

Are you of the bent that believes women with uncovered flesh are like uncovered meat to dogs? I have a better view of the inherent human decency in Australian menfolk than that, although we can still do better.

Besides if someone gets r*ped by a "creep" is it the woman's fault that the creep did it? Even if she was dressed provocatively? Are we beholden to the most deranged in our society for how we act? Do we apply that logic to other liberties that we've fought for? ie. Should we restrict free speech to appease terrorists or the worst among us? Actually don't answer that...

 

[Raz0r6ack]

The problem is that what you call being a creep is a legitimate form of enforcing morality in some countries. There are many factors but cultural norms play a big part in changing the behaviour of people in regards to sexual assault just as they do in theft and other crime that might force one to lock their doors. Japan is a modern, democratic, developed nation where theft is virtually unheard of compared to Australia, primarily because of cultural reasons. These things can change...

Are you of the bent that believes women with uncovered flesh are like uncovered meat to dogs? I have a better view of the inherent human decency in Australian menfolk than that, although we can still do better.

Besides if someone gets r*ped by a "creep" is it the woman's fault that the creep did it? Even if she was dressed provocatively? Are we beholden to the most deranged in our society for how we act? Do we apply that logic to other liberties that we've fought for? ie. Should we restrict free speech to appease terrorists or the worst among us? Actually don't answer that...

Enforcing morality? WTF? I don't know what world you're living in mate but being a creep that assaults women is the last thing any bloke wants be categorized as. It is something which will just as easily get you ostracized, if not bashed, if you do it in a pub, a club or in any form of mixed social setting. A "cultural norm" would be to suggest that sexually assaulting women is accepted by the majority. I don't know one bloke who thinks it's okay to assault an innocent woman. It is definitely not a cultural norm.

Feel free to enlighten me more on this "rape culture" though, I'm interested to know who are these people who blame the victim are and why you are associating yourself with them.

 

[skilts]

Never lock my doors at night.
MonoTone the Mythmaker

When I bought my house in rural Victoria, I expressed some concern about the quality of its security to the real estate agent. He said, quite rightly as it has turned out, "There are no problems with security in this town." Depends where you live, I suppose.

 

[tesseract]

And I won't be bothering because it is so well documented that I wouldn't waste my time-just go and do some pretty basic reading-everywhere you look from Christine di Pizan, to the Pankhursts, to Steinem and Friedan etc.

If it's so well documented then it shouldn't be a problem. Btw, Pankhurst has been discussed and debunked already. Steinem had connections to the CIA, thus showing that feminism wasn't a grassroots movement and indeed is as I've previously stated: a top-down movement funded by the rich elite with wives of plutocrats being the face of the movement. Btw, I've already provided an extensive list of feminism's global leadership and provided quotes from them. Betty Friedan being among those I've quoted.

 

[tesseract]

I'm not about to throw a linkstorm at you, but you can do some reading if you'd like. Look up the wage gap, influential functionalist views on society (Particularly from Murdoch and Parsons who basically claim that women are good for emotional support, looking after the kids and not much else), women not being able to vote, women not being able to own ******* credit cards, women not being able to box, women not being able to refuse sex from their husband, women not being able to have their own bank account, women having all their earnings and property owned by their husband after marriage, etc.

They're just a few ways women have been oppressed throughout history, from the top of my head. I'm sure you'll find some good reading if you choose to Google these topics. So I'll ask you again to please direct me to the posts in this thread where you have disproved these things.

I've done plenty of reading on this subject. This topic is a hobby for me.

The wage gap has been debunked over and over again. To even bring this up must mean you're a noob to this subject.

So, Murdoch and Parsons have a view that you disagree with. So what! Their view doesn't shape society.

Men voting and women not being able to has already been discussed. Go and do some reading through this and the feminism threads. This will lead you into information about Emmeline Pankhurst and the evil women giving out white feathers. Men had to join the army and risk their life in order to be granted the privilege of voting rights. Women didn't want the responsibility and obligation that came with voting rights, they simply bitched and moaned until pandering men gave them the right to vote without the obligation and responsibility that men still had. Btw, first wave feminists didn't care much for women having the vote; many were flat out against it.

The traditionalist family set-up in times past was that women traded their sex and access to reproduction for a male's surplus labour. If women bitched about that it's because they wanted males surplus labour without providing their share in return. Very much like women wanting the vote but not wanting to risk their lives in war to earn it, like men had to.

If you're to tell me to do some reading in order to find answers, I'll direct you to do the same and find mine and others posts which have already answered many of your likely questions.

 

[tesseract]

You say that there's no such thing as 'the patriarchy' and then create your own version of 'the matriarchy' or sisterhood oppressing men. Conspiracies only exist when I'm being oppressed?

Please quote where I've "created my own version of the Matriarchy". Feminists lobbying for advantages for women that directly disadvantage men is not a conspiracy. To say that it is is ignorant.

Why not say, "hurt by a woman?" The problem with your MRA logic is that you want to see women as a one large mass, just as you accuse feminists of doing the same to men.

The problem with your reasoning starts by assuming that I'm a MRA? Please quote where I've claimed to be such?

I say "hurt by women" because my observation has been that men get back on the horse and try again with another woman thinking that next time will be different. Hence "women".

"Talking about women"? We're discussing feminism and feminists here. Feminists and manginas attempt to conflate feminists=women in order to brand anyone speaking ill of feminism as a misogynist. Feminism is a special interest group advocating for women's interests/ideology, women are a demographic. They're not one and the same.

The sites that espouse this stuff are riven with ridiculous contradictions that undermine anything you're saying.

You say these sites "are riven with ridiculous contradictions that undermine anything you're saying", yet you don't name these sites nor provide quotes from them. How typical so as to be as vague as possible while taking a pot-shot and not having anything to back it up.

It's just one large gripe about modernity and confusion about masculinity.

Men's rights isn't about discussing masculinity so much as it's about discussing men's rights. Other men's issues get discussed, too, but the theme is men's rights.

Unfortunately for you some men enjoy the new paradigm and it's as much self interest as ethical. If you've adapted to the new rules it's a golden age of *******, moving towards a society of mutual objectification.

What "new paradigm" are you specifically speaking of?

I've said to you before you don't have to be part of it if you don't wish too. It's a liberal society with space for many views and lifestyles. There are plenty of women out there who aren't feminists. Find a nice church going lass at the local evangelical and report back. Some women want to go out, get drunk, party, hook up all the while feeling safe from being sexually assaulted. It's not that hard to understand. Stop trying to **** it up for the rest of us.

Men are going their own way without women, hence the growing MGTOW phenomenon and the online communities that discuss related issues. It's called MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) in the western world, and 'Grass Eaters' in Japan.

How is my speaking out about feminism ****ing it up for the rest? Or are you still conflating feminism with women?

 

[tesseract]

I can understand the gist of what you're trying to say here but there are always going to be creeps out there man. Feminism nor any other movement is not going to stop this. I'm sure everyone would love the luxury of not having to worry about locking their doors at night, so that they don't get robbed, but it's just not going to happen.

How can anyone stop someone from "feeling" unsafe? It's not a matter of feelings.

 

[Vic Vinegar]

There is nothing horrible about advocating for the rights of women.
Just wouldn't hurt some people to keep a little balance and perspective when doing so.

That's better.

 

[Vic Vinegar]

Rancid bollocks continue to dribble.

Ok Ill bite:

1. You have no problem with the gender wage gap. But you hate having to pay for dates.
No, I believe that the gender "wage gap" is a carefully constructed victim mentality. Not to mention that many women make more than men these days anyway. And I don't go on dates but wouldnt have a problem with women who paid.

2. You insist that it’s a scientifically proven fact that men are stronger than women. But you complain about society believing that it’s worse for a man to hit a woman than for a woman to hit a man.
The implied attitudes here is that it IS more acceptable for women to hit men. This one really says more about the author than MRAs.

3. You believe that the age of consent is unfair and that there’s nothing wrong with having sex with teenage girls. But when you find out that a teenage girl enjoys sex, you believe she’s the biggest **** in the world.
I dont believe in having sex with teenage girls unless you are a teenage guys. Simple.

4. You hate when a woman automatically assumes that a man is a douchebag before getting to know him. But when you like a woman who likes another man, you assume he’s a douchebag just because he’s not you.
Wrong. Just completely wrong and again, another assumption about all men

5. You believe that if women want equality, they should be drafted into the military. But you also believe that the military is not a place for women.
No I would prefer women had access to all military roles.

6. You hate when women assume that men are like wild animals. But you believe that a woman who doesn’t cover up and make herself invisible to men is just like someone wearing a meat suit around wild animals.
Again using hyperbole to paint all MRAs as unreasonable.

7. You hate the fact that men are bullied for not conforming to their male gender roles. But when you find out that a man disagrees with your beliefs about women’s rights, your immediate response is to try to emasculate him by comparing him to a woman as an insult.
I dont use those kinds of insults. Wrong again.

8. You hate when women assume that there are no nice guys. But you call yourself a nice guy and act like it’s a rare quality that should cause women to be all over you.
No its feminists who spread the myth that there are no decent men out there. NOT MRAs.

9. You hate when women assume that men just want to get laid. But when you find out that a man is a feminist, you assume that he’s just doing it to get laid.
Both are true and neither is mutually exclusive. Because manginas are not real men.

10. You hate when women make generalizations about all men. But when a woman calls you out for being sexist, you claim that all men think like you.
I dont claim that all men think like me. Point out where that is the case.

11. You insist that women should be responsible for protecting themselves from being r*ped. But when they follow the one piece of advice that actually works, which is being aware of red flags, you complain about them assuming that all men are rapists.
The problem is that women ignore red flags when the guy is good looking enough. Thats on them, not on the vast majority of guys who dont rape women and who dont deserve that assumption.

 

[cartwright]

I've done plenty of reading on this subject. This topic is a hobby for me.

The wage gap has been debunked over and over again. To even bring this up must mean you're a noob to this subject.

So, Murdoch and Parsons have a view that you disagree with. So what! Their view doesn't shape society.

Men voting and women not being able to has already been discussed. Go and do some reading through this and the feminism threads. This will lead you into information about Emmeline Pankhurst and the evil women giving out white feathers. Men had to join the army and risk their life in order to be granted the privilege of voting rights. Women didn't want the responsibility and obligation that came with voting rights, they simply bitched and moaned until pandering men gave them the right to vote without the obligation and responsibility that men still had. Btw, first wave feminists didn't care much for women having the vote; many were flat out against it.

The traditionalist family set-up in times past was that women traded their sex and access to reproduction for a male's surplus labour. If women bitched about that it's because they wanted males surplus labour without providing their share in return. Very much like women wanting the vote but not wanting to risk their lives in war to earn it, like men had to.

If you're to tell me to do some reading in order to find answers, I'll direct you to do the same and find mine and others posts which have already answered many of your likely questions.

 

[evo]

Oh my God! I am on fire!

yeah, they don't do themselves too many favours with that sort of rhetoric.

 

[cartwright]

8.You hate when women assume that there are no nice guys. But you call yourself a nice guy and act like it’s a rare quality that should cause women to be all over you.
No its feminists who spread the myth that there are no decent men out there. NOT MRAs.

Nope. I'm surrounded by good men. Everyday I interact with good men. Its actually only here I encounter the idiots.

9. You hate when women assume that men just want to get laid. But when you find out that a man is a feminist, you assume that he’s just doing it to get laid.
Both are true and neither is mutually exclusive. Because manginas are not real men.

Seems, you too, are confused. Mangina is not a real word.

10. You hate when women make generalizations about all men. But when a woman calls you out for being sexist, you claim that all men think like you.
I dont claim that all men think like me. Point out where that is the case.

11. You insist that women should be responsible for protecting themselves from being r*ped. But when they follow the one piece of advice that actually works, which is being aware of red flags, you complain about them assuming that all men are rapists.
The problem is that women ignore red flags when the guy is good looking enough. Thats on them, not on the vast majority of guys who dont rape women and who dont deserve that assumption.

Such a typical response.

 

[evo]

wow! she's so empowered!

I like how she doesn't think vaginas are intrinsically female.


My vagina has been an unending and constant source of turmoil for me – not that vaginas are intrinsically female, it’s just happened to be a big part of womanhood for me personally

 

[Engimal]

I've done plenty of reading on this subject. This topic is a hobby for me.

The wage gap has been debunked over and over again. To even bring this up must mean you're a noob to this subject.

So, Murdoch and Parsons have a view that you disagree with. So what! Their view doesn't shape society.

Men voting and women not being able to has already been discussed. Go and do some reading through this and the feminism threads. This will lead you into information about Emmeline Pankhurst and the evil women giving out white feathers. Men had to join the army and risk their life in order to be granted the privilege of voting rights. Women didn't want the responsibility and obligation that came with voting rights, they simply bitched and moaned until pandering men gave them the right to vote without the obligation and responsibility that men still had. Btw, first wave feminists didn't care much for women having the vote; many were flat out against it.

The traditionalist family set-up in times past was that women traded their sex and access to reproduction for a male's surplus labour. If women bitched about that it's because they wanted males surplus labour without providing their share in return. Very much like women wanting the vote but not wanting to risk their lives in war to earn it, like men had to.

If you're to tell me to do some reading in order to find answers, I'll direct you to do the same and find mine and others posts which have already answered many of your likely questions.

In other words, you haven't disproved anything but just have a different opinion. Also, Murdoch and Parsons were hugely influential sociologists in their time, Parsons in particular.

 

[Chief]

Japan is a modern, democratic, developed nation where theft is virtually unheard of compared to Australia, primarily because of cultural reasons. These things can change...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Japan

The big issue with Japan is that when a person is found dead, nobody wants to call it a murder unless they are pretty sure they can find who did it. I would not trust any reported crime figures from Japan, where organised crime is virtually an arm of the government.

 

[Slippery Pete]

I like how she doesn't think vaginas are intrinsically female.


My vagina has been an unending and constant source of turmoil for me – not that vaginas are intrinsically female, it’s just happened to be a big part of womanhood for me personally

Vaginas are a social construct!!

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Folks don't literally asked to be r*ped, but the context of the post seems to be that if you're going to leave yourself at the mercy of people, especially in a place where drinking is involved, your own foolish actions can play a part in what occurs to you. That's the taboo truth that the politically correct never wish to mention.

I've tried to get him to answer the question a while back. The question was whether he thinks women contribute, through behaviour or desire, to rape.

I'm glad he finally got the courage to answer it.

 

[boytroy]

Wow what a typical left***d reply.