Society & Culture Feminists

[radiojake]

when message boards have the audio option, I'll be able to hear the sarcasm


until then, everyone has to suffer misunderstanding everyone else's satire

 

[Illinois Nazi]

when message boards have the audio option, I'll be able to hear the sarcasm


until then, everyone has to suffer misunderstanding everyone else's satire

That's half the fun.

 

[BORK]

fmd there are more threads on bigfooty from losers complaining about feminists then there are threads about footy...

what exactly is your problem, mottrain?

You keep talking about feminist agendas been crammed fown your throat... where? stop visiting feminist sites if it pisses you off...

You don't see me going to stormfront and endlessly quoting the stuff they write that I find abbhorent...

can someone give this loser a life or atleast a hobby, please?

Probably because the majority of the time somebody starts a thread(not necessarily this thread) to have a reasonable discussion about a politically sensitive area the same handful of posters enter the thread, fill it with ad hominen attacks on posters who were genuinely trying to contribute to the discussion and derail the conversation. Then instead of those posters being carded for their repetitive behaviour the thread gets shut down validating their actions and rinse and repeat the cycle continues.

 

[tesseract]

I find it funny that feminists are so willing to go into bat for people getting abused and criticised except for when they are white males who they think it is ok to abuse and belittle. This is incredibly hypocritical considering that they are apparently campaigners against oppression and are for equal rights yet seem to want to make males who are white less equal.

I also find it funny that the majority of feminists are white females who would ironically have to be the second most well off species on earth. It seems to me that it is rather questionable how much they whinge when they have it better than most in society if not even the best in society in areas.

Is feminism really just a front for women who have bad experiences with guys and lesbians to try and stick it up males because they don't like them? To me it tends to be the case especially when finding out their background for some of them and also arguably the fact Lesbians have it far more easy in terms of homosexual people than gays or trannies.

Feminism has nothing to do with “equal rights” for women. It’s a hodge-podge of conflicting ideas that imposes (mostly) middle class white women’s sensibilities upon the world. It is a useful tool for social engineers because it opposes all the values that have made western civilization strong and puts the control of families in the hands of bureaucrats and social workers.

Social Justice is never about justice, and is not sociable, it is a corrupt leftie totalitarian grab for power over others.

This is a very interesting passage from "A History of Western Philosophy" by Bertrand Russell about how much power the women in ancient Sparta had. Quote:

"Aristotle, who lived after the downfall of Sparta, gives a very hostile account of its constitution..."The legislator wanted to make the whole state hardy and temperate, and he has carried out his intention in the case of men, but he has neglected the women, who live in every sort of intemperance and luxury.

The consequence is that in such a state wealth is too highly valued, especially if the citizens fall under the dominion of their wives, after the manner of most warlike races. . . .

Even in regard to courage, which is of no use in daily life, and is needed only in war, the influence of the Lacedaemonian women has been most mischievous. . . . This license of the Lacedaemonian women existed from the earliest times, and was only what might be expected. For . . . when Lycurgus, as tradition says, wanted to bring the women under his laws, they resisted, and he gave up the attempt."

-"A History of Western Philosophy" pgs 99-100

And there is the ancient Greek play Lysistrata by Aristophanes in which the women of Greece withhold sex in order to persuade the men to negotiate peace.

So, hardly oppression of women. And that's but one example.

The typical feminist cries and moans over women being oppressed by men for all of human history, and they use this as validation for women having advantages over men at present - for they typically justify their hypocritical power-play as it being their time for a turn in the sun - forgetting their own mantra of 'equality'. The men of Sparta were oppressed under unfair laws that applied to men but not women. And even Aristotle points out that the women took advantage without care for how the men had it. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Feminism's claim of standing for equality is only a front to hide its true intent: female superiority, advantage and dominion over men. This is what the global leadership of academic feminists purpose. If the coffee shop/average feminist NAFALT's and doesn't proscribe this, why do they then hold on for dear life the title of 'feminist'? It's because they may well like equality in theory, but don't wish to give up the unfair advantages that women retain over men. (A list of which I've posted on the SR&P board). Thus makes feminists hypocrites! If they stood for equality, it can't come under the guise of feminism, for feminism has attached at the hip patriarchy theory and the destruction of male interests that feminist leaders associated with it. Feminism, therefore, can't stand for equality, no matter what kind of semantic spin they attempt to put on it - typically "look at the dictionary definition!" Pfft! I'll judge feminism by its actions, not its rhetoric.

 

[Taylor]

Please feel free to offer my feminism any constructive feedback you feel is warranted.

Just don't make assumptions.

 

[tesseract]

Please feel free to offer my feminism any constructive feedback you feel is warranted.

Just don't make assumptions.

"Your feminism" isn't even your own, for it can't be your own. It's yours in name, but not in actuality. It's like you're attempting to fool yourself. If it's something of your own devise, it wouldn't be 'feminism'. Feminism has things inherently attached that I presume you disapprove of, yet you still use the label 'feminist'. Hence you don't really have your own feminism. Your feminism is still feminism, but attempting to ignore certain parts of it that you really can't disassociate from due to the inherent attachments to the label. You're attempting NAFALT, but it doesn't work so long as you wear the label of feminist.

 

[Taylor]

Perhaps my feminism is the true form and others have hijacked it for their own radical vendetta?

Is that a consideration or is that an inconvenient possibility?

 

[the_interloper]

"Your feminism" isn't even your own, for it can't be your own. It's yours in name, but not in actuality. It's like you're attempting to fool yourself. If it's something of your own devise, it wouldn't be 'feminism'. Feminism has things inherently attached that I presume you disapprove of, yet you still use the label 'feminist'. Hence you don't really have your own feminism. Your feminism is still feminism, but attempting to ignore certain parts of it that you really can't disassociate from due to the inherent attachments to the label. You're attempting NAFALT, but it doesn't work so long as you wear the label of feminist.

I played a drinking game for your post, one scull every time you said "feminist", I'm wasted right now.

 

[tesseract]

Perhaps my feminism is the true form and others have hijacked it for their own radical vendetta?

Is that a consideration or is that an inconvenient possibility?

Given that feminism was around before you were born, such a rationalization would be foolish.

 

[tesseract]

I played a drinking game for your post, one scull every time you said "feminist", I'm wasted right now.

Cheers. Better head to the bottle-O and stock up your reserves.

 

[The Passenger]

All hail the women of sparta.

 

[Taylor]

Given that feminism was around before you were born, such a rationalization would be foolish.

What would you call my own then?

 

[the_interloper]

Cheers. Better head to the bottle-O and stock up your reserves.

Nah I'll just send my wife, she does what she's told.

 

[tesseract]

What would you call my own then?

As previously stated, "something of your own devise". Any version of feminism can't be your own because it's adopted and not of your own devise.

 

[tesseract]

Nah I'll just send my wife, she does what she's told.

Driving whilst pissy isn't a good idea. It's a good enough reason to send the missus on a mission for you and save you the hassle.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Wow, just what we need. Another thread for the same tired old posters to rehash their same tired old arguments about how feminism is ruining the world.

 

[Taylor]

What about religion? The interpretations of that has changed and been adapted throughout.

Do you mean like that?

 

[tesseract]

What about religion? The interpretations of that has changed and been adapted throughout.

Do you mean like that?

Analogy doesn't fit, for differentiation is had by a change of label between religions. That's not your proposal, for you seek to keep the label of feminism instead of devising something of your own and breaking away from it.

 

[Taylor]

Taylor Feminism, now it's mine

 

[tesseract]

Taylor Feminism, now it's mine

Russian Orthodox isn't changing label compared to Greek Orthodox, for example, for it returns a part of itself. So, too, does Taylor Feminism, for it keeps the binding label that doesn't allow for separation - the common denominator. Catholic and Seventh Day Adventist, for example, on the other hand...

 

[Floor Pie]

If tessa can be in charge of what the term feminism means, I can be in charge of what MRM means!

 

[Gough]

So how's dem femmos?