Is Feminism Dangerous, Dogmatic, and Antiquated? Maybe!

[ComDom]

Feminism: : the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities : organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

This would make Feminism a religion by definition. Religion: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group. Feminism is not based on science. It is based on belief.

Dangerous: : involving possible injury, harm, or death

Feminist books like the "SCUM Manifesto" claim that men have destroyed the world and that women have to correct it by fixing men, i.e. eliminating them. This book has been published commercially.*

There have been "Women Against Feminism." [1] And they have been attacked and threatened by Feminists who mock them for bringing to light attributes of Feminism:

"But they also say that modern Western feminism has become a divisive and sometimes hateful force, a movement that dramatically exaggerates female woes while ignoring men’s problems, stifles dissenting views, and dwells obsessively on men’s misbehavior and women’s personal wrongs." [2]

Dogmatic: : expressing personal opinions or beliefs as if they are certainly correct and cannot be doubted

Feminists are against the "patriarchy".* But the entirety of human-kind has essentially been a collection of patriarchies even when there were women heads of state including: Queen Ranavalona I of Madagascar, Queen Mary I, and Elizabeth I.

It's also interesting to note that even some Atheists, whom are interested in science but are still belief driven, have a problem with Feminism:

"Atheists should be Feminists because of the inherent levels of misogyny in religious texts and how religion often attempts to perpetuate the traditional Male-Female dynamic." I found this logic flawed and felt compelled to write a rather lengthy reply, explaining exactly why I believe that Feminism is equally worthy of my disdain as religion. [8]

There has never been a human matriarchy anywhere ever. [5] It's untested. Also, bonobos are an anamoly and they are rarely found if ever in the wild so to say that this consitutes a viable matriachry is a stretch. Feminism also often combats science fundamentally.* [3a][3b]

Antiquated: : very old-fashioned or obsolete

Feminism has accomplished its original goals in the western world. Yet Feminists now seek to erase gender roles and identities which causes people to end up being and looking more neutral rather than distinctly different. This is evidenced in at least some women's studies programs.* [10]

They also fail to recognize the variance in brain chemistry between men and women. [6] Feminism appears to be chasing phantoms, i.e. creating problems to attempt to stay relevant. [7] Feminists also claim to support equality but fundamentally and by definition Feminism is a women's advocate movement and nothing more.*

Feminists have often called Women's Studies the "academic arm of the women's movement." But Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge charge that the attempt to make Women's Studies serve a political agenda has led to deeply problematic results: dubious scholarship, pedagogical practices that resemble indoctrination more than education, and the alienation of countless potential supporters. [10]

Can Feminism be dangerous, dogmatic, and antiquated? It certainly seems possible. No Feminist's opinion is any more or less valid than another because their views of Feminism are only their opinions based on its definition.*

If people want Feminism to go away they should probably stop reproducing with Feminists, marginalize/demonize their views, and bring forth the truth. This, in theory, would accomplish their goal by not perpetuating the cycle.

*No True Scotsman Fallacy: No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim ("no Scotsman would do such a thing"), rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing")

Whenever Feminists attempt to deny that Feminism is the things above it falls under that fallacy due to Feminism ultimately being open-ended by definition.

Feminism: organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

I'm furious about the women's liberationists. They keep getting up on soapboxes and proclaiming that women are brighter than men. That's true, but it should be kept very quiet or it ruins the whole racket. - Anita Loos

Bibliography:

https://www.BBC.com/news/magazine-28446617 [1]

https://time.com/3028827/women-against-feminism-gets-it-right/ [2]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/18/feminism-rosetta-scientist-shirt-dapper-laughs-julien-blanc-inequality [3a]

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminist-science/#Con [3b]

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-epistemology/#crit [4]

https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/369468/matriarchy [5]

https://www.sciencevsfeminism.com/the-myth-of-equality/sex-differences-general-intelligence/ [d6]

https://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm [7]

https://invisibleatheist.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/atheism-vs-feminism/ [8]

https://aimhs.com.au/cms/index.php?page=against-science [9]

https://gender.stanford.edu/professing-feminism-education-and-indoctrination-womens-studies [10]

Videos:

[Anonymous]

Feminism is "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities"

I laugh every time I read or hear someone make that claim. If feminism were really about equality, it would not be so hated as it is today. Feminists are among the most biased (and dishonest) people alive.

[ComDom]

They can be very much that way, at least intellectually dishonest.

[Opinion Owner]

I'm pretty sure feminism was the inspiration for the term "intellectually dishonest".

[nalaa]

". If feminism were really about equality, it would not be so hated as it is today"

You can't conclude that. Equal rights for black people was once a hated subjects. So much so, that the US fought war over it.
Why did southern people dislike the idea of equal rights? Well for once because their economy depended on it and secondly they didn't like a loss of privilege. Obviously, who would? And same could be said about men and feminism

[Opinion Owner]

In the Western world, feminism does far more harm than good. It's despicable that women like you are willing to overlook all the sexism and hatred feminism mongers and still support it. Truly despicable. You should be ashamed.

[ComDom]

@nalaa "You can't conclude that. Equal rights for black people was once a hated subjects. So much so, that the US fought war over it."

Sure you can. Feminism isn't about equality. It's about corruption and elevating women. The latter of which by definition.

"Why did southern people dislike the idea of equal rights? Well for once because their economy depended on it and secondly they didn't like a loss of privilege. Obviously, who would? And same could be said about men and feminism"

The first part is true but the second is not. The same can't be said about men and women anymore because Feminism should have ended years ago yet it continues on and on in the western world feminizing society. This wouldn't be a problem but it's indoctrinating women now and it's going too far.

[miserybusiness]

feminism is necessary because it's the driving force behind 90% of GaG takes

[muspelhem_5]

Hahaha :)

[ComDom]

You are seriously funny.

[emmabee11]

Yup pretty much lol to get as many women offended and pissed off as possible TROLLS!

[Alexzktra]

Whatever it takes..

[xMoonlessNight]

I don't get it..

[nalaa]

"Feminism is not based on science. It is based on belief." Same could be said about equal rights between races, gay rights, protection of minorities, freedom of speech and pretty much everything else. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make there?
Morality is mostly a believe. Slave owners could legally kill their slaves because belief at the time was that slaves aren't people. Equally a husband could legally rape and kill his wife because women also weren't seen as people.
Believing that there should be no slavery is a belief, it's not based on science. If you want to call that a religion, then fine, I guess I'm religious.

patriarchy: "a system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line.
a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it."
That has been a historical fact. You didn't deny that so not sure why you mentioned it at all?
It's also not inherently a bad thing, however it historically played out to be a bad thing
Yes there were female queens. Elizabeth and Mary that you mentioned were half sisters and they were queens essentially for a lack of male heir and only after their younger brother died. Female rulers were and still are certainly the exception

Now as for the videos, I love bill maher, but let's not forget that he is making comedy. Political comedy but they're jokes nonetheless. He does make SOME good points (because a lot of it is just a joke) and I think he's right, but he's not exactly those mra movements he acknowledges problem where there are problems and historical facts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNzaKhW7Axshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjOvJgd-yag

The second video, her and the mra's are two very extreme groups, you're not gonna get a sensible conversation there. And if I've ever seen hate speech it was on mra blogs. So again, comparing two extremes, not sure what your point is.
Same for the last video. And not demanding no speech on campus isn't unreasonable

[nalaa]

Oh and before anyone downvotes me, I would like to know with what part of my answer exactly you disagree, please?

[alb84]

"however it historically played out to be a bad thing" (about patriarchy)

How exactly this has played out as a bad thing? thanks to this “patriarchy” our society has evolved to a much more complex thing after thousands of years... and I'm going to tell something that you may not like, matriarchies are weak and useless, since none of them has been able to survive on their own, except for maybe some isolated tribes, who ironically need the help of other patriarchal societies to survive or to live better ^^'... patriarchy has “given” us the technology we have today, medicines, etc, things that has helped us a lot as a whole (women included). I know that patriarchy also has it's “dark side”, and that mistakes had been done, but nothing is perfect, and we adapted and learned of those mistakes... that's the only way to “improve”, learn from mistakes, and try to correct them...

[alb84]

I'm not saying that the patriarchy should continue, the way I see it, it has had it's function and it has been useful, but now is obsolete, in fact, we are no longer living in a patriarchy (at least in the west), we are in a period of transition to something new, in which feminism had it's positive part (in the past, because right now is like a bad joke). We need to focus on which kind of society we want, but certainly, feminism is not the one who has to do this (and after seeing what they have done once they have grabbed political power... my faith is completely lost on them); anyway, that was not the issue, what I was trying to say is, that massive change can only happen if you take into consideration all possible angles of our reality, and we are a long way to do this, specially with this constant weird “gender war”... in which nobody wins.. is like fighting with your sister, you may win the “conflict”, but in the end both of you will end up being damaged ;)

[alb84]

I haven't downvoted you by the way... XD

[nalaa]

@alb84 well for example that until the 20th century a man could legally kill his wife. I would think tat's generally a bad thing?
Do we agree that women were historically oppressed as opposed to men? Because if it not, this is an entirely different conversation
And oppression of women is not a necessary result of patriarchy, but for the most part that IS what happened.

You can't only look at the good parts. It also brought us war, slavery, injustice... I think any culture that systematically oppresses a certain kind of people, would have to be judged negatively.
I mean until the mid 20t century when gained more political power, the world pretty much sucked. In areas where women are denied that power it still sucks. Considering that, how can you say patriarchy did a good job?

There is something in between matriarchy and patriarchy and that is what most feminists want

[ComDom]

@nalaa It's not about what I "want" to call it. It is a religion by definition. My point was that Feminists are invading and corrupting science as I understand.

I mentioned the Patriarchy because there are a lot of Feminists who are opposed to it. This isn't about MRA's for me. This is about Feminism and the extremists are just as much Feminist as you (probably) are. Neither one of you are right because of the nature of Feminism. It's open-ended. I also don't consider MRA's necessarily extremist. I do consider Feminism extremist.

"And not demanding no speech on campus isn't unreasonable"

I don't understand this. You're agreeing with them?

[nalaa]

Well as I said, then so is all of morality !

Welll who wouldn't be opposed to the patriarchy as we know it? as I told alb, it's awful.

"I also don't consider MRA's necessarily extremist. I do consider Feminism extremist" so where exactly do you see the difference. Because I've read MRA blogs and they're full of posts like "Are women becoming obsolete", "Women are evil!" and they were not objectively written or scientifically inspired, they were just hate speech.
Which brings me to the last point. In the last video you posted the feminists were demonstrating for no hate speech on campus and what's so awful about that?

[alb84]

And everything you are saying are precisely mistakes that had been solved (most of them anyway)...

“There is something in between matriarchy and patriarchy and that is what most feminists want “
making discriminatorial laws against men... is an odd way to accomplish this, and even a stranger way to fight against “discrimination” XD

“You can't only look at the good parts. “ (patriarchy)
I haven't done that... but you seem really interested in looking only at the negative part ;) I already mentioned that patriarchy had it's “dark side”... Matriarchies as well, and both had their time and purpouse... and of course, both had mistakes from which we have learned (I hope)... time to move on and work to have something COMPLETELY new :)

[alb84]

"Welll who wouldn't be opposed to the patriarchy as we know it?"
a matriarchy is awful as well... just in a different manner ;)

As for MRAs, for me are the same as feminist... they only care for their side, instead of trying to look at the bigger picture here... or at least, that's the impression I have with both groups, so I could be mistaken :S

[ComDom]

"Welll who wouldn't be opposed to the patriarchy as we know it? as I told alb, it's awful."

Based on what? There have been MANY peaceful and successful patriarchies. We have one now. You are alive because of them.

"I also don't consider MRA's necessarily extremist. I do consider Feminism extremist" so where exactly do you see the difference. Because I've read MRA blogs and they're full of posts like "Are women becoming obsolete", "Women are evil!" and they were not objectively written or scientifically inspired, they were just hate speech."

I've never seen any legitimate MRA documentation that says all women are obsolete/evil/etc ever. They say that about Feminism as I am right now though and I agree. If Feminists equate women with Feminism then there lies your problem. Granted I'm not overly familiar with the MRA movement so I will claim ignorance there.

Because an MRA rally isn't necessarily hate speech. Feminists have been indoctrinated to believe that.

[ComDom]

@nalaa whoops I responded above^

[nalaa]

@alb84 "And everything you are saying are precisely mistakes that had been solved (most of them anyway)..." what are you even talking about?

"making discriminatorial laws against men" like what? All laws we have are gender neutral

"Matriarchies as well," do they though? I mean I guess they do, but we couldn't possibly know because because there hasn't been a large scale example of one.
My point was that patriarchy was awful. Once women gained political and economic power it got much better and again countries that don't do this are still bad. So obviously patriarchy isn't the ideal solution

Also "patriarchy has “given” us the technology we have today, medicines, etc, things that has helped us a lot as a whole" well imagine where we could be if the patriarchy hadn't systematically excluded half the population from contributing to that for thousand of years. Which is why I stand by it, it's generally a bad thing

[ComDom]

@nalaa "My point was that patriarchy was awful. Once women gained political and economic power it got much better and again countries that don't do this are still bad. So obviously patriarchy isn't the ideal solution."

"Bad/awful" is a misnomer. Based on what? Based on your women's studies classes? I honestly don't understand.

"well imagine where we could be if the patriarchy hadn't systematically excluded half the population from contributing to that for thousand of years. Which is why I stand by it, it's generally a bad thing"

To my knowledge this is at least somewhat exaggerated and probably false. Patriarchy excluded almost everyone including men. It included people related to power which included women at least sometimes.

[nalaa]

As for the take owner
"Based on what?" well, what I told the other guy. I'm not gonna repeat myself

"There have been MANY peaceful and successful patriarchies. We have one now. You are alive because of them." Do we though? I see your American, just in my life time you've been involved in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan and Libya. If you look at my parents lifetime that list gets a lot longer. Overall you've not been at war once since I was born. But you're right historicaly we're living in the most peaceful era ever. And what has changed worldwide in the past few generations? - women have gained in influence!

"I've never seen any legitimate MRA documentation that says all women are obsolete/evil/etc ever." well care to link one that doesn't? Just any one. Because all the ones I've read did not make a distinction at all, aside from maybe their mothers. But even if there is a distinction and that distinction is all women are evil unless they submit to

[nalaa]

men, I think that would just very much proof the point that those guys are just bummed out about their loss of privilege and don't give a shit about equal rights.

[nalaa]

take owner, first of all you don't need to @ me on my own answer, it's a annoying! Second of all that comment was not for you. It doesn't make sense to you, because it's not for you.

But "Patriarchy excluded almost everyone including men" that's true, which serves to underline my point of it being a terrible system.
But almost all meaningful discoveries were made by men who had wealth and power. Women didn't have any power, never. So while few men had, no women had. And no matter how wealthy women were, they weren't allowed in universities or even think about science. Women and science were considered an abomination something gross and disgusting.
Look we can look at the class issue, but that's a different point. Excluding poor people from power is also bad, but that's not the point. In any given class women were denied more opportunities than their male counterparts. The only class that could get an education and make scientific advances was the very top and even there just men

[nalaa]

because as I said, women were legally not allowed to. And generally attitude was that they shouldn't

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ887227.pdf

[alb84]

“"making discriminatorial laws against men" like what? All laws we have are gender neutral “
not in my country ;) here we have laws that only aknowledge women, not men... and on top of that, removing basic rights to men in certain cases, those laws where enforced by feminists under the last socialist governement... don't know about your country, but here they have done this.

[alb84]

“well imagine where we could be if the patriarchy hadn't systematically excluded half the population from contributing to that for thousand of years. “
we would be far worse.. who would have raised the children? you seem to forget that until not too long, raising a kid and working in the house was a full day job, and that men working needed to work from dawn until dusk to put food on the table... women needed to do every few days a long walking distance to only clean their clothing, etc... things were far different than today; and far more difficult, in all aspects. The kind of society we have today, would have been IMPOSSIBLE to have 300years ago,.. also you seem to forget, that most people didn't had access to education, and that jobs where so fucking hard that even strong men struggled to do them (working in a mine is hard today.. imagin that 200 years ago without tech)... I think you should put everything in it's own context, the present and the past are two completely different re

[alb84]

- realities XD

[alb84]

besides.. why are you (feminists) always talking about the past? this really bothers me... wouldn't it be more productive to focus on the future? call me crazy, but I think this is where we should be putting our energy... not in what tragedies happened 100, 200, 1000000 years ago...

[nalaa]

@alb84
"who would have raised the children" the Servants!
I just basically told the same thing to the take owner, so let me just copy and paste

we can look at the class issue, but that's a different point. Excluding poor people from power is also bad, but that's not the point. In any given class women were denied more opportunities than their male counterparts. The only class that could get an education and make scientific advances was the very top and even there just men, because women weren't allowed to.

" confining women
to the home was a way of shielding them from the avarice and corruption
of the outside world, preserving their precious purity. because
innocence requires ignorance, the formal education of women threatened
to eliminate the very quality that gave them worth"
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ887227.pdf

[nalaa]

@alb84 well the only thing you commented on was the past. How else am I supposed to reply to that? You asked why judged patriarchy to be a bad thing and I told you why it was in pretty much all cases.

[ComDom]

@nalaa See right now I don't know who you're talking to and that's the ENTIRE point of using the mention system. So no I won't stop mentioning you because it makes NO sense.

We are largely peaceful here. I've never seen war so the impact doesn't hit home. Those wars you mentioned aren't even technically considered wars. The United States hasn't had many declared wars. The last declared war we had was WW2.

"But you're right historicaly we're living in the most peaceful era ever."

This is FALSE. The Romans were EXTREMELY peaceful, more than we are now. Along with the Greeks. The Persians. And MANY others.

Link you to the MRA... sure: "https://mensrights.com/"

"MensRights. com reports on men’s rights issues that occur. We focus on supporting men’s rights through reporting on men’s rights, and supporting men’s rights activists in their goal of creating a fair society."

[ComDom]

@nalaa "men, I think that would just very much proof the point that those guys are just bummed out about their loss of privilege and don't give a shit about equal rights."

The fact that you say that is the EXACT reason I made this post. You've been indoctrinated to believe something that is FALSE. I believe in equal opportunity because females DO make contributions. It's a fact. But Feminism has mutated into a monster and it is corrupting society.

"that's true, which serves to underline my point of it being a terrible system."

Based on what? We are here because of it and we have technology and science because of it.

"But almost all meaningful discoveries were made by men who had wealth and power. Women didn't have any power, never. So while few men had, no women had."

FALSE. PEOPLE in power had wealth. That INCLUDED women.

[ComDom]

@nalaa "And no matter how wealthy women were, they weren't allowed in universities or even think about science. Women and science were considered an abomination something gross and disgusting."

NOT TRUE. There weren't even always Universities FOR ANYONE. Science was considered bad for EVERYONE for a while. At least in Europe . Think Galileo.

Start here: en.wikipedia.org/.../Female_education

"Look we can look at the class issue, but that's a different point. Excluding poor people from power is also bad, but that's not the point."

Based on what? Excluding people is evolutionary. Survival of the fittest. What you linked is ONLY attitudes of SOME males toward educating females not whether or not they were educated.

[nalaa]

Take Owner. You're not having a conversation with him, so I'm not getting confused. Then at least put a space in between the @ and my name so I won't get double the notifications. Because the whole point is to be able to notify people who commented on answer and wouldn't otherwise get notifications. but this is my answer so I do anyways

"The United States hasn't had many declared wars" ya because that doesn't sound good does it? And looking at it like that ignores important wars such as the vietnam war. Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean it's not there. I can't believe you actually said that.

"The Romans were EXTREMELY peaceful, more than we are now. Along with the Greeks" well that statistic referred to violence in general and are you fucking kidding? The romans were huge warmongers. How do you think they conquered so many countries? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't by giving out free hugs. They had slaves and they let people fight to death in an arean for entertainment.

[nalaa]

and they literally nailed people to a piece of wood and let them hang around until they died of thirst.

""men, I think that would just very much proof the point that those guys are just bummed out about their loss of privilege and don't give a shit about equal rights."

The fact that you say that is the EXACT reason I made this post. You've been indoctrinated to believe something that is FALSE. " No , No , No that is only part of the sentence. I said IF there is a distinction and that distinction is all women are evil unless they submit to men... so if you believe that you can't possibly believe in equal rights and opportunities. Choose one. They're mutually exclusive!

"Based on what?" based on what we have today, because women have more power than ever before and we're doing better than ever before

It's the common attitude towards women and education, which was reflected in the laws of that time. Look, I literally just said that higher education was always only acessible for

[nalaa]

not sure why you felt you'd have to bring it up again. But even withing the upper class, higher education was only for men. I also said higher education, so you linking an article that says women in rome went to primary school isn't proving anything, the article then goes on saying women in medieval time weren't educated. It also looks at the population as a whole not gender difference within the upper class, which is what we are discussing

[ComDom]

@nalaa I'm aware you're talking to two people so I'M confused on who you're responding to. That's WHY you should ALSO use the mention system. That's WHY it's there. It's also possible I could talk to him as well.

I'm aware of Vietnam but it's technically not a declared war. It's a military engagement. You can believe what you like but I prefer the truth.

The Romans did conquer that's obvious but at a certain point they conquered basically everything and in more than one instance had peaceful periods including the Pax Romana.

"men, I think that would just very much proof the point that those guys are just bummed out about their loss of privilege and don't give a shit about equal rights."

Then I still don't understand so rephrase this^

"based on what we have today, because women have more power than ever before and we're doing better than ever before"

Again based on what? Link some material or something. I've heard women aren't as happy now.

papers.ssrn.com/.../papers.cfm?abstract_id=1405977

[alb84]

nalaa “well the only thing you commented on was the past.“
I know, I know... I was mad for a second XD jejejeje

I agree, is a bad thing to close the doors of “power” to anyone... but again, without a basic education you CANNOT have any sort of power, unless you want to make a mess. And education at that time was a real privilege, only for the rich, powerful, or under the church.. and you know it. I'll admit that women weren't allowed, but that doesn't change the fact that 90% of men had that restriction too. Personally , I think is a big mistake taking outside of this discussion the social classes, etc... in because that explains a lot of how thing were at those times.

[alb84]

Now, about this:
“men, I think that would just very much proof the point that those guys are just bummed out about their loss of privilege and don't give a shit about equal rights. “
are you talking about me? O_o first of all, what privileges do I have? and second, from which part of what I wrote, did you arrived at the conclusion that I don't want equal rights? because I have no problem with that... I have a problem with feminism, because as I said earlier, in my country this has translated in legal discrimination against men, among other things...

[ComDom]

@nalaa "It's the common attitude towards women and education, which was reflected in the laws of that time. Look, I literally just said that higher education was always only acessible for not sure why you felt you'd have to bring it up again."

I brought it up again because your claim was false. Women WERE educated in antiquity if they had power or the resources to do so WHEN it was possible for ANYONE to be educated.

"But even withing the upper class, higher education was only for men. I also said higher education, so you linking an article that says women in rome went to primary school isn't proving anything, "

There wasn't always higher education. What are you even talking about?

[ComDom]

@nalaa "the article then goes on saying women in medieval time weren't educated. It also looks at the population as a whole not gender difference within the upper class, which is what we are discussing"

MOST of the population wasn't educated because AT LEAST some of the medieval period was in the dark ages. They also WERE educated in convents. You're resorting to attempting to cherry pick because your argument doesn't stand up. Why would you want it to anyway? Isn't the truth a better foundation than dogma? You make it seem like men are fundamentally your enemy when that isn't true. You have male relatives and friends don't you?

[nalaa]

@alb84 No as you can see by the comma after men, that was only partial sentence and it wasn't meant for you, it was meant for the take owner

We can leave the classes in, but you were saying that patriarchy has produced an awful lot of scientific advancement. Well ya but only the wealthy have. And even among the wealthy, just men. And I was saying imagine what they could have done if they hadn't excluded women from that. So now you can't back paddle and say that most men didn't have that opportunity either

[nalaa]

@take owner "I'm aware of Vietnam but it's technically" ya technically, that's the point, but would you really define the Vietnam war period as a period of peace?

"conquered basically everything and in more than one instance had peaceful periods " ya aside from the fact they enslaved the conquered countries, nailed people to a cross and let people fight to death for fun

I was saying that in the article I've read there was no distinction. They said all women were evil. And if there was a distinction it was always something like all women who don't submit to men are evil, which, makes me think that those men are just bummed out about their loss of privilege

"Again based on what? Link some material or something. I've heard women aren't as happy now. " I really don't know what you're looking for there.
And that paper is irrelevant. It compares the 70s to 2000s. Not much has changes since the 70s in terms of feminism. If was comparing the 1900s to 2000s and got the same result,

[nalaa]

that'd be relevant

[nalaa]

as for the education thing, look exactly at what I told alb84 in my last comment to him. I'm getting tired of repeating it over and over agai And he agree with me there

[alb84]

No prob then.. about education, well, that depends on the “framework” ? of time we are talking about... 100 years ago, women were able to study (Marie Curie comes to mind, a brilliant mind and an example to every women in this planet.. not like celebrities or all those shits), but at that time, education was starting to be accessible to a lot more people.

Also have into consideration, that science, technology and education, are dependant of ressources... if you don't have them, you can't have any of those, so if you have limited ressources you use them on those who can, and at that time, those were the powerful, rich, or church. That being said, I agree, if every man and women could have had access to education, we would be far more advanced, but again, all that depends directly on ressources, which where scarce at that time... but you should notice something, the more evolves science and tech, the more freedoms we have, and this applies to everyone ;)

[nalaa]

@alb84 ya major advancment in women's rights were made in the mid to late 1800s and the early 20th century. Before that, not much
And let's not pretend like she didn't have it much harder than all her male counterparts just because she was female. She was a pioneer at the time

[alb84]

her father was essential in her life; if I recall correctly, their mom died, when she was a kid (and I think her sister too), and her father was a professor of science, and he was the one who teach her until she go to college, so she had a hard life, yet, she managed to win 2 noble prizes ;)

Anyway, returning to the main subject, and at the beginning to all this long discussion XD, patriarchy has made mistakes, I know, but, it has also adapted and evolved and solved a lot of those mistakes, and that's the whole point, it has had it's purpose, and now it's time to work for something new. I'll will put it this way: It's like when you have a really old building, which has been useful (despite it's flaws) and at some point is a waste of time and money trying to repair it, and what you need to do is demolish it, and rebuild it from the ground; the thing is, that before demolishing it, we need to know with what we are going to replace it.. and this is where we are right now ;)

[alb84]

*I meant "Nobel" XD

[ComDom]

@nalaa "ya technically, that's the point, but would you really define the Vietnam war period as a period of peace?"

Not in Vietnam but the war never reached home. So all in all it was pretty peaceful. WW2 reached home. We were threatened in the states and it was a very real possibility they could have invaded. I'm also not arguing for the states being perfect. I think Feminism has corrupted the states for quite a while.

"ya aside from the fact they enslaved the conquered countries, nailed people to a cross and let people fight to death for fun "

Not for fun. Crucifying was a punishment. They enslaved conquered countries for two reasons punishment or for economic purposes.

"And that paper is irrelevant. It compares the 70s to 2000s. Not much has changes since the 70s in terms of feminism. If was comparing the 1900s to 2000s and got the same result,"

That paper is 100% relevant. Feminism was getting very big and getting weird in the 70's. If you read it you'd realize it.

[ComDom]

@nalaa "as for the education thing, look exactly at what I told alb84 in my last comment to him. I'm getting tired of repeating it over and over agai And he agree with me there"

I mean we don't need to have this discussion. I'm trying to tell you the truth. I'm doing you a service.

[nalaa]

@Take Owner, I don't think you really get anything I said, so I don't see the point of this going on. I could respond to you points but I'd be repeating myself

@alb84 Ok I didn't really mean her private life so much as her academic career. It was much harder for her to suceed in her field at the time, than it would have been if she had been a man

I'm not sure we need to know what to replace it with right away. You know how there was a very public discussion about what to build on ground zero? Why can't we do it that way?

[tenofthepeaks]

THis guy seemingly is uni-educated, but never got the strong reasoning skills... he probably fucked his lecturer and s/he gave him his degree by default..

[alb84]

Nalaa, I don't know what you are referring to with this "ground zero" thing XD (I'm not English , and I'm not sure if you are talking about a concept or it's literal meaning :S)

[nalaa]

@alb84 after the 9/11 attacks, in the place where the world trade centre used to be (ground zero) there was nothing for quite a while and people were very publically discussing what to do with the space

[alb84]

ah, okok XD I thought it was a concept but I wasn't sure :S anyway, yes, I think this is what we should be doing, instead of focusing only in present problems (which are important of course), also start to think and plan what kind of society we want to have, problem is, nobody seems to be doing this right now,.. and I'm not talking about discussions inside some group (like feminists, or whatever), everybody should be involved (or at least those who are interested XD) and this is what I was trying to say earlier when I got mad jejeje

[ComDom]

Ultimately we have to agree to disagree. Is it possible Feminism has caused harm? Yes. Is it possible Patriarchy has worked? Absolutely. But it's an opinion. If Feminism convinces you otherwise then it has deluded you.

[dutchpride92]

As a girl who has been wearing mostly dresses since the age of 13 (when I got to decide what I'd wear), loves to cook, clean and had the ambition to become a good wife and mother, I sometimes feel out of place in this world. I get so much sh** thrown at me for life choices I've made because it makes me happy that I feel I truly was born in the wrong decade (I'm a housewife). I'm happy, my husband's happy, and still both men and women say bad things. Comments I get in my face: "But don't you have any other goals or ambitions? Don't you feel useless sitting at home all day? Please tell me at least that you don't like to be objectified?" Comments my husband gets: "Your wife should get off her lazy ass and start working for her money instead of living off yours. Your wife sounds like she only knows three things: how to cook, how to clean and how to wear pretty clothes. No brain at all. Your wife is a disgrace to the modern woman, she wants to go back to the middle-ages when women have worked to hard for the position they're in today" and more of that nonsense. It frustrates me that in this modern day and age, I HAVE to have a "career" to count in society. What, I'm not ambitious because I'm a housewife? I got some diplomas and certificates to make sure that I can work from home in financial difficulty. I want to be the very best wife my man could ever wish for, and that's not ambition? And oh, the looks a man gets when he says he would actually enjoy being with that kind of woman. He'd be labeled as a sexist pig immediately.

[genuinlysensitive]

Exactly, what feminists say "Women deserve the right to choose a career."

What they mean "Women without a career are shit!"

"Women can do it all!"

"Women MUST do it all."

And of course that isn't even touching on the fact that somehow CHOOSING to be a stay at home wife/mom is slavery, but working 80 hours a week in a Corporate office at a job you hate for a boss that doesn't take you seriously is somehow empowerment! What a load of crap!

You are a wonderful caring loving woman, your husband is a lucky man, and your children are also lucky.

As for being labeled a sexist pig you are 100% right! Although, feminists label all men that anyway, so I'm sure your hubby is used to it. Remember it's only ok to call MEN sexist!

[ComDom]

You and other people in your situation are the motivation for what I put together above. When I was younger I remember addressing only the POSSIBILITY that women didn't necessarily NEED to work if their husband could provide and was ridiculed for that conception. But I came to realize after quite a bit of introspection and research that their views are ONLY unfounded opinions.

Feminism, fundamentally, is the root of you being treated as you have been. It has become divisive and it probably needs to be extinguished. So essentially, I emphasize with you and hopefully things will change.

[ComDom]

and hope things will change*

[Roark]

To be honest, I consider myself a feminist. My mother was a housewife for most of her married life, she decided to work only later - her kids grew up, and she found herself being bored at home most of the day. I come from a culture where this dynamic is accepted, and a woman choosing to work after marriage is frowned upon in many cases. The husband earns, and the woman is a housewife. It works for you, and that's absolutely fantastic! Good for you. I've always viewed feminism as the idea that you get to choose. If you want that lifestyle, that's okay with me. But if another woman doesn't want that lifestyle, she should have the right to forego it. Continue to stick up for yourself!

[ComDom]

@Roark unfortunately that's what Feminists want you to believe but it's much more than that.

[phanindra554]

@dutchpride92
If you are good person and your husband is happy with you it is enough no need to listen to others.
You can your own good luck:-)

[Roark]

As I said, I consider myself a feminist. And to be fair, just like people follow religions to different degrees and adopt religion to their own lifestyle (you did say that feminism is a belief), there is a huge range of people who identify as feminists - and define it a little differently.

[ComDom]

@Roark "there is a huge range of people who identify as feminists - and define it a little differently."

True but Feminism isn't like other religions (such as Christianity) in that it doesn't haven't a centrally accepted doctrine. So it can mutate and infect society covertly while simultaneously remaining "Feminist" yet not. It has become unfalsifiable because it's fallacious. That's why it's virulent. That's why people are being indoctrinated because it can be dangerous while appearing harmless. It's sort of like a cult.

[alb84]

jeje, funniest thing of all... feminists see a housewife as a slave, yet, they see a stay at home dad, as equality ^^'... am I missing something here? because that's hipocrisy at it's best... as for your case @dutchpride92 don't bother about what others think or say.. if you and your husband are happy, that's the only thing that matters. I also thought (long time ago) that feminism was about being able to choose for youself while having the same opportunities as men, but reality tells us a different story :S

[Roark]

Whilst that may very well be the case, your assumption is that my views cannot be defined as feminism. Or at least, I felt that was implied. @ComDom

[ComDom]

@Roark you may have views that align with some of Feminism as I do but I do not associate myself as a "Feminist" because of the whole picture of Feminism. It's flawed BECAUSE it is not clearly defined. It is flawed because it has mutated into something malignant and it only stays around because of the supposed 'good' it has done and is doing.

This is, of course, leaving out the whole picture of the bad it does along with the exaggerations it makes. The key to understanding Feminism is the big picture and the big picture for Feminism is not as pretty as it appears superficially. I've witnessed this first hand more than once. I've also lost track of how many second hand stories I've come across.

[DanHart]

In Germany, feminism is also strongly linked to political parties that want to establish communism , socialism and an anti- military / anti-nationalism ideology.
They're also in favor for natural energy-sources and come close to eco-activists or hippies so to speak. - YES FEMINISM IS AS DANGEROUS AS TERRORISM.

For example there's a group called "women on 20s" who want the face of some other feminist women on the 20$ bills, but just think about how much it would cost to print all these new bills and about the inflation this would cause !
It would devalue the US$ and is an act of terrorism on the US economy !!!

And what's even worse are their plans to abolish the military, which would make millions of people unemployed and would make the US an easy target for foreign terrorist groups ! (This would also damage the economy a lot once again)

Their wish to transform a country to a communist nation would cause the economy to become command economy which was responsible for the poverty of today's former Soviet countries like Ukraine, etc.
Communism would also take away peoples' social mobility and FREEDOM ! Communism intends to make every citizen equally poor !

just think about it: Do you FEMINISTS really want POVERTY, SLAVERY, COMMUNISM, NO MILITARY DEFENSE and dirty HIPPIES?

Sorry, feminists, you are SCUM in my eyes ! GO TO HELL !

[Slavanna]

So... how do you go from German feminists' political alignment to communism in the USA? I dislike communism as much as the next guy (even more so because I grew up in post-commie Poland), but I don't see how feminism can lead directly to a dramatic shift in the entire political makeup of the country. A bit of a fallacious use of the slippery slope argument. Not a feminist myself, just for the record.

[DanHart]

Well, maybe it is necessary to distinguish between German and American feminism in general.
But here in Germany, they really do want to implement communist ideas ! It is a fact in Germany.

[fraikrop64]

I was with you until the "If people want Feminism to go away they should probably stop reproducing with Feminists, marginalize/demonize their views,".

No. Any man in his right mind, and with any self respect will avoid a feminist like the plague. No doubt about that.
But to call for joint boycott of feminists as individuals, instead of feminism as an ideology, and by demonizing their views, instead of discrediting them with facts, is to engage in censorship.

That would be as fucked up as what religion does > calls for boycott of all non-member, asks to demonize them and don't marry them, let them die out.

[ComDom]

I wasn't telling people what to do I was suggesting how to be rid of an ideology. It's only an option. Some of their views deserve demonizing and marginalizing. They are advocating genocide at times and blatant falsehoods. It's gone too far.

They are polluting people's minds. My point was that if Feminists cannot reproduce, spread, and continue on its legacy it will end. Censorship might not always be bad though. What happens if Nazi'ism takes off again? It's ultimately just an opinion. It's just gotten crazy now.

[fraikrop64]

And my point is that censorship is ALWAYS bad. It degrades society and its progress. The buck stops with the moron who got offended the most.

You may even be able to defeat feminists using their own tactics, but the price would be too high.

[ComDom]

Oh this isn't about me getting offended. This is about me opposing false information. I think we need to defend ourselves and use the truth.

[godislovee]

it's their own opinions why they are dangerous? If they are dangerous, everything else is same as well. abortion seems to be the key but then men don't want baby also. do you know how many white guys sleeping around underage black girls and they love to kill their babies. they seem like they have to kill their own baby so that they can get over the fear of exposing themselves as self haters. You think you can kill the baby murderers? no way. they will do it and they can do it no matter who try to stop them. it's everyone's fault. baby is dead because of you and the girl. both are guilty so why blame only the girl? well in genesys adam was doing that to eve. Your women told me to eat the fruit. that happens all the time with my ex. They want to make excuses by lying and pretending. All you want to do is fool around but then you need excuses. I can tell right away without going through all that drama. so promoting birth control pill or condoms will do the trick but you all want kill the baby so that you will be free from the burden and have ultimate fun 100% guilt free justified. so abortion will not be stopped. but then if you kill your own baby, you will become high statues when you die in hell. it's ancient legend so a lot of celebrities become fame that way.

[ComDom]

"it's their own opinions why they are dangerous? If they are dangerous, everything else is same as well."

Because they are polluting people's minds with falsehoods.

"do you know how many white guys sleeping around underage black girls and they love to kill their babies. they seem like they have to kill their own baby so that they can get over the fear of exposing themselves as self haters. You think you can kill the baby murderers? no way. they will do it and they can do it no matter who try to stop them. it's everyone's fault. baby is dead because of you and the girl. both are guilty so why blame only the girl?"

I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm white and I don't know guys who do this. Can you link me?

[godislovee]

just take a good look at black girls when they near you. they are hiding under your shadow. and they will be hooked up with some older white guys. white guys use her as waste and they use their baby as a target practice if they are born otherwise she will gain confidence to deny herself not being self hater so much by killing the baby. it's ancient ritual. it's been done by the people. for the money and fame, she has to sacrifice her own offsprings and give it to devil and the devil will make the baby into a demon and protect her until they drag her into hell when she dies. just take a good look at it around you. they are there.

[godislovee]

it is wrong to kill baby for her fame and money. they use the baby fetus for her social experience and her over coming fear of looking bad as a single mother and they act like they are bolder than any woman who is pregnant and gave a birth to a child. that gives a lot of men's attention who are horny and want the baby or unable to have it. but some cases, baby is evil. she would know what's inside of her. Jesus said that ilkariott juda shouldn't have born. and some cases they just don't like the guy. I don't know. she would know.. everybody knows actually. they just don't say it.

[genuinlysensitive]

"it's their own opinions why they are dangerous?"

Why is it only dangerous when radicals hate women, but not when other radicals hate men? That is all feminism is doing replacing one kind of radical hatred with another!

[godislovee]

you can't just say suck my cock, you will get fed and live. I have sucked thousands of cocks and I am not still getting fed well. what's going on? who is lying?

[godislovee]

I still hate men. but I am not expressing myself because expressing hate don't do any good. but people know anyway. but the point is.. men also hate women and we are even. so, why not everyone just live their life and be happy? equally.

[godislovee]

i don't see her that aggressive anyway. I bet you guys are spooky. I know..

[Pedantic]

Even within the 'Feminist' movement you have numerous viewpoints, approaches, methods, and so on.

The term really needs to get broken down, and some groups have made manifestos to that end, but the main problem is you still have many different types of women all still wearing that massive label with their own interpretation of it.

Then you have other movements like anti-racism, multiculturalism, and so on, that threaten a more important cause than just limiting to one gender.

Then there was egalitarianism, the massive umbrella that incorporates it all. That basically all people should be treated like people. I had considered myself one for some time, until various dregs have ruined that umbrella too.

At the end of the day, a person will try to get know people and see them from where they are at, or they will not. Turns out this has been going on for a few millenia.

Damn, what a shocker.

[ComDom]

We see it mostly the same way I think. I'm not saying "Egalitarianism" is necessarily the answer but it seems to be a step in the right direction. We should focus on what unites us rather than what separates us. Thanks for the insight!

[jordan0101]

"Woman deserve the right to a career." If you were to ask my mother she would tell you that her job, as a housewife, is a hard one, it is a job not perhaps even a career. Perhaps some people believe that all feminist are against men but being a feminist myself i believe that i shouldn't be seen as a sex object, not something less than men, but I also believe that men deserve the right to be sensitive, caring and they should be aloud to feel. Men should not be seen as weak or pathetic if he cries. He should be seen as HUMAN, I believe that all women should be able to get an education and that men shouldn't be forced to provide for the family. I have a friend whose dad is a 'housedad' and her mother works. It's the choice of the family, it shouldn't be assumed that woman must stay at home and men must work. i believe that women shouldn't be harassed because of the clothing we wear or because of our body shape. we shouldn't be telling girls to cover up, we should be teaching people that rape is wrong and a crime. And it's not just women, men are raped too. These videos are just a sample of people.
If you still do not understand feminism click here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-iFl4qhBsE

[ComDom]

I understand Feminism perfectly but based on your response it leads me to believe you either did not read what I wrote or that you didn't understand what I wrote. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter. Feminism is made up of many different subsections that are all equally Feminist because of Feminism's definition. Feminism is open-ended, lacking an official doctrine. It allows for extremists. Your view is your opinion but that is not the entirety of Feminism.

Also, gender equality is not necessarily rational as the sexes are not the same. They should have equal opportunity in my opinion though. What she said is the definition of Feminism is not the entirety of its definition. They are also attempting to force genders to be equal. I'm glad women are choosing not to be Feminist. Her views are not too strong, they are too warped. Her views are not too isolating they are detached from reality, being a Feminist.

[ComDom]

The market should decide what she's paid not the government, she should be able to make decisions about her body until she harms another person (as in abortion), affording the same respect? why not the same level (she is not a man why would she want the same respect as a man?), no country has achieved gender equality? that makes perfect sense because the genders are not the same,

[jordan0101]

On your point about abortion, abortion is not murder. She, we, as women should be able to decide if we want to keep a child or if we cannot provide for the child. If the mother cannot provide the nessary things a child requires, she has two choises. She can abort the child or chose to put it up for adoption. Statistically speaking, There are more than 400,000 children in the foster care system in the United States. And out of all those kids only 49,866 youth in foster care were adopted. Of those youth, 54% were adopted by their foster parent (s). The “foster parent” category excludes anyone identified as a relative of the child. Thirty one percent of children adopted in FY 2011 were adopted by a relative. A “relative” includes a step-parent or other relative of the child. And that's not even considering the number of children abused within the foster care system. 20,000 foster kids age out of the foster program on top. Statistically speaking abortion would happen to make more sense.

[jordan0101]

my source: https://childrensactionnetwork.org/resources.html

[jordan0101]

As for " Feminism is open-ended, lacking an official doctrine. It allows for extremists." doesn't every movement allow for extremists. Was the fight for the rights of black men and woman not violent at times? Were there not wars caused by the decolonization movement? People were arrested, people were killed for expressing their rights to be free and equal. Movements are always in need of who ever they believe can help them. Usually no one asks why people have joined the movement all that counts is that they are there.

[jordan0101]

Women do deserve the same amount as respect from others as a men. WE deserve to be seen as a contender, a serious businesswoman, a strong willed sports person. WE shouldn't be seen as dainty figure that require men to survive but would rather love men. Every now and then it's nice to know that there is someone to catch us if we fall but we do not, should not, be forced into relying on men. We are not the same, our bodies are made differently, we are all individuals, all unique but that doesn't mean we should be treated differently. What if the roles where reversed and men were the ones seen as beneath women? You are likely to react differently, if i where to be the one telling you that men do not deserve the same respect that women receive. Would you not be against what i where to be saying?

[ComDom]

"On your point about abortion, abortion is not murder."

That's 100% debatable. My basis is that you were once unborn and if someone had aborted you then you would not be alive. That's a fact. If murder is justified killing. How is killing a child before they had a chance to live justified? Your basis thus far seems selfish. Not to mention that what you've said thus far could be prevented with responsibility and contraception rather than killing unborn children.

"doesn't every movement allow for extremists."

No. Because most movements have more explicit definitions/doctrine and more directly renounce extremists. There are members that I've mentioned that openly run/influence women's studies programs and are accepted.

"Was the fight for the rights of black men and woman not violent at times?"

They were and they were put in prison or killed themselves (Malcolm X). MLK and Ghandi were not aggressively violent.

[ComDom]

" WE deserve to be seen as a contender, a serious businesswoman, a strong willed sports person."

No women do not NECESSARILY deserve it. That's not how the market works. You deserve ONLY the opportunity to be taken seriously. People have to PROVE their ability to contend. It isn't just given. What you're saying isn't equality. It's manipulation.

"doesn't mean we should be treated differently."

... Yes you should be because psychology and statistics say you should. Who do you think commits violent crimes? Men. Who do you think are the victims of most rapes? Women. The biology is different. You SHOULD be treated differently but not necessarily worse.

"What if the roles where reversed and men were the ones seen as beneath women?"

They are in some ways: alimony, custody, sentencing, etc. are often more favorable for women. Equal opportunity should be for everyone not JUST women. Feminism < Egalitarianism.

[aamy811]

When you talk about feminist hating men are you really talking about feminists or mysandrists. I see this mid used a lot the other day I heard a guy say "she hates guys, she's a total feminist", but if she hates men then she's not a feminist but instead a mysandrist. I feel like people use the word wrong a lot. You can love men and still want women's rights if your a feminist, you can't live men and want women to succeed if your a mysandrist.
And I don't get why telling my daughter it's okay if she wants to do more "boyish" things is a bad thing. You say it would make us neutral, but not necessarily. Some girls will still choose to be exceptionally feminine, some guys will still want I be traditionally masculine. And even if most people were neutral what's wrong with that? There are great aspects of both genders so wouldn't it be great to mix and match those great things (examples, someone whose very kind and nurturing but very truthful and says what they mean).

[ComDom]

No. Feminism is fundamentally corrupt. It is growing closer and closer to misandry.

"And I don't get why telling my daughter it's okay if she wants to do more "boyish" things is a bad thing. You say it would make us neutral, but not necessarily."

Being neutral would be necessarily bad if they were indeed "boy" or "girl" things and the other sex was doing them because they would not be the other sex, granted that's ultimately an opinion. Some of that behavior mixing is potentially currently or in the future to be cultural indoctrination. To be fair all morality and ethics are an opinion unless there is a God.

[aamy811]

I don't get how not wearing a skirt makes you not a girl. Or being passive makes you a woman. If you identify as one I either cis genders, then you are that gender. Liking the color pink or not isn't really going to change that

[ComDom]

"I don't get how not wearing a skirt makes you not a girl. Or being passive makes you a woman. If you identify as one I either cis genders, then you are that gender. Liking the color pink or not isn't really going to change that"

No you aren't that gender if you identify with one or the other. You are born a certain gender. Not wearing a skirt doesn't make you not a girl. Girls have other options. It's not that women can't be aggressive they have testosterone too but males have MUCH more than women. That isn't really the point though. The point is that males tend to act masculine and females tend to act feminine and there is nothing wrong with that.

[ComDom]

@aamy811 again^

[aamy811]

I never said there was but making people put up a mask to match their gender is stupid. This girl may be really girly and feminine, but she's slightly assertive when it comes to school. Well now she feels like something's wrong with her or that she has I hide that "manly" part of er or people won't like her.
And as a feminist I want my daughter to know that you can fully embrace being a woman but still have "manly" traits about you, and those traits don't define the gender you identify with.
Whether someone wants to act like a girl or boy regardless of their gender is absolutely fine and okay and should be encouraged because that's just who they are.

[ComDom]

@aamy811 "I never said there was but making people put up a mask to match their gender is stupid. This girl may be really girly and feminine, but she's slightly assertive when it comes to school. Well now she feels like something's wrong with her or that she has I hide that "manly" part of er or people won't like her."

It all depends on how far away from the norm of her gender she is and if it is due to psychological trauma or cultural conditioning.

"And as a feminist I want my daughter to know that you can fully embrace being a woman but still have "manly" traits about you, and those traits don't define the gender you identify with."

So you want a manly daughter?

"Whether someone wants to act like a girl or boy regardless of their gender is absolutely fine and okay and should be encouraged because that's just who they are."

Certainly not. Being who they are isn't always good. What if they are psychopaths? What if they don't know right from wrong? What if they are dangerous?

[aamy811]

Pretending no to be a psychopath doesn't make you not a psychopath. Acknowledging that you are one and getting help is what you really should do, because pretending you aren't means you'll eventually snap.
Also that's the extreme case, let's try keeping it normal and realistic.
I don't want a manly daughter. I want a child who is comfortable with the self and isn't ashamed of their personality.
Being an assertive girl doesn't mean you've ah some sort of traumatic event, it's just a personality trait. And personalities are typically determined by surrounding but not dependent on it.

[ComDom]

@aamy811 "Pretending no to be a psychopath doesn't make you not a psychopath. Acknowledging that you are one and getting help is what you really should do, because pretending you aren't means you'll eventually snap."

I don't understand this. How does this relate to what I'm saying?

"I don't want a manly daughter. I want a child who is comfortable with the self and isn't ashamed of their personality."

I mean you said manly not me. I was just using your words.

"Being an assertive girl doesn't mean you've ah some sort of traumatic event, it's just a personality trait. And personalities are typically determined by surrounding but not dependent on it."

I never said being an assertive girl necessarily means something traumatic happened. Women can be assertive too but probably not as much as males because of their hormones, males have much more testosterone than girls. Males and females are different biologically and males tend to be more aggressive because of this. It's a fact.

[aamy811]

"It all depends on how far away from the norm of her gender she is and if it is due to psychological trauma or cultural conditioning."

You said if her personality isn't stereotypical girl then it's either do to trauma or culture conditioning

I wasn't slamming you for using manly I was just saying that I was only using the word manly to give an example. I really don't are as long as their comfortable with themself

[ComDom]

"You said if her personality isn't stereotypical girl then it's either do to trauma or culture conditioning"

No those are among the reasons. She could have hormonal deficiencies as well.

"I wasn't slamming you for using manly I was just saying that I was only using the word manly to give an example. I really don't are as long as their comfortable with themself"

You should care. What if being "themselves" is dangerous? What if they are cutters?

[NateInAk]

Good feminists, who just want to make sure women don't ge the short end of the stick for being women, if you don't agree with these views, then why are the most prominent "feminists" always spouting these off?
If you don't want people believe feminist=feminazi, take control of the movement!

[ComDom]

My point exactly.

[genuinlysensitive]

Because despite what they "say" their actions are completely different! Take Girl Scouts revenge. She claims not to "hate" men I say one thing to her next she is going on how "loads" of men are rapists so I should be held accountable because I am a man... Yea they really don't hate men...

[Watermelonoma]

i agree with feminists on some things, and disagree with them on others. The first paragraph is kinda silly too honestly. I mean do you need science to tell you that women should not be raped when they walk outside? That's not really the job of science. It's there to explain what we do not know about our natural world. Morality is what dictates these things and our belief about what's fair and what isn't. So i think your claim that its a religion is hyperbolic. That being said, i do think feminism can be dangerous, especially when they create an atmosphere where one is labelled as a misogynist for simply having a different point of view. On certain important issues, i think feminists are wrong, which is why i dont identify myself as a feminist, but in conversations with feminists, its real easy to see that they aren't really accustomed to much debate, because what comes from the movement generally isn't debated much outside of the internet. That's a problem.

[ComDom]

It appears hyperbolic but it isn't. Feminists can and have attempted to hijack our conception of science through social and educational indoctrination. They attempt to refute science on fallacious grounds.

"but in conversations with feminists, its real easy to see that they aren't really accustomed to much debate, because what comes from the movement generally isn't debated much outside of the internet. That's a problem."

This was one of the biggest purposes of me writing this. I'm trying to understand and identify how they are preventing the dialogue from happening and hopefully reopen it.

[Alexzktra]

My friend was at that University of Toronto event. Well, she's not my friend anymore cos she doesn't believe me & my rape claim - 'cos I consented under the belief he would kill me if I did not. Sorry I just do this everywhere these fucking two-faced pieces of shit. Talk this big talk about consent & rape culture but when their friend is a rapist it's like

s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/.../...a1e61a546d.jpg

None of this rant made sense tho lmao. Like, what do you think "patriarchal" means? You can have a patriarchal society and a queen, like.. c'mon. Please!

Also, what is the No True Scotsman shit about, like? What does that even refer to? What are you talking about!

[ComDom]

"My friend was at that University of Toronto event. Well, she's not my friend anymore cos she doesn't believe me & my rape claim - 'cos I consented under the belief he would kill me if I did not. Sorry I just do this everywhere these fucking two-faced pieces of shit. Talk this big talk about consent & rape culture but when their friend is a rapist it's like"

I have no idea what your point is.

"None of this rant made sense tho lmao. Like, what do you think "patriarchal" means? You can have a patriarchal society and a queen, like.. c'mon. Please!"

This isn't a rant. Everything I said was factual. That's why I cited it. Your assessment is inaccurate. I'm aware you can have a patriarchal society and a queen. I said that. Can you not read?

Rant: to talk loudly and in a way that shows anger : to complain in a way that is unreasonable

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra "Also, what is the No True Scotsman shit about, like? What does that even refer to? What are you talking about!"

"Whenever Feminists attempt to deny that Feminism is the things above it falls under that fallacy due to Feminism ultimately being open-ended by definition."

No True Scotsman pertains to that. I explained this above. I'm not sure how you aren't comprehending it.

[Alexzktra]

Surprisingly, I skim-read bc I was triggered by seeing an ex-friend rape apologist's face, tho I don't even have to play the video tbh. I know which video it is. In any case I was just sayin', I hate her.

Go fuck a dictionary if you love definitions so much lmao

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra "Surprisingly, I skim-read bc I was triggered by seeing an ex-friend rape apologist's face, tho I don't even have to play the video tbh. I know which video it is. In any case I was just sayin', I hate her."

You should read it. I put a fair amount of effort into it. That's unfortunate.

"Go fuck a dictionary if you love definitions so much lmao"

Why would I do that? I like women. What I don't like is women being indoctrinated by some of the monsters in Feminism. It's starting to affect me now so it isn't funny anymore.

[Alexzktra]

lmao aww! Feminism is started to affect you? aw diddums. Misogyny has scarred the lives of women for centuries. You poor baby.

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra "lmao aww! Feminism is started to affect you? aw diddums. Misogyny has scarred the lives of women for centuries. You poor baby."

The Misogyny you're told about is largely an illusion. Life sucked for everyone in the past. The monsters within Feminism feed you that nonsense because they are the ones that actually hate men fundamentally. I bought into it too for quite a while. But the truth is a far better foundation than dogma.

[Alexzktra]

Well, commenter below me says yr a defender of paedophilia and now yr gaslighting me about my personal trauma as a woman like you believe I didn't actively seek out feminism bc I was traumatised? Do not all feminists do that? All women are traumatised by the patriarchy; womanhood is traumatic, womanhood is trauma inherently; to be female is to be oppressed. And to be male is to be oppressor. For there is no sex. There is but sex that is oppressed and sex that oppresses.

But apparently I am just being fed lies by the Illuminati Feminists or something and it's conspiracy like don yr tinfoil fedora mate, you'll be fine. You'll be fine because you don't need feminism; feminism is not for you. Feminism is not about you. You have no right to have an opinion on women's liberation-- that is exactly the point!

[ComDom]

"Well, commenter below me says yr a defender of paedophilia"

No. After puberty it isn't pedophilia. It would be statutory rape. This is a new concept. One that doesn't make much sense as far as science goes. It's emotionally driven.

"yr gaslighting me about my personal trauma as a woman like you believe I didn't actively seek out feminism bc I was traumatised?"

In order for me to be gas-lighting you I'd have to be lying to you and I'm not. If you were traumatized you should have seen a psychiatrist. Feminism is more like a cult in some ways. It takes people and brainwashes them into believing things that aren't true. If you were treated poorly I'm on your side. That behavior is unacceptable.

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra "Do not all feminists do that? All women are traumatised by the patriarchy; womanhood is traumatic, womanhood is trauma inherently; to be female is to be oppressed. And to be male is to be oppressor. For there is no sex. There is but sex that is oppressed and sex that oppresses."

Based on what? This is brainwashing. Men go out of their way to keep women happy. You've never heard the expression, "happy wife is a happy life." From experience that's true. Unhappy women make life miserable.

"But apparently I am just being fed lies by the Illuminati Feminists or something and it's conspiracy like don yr tinfoil fedora mate, you'll be fine. You'll be fine because you don't need feminism; feminism is not for you. Feminism is not about you. You have no right to have an opinion on women's liberation-- that is exactly the point!"

I have MORE than every right to comment on it BECAUSE it affects me. It can brainwash women I care about.

[Alexzktra]

"After puberty it isn't pedophilia." Tell it to the judge, mate.

Psychiatrist spend 10-15 minutes with you, even in hospitals, --perhaps even moreso bc then they are more stretched-- they will give you a diagnosis (if you don't have one, already accounting for yr current presentation of symptoms)(or, in hospital, assess the possible risk of harm to self/others---or both) & prescribe you whatever the feel is necessary [with little to no input from yourself].

I know that bc I've seen doctors both in community mental health and inpatient wards so yeah. I did see a psychiatrist. I wouldn't be making "tinfoil fedora" jokes had I not earned the right.

Don't get me started on psychiatry, though, I'm a Mad proud lesbian feminist don't talk to me about seeing psychiatrists.

[Alexzktra]

You don't care about women. You neither care nor understand the pain of being a woman.

It is not brainwashing -- it's literally my own words. Well, somewhere in there I quoted Monique Wittig but y'know. No-one ever said to me "womanhood is trauma"; I came to such conclusions myself.

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra ""After puberty it isn't pedophilia." Tell it to the judge, mate."

I never said it wasn't illegal. It is. I corrected your terminology.

"Psychiatrist spend 10-15 minutes with you, even in hospitals, --perhaps even moreso bc then they are more stretched-- they will give you a diagnosis"

If what you said about that is true it worries me. I know it's not always true because I'm familiar with people who have had much more positive experiences. Are you not from the states? Generally psychiatry and psychology are long drawn out processes. I have a pretty wide knowledge base on the subject, though not being officially trained in the field.

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra "You don't care about women. You neither care nor understand the pain of being a woman."

Sure I do. My mom is a woman. I have a lot of female friends and I've been around females romantically. Trust me that couldn't be further from the truth. I don't understand the pain though so that's true.

"It is not brainwashing -- it's literally my own words. Well, somewhere in there I quoted Monique Wittig but y'know. No-one ever said to me "womanhood is trauma"; I came to such conclusions myself."

A person can brainwash themselves. You only need to convince yourself of something that isn't true. Womanhood doesn't HAVE to be trauma though at least much more so than living. I know plenty of women who are very happy with life, in general.

[Alexzktra]

Can I just say, if I ever heard I was one of those people someone was talking about like 'I can't be a homophobe/lesbophobe, my friend Alex is a lesbian!' I'd declare them no longer my friend like yr friends aren't a Get Outta Jail Free card, mate. That you devalue them so.. smh

[Alexzktra]

Also, I'm not from the States, no, if you hover over my username it says "United Kingdom" ..

[ComDom]

Fair enough. I'll try again. I'm not afraid of nor do I hate women fundamentally. I do hate at least some of what Feminism stands for. I hope I've made a clear distinction between the two.

[ComDom]

@Alexzktra "Also, I'm not from the States, no, if you hover over my username it says "United Kingdom" .."

Well there's your problem. I don't socialized medicine for reasons similar to what you've experienced. It's incredibly inefficient. I'm sorry you have to deal with that.

[genuinlysensitive]

I'm truly sorry for what you went through, but I am not a rapist, none of my friends are rapists. In fact the VAST MAJORITY of men are not only NOT rapists but see rape as a horrible evil vile crime.

The thing feminists don't tell you is that horrible evil vile crime was committed by horrible evil vile people, not all men, and not any culture where we get together and encourage each other to rape.

That is BULLSHIT!

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

Thanks for dictating what feminism means to everyone, real intelligent take there, so useful and enlightening. I've seen the errors of my ways finally! I shall now go to the kitchen and make my man a bacon sandwich, then suck him off as he watches some manly sports then goes and voted republican.

Thank you ComDom, what would i have ever done without your superior wisdom to shine the way...

[ComDom]

Feminism was useful 50-100+ years ago, then it became humorously divisive, and now it's become clear to me that it is indoctrinating people on a large scale. It isn't funny, to me, anymore. It's able to do this covertly because of powerfully well hidden fallacies, one of which I've discovered.

"Thanks for dictating what feminism means to everyone"

The KKK, Nazism/facism, Communism, Black Panthers, etc. aren't ALL bad. They all revolve around community (dangerous exclusive ones), unity within said community, and equality (often at the expensive of freedom and by extension individuality).

This all leads me to believe that Feminism is in at least some ways like a cult. Cult: : a small religious group that is not part of a larger and more accepted religion and that has beliefs regarded by many people as extreme or dangerous.

Feminism being the religion belonging to a larger group about equality like Egalitarianism.

[jacquesvol]

MHO here!

[jacquesvol]

MHO for @GirlScoutsRevenge

[Noxifer626]

@Take Owner
Democracy was invented 3000 years ago.
¿Does that make it useless?

[ComDom]

@Noxifer626 no and I never claimed it did so I have no idea what you're getting at.

[Noxifer626]

@TakeOwner You mentioned that it was only useful 50-100 years ago.
I made another example of something useful invented a long time ago.
Also, you say: "It isn't funny, to me, anymore", as if feminism had been invented to be funny.

[ComDom]

@Noxifer626 lol no. I'm not saying it isn't useful because it's old. I'm saying its original goals have been accomplished. It has mutated into whatever it is now.

[ComDom]

@Noxifer626 "Also, you say: "It isn't funny, to me, anymore", as if feminism had been invented to be funny."

Lol no. You make some really weird assumptions. It wouldn't have to be created to be funny to be funny. Another fallacy.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

He's calling you out on your fallacy yet you insist on doing your normal trick of repeating back what has been said while skirting around the actual issue.

[ComDom]

@girlscoutsrevenge lol no. He thinks he is. I have to repeat myself because people either aren't paying attention or they don't understand. If they don't understand I would suggest they do research. Or I guess I could try educating them but that sounds like a lot of work

[ComDom]

The difference between you and me is I have intellectual honesty or you don't understand either.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

What do you mean I don't have intellectual honesty, because I refuse to engage in a pointless battle of wits with you?

Your repetition is not for the benefit of others or clarification, you do it every time you reply. You did it to me while claiming you had never done it, so don't start taking the "honesty high ground" when the only interactions we've had you've denied.

[ComDom]

@GirlScoutsRevenge "What do you mean I don't have intellectual honesty, because I refuse to engage in a pointless battle of wits with you?"

No I'm NOT saying you have intellectual dishonesty. I'm saying you don't understand OR you have intellectual dishonesty.

My repetition is because we have reached a logical loop. It is exclusively for the benefit of the other people in this discussion. I don't recall denying anything unless you were mistaken.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

You did, you literally repeated what I had said and then said something along the lines of "I have never done that [repeated my own words back to me]"

What am I not understanding, your point of view? Are you saying that if I don't agree with you I'm just lying to spite you?

[ComDom]

"You did, you literally repeated what I had said and then said something along the lines of "I have never done that [repeated my own words back to me]"

I'm honestly not sure what this is in reference to. I apologize.

"What am I not understanding, your point of view? Are you saying that if I don't agree with you I'm just lying to spite you?"

This isn't just about opinions. My points are typically about logical/deductive consistencies/inconsistencies.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

But it's your interpretation of data, events and behaviours. Your interpretation. It's subjective.

[ComDom]

@GirlScoutsRevenge "But it's your interpretation of data, events and behaviours. Your interpretation. It's subjective."

Not quite and that's the difference between hard and soft science. But yes sometimes it can be subjective. For instance: the speed of light in a vacuum is consistent and replicable. Evolution is also very consistent. So it depends on the context of the discussion.

That would be the difference of fact vs opinion. For instance my opinion is that Feminism has become bad enough not to justify its continued existence. Your opinion is the opposite and that's okay. We can agree to disagree. That's intellectual honesty.

[genuinlysensitive]

Well feminism doesn't mean that to you? I guess that excuses EVERYTHING else feminists do!

On another note there are some ISIS members who say that what ISIS is doing isn't what it means to THEM, so I guess we can excuse the entire groups behavior based on that.

Real intelligence here.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

@genuinelysensitive so that means all Muslims should give up their religion?

Loads of men are rapists, but you don't rape so that excuses all the rapists yeah? No. Of course it doesn't. I'm not saying we excuse the bad actions, I'm saying you can't shut feminism down and you don't need to, it's a retarded idea because it's blatantly obvious it will never work.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

@genuinlysensitive

[genuinlysensitive]

Can any feminist go more than two seconds without accusing a man of being a rapist? I meant just to try something different? Or is that just your go to when you are threatend with reality?

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

@genuinlysensitive and the Nazi accusation of feminism isn't old, or the demasculising of men?

What reality am I threatened with exactly? Nothing about a bunch of losers repeating the same old shit online threatens me, it obviously threatens you and asker though.

[ComDom]

@GirlScoutsRevenge "Loads of men are rapists"

And the vast majority probably aren't. So what's your point?

" I'm saying you can't shut feminism down and you don't need to"

Debatable and probably untrue at least with respect to the first part. If Feminism can be dramatically reduced in its popularity and influence that would more than suffice. As far as needing to goes... That's questionable. My initial thought is yes because I think Feminism is probably rotting society from the inside out.

"Nothing about a bunch of losers repeating the same old shit online threatens me, it obviously threatens you and asker though."

Losers? Based on what? Same old shit? Please link me to an article as thorough as mine. Maybe I should have done more research but I had a hard time finding one that had this hard of a punch. Granted I hope this mentality is only the beginning. If Feminism fades into the background and you want to remain one and be a pariah... enjoy.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

You can't shut it down and I find it so laughable that a) you think you can and b) you think it's a solution!

[ComDom]

@GirlScoutsRevenge "You can't shut it down and I find it so laughable that a) you think you can and b) you think it's a solution!"

First off I didn't say "shut it down." I said reduce its influence and popularity. If you believe that's impossible you're almost certainly deluded or ignorant. Much bigger movements and governments have been defeated including Nazism.

It appears to be losing steam on its own fortunately. More and more females I know have become less interested in it. So I'm thankful for that. It just needs to be stopped at its sources and it should begin to fade away.

It is a solution and I've explained why. So far you have empty words. Prove how it can't be reduced and my proof will hopefully be in my assistance in extinguishing it. But we appear to have reached a natural stopping point again until/unless you have proof it can't be done.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

We reach a natural stopping point because you're putting words into my mouth, yet again. I never claimed it was impossible for it to decline or lose popularity.

No, you didn't say shut it down, you said this in response to me saying that:

"" I'm saying you can't shut feminism down and you don't need to"

Debatable and probably untrue at least with respect to the first part.""

This is why I don't engage you properly, the repetition and the made up words. You assume so much that you and up arguing points I never made.

[ComDom]

"This is why I don't engage you properly, the repetition and the made up words. You assume so much that you and up arguing points I never made."

I stand by what I said: IF you are saying it's impossible to shut it down completely and eliminate it you're PROBABLY wrong. BECAUSE I'd imagine it's more than POSSIBLE for a multitude of reasons. Is it realistic? Maybe.

But that was never MY point. My point was that it could be and has been reduced in its popularity and influence. I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth. I said IF you think that then you WOULD be delusional or ignorant. That's WHY I quote you meticulously. IF I'm assuming that is incorrect then correct me BUT I typically quote you for a reason.

I don't like repeating myself but if I do it's because you apparently weren't paying attention or didn't understand so I had to reword it. People have a hard time with logic. I'd rather people just know this sort of thing or absorb the information. This is like education.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

You asked me to prove something which I never claimed. That's putting words in my mouth in my opinion.

And you don't educate me by repeating my own words back to me, all you do is bore me and make it an absolute chore to read. Hardly "educating".

[ComDom]

@GirlScoutsRevenge "You asked me to prove something which I never claimed. That's putting words in my mouth in my opinion."

Even if I did put words in your mouth on that and I don't recall doing so. It wouldn't make a difference because you don't disagree that it could lose its popularity and influence. So that's a perfectly fine conclusion for me. It's my goal, after all.

"And you don't educate me by repeating my own words back to me, all you do is bore me and make it an absolute chore to read. Hardly "educating"."

Huh? The education comes from what I say not from what you've said. I use your words to make it clear what I'm addressing and nothing more. I disagree with your words... why would i use them to educate you? Those quotes aren't so you read what YOU said. It's so YOU (and I) know what is being spoken about. That's how debates AND science are done, so there is no ambiguity.

[ComDom]

@GirlScoutsRevenge Listen, I don't care so much if you CHOOSE to be a Feminist, though I can't think of a single rational reason why you would. I have a problem when people are INDOCTRINATED into it. If Feminism disappears into obscurity, as I think it should, I'm happy. The rest of this is opinion. However, If you choose not to accept the facts I've brought above that's your prerogative but you are deluding yourself.

Have a nice day.

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

I'm not a feminist per se. I don't have an issue with the facts that show mental women are taking egalitarianism to extremes in the guise of feminism. I don't think men are the enemy, I actually believe that women are the main problem with many issues women face. What I object to is your blind ignorance to the fact that it isn't feminism as a belief or ideal that is the issue, that's what fucks me off about all of the anti-feminism rants on here and the fact that there are never any compromising solutions offered. Never anything productive.

[genuinlysensitive]

@completelyclueless, wait I'm sorry @GirlScoutsRevenge I have never once said anything about Nazis or emasculation, perhaps that was one of the voices in your head?

However although "claiming" you don't hate men you immediately responded to my comment saying that "loads of men are rapists" Which is in fact FALSE, you know the reality feminists don't want getting out? There are a very small number of men who are evil vile horrible rapists, but the fact you take that fact to accuse "loads of men" just proves that once again what feminists say and what they mean are two COMPLETELY different things!

[GirlScoutsRevenge]

@genuinlysensitive there are loads of women who are complete mentalists too, I didn't claim you mentioned Nazis I was using it as a commonly used argument. It was mentioned in this thread, not my head.

[Anonymous]

You're going to find extremist views in all political movements and religions. You are focusing on the extremist feminists views. That's like saying all Christians are evil by citing the Westboro church members who yell profanities at gay soldiers' funerals. I believe in feminism the same way I believe in civil rights for minorities. I never hated men or thought all White people are evil, just that everyone should be given the same opportunities and be treated with the same respect. We just want equality. By the way, studies show that there are more similarities between men and women than differences. We have similar wants and needs, can feel empathy at the same level, want to eat, have housing, families, good jobs-just like men.

[Hannah591]

I don't know why guys have to make feminism more complicated than it is. It's just women wanting more rights than they do now, to be treated like their male counterparts, to get paid the same etc. It's not as horrible or ridiculous as you make out and it's certainly not a religion. It's purely a movement. If it weren't for the women suffragettes a few decades ago, women wouldn't be able to vote or do a lot of what they can do now so most feminists are their equivalent, striving for total equality in the 21st century.

[Hannah591]

All this hate of feminism is getting tiresome and boring tbh.

[ComDom]

No it isn't. It is a religion by definition. Feminism has mutated into many different sects and some of those are dangerous. Feminism is open-ended by nature and because of that the extremists views are just as validly Feminist as yours. I thought what you did until I realized the truth. They sneak under the radar and are corrupting people through women's studies programs to believe in their filth.

Feminism deserves every ounce of hate it gets. Hopefully more people will realize what I have and as a Feminist I imagine your life will get a lot more interesting.

[toxicketchup]

What feminism WAS then, and what it IS now, are two very different things. When people oppose and speak up against feminism, they're referring to the more recent, more toxic form of feminism spreading among impressionable young people. Extremism is dangerous and volatile. Outrage culture has turned feminism into a parody of what it used to be.

[ComDom]

@toxicketchup Feminism may have been beneficial in the past but it is corrupt now. Everything I said above stands. People should move toward a different movement focused on justice for everyone in my opinion. Feminism belongs in the history books.

[toxicketchup]

That's true. We should be focusing on making life better for ALL people, from ALL walks of life. Feminism is too selective, and as of late, too virulent and malicious.

[ComDom]

@toxicketchup I'm glad we agree. I'm all for women. But I'm not for women being indoctrinated by some of the monsters in Feminism. It was funny before but it isn't now. It's getting too virulent.

[genuinlysensitive]

I don't know why so many women have to lie about feminism. And you are right it is not complicated, men are evil, men are to blame for everything evil. We know that is what it is, so do you. Our argument is that it is no more right than hating women because they are women.

"All this hate of feminism is getting tiresome and boring tbh." Imagine if you were the target of feminism's hate because you were a man? Or even a woman who didn't accept the propaganda of feminism?

[Roark]

You've basically taken the worst of the bunch and based your opinion of feminism on them. There are parts of the world where women don't have the same right to education, or work, or even the ability to choose who they marry - and whilst I agree some feminists take it way too far, it's hardly antiquated and dangerous in those scenarios.

[ComDom]

I've taken the parts which together equal the whole to formulate my conclusion. That's how logic works. It's still dangerous and antiquated fundamentally. It was the best people had in the past.

But there are new ideas which can and probably are much more effective than Feminism is, was, or could ever be. Granted that part to an extent is my opinion. But MyTake above was not opinion. I provided facts. I urge you to quote my opinions if you found any.

[genuinlysensitive]

"You've basically taken the worst of the bunch and based your opinion of feminism on them."

You mean the ones who run the movement? Yes that is who we should base our opinion of said movement on.

[Roark]

I haven't quite figured out how to use this interface yet. So hopefully, whoever I'm responding to sees this.

But yes, there were no opinions in your take. I was just suggesting that as an American, you've likely only seen the type of feminism that is dangerous, dogmatic and antiquated. And based on this, you have decided that feminism, full stop, is all of the above. I'd argue that the places where feminism is all of these things is where feminism is an issue. But you admitted it yourself, feminism was necessary 50-100 years ago, and there are developing countries who need it now more than ever. So I do agree with you - I've already said that. But surely you can see the necessity of feminism in developing countries now.

[Roark]

@genuinlysensitive I'll have to concede there. This article is about feminism in the Western world. And given I'm a Londoner, I can see that you're right and that is how most of the feminists I've met are. I'm just suggesting the movement itself may be antiquated, dogmatic etc. in the West, and yet of utmost necessity in developing countries, where most feminists are the kind I spoke of, rather than the kind this take spoke of.

[ComDom]

@Roark "But surely you can see the necessity of feminism in developing countries now."

It was necessary then because there weren't better ideas in the past at least not ones that could gain traction. But until that time I suppose Feminism will have to do.

[Roark]

May I ask what you consider the better alternative?

[ComDom]

@Roark something like Egalitarianism or Equalism seems like a good place to start. It's based on the idea that we are all humans deserve the same opportunities.

[ComDom]

all humans and deserve the same **

[Roark]

Yes, I'm aware of egalitarianism. But the entire point I raised was that women are treated less than men, in some countries. In a way then, in some cases, a feminist would be an egalitarian, and vice versa.

[ComDom]

@Roark no and that's the point. A Feminist CAN be Egalitarian but Egalitarianism can't be a Feminism because of Feminism's nature. Feminism is not ONLY about equality of the sexes. It has become more more than that, for better or worse due to its definition. Feminism =/= Egalitarianism.

Feminism: : the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities
: organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

Egalitarianism: a belief in human equality especially to social, political, and economic affairs
: a social philosophy advocating the removal of inequalities among people

Am I saying Egalitarianism doesn't have baggage also? No. Does it appear to be the better solution to me than Feminism? Yes. I just think its ideas are the better step in the right direction by a long shot.

[Roark]

Yes, we've already agreed that it is becoming less so about equality. But I was speaking specifically about the necessity of feminism in developing countries - and I think you agreed with me that it is an issue, and in that case it is very much the same thing.

[genuinlysensitive]

@Roark The thing is feminism in developing countries is spread FROM the West aka From the feminists here in the West. In many countries where women have little to no rights they can spread their hatred and blame men for society's woes without people realizing what they are doing. Until its too late, you know just like what happened here in the West.

[Anonymous]

Ranavalona I -
Reported the public execution of fifteen Christian leaders near the Queen's palace who were dangled on ropes 150 feet above a rock-filled ravine before the ropes were cut upon their refusal to renounce Christianity.

Queen "Bloody" Mary I Tudor of England -
Thomas Cranmer, the imprisoned archbishop of Canterbury, was forced to watch Bishops Ridley and Latimer being burned at the stake. Cranmer recanted, repudiated Protestant theology, and rejoined the Catholic faith. Under the normal process of the law, he should have been absolved as a repentant. Mary, however, refused to reprieve him. On the day of his burning, he dramatically withdrew his recantation. In total, 283 were executed, most by burning.

[genuinlysensitive]

Interesting... do you know what take you are on?

[muspelhem_5]

I'm so tired of hearing that ridiculous non-argument about erasing gender differences. Feminists do not want a more homogenous world where men and women are the same. They want a world where a person is not constricted to one of two sharply defined gender roles from birth.

At least get your facts straight before spouting off.

[ComDom]

My facts are straight. "One way to interpret Beauvoir's claim that one is not born but rather becomes a woman is to take it as a claim about gender socialisation: females become women through a process whereby they acquire feminine traits and learn feminine behaviour."

plato.stanford.edu/.../#GenSocCon

Maybe you should get your facts straight? Also there are stranger Feminist theories that still remain under the Feminist umbrella.

[muspelhem_5]

How does your quote invalidate my criticism?

[ComDom]

There are stranger Feminist theories and plans to eliminate the male species or at least alter them hormonally.

[ComDom]

"Feminists do not want a more homogenous world where men and women are the same. They want a world where a person is not constricted to one of two sharply defined gender roles from birth."

Also this is almost a contradiction. In fact it might be. Part of being the same deals with "gender roles" if you remove/alter chemicals and behaviors then the sexes are no longer distinctly different, especially if those differences are inborn.

[muspelhem_5]

What about the immense variation within a gender? What about the readily observable fact that some women are very manly and some men are very womanly? What about the role of nurture? Traditional gender roles don't acknowledge the variations within a biological gender, and they impose a role based on that biological gender. Many people don't feel that they fit into that role. I can't see how letting them be themselves will somehow make the world less diverse.

[ComDom]

@muspelhem_5 "What about the immense variation within a gender? What about the readily observable fact that some women are very manly and some men are very womanly?"

Most females and males fall within the "norm" and that's why a norm exists. If people fall outside of that they are anomalies.

"What about the role of nurture?"

Here we agree. Women's studies programs (and probably some parents) are indoctrinating people to believe things that aren't true.

"Traditional gender roles don't acknowledge the variations within a biological gender, and they impose a role based on that biological gender. Many people don't feel that they fit into that role. I can't see how letting them be themselves will somehow make the world less diverse."

These are anomalies and not the norm. People have the freedom to do what they want but when they start indoctrinating people to believe things that aren't true we have a problem.

[ComDom]

@muspelhem_5 "How does your quote invalidate my criticism?"

My quote invalidates your criticism because I was illustrating one example of when Feminism attempts to remove gender roles and identities. More info:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#Biology_and_gender

[muspelhem_5]

I acknowledge the norm. I posit that it is based to a large part on nurture. People unthinkingly adopt the culture they live in, even when it limits their ability to fully express themselves. The feminists I have met are frustrated by the prevalence of limiting cultural beliefs about what men and women may and can do. Regarding what you term 'anomalies', I see them as a boon, not a problem. I was just watching X-Men, rather apropos.

Regarding nurture, and your quote, take a look around you. Our culture massively influences the way people of different genders define themselves.

[ComDom]

@muspelhem_5 I'm well aware of that. And what you and Feminists "posit" is nonsense. It has zero scientific merit. It is an empty ideology. It's cultural delusion and NOTHING more. Males and females have tendencies that emerged BECAUSE of their biological/evolutionary differences. That isn't an opinion. That is a fact. It's consistent with humans and other mammals that share almost identical DNA with us.

Of course culture influences us. But that's too micro. You have to take in the whole picture and once you do the illusions Feminism brings out fade away.

What you're saying is dangerous BECAUSE it's false, BECAUSE it's delusion. What you're saying IS the reason I wrote this post. It's ONLY indoctrination. It was funny until (primarily younger females) started believing it. It's not funny anymore.

[muspelhem_5]

If your biological determinism held true, we wouldn't be living the way we are today. We live in an utterly artificial world that we have created. Most of the 'differences' between men and women that you and others are so sentimental about were hatched inside marketing departments. Why are our names blue and women's names pink? Is that biology? I'm pretty sure a few decades ago you'd have been the guy claiming it is unnatural for women to work outside the home.

[ComDom]

"If your biological determinism held true, we wouldn't be living the way we are today."

False. You've left out free will and operant conditioning. I'm not saying some of these things aren't cultural because they are. But some of them are certainly true.

"Biological determinism, also called biologism or biodeterminism, the idea that most human characteristics, physical and mental, are determined at conception by hereditary factors passed from parent to offspring."

www.britannica.com/.../biological-determinism

[ComDom]

@muspelhem_5 You fail to understand genetics conceptually.

[genuinlysensitive]

"They want a world where a person is not constricted to one of two sharply defined gender roles from birth."

If they were really for equality they would fight for BOTH genders equally when in need, not just one ALL the time.

At least get your facts straight before spouting off.

[Anonymous]

Many women want a traditional marriage... Feminists hate that. I think the family is the best environment for children to grow upmin and I think feminismm tears down family structure.

[musicbrain5]

In what ways? And what is considered a traditional marriage in today's world? Not criticizing you by the way.

[Opinion Owner]

From what I am seeing, feminists think that being equal means being exactly the same, in all ways. If one makes dinner then the other has to make dinner the next night... Seems so ridgid and comes froma place of insecurity that says we both have to do exactly the same amount of everything so no one is cheated of an equal life. F that. I want a life partner, not whatever that is. My wife is best suited for caring for kids and I am best suited for the business world. This type of family has worked for ten thousand years. i am not sure why it is seen as so terrible. In many ways I think my wife has had a better life than me but I am happy as well.

[musicbrain5]

First, thanks for actually answering and not accusing me of attacking you, which is what people seem to love doing here.

I think in today's world, we are as close to equality as we can get. I like that, but I also know that it's impossible to be completely equal because men and women have different capabilities. It's not about trading off either, it's about complementing each other.

I think it's great when women can stay home with the kids even if it's just until they're all in school during the day. That's basically what my mom did and she just worked on weekends. She went back to full time work when we were all in school. But that was back in the early 90's.

In my city right now, it's hard to manage on two incomes, let alone one! Average house prices here have closed in on a million dollars now, and cost of living is very high in Canada in general.

[Opinion Owner]

I am old enough to remember that when women really came into the workforce in the early 1980s that the housing prices started going up significantly. I remember saying at the time that for a while it will be extra money for the family but later it will require both tomwork as the hosuing prices will demand it. I was the only one who worked in my family as after the first year my wife stayed home. Because I was the only one to work it made me work harder and most imprortantly, smarter. we moved a lot for other jobs as it was easier for ke as she didn't have to quit. I could go to Eurpoe on a days notice for business as well since she stayed home with the kids (real examples here). I could work later if needed as I didn't need to pick up the kids. I was more valuable to my employers because of things like that. Neneded up moving into higher positions that pay far, far more than two average paying jobs. So for us, one job paid a lot more than two jobs and my kids had a full time mom.

[Opinion Owner]

Excuse the fast typing and typos.

[musicbrain5]

The stay at home mom lifestyle isn't bad at all. I commend you for being able to maintain it for so long. It's just not what I want for me though, for a couple of reasons - I've spent a lot of money and time on my education and now I'd like to put it to use doing a job that I love, and I also want to be financially independent from my husband in case my marriage fails for some reason, and also be able to maintain a steady job in case that ever happens so I won't need to ask him for alimony (that was the agreement made before we got married). And also just because I don't want to have to ask him for money when I need things. That's what I did with my parents, lol.

We are both teachers (he just accepted a job last week and I'm still looking, but hopeful). So when we have a child, they can be looked after by family for the first couple of years and then at age 4 when school starts, I'll have similar hours so care won't be needed.

[Opinion Owner]

That sounds like a good plan. I moved so much early in my career that she would have been able to keep a job. I made more and more. And we had our first two years into the marriage so she stayed home which she actually wanted to do, I wanted a BMW with her pay lol. most of my neighbors wives stayed home too. They are all senior business people or high paid lawyers/professionals etc so maybe this helps get to that level. My wife takes care of the money so I am the one asking for cash, lol. myndaughter is graduating college in May but is dating an Engineering student. She will go onto being a nurse. If she wanted to staynhome O would be fine with that even though I am paying for the education.

[Opinion Owner]

Would not have been *.

[musicbrain5]

I remember last year, I had a conversation with my dad about this whole thing. He is a surgeon and even at that he was working around the clock for ten years so that my mom could work one or two days a week. And he told me he regretted that years later because he missed out on so many important things in our lives. Actually, he put it more succinctly - he felt he missed out on being a dad during the formative years. It was hard for me to hear that, honestly.

So yes, it absolutely works for people in high paying professional jobs, but at what cost? My dad worked day in and day out to support a wife, FIVE children, and fund our future education, and he now feels he wasn't there to be a dad when we needed it the most. I decided to never marry a doctor because the lifestyle sucks!

My husband and I are a young couple with a chunk of school debt. He has more just because he was an international student. I'd never expect him to have to pay for my education alongside his own, lol. $$$$$

[Opinion Owner]

I hear ya. I was fortunate to have a good balance of family and work. I made it a point. I could have gone higher at work but decided to spend more time with the family. I made it a balance and that was fine as I made more than enough. I worked a lot of 8 hour days. I also worked more hours at times. I was at most school events for my kids and really didn't do a lot of work at home. My skills were transferrable so if my company pushed me I would move on. I made myself a nice niche that i could make a lt and not have to put up with a lot, I just worked smarter tonget what I wanted.

[musicbrain5]

That's great! It's important to balance work and family and that's my goal. I think it's easier to manage in the typical business world than it is in the medical world as an orthopedic surgeon, haha. My dad has always worked in a hospital ER, so you're on call 24/7 if you're not actually at work. And some shifts go for hours on end depending on the patient's needs. He worked all the way up to actually running the department though, so now he can make his own hours.

[Opinion Owner]

I am glad he is getting a breather. My daughter was going to be a doctor but saw how much time would be required. I think one of the reasons she decided against it is that she would be too squeezed for time to have a family. They need to change the requirements for beinga doctor as they seem antiquated.

[musicbrain5]

My mom is actually a doctor as well but not in a high demand specialty. She does lab work and autopsies (ughhhh), and that's what allowed her to stay home most days of the week. Good for your daughter for becoming a nurse. Nurses are the real healers in the end and they run the whole show. Paramedics/EMTs as well.

[genuinlysensitive]

Not only that but couples in traditional marriages are bullied to the extreme. The man is a sexist pig and the woman has "internal misogyny."

If it really WAS about choice couples who CHOSE to have a traditional marriage would be celebrated not brated!

[genuinlysensitive]

*berated*

[JackKerouac77]

I enjoyed this take, especially the bibliography.

[ComDom]

Much appreciated!

[ThatGuy98]

I agree with this article, feminism is ridiculous, sexist and potentially dangerous.