Is Feminism REALLY About Equality?

[M_A_X]

First off, I'd like everyone to scroll down and watch this video, because this girl will probably cover half the points so I don't have to.

Now then, let's get to the meat of this myTake. If you watched the video, you might notice some of the underhanded tactics being used by the feminists in the video that this girl reacts to. Notice all of the broad, overarching statements they make, such as "You're free to believe what you want, BUT", or "Men are not systematically oppressed by their gender, AND THAT'S A FACT", "But women are, and THAT'S A FACT TOO", "If you think that you're a humanist.... we gotta go, we don't have time for this".

Notice how they're not interested in backing up their supposed facts, or actually discussing the issues just pressing their propaganda. Notice the language used. They basically say "If you don't identify with feminism, you're probably a feminist anyway. If you THINK you're a humanist, ain't nobody got time for that"

If this is how easy it is to manipulate feminists, don't you think there must be something wrong somewhere?

Let's discuss this.

[Anonymous]

While feminists brag about liberating women from patriarchal homes, they don’t seem to mind the fact that women are now enslaved in corporations where they are worked to a point of exhaustion. It’s clear to us that feminists are more concerned with destroying families for the sake of their ideology than they are with promoting women’s welfare.

The vast majority of today’s women have bought into the false promise from feminists that they could have it all without any consequences—we merely want to tell women to be realistic about their life choices. Women must know that there is a price to be paid for opting the Sex and the City type of lifestyle and that they must choose between motherhood and career. As they say: Don’t shoot the messenger.

[rose004b]

No, feminism is no longer about equality. It has become an ideology that often promotes misandry and female privilege. The dictionary definition is irrelevant because the movement itself doesn't respect it.
Women: if you believe in the dictionary definition of feminism, it's better to label yourself as an Egalitarian.

True equality IN THE WESTERN WORLD has been achieved. It is pathetic that middle class white western women claim that they are oppressed by "the patriarchy".
My advice to learn about feminism: subscribe to Milo Yiannopoulos, Thunderf00t and Paul Joseph Watson on Youtube.

[M_A_X]

Shoe0nHead is actually dating ArmoredSkeptic, and he hangs out with a lot of that same crowd

[Transigence]

Feminism never was about gender equality. Read the Declaration of Sentiments and just get a load of that bigoted, chauvinistic, one-sided, threat-narrative-peddling language. 167 years ago.

[rose004b]

@Transigence
If we go back to early feminism, 1st wave feminism focused on legal issues (for example: the rights to vote, to own property, to attend university). So yes, in the past, the goals of feminism were about attaining equality.

Let's not forget that feminism has many sub-movements and ideologies. Inevitably, we will find works with "bigoted, chauvinistic, one-sided, threat-narrative-peddling language" throughout history.

[rose004b]

The debate continues in case you want to give your two cents. www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q1939531-is-masculinity-being-demeaned-while-femininity-is-being-revered

[Transigence]

Early feminism did indeed deal with legal issues that needed to be dealt with, but other organizations (non-feminist ones) were already working on those issues, such as the suffragists, who would have gotten women those rights but WITH the responsibilities that go with them (like voting, and conscription).

However, such things were never the FOCUS of the movement. It's not a real rights movement and never was. That's just the cover that allows us to tolerate its existence.

It's true purpose is to spread lies about men and the nature of men and women and a cursory glance at the Declaration of Sentiments reveals this. It is filled with lies about men, gender relations, and history, much of the same ones being bandied about by 3rd-wavers.

[Erinna]

feminism:
*The belief that women are and should be treated as potential intellectual equals and social equals to men. These people can be either male or female human beings, although the ideology is commonly (and perhaps falsely) associated mainly with women.*

There are two types of feminists:

Type A:
Feminists, who loudly shout GENDER EQUALITY, but only care for the issues, that disadvantage women. Gender equality is about making both genders equal. And it can't work by caring just about one of both (in this case: women).
So this type of feminists ignores either the fact, that also men get disadvantaged or they're just stupid. No matter if ignorant or dumb, they don't even fit the definition of "feminist". Why do we have to connect feminism always to this kind of people?

Type B
That type knows that there are disadvantages on BOTH sides. And they indeed care about BOTH sides. But somehow, they're always get thrown in the same pot as Type A.

Now what I criticize is not Type A (well I do not think they're right, but criticizing ignorant/stupid people normally just leads to insults, anger and violence, what else do you expect from primitive creatures? No smart person has the need to use insults and lower him/herself to such a level), but the people who put Type B's in the same pot as Type A and title them all as "radical, stupid, ignorant people who believe in an unequal and men-victimizing ideology". Because this is neither what feminism is, nor what a actual feminist should believe in.

Please explain this to me.

[Silver119]

What about the women who shout about gender equality until it comes to doing something that they find inconvenient? Such as something a man would normally do (a job normally done by a man for example)

[M_A_X]

Sorry, but for one, you obviously didn't watch the video. She already covered the fact that modern feminism has strayed far away from the original purpose and definition. For 2, I'll gladly explain it to you. You choose to use the same word to label yourself as the crazy people from category A.. You care more about the label "feminist" than you do about the issues. If you do not, then there's no reason to call yourself a feminist and group yourself with crazies.

[Transigence]

I'll try to be as brief and simple as possible.

B-type feminists turn a blind eye to A-type feminists and in so doing give their implicit approval. They are complicit in the crimes of A-type feminists.

Either clean up your movement, or leave it. Until then, you're just as bad as the A-type feminists.

Also, B-type feminists still subscribe to, support, and push the bogus feminist-revised history, painting history of one of abuse and subjugation of women by men, when it wasn't even CLOSE to that. So you still get your chauvinism points for not questioning the narrative and doing your own homework.

[steven7890789]

@Erinna most women are hypocrites

[mistixs]

@Silver119 I'll start advocating for gender equality in physical labor jobs done by a tiny minority of men, when we achieve gender equality in the labor done by 81% of women. Specifically, childbirth.
Don't say it's impossible - if we can find a way to land on the moon, we can figure out a way to get men to give birth.

[Silver119]

@mistixs I'm more talking about the ones who are like "Men and women are equal so I can do that stockroom job because a man can" Then they get told to go pick up something and their response is "but it'll ruin my nails"

[M_A_X]

@mistixs That's an equivocation fallacy. You used the word labor in two different ways, with two different meanings.

[mistixs]

Labor means "work." Child labor is indeed definitely work.

[Erinna]

@Silver119 Sounds like Type A. Preaching that taking care of children is not only something that women need to do and that men can take care of children too. But a job where she might get dirty... no woman needs that.

@myTake Owner
1) "modern feminism has strayed far away from the original purpose and definition". Yes, in the past it was just/almost only about women, now it's supposed to be about both, men and women. That's what the modern definition says... you can look it up in every dictionary.

2) Normally I don't call myself a feminist. And if I do, I always explain what I exactly believe in. I just wonder why we have to label "feminism" as bad, just because there are some people who don't understand the defintion. After all, I don't think that Type A makes up the majority of all feminists.

[Erinna]

@Transigence I would call myself a B-Type and I don't turn a blind eye to the A-Type. Actually a lot of B-Types I know (and I see commenting under such kind of videos) don't "turn a blind eye to them".

"feminist-revised history, painting history of one of abuse and subjugation of women by men, when it wasn't even CLOSE to that"

Do you got sources for that? Because my sources tell me otherwhise.

[Erinna]

@steven7890789 I wouldn't dare to claim that. Do you know "most women"?

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Yeah, child labor is definitely not work. Tell me about labor got you a 401K or a paycheck from someone other than the baby daddy lol

If you think child labor is work, then is the baby daddy your boss?

[mistixs]

See, men have the privilege of defining work as something you get paid for. Women do the majority of unpaid labor such as housework. (Which, yes, is work - ever heard of maids?)
No, no one pays a woman for giving birth, so it may not be a JOB, but it's still work/labor.

[Fugue]

Abortion is being attacked by right wing government officials, on a state by state basis, by instating policies that are undue burdens. But abortion is legal, and cannot be outright deemed illegal. A man being forced to be a father and go give child support, against his wishes, is patently mandated by the government.

[Transigence]

@mistixs What are you talking about? When you do housework at your OWN HOUSE you are paid with the result of your work. You are working for yourself. Nobody is going to pay me to cook my own meal. Nobody is going to pay me to change my own oil or mow my own lawn. The only time money changes hands is when the beneficiary of the work isn't the person DOING the work.

If your boyfriend or husband or whatever needs to pay you to do house work at a place where you live, then he needs to bill you for half of all of the expenses as well as demand matching financial contribution to the family.

The gall of women sometime. To live, rent-free, eat on someone else's dime, and have a living provided for them, and to turn around and DEMAND to get PAID for straightening up around the free place? Wow.

[mistixs]

@Transigence "To live, rent-free, eat on someone else's dime, and have a living provided for them, and to turn around and DEMAND to get PAID for straightening up around the free place?" Oftentimes the woman has a job too

[Transigence]

@mistixs That's irrelevant.

The main thrust of my argument is that you don't get paid to work for yourself. I don't get paid to change my own oil or mow my own lawn, because I am the beneficiary of my own work. I only get paid when I change the oil in someone ELSE'S car or mow someone ELSE'S lawn. In these cases, I'm not the beneficiary of the work, so I need some incentive to do it. And the owner of the lawn would rather trade his work (which could be making pizza) for my work (which would be mowing lawns), and we use money to facilitate that trade.

When you clean your house, do your dishes, all that stuff, you are the beneficiary of your own work.

Otherwise, what you do is invite the man to start putting a price on everything he does for the household. I suspect you'll quickly find that if you had to PAY a man for all the things he contributes fair market value, you couldn't afford a man, much less would you want one.

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Yes, it's men who have the privilege to define what work is. Jesus Christ, you're sick. You need so much help. I mean really. "Men made English so any argument in English is wrong"

[mistixs]

@Transigence HouseWORK is still WORK though, regardless of whether it's paid.
He said that childbirth isn't "WORK." It is "work," regardless of whether it's paid.
And if women weren't so busy doing all the UNpaid work, then maybe they'd have more time to do paid work more often like men do.

[Silver119]

@mistixs You realise men do housework as well right? Probably not, you're too busy being oppressed...

[mistixs]

@Silver119 Not nearly as much as women do
And men don't do childbirth

[Silver119]

@mistixs And? What's that got to do with anything? Men and women are physically different. That's never going to change. THe feminist movement is about equal Legal rights and opportunity. It has NOTHING to do with childbirth...

[mistixs]

@Silver119 I mean that women have a burden that men don't have to deal with, so it's only fair that men be expected to deal with a burden that women don't have to deal with. Otherwise a double burden is placed upon women

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Yes, because two wrongs make a right. That's totally fair. If you have a shitty day, all you can do is take it out on other people, because you're so burdened and weak

[mistixs]

No, for me, my personal feminism isn't about "equality".
For me it's about "equity" = fairness.

56.media.tumblr.com/.../...5gz7lR4r1svjbm5_500.png

image.slidesharecdn.com/.../...to-brave-22-638.jpg

image.slidesharecdn.com/.../...concepts-10-638.jpg

I mean, I personally think it counts as equality, because equality doesn't mean "same" (4+6 and 5+5 are equal in that they both come to the same outcome but are different), but people are too stupid to realize that "equality" doesn't mean "same" in that we should treat everyone the exact same in spite of their differences in situation, biology, personality, actions, tendencies, fears, likes, dislikes, etc.
So I just use the term "equity."

[hellionthesage]

So why use the term feminism then?

[mistixs]

@hellionthesage Why not?

[M_A_X]

Well, I'd like to ask you, in what areas do you think men and women aren't on equal levels, equity-wise?

[Calex]

Do you think feminism's job is over?

[FakeName123]

So you don't want equal chances, but equal outcomes. Welcome to socialism. Now take a history book and see how well it worked in all those countries who tried it.

Hint: I am from a former socialist country and it didn't work... at all.

[FallOutBoy2001]

By this point, I hate anti-feminists, as well as ultra-feminists. Humanists/Egalitarians, are what I feel most "gender activists" should be, but I don't mind a Humanist/Egalitarian that spends more of their time focused on the female gender, or the male gender, the LGBTQ+ community, or racial minorities.

However, they shouldn't completely ignore and dismissing the issues faced by other communities. Saying things like "I personally believe that the issues you're talking about is not quite as severe as you are making it out to be. Can you show me some statistics about it?" or "I don't agree with the idea that men are more oppressed than women" is ok, but when you start saying things like "All feminists are stupid" "Men just abuse women" "Men are rapists, nothing else" no one wins. You've only succeeded at making one group mad at you, detracting from your cause and making you look like an asshole.

Furthermore, if you're all striving for equality, then when an unpleasant side effect of equality is handed to your group of choice, suck it up and face it like the other group is doing. A good case for this would be the recent idea of adding women to the draft, because they are now allowed in combat roles. Personally, I have no problem with it. We strived to be allowed into combat roles, and now that we are, many women are balking at the idea. We wanted equality: If our fellow men have to sign up for the draft, and there's a law saying women can be in combat roles, then women should have to sign up for the draft.

[Transigence]

Anti-feminism is largely based in a rejection of the narrative that feminists put forth regarding female issues, not the disbelief that females have any issues.

In other words, anti-feminists say that yes, females have issues, but feminists are making shit up.

[FallOutBoy2001]

@Transigence the majority of the anti-feminist I've seen aren't limr that. They're rude, and press their agenda, just like ultra-feminists

[Jager66]

This is pretty common actually, some people can't separate feelings from decision making. Some people don't care how important the issues are or how right the person talking about them is, or even if their anger is justified, if that person is rude anything they say, no longer matters.

[Kirah]

Feminism used to be about equality. But currently? It's about female supremacy.

In today's society, both men and women suffer from sexism. But feminism is actively ignoring men, and actively attempting to suppress help for men. When confronted, feminists say "oh, but we're not all like that! Those are just the radicals".

Why aren't these "real feminists" speaking out against the radicals? Why are they sitting at home doing nothing, while the radfems are actually doing something?

Feminism is not about equality.

[Rawrzz]

It's also pretty insulting to women: the base premise is usually that women are weak, stupid flowers that need to be protected from savage and powerful/intelligent men. One of the fundamental principles of any form of feminism is that women have been the only class to have been oppressed for thousands of years without a peep. Effectively making feminism the single most convincing argument for innate female inferiority: being willfully subjugated and used by powerful, intelligent men for millennia through the slavery known as marriage.

[M_A_X]

@Rawrzz If women were truly always oppressed though, I can't see this have happening though. A bunch of women in the 1600's got together and wrote a letter to the king DEMANDING he ban coffee because it was making their men into weak "frenchified" wussies.

englishhistoryauthors.blogspot.com/.../...fee.html

[Rawrzz]

A really good one is during WWI or II, with the white feathers of shame in Britain. Random women would give out 14, 15 year old boys white feather's of shame if they didn't go to (or back to) war. Clearly, those boys had all the power and were significantly advantaged in contrast to those women. Basically calling 14 year old boys pussies for not wanting to die horribly.

My reasoning is that it's simply impossible that women are that weak or stupid that they were oppressed that long. That's why I'm not a feminist. I don't view women as children. They liked or accepted the way things were, because it was all to protect them. While millions of men died in dangerous occupations or, they were relatively safe at home: many times more women passed their genes on. Feminism didn't take off until after the industrial revolution when things got a million times safer. Curious that they didn't want the same right-to-die that men had until things got significantly safer.

Also rofl @ the coffee

[Transigence]

"But feminism is ACTIVELY ignoring men, and ACTIVELY attempting to SUPPRESS help for men. When confronted, feminists say "oh, but we're not all like that! Those are just the radicals"."
(emphasis mine)

God. Fucking. Bless you.

[M_A_X]

@Transigence And then you talk to them for 5 minutes and question them, and find out that they are the radicals they're pretending not to be lol

[Transigence]

Yep. I go straight to patriarchy theory.

"So do you believe that since time immemorial that men, as a sex, have subjugated and oppressed women, as a sex?"

Invariably, the answer is yes.

Bottom line is this: If you subscribe to feminist doctrine (namely Patriarchy Theory, formerly known as "the problem with no name"), then you believe that men are sociopaths who don't love their families and the members of their own societies, which is no different than thinking blacks are ignorant or Jews or stingy, etc.

Subscription to patriarchy theory IS anti-male chauvinism.

[Rawrzz]

@Transigence That's funny. Because when I phrase it the way I do, they don't say they believe in the patriarchy. They just don't respond or try to change the subject. But again, like I said, it's not only insulting to men--*it's also very insulting to women*. If women were oppressed for thousands and thousands of years, they would be *the only group* to remain oppressed for that long without fighting back. That patriarchal theory asserts that men are intelligent, powerful monsters who used women like sex slaves; and that women are the weakest, stupidest, most passive class. The only group to not fight back against "oppression". Then, when things got safer, there was no war for independence. There was a bunch of women saying "Hey, guys, most of us women want everything you have, but without the obligations." To which the men responded, "Oh, okay, well, if most of you want them."

[M_A_X]

I usually just ask them who the patriarchy is, then ask if it's the government, then ask if that means they want to bring down the government. That shuts them up REAL quick

[BarbaraP]

I think we should all stop considering every person who claims to be a feminist, an actual Feminist. I can say I'm smart, but it doesn't consequently mean that I actually am. Most women who claim to be Feminists today don't know anything about Feminism, which was -obviously- born to bring gender equality to our "civilized" world. Every woman who whines about women being better than men because we give birth, about men being rapists and such, is NOT a feminist. We should just call these individuals with their actual name which is sexist bitches. Believe it or not, men need Feminism just as much as women do nowadays. Gender roles have been destroying our personalities and our spontaneous behaviours. A REAL feminist of today is Chimamand Ngozi Adichie and what she has to say about men being as equally morally oppressed by this society as women are would surprise you.

[BarbaraP]

https://youtu.be/hg3umXU_qWc?t=11m11s

[BarbaraP]

The speech about men starts @ 11:11, if you're interested @M_A_X

[M_A_X]

Yeah, my only problem is that she talked about men for all of 5 minutes, and still is pretty sexist herself. If a man is intimidated by her, she doesn't want to date him. Sounds like she wants a manly man.

[cth96190]

Okay, how about these 'actual feminists', all leading intellectuals, writers and thinkers in the feminist camp.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbzF-Q_ZEDg

[cth96190]

Or these quotes from prominent feminists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JInPCnhyM

[cth96190]

Feminism. How to identify a violent hate movement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vprTOAg1Qh0

[Mustachekitteh]

@M_A_X would you want to date a women that felt intimidated by you? Where they would keep saying how they felt intimidated, became bitter over it, would bitch about it a lot, make you feel bad for what you do because it makes them feel intimidated, etc.

[Rawrzz]

My God, I love her so much. She hypnotizes me. Not only is she ridiculously hot; she's not an idiot and is pretty hilarious. I discovered her like last week, so I'm surprised to see a link to her on GAG. I was thinking about posting a Mytake featuring one or two of her videos, but I didn't feel like typing out basically exactly what she had said. *thumbs up*.

I don't need to discuss anything. Think I've beat this topic with a dead horse on GAG. I'm in pretty much full agreement, anyway.

I particularly liked this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc_E9JtM_ss

[M_A_X]

I consider this Mytake a failure because I haven't gotten one actual debate from a feminist. I was hoping to have something to talk about and figure out, instead I just get a bunch of anecdotal replies and worse, women who just say "You're wrong but I'm not going to elaborate because REASONS"

[Rawrzz]

Ehh. As they say. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. The Socratic method would probably be best. Making statements at people tends to put people on the defensive. <---kinda like I did there... I could come off as significantly less of a know-it-all if I would have asked you whether or not *you* thought it was more effective to use the Socratic method, instead of just throwing it at you. But, it takes cognizance and patience, I've noticed. Which I don't have much of.

[ManOnFire]

Yeah, I've watched videos like hers before, and one from that Lacey Green too. I also love the way feminists - or people with feministic thought processes - like to whip out the meaning of feminism from the dictionary, as if it really sets it in stone.

They will forever argue against anyone who hasn't adopted their logic, but it won't change. At the end of the day, even most women are not feminists and they themselves don't want things run solely or majority by women. Feminism is just another socially political circus tainted with its own sins, bias, and confusion.

[Transigence]

You obviously didn't watch the video.

[M_A_X]

Yeah, you really should watch the video before you assume @ManOnFire

[ManOnFire]

Oh, I thought you were saying what she was saying in the video was crap.

[cth96190]

They go to the definition because that was what they were taught to do in their university assignments.
It is a sign of someone who still has the mind of an undergraduate.

[Steelcore1085]

Feminism is not about equality. It's about female superiprity. It's an ideology of sexism that places women on a pedestal while villanizing and demonizing masculinity and men. They don't care about making women equal; they seek to give women special rights and privileges over men (which I can name several).

Plus, Feminism is destroying relations between men and women, causing women to think men are the enemy and that men are evil monsters. As if the relations between the sexes are mostly hostile, Feminism is attempting to make it even worse today.

There's a reason why MGTOW and the MRA movements have developed as a response to this misandric movement. If you're a Feminist, you're a bigot and a misandrist, there's no in-between.

[AARON9890]

I think in most cases its just about putting the idea across that women should be treated as equally as men and i believe most feminists can do this and still get on with men. However i have seen in some cases where feminists just seem to have a pure hatred for men, probably down to bad experiences or relationships. Sometimes its hard to distinguish between these two types of feminists but in general i think its just trying to get equality for women. In reality though i think women have the control over us... without them we are completely useless.

[Anonymous]

Feminism has been done to death on this site and most people on either side of it don't want to talk about it anymore but all these people that just have to bring up feminism in any conversation just to bash it are the only ones that talk about it now. Seriously the only feminism problem on this site is people refuse to let the topic die they just have to keep bringing it back up just so they can say what 30k other dudes have already said about why they hate it.

If you don't like feminism then shut up about it and feminism would disappear off this site because the only ones who are keeping the feminism conversations alive are the haters of it.

[M_A_X]

Not talking about just this site, bro. Also I wasn't compelled to post this because of anything on the site, but because Shoe0nHead created a new video and made a lot of very good points.

Also, common sense dictates that pretending something doesn't exist won't make it go away, especially when it's a belief system that can affect how people think and act without being directly addressed.

My only real problem with you at this point is that you were too cowardly to post without going anonymous, when what you're saying REALLY isn't even very offensive to anyone. It's not even that offensive to me. Speak up and be proud of your opinions, especially when they don't hurt ANYONE, sir.

[lumos]

^ this. I'm a feminist and I've already decided a long time ago to just slowly stop bothering with feminism on here. I'm fucking tired of trying to talk about it over and over lmao.

[M_A_X]

@lumos Sounds to me like your beliefs aren't worth very much if you can't argue them. People should always be ready to debate and change their beliefs if they're wrong. It's simply childish and closed minded to automatically assume you're right and not give someone the benefit of the doubt to debate.

[lumos]

That's kind of childish of you to say, actually. I do believe in my stance a lot. I just know when to pick my battles. Gag is not my battle anymore. Repeating yourself over 100 times like a parrot becomes boring, especially when the other side won't even take your perspective into consideration. And I'm really just here for fun mostly. I don't want to take the fun out of being here.

[M_A_X]

@lumos This isn't a matter of picking your battles. I'll provide a link below on what picking your battles means and when it's useful.

Yes, I'll agree that parroting yourself over and over is boring, especially when the other side won't even take your perspective into consideration. The problem is though, that you're doing that, and I'm not. I'm more than willing to discuss the points at hand, and always willing to change my mind given logical points and corrections.

www.innovateus.net/.../what-meaning-pick-your-battles

[hellionthesage]

Feminist are not interested in facts because all the facts show that they are and have been lying since the very begining. They would have to concede that for all of history men existed essentially as a tool for women. Its why men died in wars not women, its why men built houses for women, slaved in fields for women, died so that women could live. Feminism cannot stand up to facts so they brainwash and manipulate and censor to maintain control.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Actually women where the ones to oppose feminism. They thought that if feminist suceeded then women would be forced to have the same responsibilities as men did and most women didn't want to give up their special privledges. Women where never oppressed at any time, at least not by men. Men couldn't vote and women couldn't vote, it had nothing to do with gender. It was classism. Men got the right to vote 70 years (technicly slightly less) before women only because they could and where conscripted by the government against their will (posses for police, bucket brigades for fire, and of course military) they had to risk their lives in order to vote, women got the right only after enough women stopped opposing it, and women didn't have to do anything to get it either except exist. As for systemic power, is this the same power that only benefits women as we have multiple laws that only benefit women and routinely hurt men.

[mistixs]

Yes, women were oppressed, because they weren't able to be financially independent, thus trapping them in abusive relationships. Some would commit suicide because there was no other escape.

Domestic violence kills as many women per 5 years as the total number of Americans who died in the Vietnam war.
www.beaconofhopeindy.org/...olence-statistics.html
PTSD is more common among rape victims & battered women than among war veterans. www.pssfnet.com/.../...TraumaticStressSyndrome.pdf

"Its why men died in wars not women, its why men built houses for women, slaved in fields for women, died so that women could live."
Many women died (in childbirth) so that men could live.
If women had to go to war ON TOP OF giving birth, that would be completely unfair, because that would be giving women a double burden that men didn't have to deal with.

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Much fewer women die in childbirth than men who die in wars and 40% of domestic violence victims are men, BUT, that's neither here nor there. You're only quoting anecdotal evidence and cases. Can you try to actually debate? Do you understand the purpose of debate, and why anecdotal evidence is useless in it?

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Financial independence? So men didn't have reproductice independence and therefore in order to fullfill their biological function had to do as a woman said. Women not being financially dependent means nothing because a man was legally obligated and socially obligated to provide for her, its why we have life insurance and pentions both where ways for men to continue to provide for a woman after he died (a man cannot even cash out a pention without his wifes consent) thas also why their was alimony which was paid for life by her exhusband.(many cultures allowed for divorce through out history like egypt where if a man abused his wife she had cause to divorce, same with nordic society). As for abuse, statisticly women are far more violent then men in domestic partner ships (your links are actually backed by feminist research, people who recieve money only when women are victims) as has been shown by the CDC and other independent organizations.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs www.saveservices.org/.../
www.independent.co.uk/.../...ays-study-622388.html
https://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/
www.medicaldaily.com/domestic-violence-against-men-women-more-likely-be-intimate-terrorists-controlling-behavior-290662
Even the NCVS showed that men are more likely to be abused. The problem with your statistics is they are all based upon feminist research all of which ignores male victims. Like the 1 in 5 rape statistic that asked women if they had ever had sex when they didn't want it (which of course has nothing to do with actual consent, this could be rape or her just pleasing her boyfriend of her own volition, it doesn't create a distinction between the two) or while they where intoxicated or under the influence (again ignores consent) this among many other methodology issues creates false readings, especially when they ask men if they have ever had sex with a woman when she didn't want it (again ignoring consent) or when she was intoxicated.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs It doesn't ask if men where the victims only women thus for every postive repsonse from women that accounts for one "victimized" woman, and with every postive response from a man counts as one "victimized" woman. It double counts while ignoring male victims giving an extremely lopsided account.(in fact men are almost as likely to be raped by a woman a woman is a man: https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/ )
Historicly it was called being henpecked when a woman abused her husband and while if it was discovered, he would be dragged into the streets and publicly humliated: https://www.fact.on.ca/Info/dom/george94.htm
So while it was illegal for a man to abuse a woman it was absolutely illegal for a man to be abused BY a woman. So as you can see the argument of abuse is not actually accurate and in fact is yet another example of the sexism against men as all evidence shows men are also victims yet society and feminist refuse to acknowledg this.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs As for being trapped in a marriage, why do you say women where trapped? Men could not divorce either only unlike women men actually had legal obligations to the woman, he had to pay her debts or he would be the one punished not her, he had to provide food for her and shelter for her. She did not have to do any of these things. So if you argue that she was trapped you have to acknowledge that he was more so then her.
So what if women experience PTS more then men? First and foremost its not really an accurate picture since technicly women also suffer from depression more then men do but men are more likely to be alcoholics and substance abusers then women are ie they are as likely experience depression but since society does not allow the idea that men can be victims to exist (as your examples have shown) they find other ways of coping and self medicate.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Same goes with PTSD. Also that has nothing to do with the fact that men have been forced through out all of history to fight and die against their will and women haven't. Women did not die in child birth so men could live they died in child birth because of biology and they did it because the sole purpose of life is to reproduce, men chose (or frequently where forced) to die in defense of women, women never chose to die in child birth. Furthermore why is it so rare for women to die in child birth now then it was historicly? Because of men trying to find a way to help women (thats also why women have so many more contraceptive options as well, because of men) why do you try and deny their sacrifices? Why do you wish to belittle them so much that you refuse to akcnowledg the good men have and continue to do? Why can you not except the idea that men are not monsters but in fact people no different then you?

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Its not a double burden for women, in fact women through out history had almost no burdens. Physical labor was reserved for men, dangerous jobs where reserved for men, taking care of a family and insuring they where safe cared for and sheltered was reserved for men. Hence women having always had better health fewer deaths and better quality of life then men have ever had. Its also why almost 80% of all homeless are men yet 90% of all shelters and help is provided to women (yet we say that poverty is a womans issue?) its why women say women need more reproductive rights yet men have none. Women can abort (without fathers consent or notification) they can abandon thanks to safe haven laws (without fathers consent or notification) and they can give the child up for adoption (without the fathers consent or notification). A woman can choose parenthood if she wishes, a man cannot as she can legally hold him financially responsible.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Despite the fact that the child exists because of both of them and she chose to keep it. In all scenarios she has absolute control he has none. The notion that women are victims despite the fact that they are more violent in relationships, as likely to rape a man as a man is a woman, that men make up the majority of the homeless, men make up 98% of work place deaths and accidents, that while its illegal in the western world to circumcise a woman it is perfectly legal, and in the us heavily encouraged, to circumcise males (as infants when they cannot give consent and without anesthetic), women recieve a third fo the sentencing that men do for commiting the same crime: www.huffingtonpost.com/.../...r-gap_n_1874742.html
Also their is a wage gap, in modeling and stem fields that only favor women.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Female models recieve almost ten times the amount of money as male models do and in stem fields women receive higher starting pay because of gender quota laws. Also gender quotas which only apply to women in male dominated fields yet fields that are dominated by women like HR managment, social work, pediatrics, psyciatry/phsycology, and education have no hiring quotas for men despite being over 80% female.(of course their are also no hiring quotas for mining garbage and waste managment and construction all dangerous and unpleasent jobs that are almost entirely comprised of men, I wonder why?). Speaking of education, education has been feminized: www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/fem-schools.html
www.forestparkreview.com/.../

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs to the point where male drop out rates are 4x higher in all grades and 63% of all college graduates are female and that number is rising (it was considered sexism when the genders where reversed but now that its men suffering its just men being lazy apparently). Also women centric health issues get more then twice the funding that males do despite the fact that men are more at risk for most diseases and die younger then women: www.couriermail.com.au/.../story-fnihoylo-1226794504245
If you look at the data all of it shows a distinct bias favoring women. This is why feminism cannot hold up to actual facts and debate.

[mistixs]

"men didn't have reproductice independence" That's just nature. "had to do as a woman said." No men didn't.
"women not being financially independent means nothing" Yes it does. It meant that women couldn't escape abusive relationships. And YES, men could easily get divorces whereas women could not.
As for women potentially being more abusive nowadays... well do we know if that was true BACK THEN?
Yes, women chose (or were often forced) to give birth SO THAT MEN (AND WOMEN COULD LIVE. Without childbirth, no men NOR women would be alive in the first place. "Why can you not except the idea that men are not monsters?" Again an anti-feminist accusing me of saying shit I never said. I never said men were monsters.

[mistixs]

"Physical labor was reserved for men" No it wasn't. In many places women had to do physical labor too. And YES, women having to give birth ON TOP OF doing physical/dangerous labor IS/would be a double burden.
Also women go to college more often than men because THEY NEED TO. It's easier for men than women to get jobs without going to college first. And the reason breast cancer gets more funding than prostate cancer is because breast cancer is sexualized, and sex sells, huh? And no, nowadays more women die in childbirth than men die in wars.
The number of yearly soldier deaths year to year, but it has ranged from as high as 499 to as low as 12. Each year, about 1,200 American women die in childbirth.
You could say that we're in a fairly non-violent time during warfare right now, and many more men died in war during history, but you could also say we live in a fairly safe time for childbirth right now, and many more women died in childbirth during history.

[mistixs]

Extremely dangerous warfare only happened periodically in history, whereas women died from childbirth on a constant basis throughout history. So maybe higher numbers of men died in combat during certain time periods, but that was compensated by the fact that women died in childbirth during *every* time period. It probably evened out.

Source for my claims about death in the Afghanistan war: www.statista.com/.../
Regarding women dying at rates of 1,200 per year in America: qz.com/.../

[mistixs]

However, you make some good points in other places. You're right that men did/do have it hard in some points.
Where I disagree with you is the thought that women had/have it better than men. Both men and women had/have it bad.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs What do you mean men didn't? So your saying men would fight and die for a woman was by their choice and the fact that it only benefited the woman and not the man was mere coincedence? that a man was expected to put women first to slave away for a womans well being and that despite her being the one who benefited from this and not him, he chose to do this without any influence from say his mother who raised him, his wife who chose him? Seems a little unllikely don't you think? No men could not get divorces, the king of england managed to get a divorce because he could not get an heir to the throne which would have resulted in a civil war, when he attempted it again he had to turn his back on the church and create his own religioun (Angelican christian). And that was a king, the average guy could not get a divorce that is just patently false. So he was stuck as much as a woman and as I pointed out while she was protected by society he was not so he had more to worry about

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs domestic violence then any woman did, and as I also pointed out we can even show that women are significantly more likely to be abusive then men so that also ruines that theory of yours as well. As I pointed out they called it henpecked and men would be publicly humilated and punished for being beaten by their wives, it was pretty common, when it was discovered, most men tried to not let on they where abused. So yeah, pretty common. You never said men where monsters that is true, its also true that you accused men of imprisoning women in abusive marriages that only men benefited from (which as i pointed out was not the case) that men where violent in general (which as I pointed out was not the case) that men where oppressing women (which again was not the case) ie I praphrased your accusations into a much more concise form. You can't accuse men of being responsible for all of womens suffering and not accuse them of being monsters as well.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Women had it easy in comparison to men thats why they lived longer, thats why more men die in accidents and do more gruelling labor then women why mens health is ignored is why women have less severe sentencing for the same crimes its also why women are viewed as innocent even though statisticly they commit more violence with in relationships then men and rape at the same rates (potentially more if we factor in statutory rape) in short you ignored everything I said because it was inconvient thus proving my point. Stating that I am wrong and not having the evidence to back it up is meaningless. I gave you links upon links historical and modern all showing quite clearly that men are not monsterous oppressors and that women actually have it better then any other group. Women are not victims, if any one is a victim its men.

[mistixs]

Yes they could easily get divorces. And when they got divorces, they got custody of the kids.

And no, the reason women live longer than men is purely biology.

The sex difference is even present in the WOMB, with males being much more likely to be miscarried than females. Male fetuses are also more likely to be born premature, stillborn, have brain damage, or congenital deformities. Essentially, fetal males are more vulnerable than fetal females to almost all obstetric catastrophes that are possible both before and after birth. By the time of birth, males are several weeks behind females developmentally. Male infants get sick and die more often, and this pattern continues all throughout life. And females also live longer than males in most other animal species.

Sources: www.npr.org/.../why-men-die-younger-than-women-the-guys-are-fragile-thesis

[mistixs]

articles.chicagotribune.com/.../0805240292_1_male-fetuses-infant-mortality-rate-boys
search.proquest.com/.../1?pq-origsite=gscholar
https://www.bec.ucla.edu/papers/Kruger_3.19.07.pdf

How is it SOCIETY that makes it so more males die IN THE WOMB?

The evolutionary reason is simple: Longevity differences between males and females make sense. Because evolutionarily, females are the more valuable sex. What do I mean by this? The female has to be strong enough to survive 9 months of pregnancy, plus (evolutionarily) a few months of breastfeeding. A male can just drop dead right after intercourse, but the baby would be born just fine (I’m not saying that all men should drop dead after intercourse – and I would never want that to happen! I’m just saying that it’s theoretically possible!). Which is why females' bodies evolved to be more robust.

[mistixs]

"more men die in accidents" Because they're more likely to drive recklessly.

Also women do grueling physical labor in many places. www.uniteforsight.org/.../women-physical-labor

Not that they should. Because again, it creates a double burden. Women endure pregnancy and give birth, they shouldn't be expected to do physical labor on top of that, but they often are.

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs You are completly wrong, first divorce was near impossible as I pointed out, second they did not get custody. Their was one case that suggested that the father should get custody because he was responsible for his families well being but even then custody still whent to the woman. I don't care about more boys dying in the womb, that has no bearing on anything i said. I stated womens health gets more funding, men die at higher rates from disease (and accidents and violence). Basicly what the hell are you arguing? You said it yourself that women where more valuable which is what I am saying that society has always viewed men as disposable, as you pointed out, and ergo men suffer considerablly due to this attitude as all efforts go towards helping women due to them being more "valuable" then men. Warren Farrell wrote a book the disposable male that goes into great detail with this. So yes I know that whats your point?

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs I was not reffering to car accidents (and that is not really an accurate appraisel anyway as their are actually more male drivers, socially women tend to preffer the man to drive and men are more likely to drive farther away for a job making them more frequently on the road as well as their are more male truckers etc then women all of which would increase the rate of males being in car accidents ie exposure not them being "reckless") 98% of work place accidents and deaths are male. Here are some break downs on your so called women in male dominated physical labor fields: www.catalyst.org/.../women-male-dominated-industries-and-occupations
Notice anything? They make up about twenty percent of workers yet almost twenty percent of managers are female ie women even in physical labor industries are less likely to do physical labor then men. Women are not the only victims, in fact they rarely are as I have proved.

[mistixs]

I meant on an EVOLUTIONARY level. Women's bodies are simply more robust, which is the cause for their longevity. The same is true for other species.

Anyway if most SOCIETIES viewed women as more valuable then why would they be committing female infanticide en masse to the point there are 60 million more males in the world than females despite women's extra longevity?

And well maybe men get into more accidents bc they are more inclined to take risks?

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Pretty sure the "societies" you're talking about are 3rd world, and therefore not very good societies. Also, if we're just going to use anecdotal evidence and bullshit, then men don't get to decide if they get part of their dicks chopped off as a baby, and that doesn't happen in the 3rd world.

Either way, you're awful at arguing a point, and really have only proven every negative stereotype I've heard about feminism in the past. I've got you, giving anecdotal evidence and bullshit, and every other one simply refusing to talk about it.

I consider this Mytake a complete failure, because I haven't had one decent debate with an actual feminist.

[mistixs]

Is China (which makes up 20% of the world's population) the 3rd world?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infanticide_in_China
www.BBC.co.uk/.../infanticide_1.shtml
https://www.unicef.org/newsline/97pr28a.htm

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Your also ignoring the fact that in china they get fined and punished for having more then one child (in the more agrarian areas they get away with it usually) and also the reason why they want a male child. Their are several reasons but one of the big ones is as a retirement plan. The well being of the parents falls onto the son not the daughter (her privledge ie fewer responsibilities). In fact men have been getting sued by their parents in china because they simply cannot take care of them in their old age (or won't). This does not happen with women because they are not expected to have to take care of her parents and in fact they are expected to care for her until she is married. You neglected to mention in asia its the women that control the money, for intsance in japan being worked to death is an actual cause of death: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kar%C5%8Dshi

[hellionthesage]

@mistixs Yet all of the money they make goes to the wives who give them stipens (which have been decreasing in quantity for years). So these men work until they literally drop dead and the wife who got all the money these men worked for also then get the life insurance policy of their husbands as well. Its so pushed that they have to work and provided for their families every need completely disregarding their own even to the point of death, and yet you want to claim its women who suffer? As @asker pointed out, your evidence is ancedotal and cherry picked, and even then it ignores the reasosn why things happen this way. You are afraid to acknowledge the sever issues that men face everywhere because your afraid that then women won't be placed first, at leats that is the only explanation I can come up with as to why you ignore all evidence that shows men are the ones suffering in literally every catagory.

[Chief16]

If you talk about Feminism in all its originality, yeah, it preaches equality. Or at least it did, before some modern day feminists thought women are better than men. So screw men. Yeah, the misandrist bunch are leading Feminism into oblivion. They're making the same mistakes those men who repressed women did all those centuries ago.
They should just do away with Feminism and call it Egalitarianism, if they truly want the equality. Also they mustn't confuse privileges and rights.

[mistixs]

People have been claiming that feminists think women are better than men since the very beginning of feminism.

"They're making the same mistakes those men who repressed women did all those centuries ago."
No because they're not in systemic power.

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Can you explain what systemic power is?

[mistixs]

For example, men make up over 80% of government

[Chief16]

@mistixs Feminism means equal opportunities for both sexes. Not a 50-50 power split. That's stupid. The ones who are the most capable will lead. Man or woman.

[mistixs]

But still. Men are the ones in systemic power, not women.

[Chief16]

@mistixs like I said, women who can lead should. I'm never biased on competence.

[mistixs]

Regardless, my point was that men are the ones in systemic power.
Therefore, feminists aren't "just as bad" as the men who oppressed women, because back then, the men were in power; nowadays, feminists are not the ones in power. Men still are.

[Chief16]

@mistixs what does systemic power have to do with competence?

[mistixs]

Feminists don't have the systemic power to systemically oppress men like men can do to women.

[Chief16]

@mistixs are women really being oppressed today, in the first world?

[mistixs]

I was referring to, as you said in your OP, "the men who repressed women did all those centuries ago."
Feminists can't compete with what those men did.

[Chief16]

@mistixs dude... That's what progress means. Those men were ignorant, even fearful of women. If we want more progress, I can only vouch for equal opportunities and no gender restrictions. I wouldn't care if 80% of women lead the government as long as equality and progress go hand in hand.

[M_A_X]

@mistixs Please explain to me, how men systematically oppress women, in your own words. Also, who are these men that are systematically oppressing women? Is it the government?

[Transigence]

No it did not. Read the Declaration of Sentiments.

[cth96190]

Feminism was created by communists to undermine Western Civilisation by driving a wedge between men and women.
See what this former Soviet diplomat, KGB officer and defector said about feminism in 1984.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLqHv0xgOlc

Feminism survives on lies, cognitive dissonance and naked intimidation.
It is cultural and spiritual poison to a society.

[Mysterio421]

This is an eye opener. I have thought about the system as a whole, but I didn't know the bunny rabbit hole was this deep.

[Fugue]

If you are a critic of, or if you question feminism, I recommend the Rantzerker podcasts on Honey Badger Radio. I staunchly disagree with many of the unrelated politics expressed by some of them, but they raise some interesting points about feminism. They basically do commentary over viral feminist videos, similar to what this girl is doing, but they do it on a regular basis.

[lolatyou]

You know the anti-feminist people are becoming just as annoying to me as the angry feminist groups. It's one angry group yelling at another angry group and in the end you end up looking just as bad as they do.

[hellionthesage]

The problem is one side has some very good points, points that are ignored. By simply being quite about it it would allow these disparities to continue and for lies to propegate. Thats not really a good way of fixing a problem.

[M_A_X]

@lolatyou Sorry, but I haven't yelled a single time and am being completely civil, so... I don't know who you're talking about

[lolatyou]

lol yelling wasn't a literal term. A lot of anti-feminist resemble the crazy feminist a lot to me. That video being one of them. People spend more time arguing over the actual word feminist than they do about any of the rights that either side is fighting for. I have an issue taking people who are extremist in anything seriously because normally they're so focused on picking fights, being right or arguing just for the sake of arguing. It's all just so typical.

[Kiwedin]

I think she's great and clearly intelligent enough to question misinformation and blatant lies.

[Elena_the_Star]

I find it ironic that she dismissed every other issue of Feminism like reproductive rights and only focused on Gender wage gap, like " Aha! I found one fault and I am going to keep hammering feminists about that". Quit cherry picking.

[hellionthesage]

What reproductive rights do women not have? They can have an abortion by federal law she cannot be denied an abortion no matter the circumstance, she can abandon the newborn child thanks to safe haven laws, she can give the child up for adoption. She can use contraceptive of any kind (which there are many). A man cannot demand an abortion nor can he decide not to be a father, if the woman wishes it he must pay child support irregardless of his wants (she however can choose parenthood unlike him) He cannot abandon a child and he doesn't need to be notified under any of these conditions by the woman (yes a woman can legally in most states give a child up for adoption without even telling the man or having any legal obligation to give him the chance to take his child).

[hellionthesage]

If a woman tells a man she is using birth control but isn't he is still obligated to pay child support (even if she steals his sperm from a discarded condom he is still required to pay childsupport) If he is underage and she rapes him (as has happened numerous times) when he reaches the age of 18 he is then legally obligated to not only pay child support ot his rapist but also has to pay the tax and the fines for back pay as well, TO HIS RAPIST. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer
Its actual law, so in fact not only do women have reproductive rights, they are the ONLY ones with reproductive rights. Now sure women don't have their contraceptives paid for but then men don't either, and why should they? Its not their responsibility to pay for your sex life. In short, its not cherry picking its literally everything feminist say that is patently false.

[Elena_the_Star]

@hellionthesage Are you not aware of the whole debate going on in America over abortion? Women are getting attacked right outside abortion clinics by protestors, Planned Parenthood clinics are under threat, and did you hear about the massive shooting at PP clinic by a religious fanatic?
They are being denied abortion even if its legal.

www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2013/08/16
and there are state restrictions on abortion too.
www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/17/1/gpr170109.html

[Elena_the_Star]

@hellionthesage en.wikipedia.org/.../Colorado_Springs_Planned_Parenthood_Shooting
Lets hear you talking about how abortion is so easy in U. S again , hm?

[hellionthesage]

Considering the fact that 3,000 abortions are performed in the US a day (125000 world wide) I would say that is incorrect. Just because a couple of incidents occurs does not mean that its systemic, in fact quite the opposite. As for planned parenthood they are not under threat, their is debate on whether they should recieve public funds for abortions since not every one agrees with abortions and it is a choice to get pregnant (yes I know rape etc, but that accounts for less then.001% of all abortions) that is not them being shut down that is them not recieving public funding for a very specific practice that is contended by a large part of the populace. So again, women have rights and those are not going anywhere. So now tell me about how men have reproductive rights, since you neglected to adress those points.

[Elena_the_Star]

@hellionthesage Thats a blatant generalization and I don't care for this whole Feminism debate because I remember I have debated countless times before and with you too. Yes they should be paid for, because its HEALTHCARE. EVERY woman needs contraception, as every woman has a sex life so if half the population needs it and in an indirect way , the other half too, YES it should be included in the healthcare because it controls the fucking population which is growing everyday. The State should encourage women to take it and pay for it for widespread use.

[Elena_the_Star]

@hellionthesage I would bet more than half are not legal, if even your statistics are correct.
They are not a "couple" of incidents my god! When there are state restrictions, these are not just "couple" of incidents, there are MANY MANY incidents like these. And you still deny the reproductive rights fight after the Colorado attack on PP? Really? If that's not threat to PP, i don't know what is. Many people are contesting for its shutdown and I provided all the info in the links.

[Elena_the_Star]

and you ignored the pro life protestors outside PP clinics.

[hellionthesage]

Men don't have their contraceptives paid for. Its not health care its a choice plane and simple its your sex life not mine why would I be forced to contribute to it? That is ludicris. Why the hell should the state pay for you to have sex? Why? Are they the ones getting laid? Am I? Half the population needs it? No they do not, its not a need its a choice you choose to have sex its not that sex happens despite you not choosing to, you choose to. Why do only women get to have their contraceptives paid for and not men? I thought feminism was about equality? Why do only women get to have paid contraceptives but men are still required to pay for theirs? Especially since if a woman gets pregnant he has absolutely no options to solve the problem like a woman does. As I pointed out. And no I did not generalize anything, I was pretty damn specific as you can see. So again, please explain how women have no reproductive rights but men do?

[Elena_the_Star]

@hellionthesage Sex is a biological need and just as there should be basic food and water available to all citizens, there should be contraceptives too! There is hardly any woman in U. S who was a virgin all her life and married, unmarried every woman needs contraceptives once she started having sex. This is not the Middle Ages where you will go on popping babies like pills, so yes half the population needs it. Its also a choice to work or not but we do get unemployement benefit don't we? Sex is not as big or as survival need as hunger or thirst but it is still included in biological need. I just gave my psychology exam and there was a whole chapter on it, so yes its a bio need. There's no confusion on it.

[mistixs]

@hellionthesage "she cannot be denied an abortion no matter the circumstance" Yes she absolutely can. In some states they're making it so that the father has to sign approval even if he's a rapist

[hellionthesage]

Again 3000 abortions a day, one incident at one location does not make an argument. If you wanted to argue that some people are crazy then yes you could use that as an example but as for evidence that women everywhere (again 125000 abortions a day world wide) are being forced to not get abortions (again 3000 a day in the US alone) is a terrible if not out right non existent argument. Its called an ancedotal argument and its a logical fallacy: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
I didn't ignore the pro lifers because being against something isn't the same as preventing it from happening, you have the legal right to abortion, you do not have the legal right to do what ever you wish without question. They have the legal right to peaceful protest, so I didn't address it because their was nothing to address.

[M_A_X]

@Elena_the_Star Please explain what other issues there are, and how you think female reproductive rights are unfair right now?

[hellionthesage]

My statistics are accurate, you may look them up if you like, only two countries do not allow abortion under any circumstance most allow for financial/health/rape. many allow it without reason. As for attacks on abortions clinics, their have been 44 from 1970 until now. A total of 11 people killed since 1993. Currently in the US their are 1,793 abortion providors, at least one in every single state. In short, as stated before, your argument relies on ancedotal evidence which is a logical fallacy making it a unsound argument. As for planned parenthood, people have the right to protest, I don't understand why you think that should not be allowed. Your rights are protected under law some people however feel that their money (tax payer money) should not go to an organization that does not benefit them as it goes against their beliefs. Not an unreasonable request. And again you have ignored my question, intentionally, what reproductive rights do men have?

[hellionthesage]

If you don't have sex will you die? No but you will if you do not eat or drink. Its a choice. I don't demand you pay for my contraceptives do I? In fact thus far the only people who you seem to think should get a free ride is women, as far as this is concerned. Your argument would be applicable to men as well so why do you not include them? You keep talking about half the population but what about the male half? why do you keep excluding them from the equation? Do they not count? As I pointed out before unlike women if a man gets a woman pregnant he is at her mercy he has no recourse but she does so if anything we have more cause to pay for male contraceptives then females. As for the state level their could be limitations however again you continue to ignore every thing I say, you seem to have no problem with men being raped and being forced to pay child support. WHy is that? A woman might have to acknowledge that a father exists, that would be one step closer to a man having rights

[Elena_the_Star]

@hellionthesage I have provided you enough links to prove my point and I am mature enough to walk out of this silly debate when you are diverting the issue and denying the obvious.
@Asker scroll up, and read the links I gave. You will have your answer.

[M_A_X]

Those are anecdotal examples. Bad things happen to both genders sometimes. I'm asking you, not the links, to tell me how you believe men and women are unequal.

For example, you claim every woman deserves to have contraception because they have sex lives. Does that mean you also believe every man should have free contraception (condoms) because they also have sex lives?

[M_A_X]

I mean, honestly. I could provide you links all day long of women who have gotten in a man's face and hit him, he decides to hit back, and he is immediately jumped and beaten to a pulp by a large group of men. That's anecdotal though, so I don't bother providing those links. We're trying to discuss issues here like adults, not talk about random bad things that have happened.

[hellionthesage]

But I have already disproved those? 3,000 abortions a day, 1,793 abortion providers in the US, at least one in every state, and in the past 40 years their have been only about 44 attacks of any kind, only 11 people killed by extremist (thats less then.3 people a year and 1.1 incidents a year for forty years) while we have substantial federal laws that protect womens righ to abort (or abandon thanks to safe haven laws) offspring. Ergo you have provided no argument what so ever, ancedotal evidence isn't evidence thats why its a logical fallacy, you consistently dodged the issues of mens reproductive rights most likely because they don't have any. You are clearly unable to argue this reasonably with evidence. If you wish to argue a point you must have evidence which you have not provided, you also again completely ignored the question of mens reproductivec rights again and again because as we both know, they don't have any. Either come up with a logical argument or except the truth.

[Transigence]

"Yes they should be paid for, because its HEALTHCARE."
Yes, it should be paid for, BY THE PATIENT.

You do NOT have a RIGHT to MY MONEY or a DOCTOR'S TIME. You also don't have a RIGHT to healthcare!

[Viperkiss]

@Transigence if you do not provide healthcare now before pregnancy or birth, you will in many cases pay way more after a child is born into poverty etc. That's why it needs to be available. Trust that the old men in power are not offering it because they want to- it is a fact you will save a ton by helping an issue before it becomes much bigger. Whether or not you agree with state supported healthcare and contraception, you probably don't want to get stuck with the larger bill later on because you disagree with it being available. Do you actually think governments offer that just for fun?
The other thing is that, say there is one clinic in Texas, most women in Texas realistically cannot get to it. Texas is large. So just because it exists does not mean that all women realistically have acess to it.

[hellionthesage]

@Viperkiss So your argument is because a woman is going to be irresponsible regardless EVERY ONE should be held responsible and thus pay the price to that irresponsibility? What of men? Why is it only women get to have their contraceptives paid for and not men? Men have sex men can reproduce too so why is it only women should get it? As for poverty why would I pay for some one elses poverty? More specificly why should I pay for a womans choices that make her impoverished especially since more men then women are homeless and by extention impoverished. Its a little odd that no matter how you phrase it it completely ignores men while pampering and babying women.

[Viperkiss]

@hellionthesage
You ask many questions.
1/2
-no birth control method is 100%.
-you end up paying MORE in the long run for irresponsible pregnancies than providing safe alternatives.
-whether you like it or not women will abort unwanted pregnancies. If you do not provide a safe medical facility to help them with this, a large number will use potentially disastrous methods that will often cost healthcare more in the long run.
Humans have done this since the dawn of time, for various reasons, mostly for survival. It would be foolish to think it will suddenly stop because we tell them not to or don't provide a safe place for it. That's been tried: over 2 thousand years of fanatical Christians running around and abortions continued.
-everyone is responsible because you live in a country. If you don't like it go live on an island in the South Pacific. Otherwise; since you choose to stay, and reap the benefits of living in a society, you put up with the realities of that society.

[Viperkiss]

2/2One being that we don't want to be hip deep in the sick, lame and poor; just to walk down the street. How do we avoid that? You can either try to 'clean up the mess' after the horse has left the barn or you can save a lot of money with preventative measures. Education, health care and economic opportunity.
- men's contraceptives are payed for. If the woman is using them- so are you. You can buy your own, I think that should be free too.
-we should not 'pay for poverty' but rather provide education, health care and economic opportunities. Because: 1. Don't want to be hip deep in misery. 2. They will eventually rise up and kill you. If you do not share the resources and provide economic opportunities, eventually people will revolt. 3. It is not ok to stand by and ignore a fellow human's suffering.
-no healthy person who is decently educated would choose poverty.
-it is true that men's issues have been neglected. We must do something about this while continuing and improving...

[Viperkiss]

... and improving support for women as well. And children. And midgets. Whomever. Do something about it rather than bitching about how some get help but not others. Give all help.

[hellionthesage]

@Viperkiss Of course I ask a lot of questiones. Have you ever recieved an answer to an unasked question? No no birth control is 100% except for not having sex at all, but condoms are incredibly affective and the commonness of abortion due to birth control failure is actually quite small. I never said anything about abortion being immoral or wrong or it should be done away with, I merely stated that women have reproductive rights in the form of abortion of which their is nearly 1800 providors within the united states alone, and at least one in every state we can say quite safely that abortion is not under attack, from a legal standpoint, and its not going anywhere as the number of providors has stayed stable for more then twenty years. Yes abortion has been practiced for thousands of years, its also true that it has not been as frequent and wide spread as it is now do to societal exceptance of promiscuity and abortion.

[hellionthesage]

@Viperkiss Why do I have to pay for anothers choices? That is not what society is for, if I decide to burn my house down you do not have to pay for it, I do. If I decide to have sex you do not have to pay for my condoms I do (something you neglected to address as you talked about how we should continue to baby women.) If I decide to get drunk and crash my car, you do not have to pay for it, I do, see a trend? Why is sex so different? Why the hell would I pay for some one elses life choices? Their not paying for mine despite it being a "society"(which according to you is just what societies do) why is it that its only applicable for women but not men? Again you as @Elena_the_Star did, have not addressed the fact that men are not recieving this kind of treatment (the right to do as they wish I mean). Why? Why do you refuse to acknowledge half the population? No, a womans contraceptive is not a contraceptive for the man as she makes the choice of using it not him

[hellionthesage]

@Viperkiss and since a woman does not have to answer any question on whether or not she is using the birth control (almost all of which are not visible and by extention must go on trust) or she can even lie yet their is no legal ramifications for it the man still has to have his own contraceptive. You talk about helping others, okay lets start by teaching people personal responsibility. Instead of aiding people in making poor decisions, telling them and encouraging them to indulge every little impulse they have, lets explain to them that actions have consequences that will affect them for long durations of time as well as having an affect on others. I would imagine that this would be a much more reasonable approach to letting people do as they will when they will and then demand that every one else clean up the mess irresponsible people made? Don't you agree? And yes, as I have listed men don't have reproductive rights and rights in general comparitive to women.

[Viperkiss]

@hellionthesage obvouslly you didn't read my response.

[hellionthesage]

@Viperkiss yes I did, you said a lot of things mostly how every one should be responsible for every one else. Which is weird because you would think being responsible for yourself would be easier then being responsible for an entire society/country but apparently not. What part do you think I missed? You certainly dodged most if not all my questiones but which ones do you think I avoided? If I missed any I would like to rectify it.

[Transigence]

@Viperkiss You're missing the point. Nothing is FREE. In order to "provide health care" for someone, you have to STEAL MONEY from someone else, or STEAL A DOCTOR'S TIME AND RESOURCES. I do not owe anyone my time nor money. Government doesn't have any money -- they can only take it from someone else.

Now, suppose a woman has a child who needs some preventative healthcare. That baby doesn't get the preventative healthcare because we live in a country with property rights and she can't afford it. Now later on in life the problem has quadrupled. But what you're leaving out is that it isn't MY DOCTOR'S BILL TO PAY. In a country with property rights it costs ME the exact same -- 0!

[Viperkiss]

@Transigence nobody said anything about stealing. In a society you contribute to your community so you can live in a nice country. Like fire protection. Or police protection. If you don't want to contribute, go live somewhere where you don't have to. But then you can enjoy that type of society where somthing like a relatively simple medical problem can ruin your life with medical costs. Or your house is left to burn to the ground because people should handle their own shit, and you don't want to contribute to something like fire protection.
We already have benefits we all contribute to and in some cases more should be provided.
It's simple. You don't want to help your fellow man go live somewhere else.

[mistixs]

@Transigence "You do NOT have a RIGHT to MY MONEY or a DOCTOR'S TIME. You also don't have a RIGHT to healthcare!" What about the fact that our taxes go to the military (i. e. to killing people)...

[M_A_X]

@mistixs You mean the military that protects you? Not only women's money pays for that, and again, you do not know how to argue or debate. Please learn how, then come back and try again

[Transigence]

No, you have a right to be safe in your persons as delineated by the constitution, and it is the federal government's responsibility to provide security to the states. But that is clearly delineated in the law. There are other services, too, that we have decided that we are WILLING TO SPEND for, but do not have a right to. We don't have a right to clean, running water, but we have collectively decided that a city water system is in our best interest.

But you do not have a RIGHT to an abortion. You have the freedom to get one.* You don't have a RIGHT to be fed, but the freedom to feed yourself.

*I do acknowledge that this freedom is under threat, and that vigilance is needed on this issue to maintain your freedom.

[ThisAndThat]

Men do not have the right to introduce them selves say hi or speak to women.
Men lose everything in divorce.
Men aren't allowed to be men
Men aren't allowed their opinion of a women.
Men are commonly paraded as being stupid in films and the media.
Men are always guilty.
Men aren't allowed to be associated with manly things.
All the above while women are allowed to be anything they want to be.
Feminism is narcissism in it's worst form.

[WeeGeeTheSecond]

Feminists are not just easy to manipulate, they are downright retarded.
It won't be long until they become political puppets for their naiveness and hysterical behaviour.
Hell, some leftist parties from Brazil are already taking full advantage of them, and the so called "social movements".

[Applefan1]

No feminism is no longer about equal rights, it is about power over men now. If it was about equal rights then you would hear feminists talking about what men are missing in society and feminists never do.

[Transigence]

Feminism never was about any kind of equality. It ALWAYS WAS what the third wave is.

[Applefan1]

@Transigence I hate feminists.

[Transigence]

Suggestion: Hate the feminism, pity the feminist.
Another suggestion: Read the Declaration of Sentiments. Tell me if any of that kind of language looks familiar.

[Applefan1]

@Transigence I find women use all the same pathetic cop outs when men say 1 tiny bad thing about women. They insult men, tell them to grow balls, call them misogynists or make up some other pathetic cop out.

[Transigence]

Yes, women tend to do that. But be careful not to confuse what women do with what feminists do.

One is sourced in gynocentrism (which expresses an indifference to men), the other is sourced in a hateful ideology (which expresses an affirmative hatred of men).

[Applefan1]

@Transigence it seems pretty much all women hate men. Men can't help but judge us or be sexist.

[Transigence]

Look outside your age group. Pretty much all women born around our age have contempt, fear, feel as though they are a higher caste than men. But they don't hate us. They want us and need us. But they don't love us either. They're pretty incapable of love.

All as a product of the narrative they were brought up in. '80s and '90s feminism was feminism at it's highest fever pitch without being challenged.

[Applefan1]

@Transigence There are a lot of women that do hate men. There is a lot of misandry among women. Feminism has caused a lot of problems and damage.