Feminists Fail To Point Out (Page 2)

[missvivacious]

Careers where women dominate are often low status ans low paid. What about caregiving roles like home health care aids - hard, dirty, stressful and dangerous work where you get paid minimum wages. Minimum wage to clean up bodily fluids and excrement, lift patients of all sizes to clean them or dress their wounds. Travel to homes alone, with no idea what kind of danger could be waiting for you. Unpredictable schedules and hours. And low pay.

Or how about how much we have devalued skills jobs like teaching (where women also dominate) so much, not only do we regulate what and how they teach - it is more lucrative to be a Walmart supervisor. And it requires less skill and education.

[Agagagagaga]

Wiping someone’s ass is not the same as clearing a forest for lumber or building a skyscraper.

[Summeroflove]

Because most feminists are terrible people. Sure. There is some problems women fact. I won’t deny that

But normal women don’t hate men and constantly throw tantrums

[FunkyMonkee]

The movement's been going since at least the `60's, and it was, basically, started by the Rothschild's but, in the more than 60 jobs that I've had in my life (starting in the `70's), I don't think I've ever seen more than one female co-worker in all the "dirty" jobs I've ever had! Stuff like winter clean-up, building swimming pools, tearing down a mobile roller coaster... in the pouring rain!, roadie, janitor, etc..

[suzzieQ]

Men will also point out that for the majority of history women were banned and prevented from working most jobs to begin with...

But you are kind of missing the point. Its about the right to chose and have equal opportunity based on merit not equal outcome...

[SiberFox]

Yes, because the home maker is the ultimate career. The career for which all other careers were created.
Jobs are dangerous, why put the most important and less capable in those positions?

[suzzieQ]

@SiberFox being a home maker isn’t a career. It’s the responsibility of everyone one who is in charge of the home. You assume that women in general are less capable than men which is an extremely sexist stance. There are men who aren’t capable, just like there are women who aren’t capable, basing it off of gender instead of personal capability is sexist.

[SiberFox]

Being a home maker is the ULTIMATE career, it is the career for which all other careers were created. Deny it all you want, mothers are single most important group of any society. They are responsible for the future generations.
Women are for the majority less capable than men when it comes to physical work, this is a fact. Men only groups outperform mixed groups or women only groups, this is why women were prevented from doing these jobs even if a capable women were to apply.
Sure I'm sexist, I want what's best for men, because better men allow for women to prosper. Men did better things when they were responsible for the women in their lives.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And you also failed to point out that most women wouldn't even wanna do those jobs anyways. Just like today, sure you can work as a construction worker, sewer cleaner, power plant engineer and so on but why dont women do it? I mean there are at least like 10% who qualified so being "not allowed" is not an excuse. Even if this was back then, women wouldve refused to let men dominate those fields and not allow men to not allow women on those work places. But you see, its just their choice. Another example would be, if you ask if women should be drafted, majority of women would say no.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I can also say women didn't allow men to be a house dad but forced to do those dirty jobs to benifit the family even if they didn't want to. Now should i yell oppression?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara most men don’t want those jobs either…. Men haven’t been drafted in the untitled states in like 50 years.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

What you said actually adds up to my point. Yes men don't want those jobs just like men didn't wanna fight in wars 50 years ago. If you like to say women didn't have the rights to work in a death risky and heavy duty jobs, then I can also say men didn't have the rights to refuse. So they're both equally oppressed. So if both genders didn't want those jobs, as if we all have a choice because we all need to survive. You women are safe guarded because you're the ones who can give birth and that's your privilege. It's a biological instinct to keep women safe because a ratio of more women than men helps repopulate society easier than a ratio of more men than women since women can only give birth for a few times in her life while men can impregnate hundreds of women at a time. Since men aren't that special, they're the ones who have to be in front of every struggles. Putting women in front will just doom the population

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara are you forgetting about all the women who worked in factories, who kept the country running while their father, sons, husbands and brothers were gone? No body got a choice when it came to war. Then again the draft hasn’t existed in 5 decades, so not really sure what point you are trying to make?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And when did I say there are no women who don't work in factories? Of course there are going to be exceptions but that doesn't outweigh the general population of women who just refuse to work on those field. And you say there were no drafting before? How about you check your facts first before saying it? www.nationalww2museum.org/.../draft-and-wwii Also, for bringing up your example saying there are women who worked on those fields, they're more of an assistant than the ones who'd actually get to climb, touch those electrical cords, lift tons everytime and so on. So if those women don't have anyone to serve at home, they serve at those factories. If you don't get my point then it doesn't take a genius when you were literally ranting about rights that we failed to point out yet ironically, you also failed to point out that men didn't have the rights to just be a stay home dad.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara maybe try reading what I right before jumping to conclusions…. There hasn’t been a draft in 5 decades. Most men refuse to work in those fields too…. Those who do, chose to. Men did have the right to stay home, they chose not to. Just like today, men have every right to stay at home, most simply chose not to.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then you're ignoring the link I've sent you. How about you read it? Because if there was no draft, it's only natural that all living things don't wanna die and that includes men, no men but only a few men than usual would've just join the wars. So again check your facts. You haven't even presented anything. So what makes you more qualified than those researchers giving those articles?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

50 years ago was the 1970s www.sss.gov/.../ Yeah it ended shortly after but 50 years ago is what were talking about. Not more or less but there's still drafts that time. But that would also mean that contracts your notion saying "men will also point out that for the majority of history, women were banned and preventing from working most jobs" because 50 years ago is also when women are starting to work outside of their homes. Now if you just wanna say 50 years ago isn't the majority of the history, then i can easily argue that majority of the history, men had always been drafted. So it still goes both ways and which is what you failed to point out.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara the last draft in the untitled was in 1973… you have never faced a draft, or have been forced to work in factories so I’m not sure what exactly your point is other than arguing just for the sake of arguing.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Did i even say I have face a draft? I thought you're talking about in history so why are you now talking about me? How about you make up your mind?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Lol of course you didn't unless you are secretly 90 years old lmao

You are the one who jumped into my comment. So why are you here? Are you trying to make a point or just argue?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then you're not prevented nor banned from doing most jobs unless you're 90 years old. But that's a different topic now. Nothing to do with what you first said

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara what point are you trying to make?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I'm beginning to ask you the same thing when you try to change your topic when I'm trying to make a point. I thought you were talking about in history so why are you talking about "now"? So yeah, if you're gonna make a point, at least don't contradict things.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara But Okay so what is your point?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It doesn't take a genius. If you like to address what men failed to point out then I address what you failed to point out which debunks your notions.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Actually no it doesn't debunk anything, I am taking historical fact into account, and you come in whining about how men had it bad too... yes, we know that. Talking about a specific group of people's struggles doesn't detract from different issues that different people face...

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then what I talked about is also historical facts that you women weren't so oppressed at all. It went both ways. And if you're just gonna assume that I'm whining about it, then it's not different if I assume you're whining about how women had it bad from the start. And if you know that, then you should realize that the grass is always greener on the other side.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara so what point are you trying to make?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You want to ask me up then i'm just going to have to copy paste everything i said, "Then what I talked about is also historical facts that you women weren't so oppressed at all. It went both ways. And if you're just gonna assume that I'm whining about it, then it's not different if I assume you're whining about how women had it bad from the start. And if you know that, then you should realize that the grass is always greener on the other side."

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara so you are just trying to be argumentative… not surprising coming from you

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Giving a counter argument to debunk your claim but if you like to think im just about arguments, then at least it's an argument instead of just simply making claims without anything to back it up like you did. And what about you and your first comment? Can I just say the same thing about you ust trying to be argumentative?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara... it wasn't a claim, my original statement is historically factual.. so what point are you trying to make when you say men had it bad too? We already know that... everyone knows that.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And if you know that men had it bad as well then you are contradicting yourself therefore there's no need for feminism. Your agenda has been debunked multiple times i'm feminism is not about equality.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara … you have some serious mommy issues don’t you? No need for feminism? Women were the legal equivalent of property, who were quite literally owned by their husband, fathers, sons, and brothers. They couldn’t own property, vote or have their own bank account….. but yeah legal equality isn’t necessary….

[Aiko_E_Lara]

That's not even an argument to assume someone has mommy issues. It's not different if I say you have daddy issues. But neither of us know each other why not stick to the argument? Ok if they couldn't do those things, then do you even know what it took those guys to actually own a property, to vote and to drive? It took a lot since systems before wasn't as simplified as systems today and those guys should be expected to be recruited/drafted to fight for the wars, do all those hard manual labor jobs to become a suffragist in order for them to vote, drive, own a property and so on since again as i've mentioned, it's majority of women's choices to not wanna work on those dangerous field. Those men who couldn't survive can't be valued so they'd end up homeless, slaves, doing drugs and commit suicide or just straight up dead because no women would take them. The advancement of our society which is what simplified our systems meaning anyone can now just vote easily just like cars becomes easier to drive for all people to use. Liberation has nothing to do with feminism but has something to do with change. And If you know like what you said that men didn't have it great too, then that's why there's no need for feminism. We do need equality but not feminism. There's big difference.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara It wasn't an argument it was a question...

So you do support the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I support equality that's why im not a Feminist.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara so you support the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Yeah and again that's why im not a feminist

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara dude... that is the literal definition of feminism...
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Originally that's what people "thought" it was until it's debunked multiple times. www.youtube.com/watch Words from the dictionary can get outdated which is why new words are made every time. If you really insist, then tell me, where is "feminism" in the synonym list of "equality? https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/equality The word equality itself is equality and it's not feminism.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

which is exactly why those 2 are different things. How about if I say masculinism is about equality? Now answer that one and I'll prove to you a point.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

On the other hand, i did take a look at the synonyms of feminism and I'm not surprised to see it's all about women https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/feminism but If you wanna go with Merriam's, yeah i can see they include egalitarianism in there https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/feminist but when i clicked on egalitarianism, there's no feminism in it's synonym list which kinda contradicts it. www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/egalitarian Which is exactly why the word equality and feminism just have 2 different meanings. In short, equality is equality and feminism is feminism.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara That would be incorrect because the definition of masculinism is "an ideology opposed to, or opposed by, feminism."

if it were "debunked" then the definition of the word would be something different.
If your argument is that word means something other than it's definition than... you have no basis for your arguments since a word can mean whatever you want it to... it doesn't work like that.
Weather or not you agree with the definition of a word, it doesn't change just because you dont like it.

By definition feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes... if you support gender equality, if you believe that men and women should have equal ease of access to resources and opportunities regardless of gender, including economic participation and decision-making then you believe in feminism.

If that is not what you are talking about, then that is something different, not feminism.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then you've proven my point. If you think Feminism is about equality while Masculinism isn't, then that's double standards which means your agenda can't accurately be equality.

And if it wasn't debunked, then equality would remain synonym to feminism. But still that isn't really the case. You can't even explain why the word equality alone is a different category to feminism. Even Google begs to differ. www.google.com/search you can see, egalitarianism is anything to do with equality but feminism. And dictionary. com would like to agree that that movement is truly similar to equality www.dictionary.com/.../egalitarian Also not would you explain how there's no equality here? Even the meaning? https://www.dictionary.com/browse/feminism

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara No it's not the words have completely different definitions.

[suzzieQ]

You can't pretended a word means something that it doesn't just because you want to. That is delusional.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

In addition to my first point in the previous reply, actions speaks louder than words tho. Dictionary is words while you feminists have your many different idiology. There's some who would say it's about equality, it's about for women, men can't be feminist, i'm just a feminist by choice or etc. It's like you all just want feminism to be anything you want it to be and you all can't seem to agree on each other on what feminism should be. Except all of you sharing just one thing in common which is your idea that we're living in a patriarchal society which is why it has to be feminism not masculinism. But you claimed you know the hardship of men anyways, other feminists wouldn't. Justifying that movement with their victim mentality to create a halo effect making people think women are more oppressed. But if you're not like those girls but you call yourself a feminist anyways, then you're a choice feminist. Meaning it's just nothing more but just a label that doesn't do anything because you just care so much about what the dictionary just say ignoring what really is going on while im just arguing at your level.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

not to mention, you all have your own interpretation of what equality should be. It's like "it's equality if men gets to lose 1/3 of his income, the kids and the house after a divorce" "it's equality that men should be drafted while women don't" "It's equality for women to hit a man but not vice versa" Maybe the dictionary you gave is talking about the kind of equality you feminists interpret. Also you still ignored dictionary. com's definition tho. How come there's no equality in there?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

A lot of it's meaning is like "To be equal to men" and it's talking about "equality" as a result. Don't you realize that sounds more like equity than equality?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara What something is and what you want it to be doesn't always match. There is a difference between equal opportunity not equal outcome. Feminism is based on the concept of equal opportunity regardless of sex or gender. Equal outcome is not feminism that's more akin to communism.
Not it is not equitable that men were drafted, and women were not... but there has not been a draft in the united stated in 50 years.
There is no legal president that makes physical assault legal for women and not men.
As for issues of the family court, guardianship of the children, child support and the division of community property in a divorce is a complicated matter that takes many many factors into account. A lot of those times those negotiations take place between the two with their lawyers and if a settlement cannot be reached that is when it goes to the court and a judge uses legal president to make a ruling. So for weather or not having to pay spousal or child support, custody of the children or the division of marital property is equitable... that depends on the situation

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You're still ignoring what dictionary. com have to say. I talk about it is for women. And you're still ignoring why equality is not a synonym to feminism. That alone just signifies that those who are just different. While there you are saying that you cannot pretend is that a word means something just because want to otherwise you're just delusional while ironically you're pretending that feminism and equality are the same.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And also ironically you're showing double standards by opposing masculinism when one has to advocate it is about equality. Is feminism is the idea that women are more oppressed and they just need to be more equal to men and give equity to women, then masculinism would have been the vice versa, giving equity to men until you feminists just opposed that but i thought you say you like equality. This is exactly why action speaks louder than words. www.google.com/search another thing would be if there are so many kinds of feminism and a lot of them become extreme, that just really means it cannot be equality. Just like any other numbers besides 0 which is the center of all integers which also represents equality, the other numbers can go extreme but no matter how much you add 0 to 0, the answer is always 0. That's why feminism or any other movement is not considered equality because it can go extreme. Which is why you are just not supposed to appeal to the dictionary without using any other logic specially if it is a word that is just made up in the modern age because that is a logical fallacy effectiviology.com/.../ Also, i'm bet you're surprised why it's considered a logical fallacy.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara did I didn’t say that feminism and equality are the same. I never said that. Feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes. If it goes extreme it’s not feminism is something entirely different. You are trying to synonymous female superiority and bigotry with feminism and you can because that are complete opposites.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

So there for it isn't equality. Which is why i said I support equality which is why im not a feminist. What still stands however is the idea of masculinism being opposed by feminists which still shows double standards. Which is again exactly why it can't be equality and actions speaks louder than words. Dictionaries are words but what they do is the action. So no, it's the feminists demonstrating it. If "Feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes" It never said the advocacy of women's and men's rights so there for it's more of equity than equality. And yeah you're right feminism going extreme can be something else. Like feminazism but tell you this, feminazism wouldn't exist if feminism wouldn't exist.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara except feminism is based on gender equality. If it’s not about equality then it’s not feminism it’s something else. Don’t know why you are having so much trouble with that.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then again i can say the same thing about masculinism. If it's not equality then it is not masculinism. It's something else. Just like how it is easy to say feminism is feminism and equality is equality. It's simple yet you're still having troubles with that.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara well I am using the definition of the words. Not trying to change the definitions. What is the definition of masculinism?
Because The Oxford English Dictionary (2000) defines masculinism, and synonymously masculism, as: "Advocacy of the rights of men; adherence to or promotion of opinions, values, etc., regarded as typical of men; (more generally) anti-feminism, machismo."
By definition that is not about equality, that is the promotion of opinions and values, and is anti women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You're still ignoring that appealing to the dictionary is a logical fallacy and if you know what fallacy means that just means argument without any evidence. Meaning to say you're just using the dictionary while you're ignoring what the feminists actually do. And even your own logic betrayed you because one of the dictionary also talked about how feminism is the advocacy of women's rights. It's not saying the advocacy of men and women's rights so that movement cannot be quality which is still why it is not in the synonym list of feminism. I can also say that anti feminism is about equality and those who say misogyny towards women aren't masculinist but they are just sexist. That's how your own logic gets backfired

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I can also give you a wikipedia of masculinism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism it says there it is to eliminate sexism against men, "equalize" their rights with women. Despite it being an anti feminist movement, it's still said equalize in there so it's about equality. I mean that's basically you're logic tho and you're not the only one who can use fallacies like that

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Only if you paraphrase like you just did. Feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of gender equality.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara it also says "The Oxford English Dictionary (2000) defines masculinism, and synonymously masculism, as: "Advocacy of the rights of men; adherence to or promotion of opinions, values, etc., regarded as typical of men; (more generally) anti-feminism, machismo."

Nothing about equality. If fact if it's anti feminism then then they are anti gender equality, since that is the basis for feminism.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And it's quite hypocritical to say that when feminists are also anti masculinist despite there are masculinists who are mysoginist and they don't even bother supporting that movement. Why? Because again actions still speaks louder than words and feminism is not really about equality because they would have support masculinism if it really is. But in the end, those are just new era words with controversies which is exactly why millions of people don't like the idea of feminism like i would say a majority of people would oppose feminism. That word compared to the word "chair" for example, everyone already agreed on what a chair is supposed to be while feminism is still a controversial word. So therefore if you are just like "i don't know the dictionary just said so" then that still doesn't remove the fact that you're still just appealing to the dictionary which is still a logical fallacy. You're just going to be repeating your words over and over and i'm going to predict you're still going to use the dictionary as evidence but i've already talked about it being a logical fallacy.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Masculists who *aren't misogyists

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara of course feminism would oppose masculinist. Masculinist is defined as an advocate of male superiority or dominance. Feminism is based on gender equality not superiority.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/masculinist

By definition they are not the same, and are in fact opposite. By definition one is for male superiority and the other for gender equality.
If your whole stance is that words don't actually mean what they mean, then how does anything you have said have any meaning at all? It can't go both ways

[suzzieQ]

If you support gender equality, than you would have to oppose Masculinists. You aren't opposed to feminism, you're opposed to Gynocentrism and female supremacy.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And you don't realize that you are just like "i don't know anything but it's just the dictionary just so'' again i'm not falling for it. effectiviology.com/.../ So try again. And put logic behind it

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara I am using the actual definitions of these words as a basis for my argument and your whole argument is that those words actually mean something else. I can't have a discussion with someone who can't even agree on the definition of a word...

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Other than masculinism, how come feminist are also against the idea of MRM/MRA? Like what i said if feminism is truly support equality then how come theyre not really supporting a movement for which is an advocacy for men's rights on the basis of equality for both sexes? Actions still speaks louder than words and you're not giving any logic other than just busting your dictionary. Also can you explain why is a logical fallacy to just use dictionary? i bet you can't.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara They aren't opposed to men's right on the basis of gender equality. They are opposed to male superiority. If they dont support gender equality then they aren't feminist. The issue is that men's right activism isn't about gender equality, Men's rights activism is essentially a movement based on the belief that men are losing power and status because of feminism.

How would you define MRA?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It is a movement. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement also why do you think it is a logical fallacy to just use dictionary? You're still dodging the question

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And where did it actually say that it is really because of feminism and it is truly is a backlash to feminism? I mean yes it's the scholars who said it but tell me where did it say that it is true? It is a claim that that is what the scholars said but it never claimed that that's what really is about

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara It's not a logical fallacy do used the definition of a word as the basis for an argument. Claiming that words dont mean what they literally mean is a logical fallacy.

"Many scholars describe the movement or parts of it as a backlash against feminism.[2] As part of the manosphere, the movement, and sectors of the movement, have been described by scholars and commentators as misogynistic,[3][4][5] hateful,[6][5][7] and, in some cases, as advocating violence against women.[5][8][9] In 2018, the Southern Poverty Law Center categorized some men's rights groups as being part of a hate ideology under the umbrella of male supremacy while stating that others "focused on legitimate grievances".[10][11]"

The sources are all right there, in the link that you sent me.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Ok then what kind of logical fallacy is it because what you just did is appealing to dictionary or in other words argumentum ad dictionarium which had been published for a long time.

It seems to me that you don't really read the rest of what i said so i'm just going to repeat it here "I mean yes it's the scholars who said it but tell me where did it say that it is true? It is a claim that that is what the scholars said but it never claimed that that's what really is about?" Because it is what the scholar said, so those are basically just back lashes. So they are anti men's rights. So therefore if you are just define anti men's rights activist then i am justifying anti feminism

[Aiko_E_Lara]

*Justify anti men's rights movement

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara I told you, the resources are cited, but I will copy and paste them for you if you can't find them.

[2] Sources:
Clatterbaugh, Kenneth (2007a). "Men's Rights". In Flood, Michael; Gardiner, Judith Kegan; Pease, Bob; Pringle, Keith (eds.). International Encyclopedia of Men and Masculinities. Routledge. pp. 430–433. ISBN 978-0-415-33343-6. The concept of men's rights embraces a variety of points of view that are overwhelmingly hostile to feminism or pro-feminism.
Maddison, Sarah (1999). "Private Men, Public Anger: The Men's Rights Movement in Australia" (PDF). Journal of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies. 4 (2): 39–52. Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 October 2013.
Doyle, Ciara (2004). "The Fathers' Rights Movement: Extending Patriarchal Control Beyond the Marital Family". In Herrman, Peter (ed.). Citizenship Revisited: Threats or Opportunities of Shifting Boundaries. New York: Nova Publishers. pp. 61–62. ISBN 978-1-59033-900-8.

[suzzieQ]

Flood, Michael (2005). "Men's Collective Struggles for Gender Justice: The Case of Antiviolence Activism". In Kimmel, Michael S.; Hearn, Jeff; Connell, Raewyn (eds.). Handbook of Studies on Men and Masculinities. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. p. 459. ISBN 978-0-7619-2369-5.
Finocchiaro, Peter (29 March 2011). "Is the men's rights movement growing?". Salon. Retrieved 10 March 2013.
Messner, Michael (2000). Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 41. ISBN 978-0-8039-5577-6.
Solinger, Rickie (2013). Reproductive Politics: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 130. ISBN 978-0-19-981141-0.
Menzies, Robert (2007). "Virtual Backlash: Representation of Men's 'Rights' and Feminist 'Wrongs' in Cyberspace". In Boyd, Susan B (ed.). Reaction and Resistance: Feminism, Law, and Social Change. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. pp. 65–97. ISBN 978-0-7748-1411-9.
Dunphy, Richard (2000). Sexual Politics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. p. 88. ISBN 978-0-7486-1247-5.
Mills, Martin (2003). "Shaping the boys' agenda: the backlash blockbusters". International Journal of Inclusive Education. 7 (1): 57–73. doi:10.1080/13603110210143644. S2CID 144875158.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Also I am not justifying anything. Just presenting the facts.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Actually all of what you cited are what just the scholars have to say but nothing in there said that those are facts and indeed true that that is what the movement is about. So those would still fall under the backlash category. Those are basically interviews on what they have to say about it which are basically just anecdotes. But you know what else are back lashes? That's right many people hating feminism and here is what they also have to say. https://youtu.be/guuPHxg4XXc and yes there are like 46k upvotes and only 700+ downvotes. Look just because it has way more likes means he is automatically correct, but those people in get interviewed, they would pretty much be published just like the back lashes of men's rights activists. Really what movement can men just have? I mean wouldn't you consider that privilege of yours that because you are seen as a woman, you're often seen as a victim the people would actually take your issues more seriously compared to men's? Here is a phenomenon about it and it's called women are wonderful effect. en.m.wikipedia.org/.../Women-are-wonderful_effect Yet you are still wondering why men suicide rate is still higher than womens. So those are not really fact. Those are just what those people have to say about men's rights activists and there is no proof of what they just said and also, the fallacy you gave still cannot lie. You still have no real reasoning other than just to use the dictionary.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

How about you don't dodge this question and i'll just ask what movement can men just have if you already have feminism? Or are you going to dodge it again and show double standards?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Actually no I dont wonder why men's suicide rates are higher. We already know why. Women attempt suicide 2x the rate men do but men have higher suicide rates than women because they use more violent methods.

Lol my reasoning is the literal definitions of the terms that I am using. If you are talking about something else, then specify what you are talking about instead of trying to change the definition of the word.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Alright then i'm going to repeat my points again but so far you still haven't provided any counterarguments to any of it. So how about you give your own counter argument to it one by one?

1. Appealing to the dictionary is a logical fallacy because so far you haven't given your reasoning other than just to point out what the dictionary just said. You just don't know about the situation and you don't know how in theory vs in practice works. What's even ironic is that you also try to change the meaning of MRA despite what it said "to equalize" which ironically shows double standards. This is exactly why appealing to the dictionary is a fallacy. Specially on new era political words with controversies.

2. If feminism is about equality, the dictionary would have said it is the advocacy for "men and women's rights". And the name itself wouldn't be associated for women.

3. It is not even a synonym for equality and the word equality itself already exist before feminism exist. The dictionary never said it is similar to equality.

4. If there is a movement associated for women then there should also be a movement associated for men. Meaning to say MRM/MRA movement is about equality despite what's the back lashes said. Just like how you say Feminism is about equality despite what those anti-feminist have to say.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

5. Feminists never even supported any movement that focuses on men's rights while they had been actively supporting for women's rights which would have really represent equality. The dictionary alone said that it is the advocacy of women's rights not "men and women's rights"

6. The women are wonderful effect is one privilege you have that makes society takes you more seriously whenever you have issues which is a factor why people listens to your needs more than men's needs can you don't get discriminated as much for actually making a movement, other than that you can get away with other karen stuff you do compared to men. Which is why luckily for you feminism didn't get as much backlash to MRA when it's started despite that movement is talking about the facts. The facts that people downplayed. The "women are wonderful" effect is also going to be in response for you saying that women are twice more likely to attempt on suicide. As a experiment shown that society is more likely to react when a woman is in danger. Also mean the address women more when they attempt on committing suicide. Also because women show that they attempt more but you may have no idea how many attempts men made before they really succeed. And their success rate is 4x higher than womens vs women's attempt rate which is 2x.

Now let's see, 1-6 would just be because "i don't know but the dictionary just said so" which would really prove my point #1. You can't provide any counter arguments to any of it i just know it.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara
1. When debating what a word means, using the definition of that word is a fantastic place to start. It has nothing to do with fallacy and everything to do with the definition of a word.

2. Feminism is defined as the advocacy for womens rights on the basis of gender equality.
(That means advocating for women to have the same rights as men. That’s what gender equality means.)

3. You’re right, it says it’s basis is gender equality.

4. And it would be if MRM/ MRA were based on gender equality. Which by definition it’s not.

5. Actually yes they have. Most feminists are very supportive of stopping the genital mutilation of male infants.

6. Well if men supported mrm like women support feminism than maybe it would get more support. When is the last time you went to a MRM march or protest? Volunteered are a mens shelter?
If men supported men the way women support each other, and encouraged each other to take care of their mental health, things would probably be better. But you would rather sit here and complain about how bad you have it when someone is trying to discuss Womens issues.

Yeah dude, we all know it’s sucks, but just because someone is talking about a different issues doesn’t attract detract from yours. If you want to talk about mens issues then please do so with put highjacking a thread that’s talking about womens issues.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

1. If it has nothing to do with fallacy, then why do you think argumentum ad dictionarium is published? It's still a fact that it is published. Here are another reason why it's a fallacy blog.oup.com/.../ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexicographic_error Yet you've never presented a fallacy that would actually describe what you think my argument is.

2. " Feminism is defined as the advocacy for womens rights on the basis of gender equality." Not " advocacy for men and womens rights on the basis of gender equality." So meaning that is a belief that women are more oppressed feminists advocates for more rights for women because they think it would make them equal to men. Actions still speaks louder than words.
3. And if you say I'm right then you agreed it's not equality. It's just a "more rights for women movment."
4. So you still wanna ignore what the wikipedia said en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement if you wanna read that article again, you can just simply highlight the word "equality" and you'd see it everywhere in that article. But no you just wanna go with what those scholars have to say. It's just what some scholars say in an interview but the article itself never said it's true. That's basically cherry picking and another logical fallacy you just made. effectiviology.com/.../ But if you wanna believe those scholars then it's not different if I believe in those anti feminists which basically majority of people are.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

5. While there are also many feminists who don't. I can also say there are many MRAs who are actually pro choices. And they wouldn't really have made backlashes about the MRA like how those scholars did it. Basically like you, you're believing in what the scholars have to say, maybe an excuse you have because you just don't like that movement as a feminist which is why you don't give MRA a benefit of a doubt.
6. Actually men do support MRM like how feminists supports Feminism. The only difference is that you and your other feminists just don't see it or maybe you avoid it. And if you ask me when the last time i joined their march? It's just like when the last time the "feminists" here attended the feminist march. But really tho both feminism and MRA march don't really happen here. As if we care about those movements. We all believe in equality and we don't have those which is why we don't have those march here. I'm bringing up MRA because you like to believe Feminism is about equality. So there for i gave a counter argument to it which you failed to debunk missrably.
I don't see how someone talking about an issue just automatically make them a "whatever"-ist who's supporting the movement "whatever"-ism. It's not like someone just becomes a feminist because they helped out a girl who got beaten up yesterday and will become an MRA tomorrow because they're gonna help out a man getting abused by a girl. Really it's not that hard to just be someone who's just an egalitarian or someone who supports equality for all. If I ask you, why does equality have to be feminism? Now I can already predict you're still gonna go with what the dictionary said which is gonna prove my first point. Or maybe you just wanna stick to the dictionary because you don't want me to prove another point about you because you'd sound like those typical feminists.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara I can have a discussion with you if you can't even agree on the textbook definition of a word. Feminism is about equality, if whatever you are talking about isn't about equality then it's not feminism, period.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I mean why should I when I have all my arguments backed up that you can't even give any proper counter arguments to it? They all still stand by the way and the more you keep repeating that, the more you prove my point #1. So yeah I have way more valid reasons to despise feminism than to actually be a feminist.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not a valid argument. A good example of a poor argument is trying to change the definition of a word suite your stance. I can't have a discussion with someone who keeps trying to change the definition of words.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then what fallacy is it then? Because I go with my point #1 in that. Argumentum Ad Dictionarium and Lexicographic Error debunks the dictionary en.wikipedia.org/.../Wikipedia:Dictionaries_as_sources So it's really safe for me to say that just because it's what the dictionary said, doesn't mean it's a good source nor correct. As I repeat the closures of my points, "Now let's see, 1-6 would just be because "i don't know but the dictionary just said so" which would really prove my point #1. You can't provide any counter arguments to any of it i just know it.' <--- Just what i really predicted. You lose all your counter arguments to those 6 points I gave and stick back to your dictionary.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You're only talking about point #1 at this point. So what happened to your stances with point #2-6?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Because I am not going to have a discussion with someone that keeps trying to change the definition of word to better suite your stance. It's pointless. So if you want to talk fact and will stop trying to change the definitions of words then I will discuss your issues with gender equality, but until then, there is nothing left to discuss.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It's only point this because you're losing credibility. You still have many other points you're actually dodged and you've never give any proper reason why i should believe in what the dictionary said about feminism. So yeah it's pointless because you're looking for excuse to just escape and living things hanging

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Leaving things hanging

[Aiko_E_Lara]

*only pointless

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Because that is the definition of the word... just because you dont like it or even agree with it doesn't change the fact that is the definition of feminism.. period. There is nothing to argue. If you dont like it that's fine, but I am not going to debate the definitions of words.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You still failed to answer why it's even the definition. That is circular reasoning and basically the only reason you got. Your dictionary has been debunked and i proved that it isn't an always reliable nor correct

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara It is the definition, because that is what it is... if its not then it's something else. I am not going to argue about literary definitions with you. If you can't comprehend literary definitions, then that is you problem.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then how exactly? How exactly is the dictionary correct? Are you going to dodge that question again?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara an up-to-date dictionary is a resource that lists the words of a language (typically in alphabetical order) and gives their meaning, or gives the equivalent words in a different language, often also providing information about pronunciation, origin, and usage.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And what makes you so sorry that the meaning of feminism is actually up-to-date? Because i still go by my stance that the dictionary doesn't really mean everything.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Also i'm not even talking about dictionary as a whole but i'm only talking about feminism so what makes you so sure that the meaning of feminism in the dictionary is actually up-to-date?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Because according to Merriam Webster it was last reviewed just a couple days ago

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Lol i don't see any reviews from it or maybe you're just looking at a reviews of the dictionary itself not the meaning of feminism. But i will pretend that if it's really the meaning of feminism and you're going by the reviews, i can also point out that the video debunking the feminism agenda has actually way more likes than dislikes as a review. Like having 46k upvotes and only 700+ downvotes just to argue using your logic. So what do you even have to say about that?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara If it's not about gender equality than, my definition it's not feminism. It's something else.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Ok then i can also repeat equality is equality and not something else like feminism

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Sure you can, and feminism is just the advocation of gender equality for women, that focus on issues like female genital mutilation, sex trafficking, legal, financial and medical autonomy along with gender-based discrimination. If its not about equality, then it's not feminism. You yourself said that you support the definition of feminism.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And if it focuses on women then that act alone is not equality and action still speaks louder than words. That's why i support equality not feminism, because i don't focus on anything

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Or should i say i don't focus on one but i focus on all which is why i am not a feminist

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara well you seemed verry focused on this. Just because feminism primarily gender inequities and discrimination towards women doesn't mean that it isn't advocating for equality.
You don't have to be a feminist, no one is making you, thanks to equality you get to make that choice. You can be a feminist and still advocate for gender discrimination for men too. it's not mutually exclusive.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then that's exactly the same for MRA, it is a movement for "equality" but focuses on men. That statement alone sounds contradictory actually just like the movement feminism. However the empirical data debunking feminism still begs to differ just like the youtube video i presented and you still never provided any real counter arguments to eat but you are still appealing to the dictionary which still proves my point number one.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara because I am using the actual definitions of the words, not pretending the mean what ever I want them to.

[SiberFox]

You two should just Dm from now on

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then i'm using the actual empirical data that actually debunked your "definition" instead of pretending what you think is the definition a feminism is true.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Lol you mean your little YouTube video? Thats imperial data but literal definition of a word isn't... okay sure haha
Since we are just making up our own definitions now, I'll just start doing that now. I am sure I can find a you tube video to present as "Imperial evidence" lol

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Yeah "little" indeed when it actually has way more views then the dictionary itself. Oh by the way in case you don't know, that youtube is actually a reliable source of education emberacademy.edu.za/.../ as it is a primary media people can just use efficiently. So it's not really different if those data are in a written form found at the very last page of google where you probably get your sources from

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara More views than the dictionary Haha okay sure... yeah because everything on YouTube is a reliable source of education. What next? You going to provide imperial evidence that world is flat? Oh or that the pyramid was built by Martians? Or how the moon landing was faked?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Except youtube is pretty much aware that the earth isn't flat and youtube has been roasting flat earthers. You know i'm actually still waiting for you to actually give a youtube video about feminism like what you said but i guess you are pretty much aware that they are all embarrassment. I just love the comment section

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Oh but I can find videos on you tube that provide "imperial evidence" you yourself just said that YouTube is a reliable source of education.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Except youtube is pretty much aware that the earth isn't flat and youtube has been roasting flat earthers, just like how youtube is debunking feminism and no one in youtube has made popular/viral documents about martians building the pyramid and the moon landing is fake. More like the idea of the moon landing being fake and martians building the pyramid is comparable to the feminism agenda. Like all stupid lol. You said earlier that you were going to do the same thing and use youtube as a source so i'm still waiting for you to actually give me a valid feminism source from youtube but sadly for you they are all embarrassment

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Do i have to point out something that is common sense? Like the views and the like dislikes ratio and the comment threads actually matters? I'm pretty much aware that there are stupid videos in youtube but they are also the one who got a lot of back lashes and downvotes. But that isn't really that case for anti feminism videos now is it?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Lol I am not going to debate someone who believes that you tube is a reliable source of education and that you can just change the definition of words to suite your personal beliefs hahaha

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Yeah you're just looking for excuses because you know other than me actually using youtube and people's ideas, the rest of my points 1 to 6 actually still stands. Youtube being a reliable source being the 7th point. But yeah you're just looking for excuses to actually dodge everything because you're know you're screwed

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And if it's a "personal" belief, sure we are still wondering why anti-feminist videos have more likes than dislikes lol and more people agreeing to it just like how many people agree that the earth isn't flat. I mean if youtube pretty much debunked flat earthers, and you're calling it stupid, that basically would make you sound like a flat earther just like all stupid they are compared to feminist. And if you are so smart, you would pretty much argue with reasonings and counter arguments instead of using the same no true Scotsman fallacy over and over

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Lol sure what ever, enjoy your you tube degree in political science hahahah

[Aiko_E_Lara]

at least youtube is real amd iy exisy. Enjoy your delusional fantasy world.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara lol 😂 okay you tube graduate haha

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Yeah you can laugh all you want because you know you're screwed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_ridicule i like how you just highlighted how i used youtube and you ignored the other imperical data i presented. Like what i said you just know you are screwed. Can you given explain how youtube is not a valid source? Can you even explain why youtube destroys flat earthers if you think its stupid? I'm going to predict i just bet you can't. You lost all credibility and hope lol.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Oh by the way, people upvoting those video is just not done by youtube alone but it's the people so yeah. Youtube has nothing to do with those videos. And also within those videos, there are empirical data from different sources summarize and discussed. And if it was stupid they would have been destroyed like those flat earthers. https://youtu.be/_bHqBy92iGM and at one point if the class actually use youtube as a visual aid which is basically a common thing to do in universities, you would pretty much just leave and go back to your safe space.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Lol what ever you say YouTube graduate

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Horse laugh fallacy again. Ok and that case whatever you say, hobo drop out

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara dude I’m still in highschool… I haven’t dropped out of anything and schools don’t accept you tube as sources.. so tell me more about drop out mr you tube Dr.. 😂

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And that explains why you are so ignorant. Yeah schools don't accept youtube videos as sources you say maybe it's because your school is one of those that actually believe that the earth is flat. Which is why

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Whatever you say buddy LOL You know more than anyone else and have been Enlighted by random YouTube videos, keep spreading the message haha

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"Random" youtube video. Yeah right. And as if your claims hasn't been "random" from the start lol. That's ironic tho when you can't even explain that random source you like to claim. Oh I will spread the message. I'm not surprised that majority of people are already against the idea of feminism so what's more for me to spread when you're all pretty much roasted at this point.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Oh yeah, i'd better pick a youtube video with more views than your dictionary than to just keep using the same logical fallacies like you do. And I don't think a 15 year old highschooler like is way better than those people actually doing their researches. www.youtube.com/watch

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Oh by the way you still missed the part where smart people in youtube also spread the idea of Earth being not flat. So what now? Because youtube agrees earth isn't flat, you're going to be a flat Earther at this point? Not surprise you would lol

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Okay buddy whatever you say

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Lol whatever i say but you still care anyways because that's like the million times you said that and you have nothing else to say. Are you even sure you know what you are saying?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I'm going to predict, you're still going to be desperate i'm trying to get the last word by repeating that i just know it. Or something else that you want to say? Because my point still stand

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara LMAO what ever you say you tube boy

[Aiko_E_Lara]

How predictable. Ok i will just argue at your level at this point. Whatever you say delusional karen girl.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara lol 😂 you must feel so proud of how you handed that haha

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And you must feel so proud for losing credibility. What else?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara what ever you say you tube boy.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

then what ever you say karen girl

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara you’re still here? You don’t have some other 15 year old to harass or more YouTube videos to watch?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Don't you have any others to drama with?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara it’s sad the the you’re so desperate for attention that you keep coming back to a 15 year olds thread. I guess bad attention is better than no attention. Pathetic really..

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara a grown adult, harassing a teen age girl. What a creep..

[Aiko_E_Lara]

It's sad when someone ignorant plays the victim card when they know they're wrong and even know one who started mocking in the first place. I don't care if you're a teenager, i have moron issues and doesn't matter how old you are.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Even 5 year old know better lol

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara lol okay YouTube boy what ever you say

[Aiko_E_Lara]

lol ok Karen girl whatever you say

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara You just keep coming back for more dont you? Don't you have a life? Or do you spend all your time harassing teenage girls on the internet?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You just keep coming back for more ironically don't you? Don't you have school to finish? Or do you spend all your time being a drama queen to everyone on the internet?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara Guess not...

This is my comment thread, you're the one who keeps coming back to try and mess with me. You enjoy messing with 15-year-old girls or something? Thats creepy dude...

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Guess you don't.

And if someone debunking your flawed claims means "messing and harassment" then you have no point making a thread in the first place. You can just go back to your safe space and let the grown ups talk.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Im messing with you because you're a moron and I know smarter 15 year olds or even younger than that. And I don't need to argue at their level because they don't resort to shaming someone just because they run out of arguments.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I can also ask you, you enjoy being a karen and just play the harassment card when someone argues with the same logic as you? I mean you wanna try to mess with me but when i do the same, it's crossing the line? Lmao way to go proving double standards. I'm doing it for equality so what's the matter?

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara you like messing with 15 year olds? Thats creepy fuck dude, I'd be careful with that you tube boy.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I like messing with morons not 15 year olds. Moron who play the victim card a lot which perfectly describes feminists. This can go on forever i don't really care. It's not my fault you started resorting into horse laugh fallacy so yeah you brought this upon yourself, you can't blame anyone.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

How about you go back to the main topic and bring some or counter-argument i can debunk? But if you want to continue being that way then i can argue at your level i don't care how much you whine lol

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara What ever creep

[Gutterscream]

The bottom line, SuzzieQ, is that despite there not having been a conflict large enough to warrant a draft in fifty or so years, men when they turn eighteen are still required to register with Selective Service, making them eligible to be drafted until their twenty-sixth birthday. If they don't, they aren't eligible for federal benefits (housing, scholarships, jobs, programs and a bunch others) and in some states they can have their driver's license suspended until they do. In addition, if there is a draft and they're not registered, there's a possible $250k fine and/or five-year prison term penalty.

Women turn eighteen, register with nothing and receive these same benefits automatically.

[Gutterscream]

It's really easy to dismiss the draft as arbitrary when, should it be reinstated, you're of the group that's not only exempt from the possible personal upheaval and endangerment it could bring, but are of the group that can actually have the luxury of being detached from it enough that it's quite possible it never really crosses your minds as relevant or possible.

And no, I'm not speaking of the men and women already enlisted in the armed forces. I'm speaking of those who aren't and have no plans to do so.

A thing women haven't felt, at least not in this country, is the feeling of being a physically fit man between 18-26 (or younger - wars and their drafts often carry on for years on end) who's not active in the military when war is declared (1991, The Gulf War), especially when every generation prior to yours had 'its conflict' that 'required' the draft and it's only natural to figure 'well, here's my (and my generation's) war, I guess'. Gen X was the first not to have one in a hundred years (technically it did, being active between 1965-1973 when we were all way too young to serve). Gen X, Millennials and Gen Z should consider themselves lucky. Both grandfathers, my father and his brother (my uncle) were only lucky in that they came home from their wars alive and in one piece both physically and mentally.

This is something feminists (and most women in general) fail to point out.

[Gutterscream]

And before you come back with the usual arguments of 'not having to deal with periods' or the more popular 'men will never know what it's like to carry a child for nine months and give birth' optional childbirth , can we agree that neither are quite the same as mandatory conscription?

[suzzieQ]

@Gutterscream most people oppose selective service anyways and people have been trying to get that repealed for a long time.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Gutterscream I know how this is going to turn out. If you have read the thread, you can just see your her just resorting to the dictionary when everything is debunked including the dictionary itself. Just for you to anticipate what's going to happen lol. And of course i just notice how my last comment got deleted. Just a little warning if you actually try to make efforts in making a long, detailed and meaningful argument.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@Gutterscream technically i just exposed how she'd argue like how a typical feminist would argue. And she thinks she is actually more qualified than the youtubers who actually used souces from different sites who also happens to have way more likes than dislikes in their videos and way more views than any articles she can present

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara lol 😂 okay you tube boy

[Gutterscream]

Yeah, most people oppose it, but what's the alternative? Eliminating the country's last line of emergency defense? And put what in its place? Cross fingers hoping enough citizens will volunteer? During war time?

Opposing Selective Service and actively working to change it are two different things. Since 1973 thousands of eighteen year old men have been signing up quietly and without complaint every day. If the subject of including women in it hadn't been brought up, men would have likely continued signing up from now 'til oblivion and women wouldn't have noticed or cared if they did notice.

Yeah, so instead of including women, let's just abolish the system completely. Who cares if it puts the country at greater risk? Brilliant.

[Gutterscream]

@Aiko_E_Lara Well, since you've been arguing with her for like 200 posts, I shouldn't expect different.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

@suzzieQ well i don't see anything wrong with being a youtube boy but at least i'm not karen girl like you

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara At least Im not stupid enough to claim that YouTube is reliable source of credible information. hahahah

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Well stupid people have at least one or more brain cells. Karens like you who claims their feelings are valid just don't. Not a single one.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara there you go, making stuff up again. I guess that's what happens when you think YouTube is a reliable source of accurate information.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

And as if you haven't been making stuff up from the start. I still really love how you couldn't even explain how it isn't a reliable source even though there are articles other than youtube explaining how it is reliable. Maybe it's only not reliable when it actually debunks your claims i see

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara what articles? If you have articles stating that you tube is a reliable source of accurate information then link them.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara
“ YouTube is not a reliable source of medical and health-related information. YouTube's popularity-driven metrics such as the number of views and likes should not be considered quality indicators.”
bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/.../s12909-022-03446-z

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara
“ An ex-YouTube insider reveals how its recommendation algorithm promotes divisive clips and conspiracy videos”
amp.theguardian.com/.../how-youtubes-algorithm-distorts-truth

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"of medical and health-related information." Are we even talking about medical and health related informations? Unless you mean feminism is a mental illness lmao. And how many of them are actually Ex youtubers? Here's something from google that actually popped out first bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/.../s12909-022-03446-z Youtube is more of an inanimate object just like many other articles but the people viewing and voting for it can't lie. So again how is your random site any different?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

"what articles? If you have articles stating that you tube is a reliable source of accurate information then link them." Perhaps, you were just too blind when I actually sent you a link.

Here's another one. The second one that popped out. emberacademy.edu.za/.../ It's free, it's easy to use, it's accessible, people can make discussions in there and so on. What can your sites do?

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Oh lol, the article you presented is only talking about Logan Paul. But guess what? People in youtube also hate Logan Paul. There are other more popular youtubers even roasting him. Just like how they'd roast feminists and flat earthers. So i guess your movement just belongs with that conspiracy theory because there are also feminist youtubers. Except they pretty much get roasted like Logan Paul lol.

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara okay then ask a college if you tube is a credible source of information. I’ll wait

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I can also tell you to ask a collage if youtube is not a credible source of information. I'll also wait. You'd be surprised to hear that those who made those articles is a part of collage

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara my English professor said no

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Then my English professor said yes. What now? Are we just gonna appeal to authority without actually proving anything? because i'm just doing exactly what you're doing

[suzzieQ]

@Aiko_E_Lara lol nice try but I’m not telling you th schools I go to. Try some initiative honey it would do you well

[Aiko_E_Lara]

I don't even have to ask you because it just seem like you dont go to school at all. Which is why you can't give a proper reasoning to that.

[inhua]

one thing that needs to be pointed out is it's not men who uphold the "patriarchy" in modern society, it's women who uphold the "patriarchy" in modern society.

the explanation for this would be worth an entire blog

[YHL6965]

These particular women want the good jobs without having to work for them, fight for them and earn them. They just hope to whine enough so that they are given stuff for free basically, kind of like kids throwing a tantrum because they want candy.

Oh and don't forget about the disproportionally high suicide rates in men compared to women.

[OddBeMe]

90% of serial killers are men. oh because serial killing is sexual. Coal mining is a dead industry. ditch digging... wtf?

And only 8% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women. Could that be because the board of directors hire more men because of sexism? Not even a possibility?

[RealMarek]

Almost 100% of the people who put themselves at risk to scale and maintain wind turbines are men. Technology does not invalidate the OP’s point.

[OddBeMe]

@RealMarek so because of society’s ruts that were made by sexism, feminism is bullshit?

Women have been able to work on this continent for (checks watch) less than a 100 years. .

[RealMarek]

The lack of women willing to climb those wind turbines has nothing to do with societal ruts made by sexism. Everyone knows this. Men are generally willing to take greater risks than women because of biological differences like testosterone content.

[OddBeMe]

It actually is societal ruts causing that. Same for male flight attendants or teachers.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

You failed to point out that most women wouldn't even wanna do those jobs anyways. Just like today, sure you can work as a construction worker, sewer cleaner, power plant engineer and so on but why dont women do it? I mean there are at least like 10% who qualified so being "not allowed" is not an excuse.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Even if this was back then, women wouldve refused to let men dominate those fields and not allow men to not allow women on those work places. But you see, its just their choice. Another example would be, if you ask if women should be drafted, majority of women would say no. I can also say women didn't allow men to be a house dad but forced to do those dirty jobs to benifit the family even if they didn't want to. Now should i yell oppression? Even men don't want those jobs just like men didn't wanna fight in wars 50 years ago. If you like to say women didn't have the rights to work in a death risky and heavy duty jobs, then I can also say men didn't have the rights to refuse. So they're both equally oppressed. So if both genders didn't want those jobs, as if we all have a choice because we all need to survive. You women are safe guarded because you're the ones who can give birth and that's your privilege. It's a biological instinct to keep women safe because a ratio of more women than men helps repopulate society easier than a ratio of more men than women since women can only give birth for a few times in her life while men can impregnate hundreds of women at a time. Since men aren't that special, they're the ones who have to be in front of every struggles. Putting women in front will just doom the population. What you also fail to see that it's men safe guarding women from the start but all you wanna take a look at are those "serial killers" and ignore those genuinely good guys who makes laws for them and to endanger themselves to protect the civilization from predators back then and to make organizations to help us advance so entitled women and children can eat and live luxuriously today.

[lottiebannotie]

Because it's a load of shit just like BLM and now it's blown up in all our faces because of all this 100 genders nonsense cheers

[Andres77]

They’re insane. Just like greta thorn burg is seeking the overthrow of the USA.

fuqing loony

[Andres77]

https://www.tumblr.com/realsexism

[Adaeva]

The bell cure is much wider for men than for women. Therefore, most geniuses and most idiots are men. Since there are far more geniuses, far more men will have the IQs to be CEOs.

[Anonymous]

Those jobs probably have more males since they most often are physically stronger than women. That's not to say you should think you're objectively superior for that and be a dick about it or something. I'm just saying, that biological factor could be a huge reason for a lot of this. And, this is more subjective, but when I see women in those positions, they're also usually bigger women.

I wouldn't call myself a feminist personally, that's just what I notice.

[Anonymous]

You choose:

A) They are on a power grab and only want cherry picked jobs with money and influence.

B) It's men's felt for being sexism and keeping women out of dangerous and unsanity jobs such as ditches and war.

[DJB72]

Dr Peterson? Is that you?

This has been a central topic of Jordan Peterson for some time. He's 100% right.

[KlinkyCoder]

It doesn't sound like equality either, but for men's side in this, to be fair men also happen to be the ones choosing and seeking to do the tough jobs in the first place.

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Look *i'm not saying just because it has more like doesn't mean he is automatically correct.

Those missing words made a difference but i'm fixing it here

[Aiko_E_Lara]

Oh i accidentally typed that in as an opinion when that is supposed to be a reply to an opinion here. I just noticed it now. Anyways i don't have nothing else to say about your mytake but i just agree with what you said

[007kingifrit]

men and women evolved to compliment eachother not compete. i don't want equality at all, i want fairness. i want them each to be their own unique thing that stays in their own categories

[exitseven]

Most women would not be plumbers because they don't want to show a butt crack.

[shopkeeper]

Men historically haven't wanted women in those positions so they've been kept out. In terms of coal miners and loggers, people shouldn't be doing that anyway.

[Aphrodite801]

Feminists don’t have to point out anything to you cringe guys

[PainusNdeeAnus]

I’m an electrician 95% male dominated field my job is extremely dangerous