Do you like feminism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-05-2016, 08:49 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 08:30 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(04-05-2016 04:55 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  If you're looking for anything you call a "movement" that is pure or hypocrisy free it's not gonna be there. The concept of any group growing beyond a handful is going to cause that, about anything.

My point was that egalitarianism isn't something defined or acted upon all inclusive manners either.

I suggest atheist use brights or free thinkers... no wait I don't because there's no relevance or value to be had there and the point of a label or term is next to meaningless other than what someone interprets it as.

Even if it changed to egalitarian it doesn't change the topic or points. There still will be some woman online saying if you're gay you don't like women or men need consent education ... just under the banner of egalitarianism. Nothing changes from the labels. And at all times are there people speaking out against fringe or excessively leaping arguers. There's no shift to highlighting the echos of communication chambers across the world.

Ok. Fine. We can have an srguement about whether feminism is being hijacked and what the impact might be and might even be convinced to see it your way. My ultimate point is that there is hypocracy right in the name. Feminists demanded that all gender bias terms be abandoned. That's blatant hypocracy. That's not just a little hypocracy within the movement. If this cannot be changed or even expected then I expect "fireman" to be considered politically correct.
I have no issues with anyone who demands freedom and equality but I won't be told that the term "feminism" is acceptable while "fireman" is not.

It blows my mind that people refuse to see this.

What does this gender title have to do blanketly with feminism? Yes many people may of wanted that, so what? That doesn't make anything a grand message or base statement of the idea. The notion that the term fireman is unacceptable whole feminism is isn't something legitimized or encompassing in claim to any degree that makes sense to hold it up as such

You're acting like you want purity in some form of argument reasoning but that just doesn't exist when you're talking about a collective of millions of people. I don't see any reasoning of the connection other than intentionally to paint a broad picture of a point. For positive of negative effect.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 08:53 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(04-05-2016 05:32 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(04-05-2016 05:18 PM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Yet you refuse to abandon a gender biased term. Why? Because feminism is what it's always been? That's not a convincing argument.
Policemen are what they have always been. Law enforcement. Women rightfully achieved their freedom to enter law enforcement. It seems feminist had a problem with the word "police man."
Women can be policemen too! So it's police officer please. Ok. Im fine with that.
But as it's often said, "Men can be feminists too!"

The hypocracy is too obvious to ignore.

There are tons of male feminists, some in this thread.

When I first looked for a job, I found that as female all I could be is secretary or nurse. Well, these were the skilled, best paying jobs. I spent the better part of 50 years helping to remedy that, and I, as feminist, will be done when we have equal pay for equal work. Until that time I identify as feminist.

Let the misandrists fool around with the misogynists, I don't care. I am a feminist and I ain't done yet.

Anecdotes? In my last job my wife was my boss. In fact the majority of management were women. They all got paid more than I. In all the jobs I have worked it didn't seem to matter to much what sex people were. I've worked along side women and got paid less at times and more at times. And when the question why is asked the answer came gown to experience and skill. Do these anecdotes prove any thing to you.
I don't know if you actually have a fight left. I think that might be debatable. But I'll grant you that for the sake of arguement.
I tend to agree with first part of your last statement. And you can call yourself what you like. But it's not likely I'll be convinced there is no hypocracy there.
If it's feminist its fireman.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 09:12 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 07:40 AM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(05-05-2016 07:22 AM)Dom Wrote:  Haha, yes, there is no pill that will make people wake up tomorrow and it all will be equal. Societal evolution is slow, and the gender equality issue has so far taken over 100 years to be where it stands now. All one can do is to keep raising awareness.

But biological evolution doesn't. This is the problem. Men aren't going to go in droves to be the home maker unless women only breed with men that can do that. Until then it won't happen often. To add places like america do have gender equality, most women's issues today affect both genders, difference is women are just better at communicating than men.

(05-05-2016 07:22 AM)Dom Wrote:  men can openly show love for their children,

They always could, it is just men do it differently. See the dad playing football with his kid? He is showing love. See that dad looking out for his kids safety? That is showing love. Men and women even share feelings differently .

(05-05-2016 07:22 AM)Dom Wrote:  they can be care givers

So back then men who worked for nothing? Was it for drug money? Because last time I checked they worked to care for their kids.

(05-05-2016 07:22 AM)Dom Wrote:  they can have emotions and show them...

Well men could always do that, even cry. But this comes down to when it is done. A man crying for losing a loved one, no one cares. A man crying because he was punched, is funny. So men where always showing and having emotions, it is just that most men tend not to do things like cry in certain situations.

(05-05-2016 07:22 AM)Dom Wrote:  Compared to what has been achieved already, we are now in the end phases of change needed to make things truly equal.

Sorry bro it has ended, unless you are talking about outcome instead of opportunity.

(05-05-2016 07:22 AM)Dom Wrote:  Equality doesn't mean being androgynous, it means that everyone has all the choices.

Thanks for your efforts for woman's rights back in the day. Thanks to people like you we have achieved gender equality in the united states.


Opportunity will not be equal until the child rearing and care taking issue has been resolved. Laws need to change and all burden connected with responsibility for children needs to be equal. Only then will there be equal opportunity for everyone.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 09:25 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 09:12 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(05-05-2016 07:40 AM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  But biological evolution doesn't. This is the problem. Men aren't going to go in droves to be the home maker unless women only breed with men that can do that. Until then it won't happen often. To add places like america do have gender equality, most women's issues today affect both genders, difference is women are just better at communicating than men.


They always could, it is just men do it differently. See the dad playing football with his kid? He is showing love. See that dad looking out for his kids safety? That is showing love. Men and women even share feelings differently .


So back then men who worked for nothing? Was it for drug money? Because last time I checked they worked to care for their kids.


Well men could always do that, even cry. But this comes down to when it is done. A man crying for losing a loved one, no one cares. A man crying because he was punched, is funny. So men where always showing and having emotions, it is just that most men tend not to do things like cry in certain situations.


Sorry bro it has ended, unless you are talking about outcome instead of opportunity.


Thanks for your efforts for woman's rights back in the day. Thanks to people like you we have achieved gender equality in the united states.


Opportunity will not be equal until the child rearing and care taking issue has been resolved. Laws need to change and all burden connected with responsibility for children needs to be equal. Only then will there be equal opportunity for everyone.

Yet you refuse to abandon a gender bias term..and perhaps worse you refuse to acknowledge it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 09:32 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 08:49 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(05-05-2016 08:30 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  Ok. Fine. We can have an srguement about whether feminism is being hijacked and what the impact might be and might even be convinced to see it your way. My ultimate point is that there is hypocracy right in the name. Feminists demanded that all gender bias terms be abandoned. That's blatant hypocracy. That's not just a little hypocracy within the movement. If this cannot be changed or even expected then I expect "fireman" to be considered politically correct.
I have no issues with anyone who demands freedom and equality but I won't be told that the term "feminism" is acceptable while "fireman" is not.

It blows my mind that people refuse to see this.

What does this gender title have to do blanketly with feminism? Yes many people may of wanted that, so what? That doesn't make anything a grand message or base statement of the idea. The notion that the term fireman is unacceptable whole feminism is isn't something legitimized or encompassing in claim to any degree that makes sense to hold it up as such

You're acting like you want purity in some form of argument reasoning but that just doesn't exist when you're talking about a collective of millions of people. I don't see any reasoning of the connection other than intentionally to paint a broad picture of a point. For positive of negative effect.

No. I want consistency. I want people to expect from others only what expect from themselves.
Now this is pretty goddamn simple. Either gender specific terms are fine or they are not. You don't get to "cherry pick."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 09:46 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(04-05-2016 05:47 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  
(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  A. I never said the rule is false. I'm just saying that the exceptions seem to be numerous enough for the rules to not count as an argument for what "most women" and "most men" act like and why.

To bad they aren't. It is like when I say men a stronger than woman and they bring up female body builders or something like that. How many women are body builders? How man do something like that? Very little. So when I say men are stronger than women, with a few exceptions, that means the rule is men are stronger with a few exceptions. The exceptions are too small to count. Men are competetive, women are better communicators, these have been seen, and the brain attributes to these differences. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscien...ifferences

(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  B. Again, one more meaningless, baseless generalization.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) I will get to this later.


(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Yeah... ok? The only actual study I see here that is not an anecdote or a personal opinion is the one that says that many women in their 30s were single 10 years ago. So? How does that prove that rich women don't need men?

Like how you said I did this to prove rich women don't need men when I claimed that rich women struggle to find men. And I sourced them to show

A. The struggle for sucessful women to find a mate

B. To show what mattered most to men and women on the list. Men are much more drawn to looks than woman are.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-5-JeCa...MzblE/edit

and women when listing the things they like the most tend to have a vibe of providing protection, comfort, or both.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/what-type-me...nce-299252


(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Perhaps you have seen it but did not notice. After all, as a guy, you'll probably find average girls attractive but you won't find average guys attractive.

No I meant ugly, not average. Most people find "average" girls attractive, so no I meant ugly, one no man or lesbian would be attracted too.

(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Hate to be the one to have to break it to you, but no, life on TV is not real life.

Well it depends. If you mean shows, sure. But if you mean things like media coverage that you see on T.V. that is an entirely different story.

(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  If you take into account all those "minorities", your argument is rendered useless.

No it isn't. They are minorities for a reason. A very small one. That is like me saying, most of these M&M's are poisonous. Then you saying well here it shows some are not poisonous, there for you saying there are poisonous is useless. No, that means the majority of the M&M's are poisonous don't stick your hand in it. And here it is no, the majority of men and women have a certain set of behaviors that applies to the differences between them in biology.

Also keep in mind that a few decades ago women were not supposed to wear pants, or that in some cultures men wear makeup or skirts.


(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  I never claimed otherwise. My argument still stands.

My point was not to refute your argument, but to explain why they feel that way. All the can do is man up. There is no other solution.


(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  If what you say is true, then weak, disabled, poor, mean, cold, men with no skills in anything (=incapable of offering protection and comfort) would never find a wife. Are you trying to tell me that all women who are in a relationship right now feel protected and comfortable or expect to be so by their boyfriends/husbands?

I am. Did you read point C? Unless a woman is with a man with no way to protect her, not even the will to let me self die for her(which by the way can even be used by a couple with nothing at all) Then yes. And for comfort same thing(A man with nothing can provide comfort to a woman like loyalty or being tall if he so happens to be).


(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  See above. I'm not trying to refute the rule.

So why continue? You seem to have a problem with it being the rule. Sorry but biology.

(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  It's a minority, but not an insignificant one, and that is the point I'm trying to make.

But it is not significant either.

(01-05-2016 05:10 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Does all research know anything for certainty? We just go off the factors and patterns, but there is a reason this can be falsified.

Sure, but not all studies are presented by saying "well, this whole study might be totally wrong, but yeah".

(01-05-2016 05:10 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Jesus, I never said that. But again, let me remind you:

You brought up that your brother said he meet men with homosexual experiences, you used that as an example. I am saying this is not the case. If this was not your point, why did you bring that up?



(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  That was my reply to this ^
Why didn't Ancient Greeks expect anyone to "come out as gay"? Why weren't homosexuals shunned?

Well it wasn't shunned sure, but for the coming out part, they did with their position. It was usually the higher ups were considered homosexuals. So in turn they did come out as gay, just not in the saying it way.


(03-05-2016 03:42 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Sexuality is a continuum. It's not like you either are or are not a homosexual. If anything, the people who are 100% straight must be the minority here.

So would people who are 100% homosexual too then. And for the most part, yes you either are or you aren't. There are differences between males when comparing homosexuals to heterosexuals. Its the reason why gay conversion therapy doesn't work.

I'm sorry, but I won't go on with this. Your editing of the post is chaotic, your replies were mostly irrelevant, you didn't address many of the issues I brought up and you missed the point entirely.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 10:33 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 09:25 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(05-05-2016 09:12 AM)Dom Wrote:  Opportunity will not be equal until the child rearing and care taking issue has been resolved. Laws need to change and all burden connected with responsibility for children needs to be equal. Only then will there be equal opportunity for everyone.

Yet you refuse to abandon a gender bias term..and perhaps worse you refuse to acknowledge it.

Feminism isn't over til it's over. It will be over once legislation about divorce and child rearing has changed and society has adapted to that. Then we will have equal opportunity. And, oddly, the (misogynistic) men's groups want the same thing. So, perhaps we shall get there in the not so distant future.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 10:38 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 08:30 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(04-05-2016 04:55 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  If you're looking for anything you call a "movement" that is pure or hypocrisy free it's not gonna be there. The concept of any group growing beyond a handful is going to cause that, about anything.

My point was that egalitarianism isn't something defined or acted upon all inclusive manners either.

I suggest atheist use brights or free thinkers... no wait I don't because there's no relevance or value to be had there and the point of a label or term is next to meaningless other than what someone interprets it as.

Even if it changed to egalitarian it doesn't change the topic or points. There still will be some woman online saying if you're gay you don't like women or men need consent education ... just under the banner of egalitarianism. Nothing changes from the labels. And at all times are there people speaking out against fringe or excessively leaping arguers. There's no shift to highlighting the echos of communication chambers across the world.

Ok. Fine. We can have an srguement about whether feminism is being hijacked and what the impact might be and might even be convinced to see it your way. My ultimate point is that there is hypocracy right in the name. Feminists demanded that all gender bias terms be abandoned. That's blatant hypocracy. That's not just a little hypocracy within the movement. If this cannot be changed or even expected then I expect "fireman" to be considered politically correct.
I have no issues with anyone who demands freedom and equality but I won't be told that the term "feminism" is acceptable while "fireman" is not.

It blows my mind that people refuse to see this.

They see it. The feminazi's don't care. They are not after equality. They have wanted the superior position for a long time.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 12:05 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(05-05-2016 09:32 AM)Drunkin Druid Wrote:  
(05-05-2016 08:49 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  What does this gender title have to do blanketly with feminism? Yes many people may of wanted that, so what? That doesn't make anything a grand message or base statement of the idea. The notion that the term fireman is unacceptable whole feminism is isn't something legitimized or encompassing in claim to any degree that makes sense to hold it up as such

You're acting like you want purity in some form of argument reasoning but that just doesn't exist when you're talking about a collective of millions of people. I don't see any reasoning of the connection other than intentionally to paint a broad picture of a point. For positive of negative effect.

No. I want consistency. I want people to expect from others only what expect from themselves.
Now this is pretty goddamn simple. Either gender specific terms are fine or they are not. You don't get to "cherry pick."

That is simple. The part that's not simple is how you correlate gender specific terms bring not fine to a significant or excessive notion of feminism. That part is massively complex because it's based on some assumptions, experiences, and inferences.

Well as you see it, that's fine. As you see it is still piled in judgements and inconsistencies as all things are. The source of people's notions about groups are generally anything but simple in society.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-05-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
Fireman, policeman, I couldn't care less about semantics. There are actual real issues still to be solved.

Once that is done, we can retire feminism and whoever wants to worry themselves about semantics can do so without me.

With social change it's win some, lose some. With gay pride we won. With cannabis we are on a winning streak. With feminism I find myself explaining the same thing to this generation that I had to explain to a generation born 80+ years ago. All people can now think about when they hear feminism is misandrists. It's not about that. It's about equality. And creating equal opportunity for women happens to also solve the divorce/child rearing issues men's groups complain about.

It's most disheartening that I find myself still explaining the same shit....

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: