Do you like feminism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-05-2016, 07:04 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 01:29 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Excuse me? How is citing 3 different sources all claiming that Gay men are hateful to all woman (misogynistic) by nature a misconstruction of their point?

Gender studies is based on Patriarchy theory, that wonderful feminist construction that claim men hold all the power and actively exercise it exclusively to the detriment of woman.


All their critiques all claim that MEN hold power exclusively, that men have all the advantages and that said power needs to be re-distributed to woman who hold zero power.

My contention with feminism is that it has actively harmed the rights of men in the western world, and that when called on such things, as I did with the citation of the Duluth Model of Domestic violence, I either get shouted down by feminists, ignored or accused of misconstruction the argument when the author of the very study used to create it admitted to massive amounts of confirmation bias and pushing an agenda.

Name me one legal right that a man has that a woman does not in the Western world?

It's misconstruction of their point, because all them talk about a the mysoginistic behavior of a portion of the gay community. All of them mention that those behavior are present and numerous in the gay community as a whole, especially in some fringe group. There is also a mention that those behavior aren't always conscious, but adopted thanks to some stereotypes. It also explicitly mention that the gay community isn't more hateful of women than the strait one. It's just that the gay community is more rarely criticised for it. All of your artices present actual personnal experience of mysoginy comming from gay peope. It gives them a bad rep, but if you dig in the source material to find other articles from the same author or published by the same newspaper, two of them defend explicitly gay rights and the gay community. Thus accusing the author of being homophobic and/or misandrist is a misconstruction. All they say is that the gay community has a good number of sexist person just like the strait ones and its not because they were discriminated on the basis of their sexuality that they are necesserily more respectful or open minded when it comes to gender roles and stereotypes.

One of your article also cite the experience of a transgender person. The mysoginistic behavior of the gay community thus affect mostly trans persons since both group are defended by the same organism and live in the same community. It doesn't say that all gay men are hateful, but that some are and others hare reproducing the same behavior than strait men toward women that are deemed unacceptable like gropping or cat calling. Note that the lesbian community has also been critised for the same reason. Both the gay and lesbian community also hide the two most hateful sexist groups imaginable: the lesbian separatist mouvement who is almost genocidal in its rethoric and Men Going their Own way which used to be its mirror amongst the gay community, but now has a good number of strait men dreaming of sex bots in it. Note that those articles were all written shortly after a famous gay designer passed a couple of sexist (and stupid) comment on twitter and was in reaction to people having similar experiences in the gay community. Basically, those articles are the equivalent for the gay community to those published on casual sexism in the congress after Trumps sexist jabs during the Republican debate.


When it comes to patriarchy, your are again presenting a strawman. A patriarchal system is a system in which men hold by design and/or by law more power, respect and authority than women. It doesn't say that men have ALL the power not more than a monarchie, even an absolute monarchie, means that the monarch has all the power. It only means that he/she has the central and most powerful position in society. Feminism never mentionned that women had no powers, but that it had less and only in one specific area of the society they were dominating before the turn of the century: child care. It does believe and demonstrate that men used to control the political, judiscial, economical, religious, academic and even criminal sphere of the society and it should not be so. Thus, your presentation of what feminism means when they use the term «patriarchy» is a strawman from what I can understand from your text (sorry if I am wrong). It would be good to note that this epistemologie was and is still used by some groups the Men's Right mouvement to explain men weaker status in family court where women have an advantage provided by the patriarchal system which gave them child care as a sphere of power. Many other men's right issues can also be explained, sometimes completly other partially, by using this epistemologie. That's what we call intersectional feminism studies and its developping rapidely since the early 90's. Its also why I hope that the 4th wave of feminism in North America will be the long awaited union of men and women rights mouvements.

Have some of the measure precognised by some feminist school truly hurt men's rights by placing them in a situation of inferiority based on their gender? I would say you are right. Your exemple of the Duluth Model is correct. This model, while not completly wrong is to simple to correctly explain and prevent domestic violence and abuse. It fails to understand the bilatteral nature of most case of domestic violence and offers no answer to domestic violence against men. There is some other case like these, but I would not say that they were intentionnal (not that it changes the fact that they were armful and thus unecessary). Is feminism as a whole a danger to men's right absolutly not. But one has to remain watchful for bad proposal and option. On this we agree.

Finally on the issue of the rights, women, unlike men, don't have the right to pursue any career they want without any respect to their gender. The question of women in combat unit in the infantrie, the heart and soul of any army in the public's eye, and in special forces is hotly debated despite the fact that many women have the skills, the physical capacities and the will to do so. The same goes for the SWAT teams of several police forces. Then again. no black men has fewer legal rights than a white men in the US yet that doesn't mean racism doesn't exist and that black men have it far worst than white men even if they to can face racial prejudice too. The pondering on legal rights is essential, yet isn't representative of the whole power structure of society. Equality is acheive when both gender command the same amount of power, respect and authority. Perceptions, financial situation, cultural norms, etc. all affect the level of power, respect and authority a person have yet aren't affected directly by its legal status.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes epronovost's post
08-05-2016, 07:15 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
I'm not a big fan of the more regressive members of third wave feminism.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-05-2016, 07:44 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 12:07 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  
(08-05-2016 06:35 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Dominant trend is a notion of mainstream... multiple sources equals what? 100,000 million people or like 20 people? Where is the data connection in that? We have 7 billion people who range in millions of points of view. A consistent process between people united by anything doesn't happen often. If that data set is equate to safely arguing to someone I wouldn't take their statistics gathering with a ounce of respect. How the statistical data is acquired should be taken seriously.

It's like you're taking if someone says something, that amounts to more than someone saying things. Hell someone saying something doesn't even give great reason to take it as worthwhile of truth of what they think. Again I'd be hyper skeptical of any claim of shared ideology or ism and equally skeptical of counter... And it's not some middle ground exists to everything stance, it's just a refusal to accept someone assuming something as a good argument

I've blatantly said up front all ism or any label a person generates will contain flaw, failure, and wrongness. Though generating perceptions on apparent grouping and connections between anything is also entangled immense flaw.

The argument would be... the only one I've seen is saying an argument is false because it's inconsistent. But I dont see that as any point of any value. All groups or idea held by drives of people become that.

Consistency and purity in direction aren't possible in human function. So I fail to see what the alleged desired scenario or argument contrast would be laud out as.

When it boils down, do plenty of feminist Writers, femminist mainstream news writers, feminist bloggers, feminist debaters, feminist presenters, feminist video creators, and feminist speakers use logical fallacies, assumptions, dogmatic notions, poor data mining, degrading tones, etc. Yes. Yes they do. Is that supposed to mean something significant?

Solipsism and equivocation does no one good.

Its a response to the very claims in this thread that "true feminists" are not misandrist and that they are the mainstream and majority. When it is demonstrated that the vast majority of them are misandrist, and have their views broadcasted to millions, and that they make up the majority.

Fringes can not equal main-strain. That was my contention that seems to have gone missing in this exchange. You can not be both fringe and mainstream at the same time, its a massive contradiction in terms
I don't know what many think demonstrating the majority would be. As I said about statistics, the data point claims of things here is highly ridiculous. Idk quote how many you'd say identifying or counts as feminists there are but certainly low 10,000s to 500,000 or in the multi-million. So I guess that's why I seem off to refuse the conclusions of supposed demonstrated majority when no more than probably 30 links of claims in articles/videos of what some particular people who are identified as femminists think. It's just not how data gathering really works.

Just because somethings were released in a mainstream news source also means nothing. That being released may just take 1-3 people going with it. A writer and editor letting it threw. It may influence thousands but it doesn't indicate or exemplify the thoughts of thousands.

"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
08-05-2016, 08:33 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Then wouldn't the perceptions of these groups be different too if these groups are different. Surely you don't think these are objective or static concepts right? Could not perceptions of what we see be flawed based on bad data.

They pretty much are. I know this is a chainsaw in the side of feminism. Why they hell is it that men are they ones who went to war for years? Why is it that boys across countries were depicted as playing with things with wheels? Why is it that no matter how different cultures are, men always do things that include competition, violence, and roughness? We label things masculine and feminine because no matter how much different cultures are, the reasons why they are tend to be from biological points. In fact they are. Very little cultures (if any) have men who wear make up and are masculine. So trying to point out the feminine emo dude to dismiss the millions of men who like sports and won't work here.

(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Do we do it with everything by choice or by desire?

You mean label things? Well by desire, after all we are a animal that must understand everything around us. If we weren't, things like taxonomy wouldn't exist.

(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  What defines rarely as a total?

Well it is pretty much based off population. The population of feminine men are much smaller than masculine ones.

(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Are these contrasts judged universally across the entire sir is or among arbitrary lines?

Take sports for example. Every country enjoys a sport, some of these sports are violent. For example america loves foot ball, Australia loves rugby, and japan likes sumo wrestling. The fact that men enjoy and participate in these things on a larger scale than women is no coincidence.

(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  It sounds more like defining a morality than a bilogical/sociological detailed study of humanity.

How so? Because we are labeling things males do the most as masculine and what females do the most as feminine. This is so we can understand the world better, not to determine what is right or wrong.

(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I'm not saying it's false men lean x way abd females y way, but the alleged notable divisions sound like the statements of those who know what objectively is right and wrong.

No it doesn't. It sounds like us trying to understand our selves, so we label things masculine and feminine because men and women are different and share different interest(for the most part). There is nothing wrong with these. Should we abandon masculine and feminine? And if so why?

(08-05-2016 06:41 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Why should females or feminists be trusted to say it's something or why should someone of some other mindset have a trust factor to say it's x something?

Well the thing is feminist have an agenda. They hate things like evo psych and neurology, because it points out they are fighting a pointless fight. If men and women are different in interest thanks to biology, how can we make things equal in outcome? I don't. I don't give a fuck whether men and women have different interest or not, I just look at the facts, and what they facts say goes. If we did start our minds in a blank slate I wouldn't care, if everything was only biology, I don't care. I just care about the facts, and so far the facts are not on the side of feminism.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Metazoa Zeke's post
08-05-2016, 08:40 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 08:33 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Take sports for example. Every country enjoys a sport, some of these sports are violent. For example america loves foot ball, Australia loves rugby, and japan likes sumo wrestling. The fact that men enjoy and participate in these things on a larger scale than women is no coincidence.

My, my, do you think that perhaps this could be due to indoctrination? And the fact that not too long ago it was unthinkable to have female teams? Girls were (and still are to an extent) taught to prance around in frilly dresses while boys get to play. That only started to change recently, there are girl's teams available now. Mixed sex teams are still a ways off...

[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
08-05-2016, 09:05 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Trumps sexist jabs during the Republican debate.

Not a trump supporter, but I need to see these quotes.

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Its also why I hope that the 4th wave of feminism in North America will be the long awaited union of men and women rights mouvements.

No, it will be the straw that breaks the camels back. If you think that they are going to be concerned about actual men's rights, then you got another thing commin'. To add stop saying feminism is for men, it isn't, never has been.


(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Finally on the issue of the rights, women, unlike men, don't have the right to pursue any career they want without any respect to their gender.

Like?

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  The question of women in combat unit in the infantrie, the heart and soul of any army in the public's eye, and in special forces is hotly debated despite the fact that many women have the skills, the physical capacities and the will to do so. The same goes for the SWAT teams of several police forces.

They had to make the training easier so that women could join the military. This is why it is a problem. They need people who can go through the toughest training, male or female. It just so happens, so far only males could.

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Then again. no black men has fewer legal rights than a white men in the US yet that doesn't mean racism doesn't exist and that black men have it far worst than white men even if they to can face racial prejudice too.

The problem is the fact that negros live in poorer areas. To solve this issue you gotta improve education, stop gang violence (black people kill each other more than cops) and improve law enforcement. Hell the so called 'racism' black lives matter talks about isn't racism, just whining kids. And before you say you are white and have no experience of racism as a black male, I too am a negro.


(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Equality is acheive when both gender command the same amount of power, respect and authority. Perceptions, financial situation, cultural norms, etc. all affect the level of power, respect and authority a person have yet aren't affected directly by its legal status.

What you are talking about is not equality of opportunity, but of outcome. If you want an example of how equal opportunity works, here is a quick explanation.

[Image: karl_marx_quote_2.jpg]

Also, biology is your enemy then, because that gets in the way of this 50/50 equality. As long as men and women have different brain patters and interest, it will never happen, not as long as society is free. That is the beauty of the gender equality paradox.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Metazoa Zeke's post
08-05-2016, 09:08 PM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 08:40 PM)Dom Wrote:  My, my, do you think that perhaps this could be due to indoctrination? And the fact that not too long ago it was unthinkable to have female teams? Girls were (and still are to an extent) taught to prance around in frilly dresses while boys get to play. That only started to change recently, there are girl's teams available now. Mixed sex teams are still a ways off...

No. Because this had to start somewhere. Ever notice how young boys will play rough without instruction? Do you think one day humans sat down and decided on what men and women should want, or millions of years of evolution has made us a sexually dimorphic species with different interest and motivations? Because the latter has evidence, the former doesn't. Sorry, but it is not indoctrination, just the nature of an ape.

Also mixed sex teams are stupid for the most part. Most females can't catch up to males in terms of strength. It is why women won't be a part of the NFL or in males UFC.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOW_Ioi2wtuPa88FvBmnBgQ my youtube
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Metazoa Zeke's post
08-05-2016, 10:20 PM (This post was last modified: 08-05-2016 10:34 PM by Blackhand293.)
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  
(08-05-2016 01:29 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  Excuse me? How is citing 3 different sources all claiming that Gay men are hateful to all woman (misogynistic) by nature a misconstruction of their point?

Gender studies is based on Patriarchy theory, that wonderful feminist construction that claim men hold all the power and actively exercise it exclusively to the detriment of woman.


All their critiques all claim that MEN hold power exclusively, that men have all the advantages and that said power needs to be re-distributed to woman who hold zero power.

My contention with feminism is that it has actively harmed the rights of men in the western world, and that when called on such things, as I did with the citation of the Duluth Model of Domestic violence, I either get shouted down by feminists, ignored or accused of misconstruction the argument when the author of the very study used to create it admitted to massive amounts of confirmation bias and pushing an agenda.

Name me one legal right that a man has that a woman does not in the Western world?

It's misconstruction of their point, because all them talk about a the mysoginistic behavior of a portion of the gay community. All of them mention that those behavior are present and numerous in the gay community as a whole, especially in some fringe group. There is also a mention that those behavior aren't always conscious, but adopted thanks to some stereotypes. It also explicitly mention that the gay community isn't more hateful of women than the strait one. It's just that the gay community is more rarely criticised for it. All of your artices present actual personnal experience of mysoginy comming from gay peope. It gives them a bad rep, but if you dig in the source material to find other articles from the same author or published by the same newspaper, two of them defend explicitly gay rights and the gay community. Thus accusing the author of being homophobic and/or misandrist is a misconstruction. All they say is that the gay community has a good number of sexist person just like the strait ones and its not because they were discriminated on the basis of their sexuality that they are necesserily more respectful or open minded when it comes to gender roles and stereotypes.

One of your article also cite the experience of a transgender person. The mysoginistic behavior of the gay community thus affect mostly trans persons since both group are defended by the same organism and live in the same community. It doesn't say that all gay men are hateful, but that some are and others hare reproducing the same behavior than strait men toward women that are deemed unacceptable like gropping or cat calling. Note that the lesbian community has also been critised for the same reason. Both the gay and lesbian community also hide the two most hateful sexist groups imaginable: the lesbian separatist mouvement who is almost genocidal in its rethoric and Men Going their Own way which used to be its mirror amongst the gay community, but now has a good number of strait men dreaming of sex bots in it. Note that those articles were all written shortly after a famous gay designer passed a couple of sexist (and stupid) comment on twitter and was in reaction to people having similar experiences in the gay community. Basically, those articles are the equivalent for the gay community to those published on casual sexism in the congress after Trumps sexist jabs during the Republican debate.


When it comes to patriarchy, your are again presenting a strawman. A patriarchal system is a system in which men hold by design and/or by law more power, respect and authority than women. It doesn't say that men have ALL the power not more than a monarchie, even an absolute monarchie, means that the monarch has all the power. It only means that he/she has the central and most powerful position in society. Feminism never mentionned that women had no powers, but that it had less and only in one specific area of the society they were dominating before the turn of the century: child care. It does believe and demonstrate that men used to control the political, judiscial, economical, religious, academic and even criminal sphere of the society and it should not be so. Thus, your presentation of what feminism means when they use the term «patriarchy» is a strawman from what I can understand from your text (sorry if I am wrong). It would be good to note that this epistemologie was and is still used by some groups the Men's Right mouvement to explain men weaker status in family court where women have an advantage provided by the patriarchal system which gave them child care as a sphere of power. Many other men's right issues can also be explained, sometimes completly other partially, by using this epistemologie. That's what we call intersectional feminism studies and its developping rapidely since the early 90's. Its also why I hope that the 4th wave of feminism in North America will be the long awaited union of men and women rights mouvements.

I was referring to Patriarchy Theory : A subset of femisit theory that I have found incredibly hard to pin down, though the basal properties of it are based on Marxist class theory, with an oppressor class (men) and an oppressed class (woman). This dichotomy necessitates that the oppressor class holds the majority of the power.

I view this as highly contentions as it completely negates the agency of woman, the social power and power by proxy that woman can exercise. I have read various dissertations on patriarchy theory, they all shared a few simple basal properties: That men hold the power in society, that woman have a lack of power in society and that men exploit that to the detriment of woman. Herewith to separate dissertation on patriarchy theory and from which I drew my conclusions.
Theories of Patriacy and Patriarchy: Feminist Theory

Also MGTOW is not a homosexual separatist movement. It is merely a social result of rampant gynocentrism and men who completely withdraw from society, see also herbivore men. As to woman getting the children in most cases is in fact because of the Tender Years Doctrine, a bit of legislation pushed forward by a feminist in the late 19th century. So no it is not because of patriarchal society.

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Have some of the measure precognised by some feminist school truly hurt men's rights by placing them in a situation of inferiority based on their gender? I would say you are right. Your exemple of the Duluth Model is correct. This model, while not completly wrong is to simple to correctly explain and prevent domestic violence and abuse. It fails to understand the bilatteral nature of most case of domestic violence and offers no answer to domestic violence against men. There is some other case like these, but I would not say that they were intentionnal (not that it changes the fact that they were armful and thus unecessary). Is feminism as a whole a danger to men's right absolutly not. But one has to remain watchful for bad proposal and option. On this we agree.

Indeed, though we disagree to the extent to which these have hurt men.

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Finally on the issue of the rights, women, unlike men, don't have the right to pursue any career they want without any respect to their gender. The question of women in combat unit in the infantrie, the heart and soul of any army in the public's eye, and in special forces is hotly debated despite the fact that many women have the skills, the physical capacities and the will to do so. The same goes for the SWAT teams of several police forces. Then again. no black men has fewer legal rights than a white men in the US yet that doesn't mean racism doesn't exist and that black men have it far worst than white men even if they to can face racial prejudice too. The pondering on legal rights is essential, yet isn't representative of the whole power structure of society. Equality is acheive when both gender command the same amount of power, respect and authority. Perceptions, financial situation, cultural norms, etc. all affect the level of power, respect and authority a person have yet aren't affected directly by its legal status.

I asked about legal rights as feminists purport to fight that woman should have all the rights men have, and your assertion that they are bared from entering certain fields based in gender is false.

The question related to legal rights, it is illegal for any employer to discriminate based on sex when it comes to employment. Woman do not have the same level of upper body strength as men, and as such fall short of the physical requirements for certain fields.

Most of these being jobs with high physical requirements i.e. Military, SWAT and construction. In fact woman can join the military, and police force and have lowered physical test standards.

In everyday life, if a woman assaults a man in public, they will be left alone and even assisted, yet if its flipped the man is highly likely to be assaulted and have the police called almost immediately.

There are 4 times the amount of scholarships available to woman only vs the men only scholarships. [1]

Woman on average pay less in tax than men but have many more government systems catering to them [2]

Woman make up over 60% of college graduates, and enjoy preferential enrollment criteria [3]

There are +- 15 DV shelters for men in the entire US vs over 4000 for woman, yet Domestic violence is considered a gendered issue. The actual statistics do not back this up. [4]

Female specific cancer research receives over 200% more funding than male specific cancer [5]

Men are 15 times more likely to be incarcerated and receive on average 20-50% longer sentences for the same crime [6]

Men commit suicide successfully 4x times higher rate than woman [7]

Regarding the fact that in custody cases, woman are unilaterally awarded custody in over 80% of the cases and receive less support if they awarded custody [8]

Men do not have the right to bodily autonomy, men do not have the right to parental surrender, men can be sued for child support in the case of a sperm donation [8], men have to sign up for selective service in order to be eligible to vote in the US and are done so automatically when they go for a license[9] where as woman are not required to do so. According to both the FBI and CDC men can not be raped, both collect the statistics differently, with rape having a clause that penetration has to happen, where as being male and forced into sex with a woman is considered "sexual assault" and is a separate category. [9]

So yes, woman and men are treated differently in society. Men have on average a worse time of it than woman, but I am told over and over that woman have it so much worse in the western world.

The requirement of evidence to back your claim does not disappear because it hurts your feelings, reality does not care about your feefees.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Blackhand293's post
09-05-2016, 01:58 AM
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 10:20 PM)Blackhand293 Wrote:  
(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  It's misconstruction of their point, because all them talk about a the mysoginistic behavior of a portion of the gay community. All of them mention that those behavior are present and numerous in the gay community as a whole, especially in some fringe group. There is also a mention that those behavior aren't always conscious, but adopted thanks to some stereotypes. It also explicitly mention that the gay community isn't more hateful of women than the strait one. It's just that the gay community is more rarely criticised for it. All of your artices present actual personnal experience of mysoginy comming from gay peope. It gives them a bad rep, but if you dig in the source material to find other articles from the same author or published by the same newspaper, two of them defend explicitly gay rights and the gay community. Thus accusing the author of being homophobic and/or misandrist is a misconstruction. All they say is that the gay community has a good number of sexist person just like the strait ones and its not because they were discriminated on the basis of their sexuality that they are necesserily more respectful or open minded when it comes to gender roles and stereotypes.

One of your article also cite the experience of a transgender person. The mysoginistic behavior of the gay community thus affect mostly trans persons since both group are defended by the same organism and live in the same community. It doesn't say that all gay men are hateful, but that some are and others hare reproducing the same behavior than strait men toward women that are deemed unacceptable like gropping or cat calling. Note that the lesbian community has also been critised for the same reason. Both the gay and lesbian community also hide the two most hateful sexist groups imaginable: the lesbian separatist mouvement who is almost genocidal in its rethoric and Men Going their Own way which used to be its mirror amongst the gay community, but now has a good number of strait men dreaming of sex bots in it. Note that those articles were all written shortly after a famous gay designer passed a couple of sexist (and stupid) comment on twitter and was in reaction to people having similar experiences in the gay community. Basically, those articles are the equivalent for the gay community to those published on casual sexism in the congress after Trumps sexist jabs during the Republican debate.


When it comes to patriarchy, your are again presenting a strawman. A patriarchal system is a system in which men hold by design and/or by law more power, respect and authority than women. It doesn't say that men have ALL the power not more than a monarchie, even an absolute monarchie, means that the monarch has all the power. It only means that he/she has the central and most powerful position in society. Feminism never mentionned that women had no powers, but that it had less and only in one specific area of the society they were dominating before the turn of the century: child care. It does believe and demonstrate that men used to control the political, judiscial, economical, religious, academic and even criminal sphere of the society and it should not be so. Thus, your presentation of what feminism means when they use the term «patriarchy» is a strawman from what I can understand from your text (sorry if I am wrong). It would be good to note that this epistemologie was and is still used by some groups the Men's Right mouvement to explain men weaker status in family court where women have an advantage provided by the patriarchal system which gave them child care as a sphere of power. Many other men's right issues can also be explained, sometimes completly other partially, by using this epistemologie. That's what we call intersectional feminism studies and its developping rapidely since the early 90's. Its also why I hope that the 4th wave of feminism in North America will be the long awaited union of men and women rights mouvements.

I was referring to Patriarchy Theory : A subset of femisit theory that I have found incredibly hard to pin down, though the basal properties of it are based on Marxist class theory, with an oppressor class (men) and an oppressed class (woman). This dichotomy necessitates that the oppressor class holds the majority of the power.

I view this as highly contentions as it completely negates the agency of woman, the social power and power by proxy that woman can exercise. I have read various dissertations on patriarchy theory, they all shared a few simple basal properties: That men hold the power in society, that woman have a lack of power in society and that men exploit that to the detriment of woman. Herewith to separate dissertation on patriarchy theory and from which I drew my conclusions.
Theories of Patriacy and Patriarchy: Feminist Theory

Also MGTOW is not a homosexual separatist movement. It is merely a social result of rampant gynocentrism and men who completely withdraw from society, see also herbivore men. As to woman getting the children in most cases is in fact because of the Tender Years Doctrine, a bit of legislation pushed forward by a feminist in the late 19th century. So no it is not because of patriarchal society.

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Have some of the measure precognised by some feminist school truly hurt men's rights by placing them in a situation of inferiority based on their gender? I would say you are right. Your exemple of the Duluth Model is correct. This model, while not completly wrong is to simple to correctly explain and prevent domestic violence and abuse. It fails to understand the bilatteral nature of most case of domestic violence and offers no answer to domestic violence against men. There is some other case like these, but I would not say that they were intentionnal (not that it changes the fact that they were armful and thus unecessary). Is feminism as a whole a danger to men's right absolutly not. But one has to remain watchful for bad proposal and option. On this we agree.

Indeed, though we disagree to the extent to which these have hurt men.

(08-05-2016 07:04 PM)epronovost Wrote:  Finally on the issue of the rights, women, unlike men, don't have the right to pursue any career they want without any respect to their gender. The question of women in combat unit in the infantrie, the heart and soul of any army in the public's eye, and in special forces is hotly debated despite the fact that many women have the skills, the physical capacities and the will to do so. The same goes for the SWAT teams of several police forces. Then again. no black men has fewer legal rights than a white men in the US yet that doesn't mean racism doesn't exist and that black men have it far worst than white men even if they to can face racial prejudice too. The pondering on legal rights is essential, yet isn't representative of the whole power structure of society. Equality is acheive when both gender command the same amount of power, respect and authority. Perceptions, financial situation, cultural norms, etc. all affect the level of power, respect and authority a person have yet aren't affected directly by its legal status.

I asked about legal rights as feminists purport to fight that woman should have all the rights men have, and your assertion that they are bared from entering certain fields based in gender is false.

The question related to legal rights, it is illegal for any employer to discriminate based on sex when it comes to employment. Woman do not have the same level of upper body strength as men, and as such fall short of the physical requirements for certain fields.

Most of these being jobs with high physical requirements i.e. Military, SWAT and construction. In fact woman can join the military, and police force and have lowered physical test standards.

In everyday life, if a woman assaults a man in public, they will be left alone and even assisted, yet if its flipped the man is highly likely to be assaulted and have the police called almost immediately.

There are 4 times the amount of scholarships available to woman only vs the men only scholarships. [1]

Woman on average pay less in tax than men but have many more government systems catering to them [2]

Woman make up over 60% of college graduates, and enjoy preferential enrollment criteria [3]

There are +- 15 DV shelters for men in the entire US vs over 4000 for woman, yet Domestic violence is considered a gendered issue. The actual statistics do not back this up. [4]

Female specific cancer research receives over 200% more funding than male specific cancer [5]

Men are 15 times more likely to be incarcerated and receive on average 20-50% longer sentences for the same crime [6]

Men commit suicide successfully 4x times higher rate than woman [7]

Regarding the fact that in custody cases, woman are unilaterally awarded custody in over 80% of the cases and receive less support if they awarded custody [8]

Men do not have the right to bodily autonomy, men do not have the right to parental surrender, men can be sued for child support in the case of a sperm donation [8], men have to sign up for selective service in order to be eligible to vote in the US and are done so automatically when they go for a license[9] where as woman are not required to do so. According to both the FBI and CDC men can not be raped, both collect the statistics differently, with rape having a clause that penetration has to happen, where as being male and forced into sex with a woman is considered "sexual assault" and is a separate category. [9]

So yes, woman and men are treated differently in society. Men have on average a worse time of it than woman, but I am told over and over that woman have it so much worse in the western world.

From what you say, Simone would agree. The Second sex had much to say on this subject and history seems to support it.

Having read your post above, I think any worry about moving to the US is unnecessary. You are clearly intelligent and I am sure the US would do well to have you.

Australia is nice too. Wink

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-05-2016, 05:06 AM (This post was last modified: 09-05-2016 05:12 AM by Vosur.)
RE: Do you like feminism?
(08-05-2016 09:08 PM)Metazoa Zeke Wrote:  Also mixed sex teams are stupid for the most part. Most females can't catch up to males in terms of strength. It is why women won't be a part of the NFL or in males UFC.
It's also why women have been having trouble getting into the military and other physically demanding jobs (e.g. firefighters). The vast majority of them simply aren't able to pass the physical exams because the average woman is much weaker than the average man. That's just a biological fact. To lower these requirements for the sole reason of allowing more women into these fields (which is what prominent feminist figures have suggested) is completely insane because it ignores the importance of these tests. They're conducted because people have to be able to perform these physically demanding tasks to perform their jobs.

As for the topic of feminism and men's issues: Many feminists only pay lip service to the idea that it's about equal rights for both men and women. You'll rarely, if ever, see them bring up these issues with men's rights (e.g. family courts) by themselves.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: