I find this video quite interesting
More or less it answers the attitude of the society towards men:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks
I find this video quite interesting
More or less it answers the attitude of the society towards men:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks
There's not just one movement. Anarcho-feminists and liberal feminists really have little in common.Quote:
Originally Posted by carnivorous_daisy
One of the ways it's characterised is in terms of "waves," which occludes the complexity and simultaneity of many movements, but remains a useful way to explain some of the differences...
In the early 20th century, First Wave feminists felt that women ought to count as people, and should have the right to vote.
In the 60s, Second Wave feminists felt that institutional oppression against women, most obviously characterised by the income gap, must be rectified. Some second wavers were quite militant and anti-male, though far from all of them.
In the 90s, Third Wave feminists realised that power and oppression are not exclusively a thing of men dominating women, but that similar dynamics are occurring due to sexual orientation, race, etc. Their interest was then in intersectionality (how various aspects of identity combine) and complexity. Here's where to go to find interesting, well argued philosophy, and very little man hating. Some Second Wavers believe that Third Wavers have missed the point, even accusing them of not being angry enough at male oppression.
Over the past few years we now have a Fourth Wave of feminists, specifically focusing on issues surrounding sexual assault, **** culture and the like. Slut Walk is a major hallmark of this (and originated in my city, I'd like to point out -- I've met some of the organisers).
The Fourth Wavers are the ones most active on the internet, while the Third Wavers are the ones most active in the universities. I wouldn't characterise the Fourth Wave as based on "hate" so much as it is based on *anger*. That is, they're used to seeing violence against women trivialised and ignored, and they're pissed off about it and trying to do something to change that. And they may even be succeeding. Though yes, many of them are not exactly being reasonable, and some can fairly be described as bigots.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ooeoUCJlC3.../Slut-Walk.jpg
Just look at these Nazis jackbooting through our fine streets... clearly they must be stopped (and chatted with).
It reflects how men and women are treated differently by society. Society, not feminists. Feminists would want men and women to be treated equally.Quote:
Originally Posted by dark
The video quite appropriately displays my original point though. When a woman was threatened people intervened because they thought the man was a significant threat and the woman was vulnerable and needed saving. When a man was attacked both men and women openly admitted that they didn't intervene because they didn't consider the woman to be a serious threat to the man. How can a big strong man be in danger from a frail little woman? That's the sexist attitude that allows people to ignore or minimize violence against men, not that everyone walking past that day (men and women) happened to be a man-hating feminist.
One from the Vaults, nice to see another educated man here. This forum can be pretty misogynist at times. :P
There's a mix on here. Plenty of ignorance. Probably better than average for the internet, though.
btw, that men and women should be treated "equally" is potentially problematic. Certainly it's the established dogma, based on social constructivist theories of gender. Except that it doesn't seem like those theories actually hold water (that is, social factors are a major influence, but biology is also involved and gender differences will probably never completely disappear).
Equity might be a better term than equality for this reason, and others.
He he.. A serious discussion on feminism on porn sites?? still, I like it. And buddy you said it 100% correct. Feminism is not and never was a fight for equality. Hey, did you read recent article on
It's Time That We End the Equal Pay Myth
http://www(dot)forbes(dot)com/sites/...qual-pay-myth/
[quote=carnivorous_daisy;125167]"Feminists would be pissed off by this too."
............. That's simply untrue. But you're half right, as feminists are pissed off pretty much all of the time, except when men get hurt. Anyone who thinks these two things are untrue has a very big misunderstanding about what feminism is, and has done. ....
First of all, my apologies for the long post. I just don't want anyone to think I'm avoiding a question. Also, thanks to dark, bull4you, and bbbb for being vocal supporters.
jabby: "Do you know many feminists personally? All the ones I know find violence against men just as bad as violence against women."
Ah, the ever elusive and mythical moderate feminist. Often spoken of despite being very elusive, much like Santa Claus. What next, unicorns are real as well? Perhaps they are, but I've never seen one, just like I've never seen a moderate feminist. If a person says something is true in the face of blatant evidence to the contrary that usually implies a person has either a child's mind or is a liar. Either way they shouldn't be trusted.
I don't see feminists marching in protest of male circumcision in this country, yet they're very upset about female circumcision in other countries. Where's the outrage? You say they find violence against men just as bad. I ask you for evidence. Evidence please, if you can.
If feminists find violence against men just as bad, then why do they lobby and support the VAWA? That's the violence against women act, btw. It's not the violence against PEOPLE act. It's the violence against WOMEN act. It is by and for women, at the expense of men.
jabby: "Because they are about equality, not superiority."
Name one instance where feminists marched, lobbied, demonstrated, or held a meeting in the interest of the rights of men. Name one. One. This is not a rhetorical question. Name one. You allege that feminists support equality, well name one instance of this being true other than your saying so. If it's true then you should have many examples. I'm only asking you to name one. Name ONE.
Here's a question for you. If a woman's body and her right to choose, then why is it a man's financial responsibility? It's her body, it's her choice, where anywhere do men have any reproductive rights? Are feminists marching against this outrage of inequality? No, because they don't actually care about equality.
jabby: "There are feminist extremists true, but defining the group by them is like defining all Muslims as terrorists. If you read any mainstream feminist material you will quickly see that gender equality is the goal rather than being against men."
It's interesting you compare feminists to Muslims. Is that really a stance you want to take?
jabby: "The existence of areas where men are discriminated against isn't proof of anything other than the fact that there is inequality,"
Are you actually reading the drivel you're writing?
jabby: "...which is precisely what you should be against."
Thank you for telling me what I should think.
jabby: "Discrimination against men doesn't mean discrimination against women doesn't exist, it means we need to fight both."
Let me guess, is your answer more feminism?
jabby: "Saying feminists support violence against men by not speaking out against it is like me saying you support genocide because I have never seen you condemn it."
Metaphors aren't really your thing. Here's why: that's what they do. They allegedly support equality. That's allegedly their whole deal. And yet you admit they don't speak out against it, despite your asserting they find discrimination against men just as bad. Is anyone else seeing a pattern here? If they support equality then there should be evidence of them supporting equality, don't you think?
You say they support equality, but you don't have any evidence of it because you admit they don't actually do it, but that doesn't mean they don't do it, because you say they do it anyhow despite not having any evidence, and you say they do it, so no evidence is needed? Do I have that about right?
jabby: "There are plenty of issues in the world and focusing on those that affect you the most does not mean you don't care about the others. If you actually came out and asked any feminists if they support violence against men 99% would say of course not."
You're saying you can speak for an entire group of people. Typical of feminists to make wild statements that cannot possibly be backed up. You're saying you can speak for the opinions of an entire group of people. Ponder that for a moment. And again, their whole deal is about equality, and yet they do not care about men at all, except as open wallets for child support, alimony, and false r@pe accusations without consequence of perjury, thanks to your beloved r@pe shield laws.
jabby: "However the fact that you think things like abortion rights, slutwalks and r@pe shield laws are bad things shows that you don't like women very much and probably think of them as second class citizens."
That's a pretty heavy accusation based on very presumptive evidence. Another feminist technique of flinging wild accusations with little or no evidence and expecting no personal accountability when those accusations are proven false. This is the flaw of the r@pe shield laws. It creates a loophole of due process and prevents any chance of perjury. I would welcome a discussion on any of these points. Which would you like to talk about first?
jabby: "Which is a more likely reason for your hatred of feminism than 'they are all nazis'."
That's in quotations. When did I write that? Improper quote mining on your part, also known as lying. But that's typical of feminists to change facts when it suits them to fit their agenda. I'll warn you, when a person engages in tactics like you just did it damages their credibility and causes everything they say(or have said) to be viewed with increased scrutiny.
jabby: "Equal doesn't mean the same in all ways."
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
jabby: "In this context it just means having equal rights, and being equally capable of committing violence and being hurt by violence. Which you even seem to agree with in your last sentence."
Thank you for telling me what I think, or should think, again.
"One From the Vaults: There's not just one movement. Anarcho-feminists and liberal feminists really have little in common."
You're just proving my point that feminism is ubiquitous. Feminism is everywhere.
One From the Vaults: "One of the ways it's characterised is in terms of "waves," which occludes the complexity and simultaneity of many movements, but remains a useful way to explain some of the differences...
In the early 20th century, First Wave feminists felt that women ought to count as people, and should have the right to vote."
Oh you mean when the first world war was going on and most young men died in trenches before they were old enough to vote, while bored housewives at home complained about how bad THEY had it? Cry me a river. If they were concerned about equality they would have been fighting for their place in the trenches, to do their duty to their country, instead of finding a way of getting a benefit without any of the responsibility.
One From the Vaults: "In the 60s, Second Wave feminists felt that institutional oppression against women, most obviously characterised by the income gap, must be rectified. Some second wavers were quite militant and anti-male, though far from all of them.
In the 90s, Third Wave feminists realised that power and oppression are not exclusively a thing of men dominating women, but that similar dynamics are occurring due to sexual orientation, race, etc. Their interest was then in intersectionality (how various aspects of identity combine) and complexity. Here's where to go to find interesting, well argued philosophy, and very little man hating. Some Second Wavers believe that Third Wavers have missed the point, even accusing them of not being angry enough at male oppression.
Over the past few years we now have a Fourth Wave of feminists, specifically focusing on issues surrounding sexual assault, **** culture and the like. Slut Walk is a major hallmark of this (and originated in my city, I'd like to point out -- I've met some of the organisers).
The Fourth Wavers are the ones most active on the internet, while the Third Wavers are the ones most active in the universities. I wouldn't characterise the Fourth Wave as based on "hate" so much as it is based on *anger*. That is, they're used to seeing violence against women trivialised and ignored, and they're pissed off about it and trying to do something to change that. And they may even be succeeding. Though yes, many of them are not exactly being reasonable, and some can fairly be described as bigots."
Yet again, feminism is ubiquitous. Amazing how feminism is everywhere, in media, in politics, in special interest groups, in law, in schools, in the workplace, all the signs of a monopoly, and yet they somehow are still the underdog. Fascinating.
One From the Vaults: "Just look at these Nazis jackbooting through our fine streets... clearly they must be stopped (and chatted with)."
One of these walks happened near my house. One of the women was holding a sign that read, "Why do we teach our daughters to not get r@ped but not teach our sons to not r@pe?" It's incredibly offensive that it's assumed that I or any other man need to be taught to not r@pe.
jabby: "It reflects how men and women are treated differently by society. Society, not feminists. Feminists would want men and women to be treated equally."
Evidence please. I'm aware that feminists parrot their goal is equality but have yet to see any of it in action. Please prove me wrong. Cite one example.
The video quite appropriately displays my original point though, and your response displays how utterly dense you are in the face of evidence.
jabby: "When a woman was threatened people intervened because they thought the man was a significant threat and the woman was vulnerable and needed saving. When a man was attacked both men and women openly admitted that they didn't intervene because they didn't consider the woman to be a serious threat to the man. How can a big strong man be in danger from a frail little woman? That's the sexist attitude that allows people to ignore or minimize violence against men, not that everyone walking past that day (men and women) happened to be a man-hating feminist."
Wow are you dense.
One from the Vaults: "nice to see another educated man here. This forum can be pretty misogynist at times. :P"
A bit early for smug self congratulations. What has been said that has been misogynistic? The issue is feminism, not women. Women are a gender, feminism is an ideology.
One From the Vaults: "There's a mix on here. Plenty of ignorance. Probably better than average for the internet, though."
Yes, there is plenty of ignorance on here. No argument here.
Ah, the ever elusive and mythical moderate feminist. Often spoken of despite being very elusive, much like Santa Claus.
You can't really claim they don't exist to me, since I know a bunch of them. Do you personally know a lot of extremist feminists, or are you just basing their existence (and the non-existence of moderates) on what you have read? I would consider myself moderately feminist (as much as a man can assist feminism), so do I not exist?
I don't see feminists marching in protest of male circumcision in this country, yet they're very upset about female circumcision in other countries. Where's the outrage? You say they find violence against men just as bad. I ask you for evidence. Evidence please, if you can.
Again, just because somebody focuses on the issues most meaningful to them doesn't mean they don't care about any other issues. I'm sure there are plenty of things in the world you disagree with that you have never been on a protest march about.
If you want evidence, just look for it. Here is an example of a self-identified feminist article about male circumcision: http://fembee.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04...cumcision.html . Here is an article on a feminist website where the author is concerned about whether the VAWA offers adequate protection for men: http://thefeministwire.com/2013/03/f...e-against-men/ . I found those in a few minutes. Feminists do discuss men's issues, just not as much as they discuss women's issues.
The VAWA incidentally is badly named, since it offers protection to male victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking as well as women. Look it up!
You're saying you can speak for an entire group of people. Typical of feminists to make wild statements that cannot possibly be backed up. You're saying you can speak for the opinions of an entire group of people. Ponder that for a moment.
This is pretty hilarious, since I'm the one saying there is a spectrum of opinions from the moderate to the extreme and you are telling me what all feminists are like. I guess you can speak for an entire group of people?
This is the flaw of the r@pe shield laws. It creates a loophole of due process and prevents any chance of perjury.
I don't know where you got this idea from. R@pe shield laws do not offer a defence against perjury, they prevent the prosecution asking certain questions about a woman's sexual history. Completely different thing.
One of these walks happened near my house. One of the women was holding a sign that read, "Why do we teach our daughters to not get r@ped but not teach our sons to not r@pe?" It's incredibly offensive that it's assumed that I or any other man need to be taught to not r@pe.
Considering the number of r@pes that occur where the man does not consider what he did 'r@pe' then I think educating people about consent seems like a good idea.
Wow are you dense.
Not really a rebuttal. Why do you think all the men and women in that video didn't offer the guy any help? Apart from the group of women at the end who called the police.
Really you are just approaching this completely wrong. Rights are not a competition between men and women. Improving things for women doesn't make things worse for men. In a lot of ways it makes things better! For example if you could get rid of the notion that women were weak and emotional and men were strong and tough then violence against men would be taken a lot more seriously. Get rid of the idea that women need more protection than men and VAWA becomes the Domestic Violence Act. Get rid of the idea that 'sluts deserve to be r@ped' and you don't need r@pe shield laws. That's the idea of equality rather than 'men vs women'.
You're all idiots.
Feminism is not ubiquitous everywhere, and having divisions within it doesn't demonstrate that any more than there being many types of Jews demonstrates that Judaism is ubiquitous.Pretty much. I don't think carnivorous is really worth responding to at this point, after taking the position that our friends must not exist because he hasn't met them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richter
One last thing, though:
Nowhere did I say that my feminist friends are "moderate." Probably many of them would take umbrage at that characterisation. Some of them identify as "radical queers," and openly call for revolution. Yet they do so in solidarity with all disaffected and disenfranchised groups, including a great many men.
I did say the majority of my feminist friends were moderate, but that isn't the way they would describe themselves since they actually know what feminism is. The only reason I used the word moderate is that virtually every woman on earth is 'moderate' compared to the ridiculous man-hating straw feminists some people think exist.
Have to say, I know a lot of feminists, and I've yet to meet these man-haters in real life. The only places I hear about them tend to be in MRA conspiracy theories up there with chemtrails and HAARP, or occasionally on web forums. I guess statistically speaking, chances are there are women out there who are man haters...but I sure haven't met them.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
For example when discussing the importance of consent regarding my, er our, fetish, the only people I've met so far who get it are queer/kink aware feminists.
I know a few, yes. However, it isn't just about those who declare themselves as feminists - there's also those who may-or-may-not-be feminists but don't say either way, whilst continuing to spout feminist misandry & general sexism at men & boys.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
All of them? Really, each and every single one of them? For sure...Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Regardless, that's what they'll tell you, but let's see how many of them practise as they preach. How many defend a man's right to speak for men in gender-debates? How many turn a blind eye when a woman slaps a man? How many marginalize & ignore false **** allegations? How many smirk when they hear of a man being sexually assaulted because a woman *says* her feelings were offended? How many demand genital integrity for male babies? How many promote equal jail-time for women? How many etc. etc. etc. (I'm sure you get the point of their biased attitudes by now).
Yeah and my name's Cinderella. How many promote equal jail-terms for female criminals? How many demand justice for falsely accused men? How many acknowledge female **** of men & push for a change in law to acknowledge female rapists? How many of them... etc. etc. (again, I'm sure you take the point by now about their so-called 'equality-when-its-to-their-benefit')Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Do extremist muslims push for censorship of Christian forums? Do muslim extremists lobby for laws which elevate muslims against other religions? Do muslim extremists sit in government and constantly portray muslims as eternal victims and all other religions as abusers? Do muslim extremists... (I'm sure you get the point).Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Oh, so when we saw an attack by a feminist author against men & father's day, that was a push for equality, right? Strange, to me it looked more like hate speech - which is the norm for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/loui...b_3426832.html
Correct. Yet everytime men do collaborate anywhere, it is feminists telling us to shut up and focus on women and how men should be looking at changing xyz to benefit women. It seems, men are not allowed to discuss men's issues unless a feminist allows it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Not at all, that's silly.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Men are the primary victims of all violence - not women. Look at any government stats you want and you'll see men are always the highest portion of victims of crime. Yet feminists want us to focus on women - as always - thus, they're telling us that we being the majority victims is of no consequence to them. Clearly they're sending a message that the minority is more important. More men are abused, more men die, more men commit suicide, more men are murdered, more men are mugged, etc. etc. Yet feminists continually demand we stfu and talk about violence against women, because for some unknown reason, it's apparently more important than anything.
Of course they would say that, it's their actions you have to observe. Feminists have a long, long history of lying. Even the original 1/4 women are victims of ra.pe is a disproven lie, Koss herself (the study's author) admits the errors (both mathematical and wording/interpretation of data) but feminists continually repeat the misinformation over & over in order to ensure they keep getting money for victims that don't exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Hmm, I fail to acknowledge your logic on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by jabby
Men have no means of equalizing with a woman's right to abortion, we should at the very least have a means to financially abort (drop parental rights/no obligation to pay) just as women can. We also need more protection in other areas (paternity fraud, adoption without father's consent/knowledge, etc. etc.)
The slutwalk teaches women to put themselves in compromising positions then cry victim when/if something does happen. Similar logic would be me running down the street with a megaphone shouting "I've got money, har har har, I'm really rich and have lots of spare cash - come n' grab some if you can, losers!"
Obviously, you'd tell me I was asking to be mugged... and you'd be right. Similarly, if I left my car windows open and the keys in the ignition - if it's stolen that's not technically my fault, but my insurer won't give a shit, they'll not pay up because I refused to take the basic precaution of not removing my keys.
And **** shield laws protect abusers (false accusers) whilst punishing innocent victims (of false allegations). An equal law would protect the identity of both UNTIL a verdict is reached.
I know a few, yes. However, it isn't just about those who declare themselves as feminists - there's also those who may-or-may-not-be feminists but don't say either way, whilst continuing to spout feminist misandry & general sexism at men & boys.
If that's the case, then your problem isn't with feminism, its with sexist women. Do they exist? Sure. But if they aren't identifying themselves or their ideas as feminist then I'm not sure why you're assuming their sexism has anything to do with feminism.
All of them? Really, each and every single one of them? For sure...
Regardless, that's what they'll tell you, but let's see how many of them practise as they preach. How many defend a man's right to speak for men in gender-debates? How many turn a blind eye when a woman slaps a man? How many marginalize & ignore false **** allegations? How many smirk when they hear of a man being sexually assaulted because a woman *says* her feelings were offended? How many demand genital integrity for male babies? How many promote equal jail-time for women? How many etc. etc. etc. (I'm sure you get the point of their biased attitudes by now).
Uh, plenty of of them? Not sure what you want me to tell you, but the people I know find a woman assaulting a man just as bad as the other way around. False **** accusations also really hurt the feminist cause so naturally they are against women making them. You must know some pretty horrible people if they think the way you have made out.
How many promote equal jail-terms for female criminals?
Who is it that determines jail time? Almost invariably a male judge. Maybe think about why they are giving more lenient sentences to women?
Do extremist muslims push for censorship of Christian forums? Do muslim extremists lobby for laws which elevate muslims against other religions? Do muslim extremists sit in government and constantly portray muslims as eternal victims and all other religions as abusers? Do muslim extremists... (I'm sure you get the point).
Uh, yes? So do extremist Christians. It doesn't mean the whole movement is like that.
Men are the primary victims of all violence - not women. Look at any government stats you want and you'll see men are always the highest portion of victims of crime. Yet feminists want us to focus on women - as always - thus, they're telling us that we being the majority victims is of no consequence to them. Clearly they're sending a message that the minority is more important. More men are abused, more men die, more men commit suicide, more men are murdered, more men are mugged, etc. etc. Yet feminists continually demand we stfu and talk about violence against women, because for some unknown reason, it's apparently more important than anything.
Men are also the primary perpetrators of violence, against both men and women. So who has the change for things to improve? The women?
The slutwalk teaches women to put themselves in compromising positions then cry victim when/if something does happen. Similar logic would be me running down the street with a megaphone shouting "I've got money, har har har, I'm really rich and have lots of spare cash - come n' grab some if you can, losers!"
The problem is that not doing that isn't difficult. However for women practically anything they do can be interpreted as 'inviting ****'. Being out at night, being alone with a man, wearing nice clothes, flirting. In order to not get blamed they have to not have a life.
Besides, even if you were running down the street trying to get mugged it doesn't make the mugging your fault. Its still the mugger that was doing something wrong. We should be focusing on stopping the r@pist rather than trying to make women live in fear. Since the majority of r@pes are carried out by someone the woman knows most of the 'advice' is useless anyway.