Cosmo gives ball crushing as advice to get even with a cheating boyfriend.

[carnivorous_daisy]

"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. Evidence: VAWA, child custody, alimony, child support, abortion rights, slut walks, r@p3 shield laws, draconian workplace environments, taking over and infecting all of academia, utter intolerance to any opposing views, stifling of freedom of speech, and so on. Feminism is not, nor has it ever been, about equality, it's a hate driven ideology that only holds itself out to be a movement of peace and love to get the support of the masses behind it.

"The main reason woman-on-man violence is seen as a joke is the idea that women are weak and men are strong, so the idea of a woman hurting a man is funny because men don't get hurt by women. If you get rid of the sexist stereotypes and think women and men are equal then violence is just as bad whoever its happening to."

Humans have inherent biological sexual dimorphism which cannot and should not be ignored by calling them "equal". Men and women are not equal, anyone who thinks this probably misunderstands the word "equal" or basic human biology. The interpretive social construct of these inherent biological differences based upon immediate environmental necessity creates gender roles. Non-consensual violence is unethical, regardless to whom, by whom, or under what circumstances.

[bbbb]

That's simply untrue.

Correct. In fact, many feminists openly promote violence against men whilst most other feminists silently support (demonstrated by their inaction) it.

Evidence: VAWA, child custody, alimony, child support, abortion rights, slut walks, r@p3 shield laws, draconian workplace environments, taking over and infecting all of academia, utter intolerance to any opposing views, stifling of freedom of speech, and so on. Feminism is not, nor has it ever been, about equality, it's a hate driven ideology that only holds itself out to be a movement of peace and love to get the support of the masses behind it.

Oh it's good to know other people do see beyond the lies & hocus-pocus. Don't forget, feminists are currently demanding that laws be created so as to make criticism of feminism illegal, yes illegal. Add to that the demand that Facebook remove any posts questioning feminist statistics, which have a well-documented history of manipulation and dishonesty. Recently, a poster was removed questioning the validity of the claims by feminists that 1/4 women on college campuses will be victims of ****. It didn't use any derogatory terms, but it did use actual statistics from real colleges and concluded the numbers were closer to 1/800 (if memory serves). All copies of the post have vanished from the several hundreds of 'shares' it had from various pages, users & other FB pages.

The last quote you answer is simply rubbish anyway. FB continues to allow feminist groups to continue, such as "all men are bastards" and "SCUM" (society for cutting up men). No such groups would exist if the sexes were reversed.

[carnivorous_daisy]

It seems reasonable to deduce that the existence of our community and undeniable growth over the past few decades has been much aided or almost entirely created by the ideas allowed to propagate within what is quickly becoming a global culture.

The separation between sexual identity and non-sexual identity is not as distinct as what HR departments and churches would have people believe. Everything affects everything in some way. Nothing is outside the realm of causality of another thing. Considering that(or disregarding that, if you choose), does anyone here think that perhaps any cultural factors(laws, politics, TV shows, movies, workplaces) shaped what we have become, and that our culture is creating more of us? And what are the consequences of that?

[One from the Vaults]

"Feminists" is a pretty broad term, covers a lot of people. Many of them are motivated by anger and bear the attitudes you describe... but there are others who are wiser and more well rounded in their approach. Having spent many years studying social sciences and humanities at a major university, I've had the privilege of knowing many such people.

My feminist friends are, for the most part, compassionate and not man hating. A few are. And I know that there are many others around who wouldn't even be able to be my friend, so there's a clear selection bias in the feminists I've encountered.

Suffice it to say that both exist. Many feminists want to end violence against everyone. Others want to work with intelligent and compassionate men (and non-men), powerful in their own right, collaborating for the purposes of mutual liberation and the downfall of patriarchal apparati...

All depends on which "feminism" we're talking about.

Btw, most my feminist friends to whom I've talked about ballbusting have accepted it as a fetish without judgement but for the most part not been terribly interested in doing it themselves. One mentioned how a past boyfriend of hers was into it, and she didn't mind squeezing his nuts for him but it didn't really do anything for her in particular. A couple of them are into it themselves. But anyway the smart feminists at least are united in not just thinking it's "weird."

[carnivorous_daisy]

"Feminists" is a pretty broad term, covers a lot of people. Many of them are motivated by anger and bear the attitudes you describe... but there are others who are wiser and more well rounded in their approach. Having spent many years studying social sciences and humanities at a major university, I've had the privilege of knowing many such people.

My feminist friends are, for the most part, compassionate and not man hating. A few are. And I know that there are many others around who wouldn't even be able to be my friend, so there's a clear selection bias in the feminists I've encountered.

Suffice it to say that both exist. Many feminists want to end violence against everyone. Others want to work with intelligent and compassionate men (and non-men), powerful in their own right, collaborating for the purposes of mutual liberation and the downfall of patriarchal apparati...

All depends on which "feminism" we're talking about.

Btw, most my feminist friends to whom I've talked about ballbusting have accepted it as a fetish without judgement but for the most part not been terribly interested in doing it themselves. One mentioned how a past boyfriend of hers was into it, and she didn't mind squeezing his nuts for him but it didn't really do anything for her in particular. A couple of them are into it themselves. But anyway the smart feminists at least are united in not just thinking it's "weird."

I'm sure there are also moderate n@zi's. Doesn't change that the movement itself is one of hate.

[carnivorous_daisy]

@ One from the Vaults:

I do understand what you mean about the broadness of the term, as feminism is our culture is ubiquitous.

[One from the Vaults]

I'm sure there are also moderate n@zi's. Doesn't change that the movement itself is one of hate.

There's not just one movement. Anarcho-feminists and liberal feminists really have little in common.

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.

[One from the Vaults]

Just look at these Nazis jackbooting through our fine streets... clearly they must be stopped (and chatted with).

[jabby]

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. Evidence: VAWA, child custody, alimony, child support, abortion rights, slut walks, r@p3 shield laws, draconian workplace environments, taking over and infecting all of academia, utter intolerance to any opposing views, stifling of freedom of speech, and so on. Feminism is not, nor has it ever been, about equality, it's a hate driven ideology that only holds itself out to be a movement of peace and love to get the support of the masses behind it.

Do you know many feminists personally? All the ones I know find violence against men just as bad as violence against women. Because they are about equality, not superiority. 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.

The existence of areas where men are discriminated against isn't proof of anything other than the fact that there is inequality, which is precisely what you should be against. Discrimination against men doesn't mean discrimination against women doesn't exist, it means we need to fight both. 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. 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.

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. Which is a more likely reason for your hatred of feminism than 'they are all nazis'.

Humans have inherent biological sexual dimorphism which cannot and should not be ignored by calling them "equal". Men and women are not equal, anyone who thinks this probably misunderstands the word "equal" or basic human biology. The interpretive social construct of these inherent biological differences based upon immediate environmental necessity creates gender roles. Non-consensual violence is unethical, regardless to whom, by whom, or under what circumstances.

Equal doesn't mean the same in all ways. 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.

[dark]

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

[jabby]

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

It reflects how men and women are treated differently by society. Society, not feminists. Feminists would want men and women to be treated equally.

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

[One from the Vaults]

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.

[bbbb]

Do you know many feminists personally?

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.

All the ones I know find violence against men just as bad as violence against women.

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).

Because they are about equality, not superiority.

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')

There are feminist extremists true, but defining the group by them is like defining all Muslims as terrorists.

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).

If you read any mainstream feminist material you will quickly see that gender equality is the goal rather than being against men.

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.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/loui...b_3426832.html

The existence of areas where men are discriminated against isn't proof of anything other than the fact that there is inequality, which is precisely what you should be against. Discrimination against men doesn't mean discrimination against women doesn't exist, it means we need to fight both.

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.

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.

Not at all, that's silly.
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.

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.

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.

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. Which is a more likely reason for your hatred of feminism than 'they are all nazis'.

Hmm, I fail to acknowledge your logic on this.
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.

[jabby]

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.

[Richter]

A bunch of guys on a jerk-off fetish board trying to seem intellectual about feminism.