Feminism, how do you think it affects society?

[squealpiggy]

I never said she did nor did I even connect the two, I think you should re-read my post.

So you acknowledge that Harriet Harman and the US constitution are completely unrelated?

That's part of what it means, yes, the other part is as I said, it effectively means what I or anyone else believes are matters of the state. There's no getting around that fact.

Wrong. That would be statism. The negative spin on this phrase is that it means that the person using it can never look past a person's politics. Like those clowns who say that because someone votes conservative or is a member of the republican party or believes in socialism, that there can never be any common ground because the person's politics defines them utterly.

But the phrase was coined to mean that personal problems are political problems, that is to say that a person living in poverty is the result of a political system that allows personal poverty as a norm.

It's wrong, but not in the way that you're claiming.

You need to do more than just gloss over the first result on a google search imo. The actual motto was made popular in an essay by one feminist, yes, but it was being chanted around years before that and had its origins in chattel slavery.

Provide a source for this claim.

Oh yeah I forgot to mention, Second wave feminism was based on a model of systematic oppression similar to chattel slavery, second wave feminists were certifiable lunatics and originally failed to gain the support of many women, it wasn't until (ironically) a feminist they kicked out of their group for not being radical enough opened up a shelter for victims of domestic violence (source: Erin Pizzey) that they gained actual support and that's where the myth of male-on-female violence started.

Male on female violence isn't a myth. What is a myth is the notion that women can only be the victims of domestic violence and never be the perpetrators, and that's where Pizzey came unstuck. What is true is that serious injury and death most often occur in female victims of domestic abuse because of the fact that men tend to be physically more powerful. All domestic violence should be dealt with severely but women face the greatest risk from it.

Totalitarianism always starts by infecting the intellectual class and that's why feminism started in universities.

Non-sequitur.

A quick example and simply saying "she's a crank" doesn't negate anything about her, she openly spreads hate and promotes the killing of men not only online but in real life, with an audience watching, applauding what she does, she sure has a good sized fan base for such a "crank".

Plenty of cranks attract enough support from other cranks to be able to feel they have a popular message. Cranks like George Galloway or David Icke or Alex Jones. Alex Jones for goodness' sake! Massive following of utterly devoted morons and he's the crankiest crank to have ever cranked!

So yes, a crank calling for the murder of men and supported by a bunch of crank-watchers doesn't make her less of a crank.

Asking for specific numbers isn't relevant to the point and serves no other purpose than to try and accuse me of lying. A quick wiki read should have been enough to satisfy your supposed desire to know "how many" and "who are they?"

I'm not accusing you of lying. I'm accusing you of using weasel-words. You can spot them easily. People will say "many" or "experts" or "scientists" without ever specifically indicating who they mean. You then quote from the wikipedia for the SCUM manifesto, including this telling line:

"Solanas was viewed as too mentally ill and too bound up with Warhol, according to Greer, "for her message to come across unperverted.""

More mainstream feminists considered Valerie Solanos to be a nutter.

I'd class that as "many" without fear of misconstruing the facts, wouldn't you? There was more support of the manifesto than just outlined there, as well.

Not really. For every person in that article supporting SCUM there are three highlighting excessive issues with it.

That's a cop out and you know it. What you just said is "the state would imprison the man if they deemed him a threat" which he blatantly would be, mind you, I'm sure there's a law against promoting the killing of people especially people targeted for their gender.

It depends on your jurisdiction, but generally yes, gender can be an aggravating factor in hate crimes. The fact is that threats are not criminal if they are not credible. Which is why you can say with impunity that men should be allowed to beat their wives but would be swiftly charged if you threaten to beat your wife.

You don't see it as a big deal that a large majority of people are brainwashed into believing 1 in 3 women will be abused/assaulted/raped?

Nobody believes that statistic with the exception of third wave feminists, and as we've established they believe a lot of silly notions.

You don't see how damaging such a belief is to the public people and what a strain such statistics can put on people? Why? Change the roles for a second and say 1 in 3 women will be abused/assaulted/raped by Jews and there'd be absolute uproar but as it's just men being vilified it's "not too big a deal" ? ah.

That's making an unbelievable statistic even less believable.

Feminism is a dirty word, with a very dirty history drenched in the hate of not just men but young boys too.

Not really. I can see that you are hung up on the word, but it's responsible for great progress in society.

The issue with family courts isn't directly feminism's fault, I will say that but feminism is the reason why those issues in family court AREN'T being addressed or amended, not only do feminists not support such changes they openly oppose them. That's the problem with that issue. No shock though is it? Feminists only ever talk about "equal rights" when it suits them anyways and they always have.

The problems with the family court are a result of over-correction of prior inequities. They need to be addressed specifically and not just hidden in a bunch of anti-feminist ranting.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism...of-men-matter/

This sums up my issues with VAWA.

A voice for men is not exactly a reliable source.

Which is what these "radical" feminists do with politicians.

Politics is a popularity contest. What are you doing to counter this?

I think actively promoting the hatred/killing of half the population based on gender should be considered more than just a "crank" especially when that person has an audience/people that support her.

A crank with an audience is still a crank.

That's where we fundamentally disagree and where the problem arises then, I believe (and can site sources if requested)

Do.

the cranks of feminism do get things done, very bad things that harm our society and they do it under the banner of "feminism" they hide behind it because feminism is associated with "equality" but if the actions of those people are the opposite of equality, what then? Feminism isn't a fight for equality and it hasn't been since 2nd wave feminism.

Second wave feminism was a fight for equality, or are you suggesting that men and women were legally and financially equal in 1961?

It IS a hate group or at the very least, it's a safe ground for hateful people to hide away in and subtly promote their hatred.

This is where you're wrong, and this is probably the crux of the disagreement we're having. Feminism is not a hate group, because it isn't a group at all. It's an umbrella term encompassing innumerable groups and you are lumping women's rights groups in with misandrist feminazi cranks.

Look up Harriet Hall. She is a feminist who blazed a trail and broke ground in equal opportunities for women in the Air Force. Now tell me that she's in the same group as Valerie Solanos or even Germaine Greer.

Never heard of Adria Richards? The middle-class "ethnic" college girls are even worse they get a double whammy of race baiting and gender hatred usually accompanied with a side serving of "straight hate".

Alright so sometimes they are middle class black girls with daddy issues.

[Danny Gunz]

[RiC-DiC]

Men invented almost everything, fought every war, built every nation, did everything of note in history. Why should men be treated like women, when women haven't done anything of note?? It's like saying "Amir Khan deserves just as much pay as Floyd Mayweather"!!

If you look at it logically, men are superior and deserve to be treated as such.

[WARQUEZ]

Men invented almost everything, fought every war, built every nation, did everything of note in history. Why should men be treated like women, when women haven't done anything of note?? It's like saying "Amir Khan deserves just as much pay as Floyd Mayweather"!!

If you look at it logically, men are superior and deserve to be treated as such.

Well that's all irrelevant considering how a woman made you.

[squealpiggy]

Men invented almost everything, fought every war, built every nation, did everything of note in history.

Not true at all.

[ßringer]

Why am I not surprised to see a bunch of closeted (and not-so-closeted) misogynists chomping at the bit to reply to this one?

How do I feel about feminism? Very similar to the way I feel about the civil rights movement, actually - In that both movements, have essentially attained the goals they set forth for themselves upon their inception. Neither will ever truly eradicate the prejudices and injustices that unfortunately permeate societies big and small, so you could make the argument that they're both either obsolete or a necessity depending on which side of the fence you're standing on.

However, radical feminism (which seeks superiority, not equality) really pisses me the **** off and I've been known to go at a radical feminist or two whenever the opportunity presents itself to me. Unfortunately, that movement seems to be gaining ground in Western society with the help of the internet.

[squealpiggy]

Why am I not surprised to see a bunch of closeted (and not-so-closeted) misogynists chomping at the bit to reply to this one?

How do I feel about feminism? Very similar to the way I feel about the civil rights movement, actually - In that both movements, have essentially attained the goals they set forth for themselves upon their inception. Neither will ever truly eradicate the prejudices and injustices that unfortunately permeate societies big and small, so you could make the argument that they're both either obsolete or a necessity depending on which side of the fence you're standing on.

However, radical feminism (which seeks superiority, not equality) really pisses me the **** off and I've been known to go at a radical feminist or two whenever the opportunity presents itself to me. Unfortunately, that movement seems to be gaining ground in Western society with the help of the internet.

Fret not my friend. The internet has helped give many movements the illusion of gaining ground. Radical feminism is in good company, what with the existence of creationism, health-woo and conspi******s.

Desperate cave-dwelling lunatics used to be isolated by their total lack of social ability, now they can bypass the need to interact with other human beings by registering online.

[ßringer]

Fret not my friend. The internet has helped give many movements the illusion of gaining ground. Radical feminism is in good company, what with the existence of creationism, health-woo and conspi******s.

Desperate cave-dwelling lunatics used to be isolated by their total lack of social ability, now they can bypass the need to interact with other human beings by registering online.

I certainly hope you're right about that, squeal. But, speaking from firsthand experience, I've personally run into quite a few of these radical feminist ****s within just the last year or so.

Hopefully it's just a case of the same fringe internet movement simply moving into the outside world, like the conspiracy theorist ****faces. I certainly hope the large increase in internet popularity isn't any indication of a more widespread movement.

[squealpiggy]

I certainly hope you're right about that, squeal. But, speaking from firsthand experience, I've personally run into quite a few of these radical feminist ****s within just the last year or so.

Hopefully it's just a case of the same fringe internet movement simply moving into the outside world, like the conspiracy theorist ****faces. I certainly hope the large increase in internet popularity isn't any indication of a more widespread movement.

I shouldn't think so. It appears to be an outlet for rebellious middle class college girls as opposed to a serious movement.

[PulpFriction]

feminism is just an excuse for women to dress like sluts and live like whores for the sake of money and social status.

these feminists just need a slap in the face and a good hard dick in the ass. that'll put them back in the kitchen (and bedroom) where they belong instead of protesting with their skinny **** friends.

****ing ****s.

Best response by far