@bennyboy133 living in a misandric echo-chamber, that is, living in Sweden. A more misandric country would be very difficlut to find. A feminist uthopia.
@bennyboy133 They got their views from Radical Feminist theory. For example, in one of the later parts of the documentary, it is revealed that the ROKS organisation's "course material" contains direct quotes from Valerie Solanas' SCUM manifesto (society for cutting up men) which calls for the total extermination of all men.
Read the book "The Male in Crisis" by Karl Bednarik. Although written in 1968, it predicts the inevitable destruction of Western society due to the commercialization of sexuality and the breakdown of the traditional male role. It is very depressing to read, but in the last chapter of the book Bednarik provides a solution the problems American civilization has created (if we want to avoid a social catastrophe).
What...the..fuck...was that? Seriously I hope that movement is not taking over sweden. They basically want to do to men what happened historically to women in certain parts of the world. I can't describe how sick I felt watching this.
Men are women are equal, but nature, broadly speaking, gave them different roles. Men are creators and destroyers. Women are balancers and nuturers. Without women men tend to destroy. Wtih women men tend to create. It's biological. Feminism exists because now men afford too many artificial privildeges to women and lower standards in some areas so they can participate. So the B Teams replace the A Teams in many situations, hence the decline of the West. So easy to see this.
@directorcj75 You couldn't have come up with a dafter explanation than that. Men are creators and destroyers? Without women men tend to destroy? This completely silly.
@orion00 Look to the past, when men were far more dominant as a sex. Things were far more unstable and destructive. Men and women are both the wings of the one bird. Men can comfortably live in a cardboard box. It's the woman who demands the stability of a proper home. Men are then the ones to build it. I live and work a lot in 3rd World countries where men are very dominant. They are totally lazy. They need nagging women to make them create. In the West, Dyke women are now destructive.
@directorcj75 Once again I have to call your bs. Co-relation doesn't imply causation which is one of the core rules which shape a good argument. Societies evolve not because of who runs but because things which don't evolve usually die out. The past was no more unstable or destructive than the present (unless you pick and choose times of war) and men have never been without women in order to test your hypothesis with history .. cont
@orion00 I wonder why you need to insult rather than discuss. Are you to a butch dyke type fo feminist that you feel a need to do this? Of course the past was more destructive ie Dark Ages, Black Death, Crusades, Napoleonic wars, Franco-Prussian War, WW1, WW2 etc - plus conflicts in Asia. Men have never been without women, but women had less say and no vote. Now they have too much to say due to too many regulations, so things have gone the other way and men 's creativity is shackled.
@directorcj75 I've lived in a 3rd world country for half my life and now I live in the west and your characterizations of both societies is stereotypical at best. The man in my country of birth were no less hardworking than men where I live now. Both places have their good and bad so again your entire argument is rubbish.
@orion00 When looking at the big picture one has to generalise. And the point about generalisations is that they are generally true. People and societies do fit into sterotypical categories. I don't know your country of birth, but I am very widely travelled in 3rd World countries and have lived in many. Anyone who is will say that generally the men are lazy and the women do the unskilled work. Visit any building site and see for yourself. I'm too old and experienced to talk rubbish.
@directorcj75 "When looking at the big picture one has to generalise." - Sorry but this is just plain wrong. This is the kind of thinking that leads to racism. Especially when one uses anecdotal evidence and assumes it's true for everyone else. Laziness isn't gender specific, it's a type of personality. I've visited building sites, road construction sites and seen men, women and even children working hard. Being old and talking rubbish are not mutually exclusive.
@orion00 Generalising about big picture situations doesn't lead to racisim at all. Insurance companies do it all the time to make accurate predicitions, ie women tend to live longer than men, people live longer in Japan than in India etc. Laziness is genger specific in Asia because Asian countries is patriarchal and male children tend to be spoilled and favoured from birth, which makes them bone lazy when they grow up. I know because I employ so many. I agree with your last point.
@directorcj75 Generalizing does lead to racism. Anti-Semitic generalizations are what allowed Hitler to carry out genocide, it's the reason why Sikhs were attacked in the aftermath of 9/11 before of their attire etc. Life expectancy has more basis in fact since it relies on empirical study and hard data. Can you show me empirical data supporting the fact that laziness is gender specific? ... cont
@orion00 ...cont I've worked and lived with many hardworking men from third world nations, so what makes your anecdotal evidence more relevant than mine?
@orion00 In Singapore airport returning home to Saigon from India so no time to debate now. However, I will say that generalisms can be misused, as can specifice statistics (which can also tell one anything as politicians know). My empirical data for laziiness IN 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES being gender specific is my years of experience in working in these countries. In the West it's not gender specific. In fact, my argument is that in Western society it's the other way around these days.
@directorcj75 I'd go a step further and say generalizations are of no use and do more harm than good. In fact, ironically, it's a lazy way to organize one's thoughts. Personal experience falls under anecdotal evidence and not empirical evidence. Anecdotal evidence is never reliable and is the reason why mainstream science and scientific studies shun it or try to avoid it as much as possible.
My only fear is that feminism will destroy western society (via low birth-rates, fewer kids raised with both parents, etc.) before natural selection destroys feminism. In which case we'll be left with many vicious, uncivilized and truly patriachal societies that actually exercise violence against women. And not in the metaphorical sense of the word that so many feminist academics like to use.
Modern feminism requires gov't as a tool to sustain its existence. It's a gov't financed bubble.
@dick391 Feminism has already destroyed Western society. The pendulum has swung too far in favour of women. They are given too many advantages and privileges over men. Men and women are equal, but each tends to be better suited to different roles. Now females, by being given too many soft options, fill too many roles they are less suited to, such as in the military. This means Western countries are now presenting the B Teams, not their A Teams in many situations, hence the decline.
Well the one positive take-away here is that most of those women are unlikely to pass their genes onto the next generation. At least not in the same numbers as non-feminists. Over time they gradually "select" themselves out of the gene pool.
Modern feminism is an anomaly in the grand scheme of things. It's only in the past thirty years or so that it has achieved the prominence it has (and only in one part of the world basically). Give it another generation or two and will be gone.
That sounds optimistic. Do you believe the political influences will die along with those who don't procreate? (and remember they have the option of sperm banks)
@goldsak Even with the option of sperm banks, feminist women have fewer kids than non-feminist women. This is not a theoretical; feminists have had access to sperm banks for quite some time. As non-feminists have more children, the ratio of feminists to non-feminists declines. Simple math
You're right, political influence is a different story. Most likely, feminist influence will significantly weaken Western society. As Western civilizt'n declines, so too will feminism's place in world
@goldsak Sorry, I have no statistical evidence to offer. Other than the fact that the countries with the lowest birth-rates worldwide also appear to be the most feminist (Western Europe, Canada, U.S., Australia). Also, Gen X’ers and Boomers are more feminist than previous generations and also have fewer children.
Logically speaking; however, it should be pretty easy to see that feminist women make different choices than non-feminists. And those choices ultimately lead to fewer kids.
I must be one of the rare exceptions. I've never used physical violence against a woman or threatened her, yet every women I've dated has slapped me and thrown things at me when she was upset. Every lesbian couple I've known have engaged in violence toward one another. This is anecdotal, of course. My experiences may be unique.
@TheForwardGaze You might have more company than you think. Recent psychological studies in the West have suggested that women are instigators in at least half of the reported domestic violence cases. Problem is that society has labelled a man weak for getting assaulted by a woman and a lot of incidents such as these are unreported or not taken seriously. It's probably different in other countries where laws don't protect women and they are subject to abuse.
The rub is in how what is actually meant by the word 'violence'. Some feminist theory is very loose with language and violence can encapsulate all kinds of things that people would not ordinarily associate with physical violence. One example is the idea of the Male Gaze, where the act of looking lustfully at a female is talked of as an act of violence towards women (because it 'objectifies' them)
Here is what I have gathered so far about the feminist's conception of the world: "All sex is rape. All men are violent. Women good. Men bad. Men use violence and manipulation to control women. Women would never do the same. Men are callous. Of course, there are exceptions, but you shouldn't let that get in the way of assuming that each individual man is a monster who wants to rape you, beat you, and ultimately sell your body to aliens from outer space who want it for research." Sounds legit.
@lamborger True feminism is supposed to be equal rights for both sexes; however, it has lost it's way in favour of just one. Not all those who espouse feminism think that way. My fiance` is feminist and supports men's rights as much as I do. I guess I mean to say that not all feminists fall into that category.
@5468764654 I may be a troll but I'm no female. It's not my fault the original poster made such a pathetic video that I felt compelled to belittle it within 20 seconds.
The domestic violence expert that you are, how do you feel about the vast majority of western men claiming to have been physically assaulted by the majority of their counterparts in relationships, yet the vast overwhelming majority of domestic violence charges are targeted at men? I'm sure you have some contrived feminist doctrine of denial regarding this.
@5468764654 I sure do. My "feminist doctrine" is: getting a plate thrown at you because you fucked your girlfriend's sister probably doesn't fall into the same degree of severity as beating your wife black and blue.
Ideological fanatics! Androphobic "feminism" based upon stereotypical thinking. Some of the respondents suggested "anti-capitalism" as a substitute ideological stereotype. Can't any of these people step outside of stereotypical "-isms" thinking? People who want the seeming certainty of stereotypical thinking are seldom satisfied or happy.
You made many claims and you can't explain them without recurring to conspiratory mindset of : A happens, also does B, therefore A happens because of B. Sorry but it breaches all rules of logic. You draw the same comaprison over and over again, one that has no logical sequence or empiric evidence. If you're gonna give me this recycled BS over and over again, lets both stop wasting each other's time. You don't want to answer me, and i am tired of the mantra you keep repeating.
Your presentation of the political power of feminism in Swedish politics is very exaggerated. There is absolutely no feministic political power in sweden. If you don't believe me, just look at the election statistics of the swedish feminist party - FI.
@sam91004 No the feminist groups do have a disportionate influence on society. Political influence is more than just poltical parties, lobby group have a lot of influence is western societies.
People tend to show more care and concern for woman. So when they form a group that is hysterical, and narcissisticly self interested in their own issues, they take advantage of the white knight, good will factor of men.
@GodOfTheInternets For certain jobs we (correctly and objectively) deem women weaker but also more attractive for others (fashion retail, strippers etc). You could just as easily call that matriarchy. From now on, every time someone claims we live in a patriarchy, I will, for shits and giggles, say "no, we live a matriarchy". You have just as much evidence
@mr1001nights You DON'T "correctly" discriminate African Americans for employment because of the built in stereotypes that they are lazy compared to whites. You DON'T discriminate on sex, color, what have you. You judge by merit, and skill.
@Nebelung13 What do you know about my fixations? Where did I talk about statistical equality? I was clearly talking about statistical represention. How is that irrelevant? If you had a nation that was in the realm of 90% black and all the leaders were white, would that not be a blatant indicator of something being wrong with the society or system that appoints leaders?
The case with female representation is only slightly less absurd.
@ufee You haven't formulated a case for statistical fixation, and you inadvertedly try to put the question on me. Having been you that made the extraordinary claim regarding aptriarchy and female represetantion it is you that needs a adequate explanation.
@ufee "If you had a nation that was in the realm of 90% black and all the leaders were white, would that not be a blatant indicator of something being wrong with the society or system that appoints leaders?"
-That is absolulty fallacious BS, Trying to mix racism and sex is quackery, trying to present them as similar without explaining context or reason. its not a indication of anything and its a horrible analogy to feminist problem. Absurdity is exactly what you seem to fixate on.
@Nebelung13 So the fact that men openly dominate decision making positions in society is not an indicator that men dominate decision making positions in society?
You can look at the house of congress, 362 men and 76 women, completely off the charts in proportion to the number of women (51%) and consider that it remains roughly the same after every election (you never see a male dominated congress swing to a female dominated, unlike with the two political parties). No implications?
@Nebelung13 They can vote for whomever they want, but there are less female candidates, and if you talk to people, there are irrational superstitions, even among women, about women's abilities. I have talked to women who say they would not vote for a woman because they are "too emotional". This is a cultural phenomenon.
@ufee Also explain me why in a patriarchical society males of the 18 to 30 age group are the favoured section of population to die a violent death for their country?
Then again you need to give explanation, in what way does female politicans difer from male ones? Why does a different set of genitalia impart into politics, economy or social problems?
See you say you're not fixated with statistics yet you quote statistics again, lulz, you must be trolling me fo' sure.
@Nebelung13 It's not just statistics, it's a repeated phenomenon that the proportion of women remains low election after election.
Would you look at a culture of bacteria in a petri-dish, notice that there are consistently less bacteria near a particular mold, and then claim that absolutely nothing is happening, there is no cause, no explanation?
When statistics are extreme and consistent, to discard them is anti-intellectual.
You are comparing bacteria to people? seriously? I still prefer your comparison with racism, at least that is more efficient in stiring up hatred in the audience to side with the cause.
"... to discard them is anti-intellectual."
-The problem si not statistics, its yours and other peoples subjective itnerpretation of what is just statistics. What truly is anti-intelectual si subjective itnerpretation of generic information and pass it as objective. Yo uare clueless again.
@Nebelung13 I'm not comparing bacteria to people, I'm comparing your irrational discard of data to something more generic, where your anti-rationality would be very clear and apparent.
You can not look at a repeated phenomenon like this and claim there is no cause. You can not look at a blue sky and claim that, despite my eyes being bombarded by blue, there is nothing to investigate about the air's ability to shift light into the blue spectrum.
@ufee But you are not investiganting anything, don't give me that BS, you are jumping to conclusions, thats the oposite of investigation. You already made the illogical jump to a conclusion without thinking twice, thats called prejudiced thinking in correct english, in vulgar english its called bullshitting people.
Oh i guess now i'm a lair since i came back. i couldn't let this one go, it was so fucking ridiculous.
You made many claims and you can't explain them without recurring to conspiratory mindset of : A happens, also does B, therefore A happens because of B. Sorry but it breaches all rules of logic. You draw the same comaprison over and over again, one that has no logical sequence or empiric evidence. If you're gonna give me this recycled BS over and over again, lets both stop wasting each other's time. You don't want to answer me, and i am tired of the mantra you keep repeating.
@Nebelung13 Providing evidence that a phenomenon exists is not a post-hoc.
Saying "The global economy crashed while men were dominating politics, therefore men being in power is likely why the global economy crashed" is a fallacy.
Saying "There's evidence that men run the world because they sit in positions of power that run the world, with a dominant 80% share" is not a fallacy.
@ufee Lets imagine that a country that was 90% muslim was "ruled" by a minority of 10% Hindu, what the freaking hell could you draw from this? tha there is a Hindu conspirancy to put down muslims?
See i can produce insane analogies too. No big deal.
@ufee Lets imagine that a country that was 90% muslim was "ruled" by a minority of 10% Hindu, what the freaking hell could you draw from this? tha there is a Hindu conspirancy to put down muslims?
See i can produce insane analogies too. No big deal.
@Nebelung13 And who is the libertarian-minded individual who googles for videos he agrees with and then vulgarly insults the author of any contrarian comment?
You call me the parrot while you're looking for a chior to tune into.
I didn't insult you, not until i saw your comment back, want offensive? then read your disgusting comaprison of race with gender agenda so typical of feminism.
"And who is the libertarian-minded individual who googles for videos he agrees with and then vulgarly insults the author of any contrarian comment?"
-Nice touch troll you have moved away from crap arguments to take a cheap shot at me. Please do continue.
@ufee I mean you gotta love the analogy and the implications of it too! somehow you forget that there is roughly half of the population that is female and of that half a portion voted for said males to take power of government. they don't seem bothered by the politicians genitalia.
India as a female president yet they have a cast system that is very brutal to both males and females of lesser roles in society, so, tell exactly how this says anything about patriarchy?
@Nebelung13 She got there, but the odds are stacked against women. Considering the following four prime ministers were male, evidence seems to favor the idea that women are less likely to hold positions of power.
@ufee It's the way capitalism is structured. You lack class analysis and only seem to be concerned with giving women equal opportunity to exploit/control the working class from a position of, as you said, socioeconomic or political authority. Identity politics have no place in the broader socialist tradition. If Hillary Clinton won in lieu of Obama nothing would be different. Maybe a few liberal women would feel empowered but I could care less about upper middle class women gaining power.
@crud4 I think that's a good criticism. The wider point to be made, which I did not make, is that the population is simply not properly represented in our political system. If they were, it would be comprised of low income individuals, it would have a significant amount of homosexuals, atheists, and so on. I think if you look at the power system, there is evidence of patriarchy, but even stronger evidence of plutocracy. These two descriptions are not mutually exclusive.
@ufee Capitalism and even representative "democracy" in any system that creates concentrated wealth can never achieve equal political representation let alone social equality. The abolition of hierarchical political and economic structures should be the goal not fighting for women, people of color or gay people to have the chance to climb the hierarchy in order to place themselves in an advantageous position over others. Too many people within the socialist tradition forget that.
@crud4 And yes I'm a white male but I don't see much privilege in being such. I'd be tempted to chew any feminist out who calls me privileged as I crawl into bed after work with dirty callused hands, sore knees/back and so tiered I can hardly sleep only to wake up the next morning to start it all over again. This isnt to say most large capitalists in America aren't white males but that has fuck all to do with me.I'm not a fan of them either.
@mr1001nights i think the free market creates this illusion of gender roles. we both (male and females) have the capacity to do the others' jobs. what kind of jobs is the problem. art should be fun and expressive as well as artisan crafts. the harder labor can been done by both genders and males having more testosterone driven brains will compel them to do the latter; and females will chose the more "nesting" style jobs. i believe in equality and freedom of choice. we're just different
@GodOfTheInternets "The common denominator for all these is that most workers are men." A quote from the article linked. Why would that be? Evil feminist conspiracy? Women barred due to gender discrimination (overt as well as subversive) perhaps?
@GodOfTheInternets Come to work with me for one week and lift 200 lbs all day whilst crawling, climbing, bending and stooping with 75 lb tool bags tied around your hips with some boss/supervisor driving you to work faster and harder beyond the breaking point every day for 8 to 12 hours 5 days a week, sometimes 7 days a week year round for 30 years. You'll quit after one hour. If not you''l be fired for lack of production. It's capitalism and the push for profits. Now fuck off.
Men die in the workplace because we live in a world that values the safety and lives of women over men. Men are expected to risk their lives so that women don't have to. Men are expected to generate worth through their doings while women's worth, according to society, is granter upon birth. This is no patriarchal society.
we are in the midst of a huge transformation - going from a patriarchal society to a matriarchal. Men are represented as a pervert, baffoon, peadophile etc etc The male is no longer needed as shown on tv. The feminazi and gay political movements have single handedly destroyed the family and us as individuals. @ 2;18 they both look like men - quite ironic since they hate men ha
@ZeroToleranceMan1 can u imagine if this was against blacks or immigrants - there would be an outrage. As a woman I am outraged by these comments - making men into base animals (rapists, violent thugs etc) they are bitches bcoz they are the very ppl who R destroying society
Not in canada u say, ok look at this site,stepitupontario on the right, blue column, 2nd paragraph. male power is uphelp by rape....this site is controled by the local womens shelter, its director is erin lee todd, she gets funding by going after teen girls and telling them their fathers are violent and abusive. This is from personal experience, that is what they did to mine. took me 2 years to undo the damage. Old hags.
Woman abuse kids more than men. Woman therefore are biologically inclined to abuse kids. All woman are the same. We should take kids away from the mothers, cause of the abuseful power relationships they hold over them. Woman are a biological mistake.
This is an example of female privilege right of the battle. Woman get indulged when they act up. So when they call for genodice against an entire gender, no one even bats an eyelid!
"Research has shown that men use violence bla, bla, bla...." What a bunch of grownups idiots!!! If that was true no so-called "research" would be needed; the facts would be obvious. What's very obvious is the degree of indoctrination those women have been exposed to and their inability to think for themselves. If I am oppressed I should know that. I don't need to read it in a book, magazine or research the internet to find that out, or have somebody to tell me that I've been oppressed.
watch?v=K_uRIMUBnvw <<< why do I feel like they're trying to manipulate me into some death cult? Put those men and liberal/radical feminists on an island- like that survival island TV show and watch the madness ensure. I'd give them three days before they cannibalize each other and revert back to shrinking heads and wearing dead skin masks. "and the best at murder are those who preach against it and the best at hate are those who preach love" -Bukowski- He's a feminist right? :)
Well, they don't call them feminazis for nothing. Consider former professor Mary Daly, who thinks the male population should be drastically cut and that females should rule over males for the sake of the planet. It's total silliness.
@crud4 Yes it is. The it is not meant to be taken literally is an feminist excuse for it. The whole who wrote it was an abused child, who decided to blame the entire male gender for her abuse. Any Warhol showed a lot of decency by not pressing charges against her after she shot him. If I was in his shows I would hired some thugs to give her a beating.
@brownie1982ad Warhol and his group (which included women) were pretentious assholes and I would've shot him if he treated me like some sort of "ironic joke". He's hardly a good example of masculinity anyhow. Funny thing I think he was an asshole bastard and I have one of his pieces as my pic on my profile. Did I mention he was an asshole who kinda pushed her to the brink? A bully with a supporting cast. Nothing worse. I think her book was absurd by the way.
@crud4 She did hold fucked up ideals though but I think the violent reaction had more to do with the way they treated her within that social sect that was the "factory people".
No, not neutral one comissioner was Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth, who was on the board of ROKS, an organization criticized in the documentary. And it is a well regarded documentary, it won a Gold Spade an award for investigative journalism. Evin Rubar, the driector and interviewer won a crystal award as well.
@ThePintsizeslasher One out of how many comissioners? Not convinced; if there was bias somebody high up would have noticed.
"well regarded" The Great Global Warming Scandel is a "well-regarded" documentary by some and won several awards. But they're regarded purely by their aesthetics, and not their contents; they give the audiennce an ideological buzz, but not real facts.
You place far to much faith in government. Even if they did notice the bias what makes you believe they'd do something about it?
The documentary did expose basic hateful and prejudiced ideas held by gov't officials, and one of whom stated that if Rubar were ever abused she would never be welcome in one of their womens shelters. They also exposed the people running the shelters' belief in satanic ritual abuse something I though isolated to stupid christians in the US.
@ThePintsizeslasher" You place far to much faith in government" Certainly not, I just feel it a valid opinion.
And what makes you feel gvt would be so intent on criticising it?
"if Rubar were ever abused she would never be welcome in one of their womens shelters" Hateful, but somewhat understandable after what Rubar has said (true or not).
"They also exposed the people running the shelters' belief in satanic ritual abuse" Stupid, but thaty doesn't say there wasn't bias.
Although I disagree with the main premise of these women (most men are by nature violent), I think they have a right to assert themselves and they should be listened to with sincere empathy. If some woman is constantly harassed (or worse) by men and finds it more comfortable to hang around women, who the fuck am I as a white able male to tell her that her suspicions about men are invalid?
Someone with access to statistics that show that a small number of men rape? Seriously don't be afraid to call people on their bullshit. Watch the full documentary. The people running the womens shelters actually believe in satanic ritual abuse, something I thought was limited to insane evangelical christians in the 80s.
@ConscientiousMind Why should they be listended to with empathy? If got mugged a gang of black people, and went around saying all black people are muggers would you listen to me with empathy? You would rightly ignore me. In fact you are just acting on the impulse to show sympathy. empathy for someone just because they are female. These feminists are hateful hysterical cunts, I have no sympathy for most of them.
Crazy Feminazi logic: In order to prevent men from being oppressive against women, women must use oppression against men. Therefore nothing is solved because the responsibility of violence is just shifted from one party to the other, and the cycle of oppression continues.
Like what the fuck??? Seriously how could you listen to these individuals without having a complete WHAT THE FUCK moment. Really, anything they are talking about in this video exists only in their own scary minds.
2 (2) There is a feminist party since 2005/2006 - F! (only around 0,5% in the elections) and our left party is both socialist and feminist. Maybe the documentary had some merits in showing problematic events, rhetoric and theories used by some groups, but it was hardly about mainstream feminism. And feminism is also evolving. In Sweden today it seems to be more influenced by an intersectional perspectiv and queer feminism.
1(2) The documentary is from 2005 and it was somewhat tendentious. A lot have changed in Sweden, the right wing took power in 2006. The bourgeois alliance is now working hard to dismantle our welfare system. Due to this it seems like the feminist issues have come in the background. Some say this documentary was the beginning of a feminist backlash. Hard to say if that is true.
@clockworkorange1986 I saw this documentary when it first aired (swedish state TV) and of course it's a small minority. I even read a book once called "Anarkafeminism" that basically held these very same ideals. Although i would say critique against feminism is a taboo overhere, these groups are indeed minorities. And the reason more men are injured in workplaces, well its more men in the Volvo/Saab factories and heavy industry, just like underpaid nurses are women.
Ha. With this ideology, there will be an actual war between men and women.
Testosterone does make us more likely to be aggressive. I do not think this is bad. Our species has benefited due to the defense mechanisms of men and women. They hate my biology. They then hate all human life because it takes us both to procreate.
@brownie1982ad Yea, that sounds about right. Women and men both agree that they would rather work with men than women simply because it is much easier.
It's truly shocking just how ignorant these ladies are, pushing their hate on an entire gender and dolling it all up to make us believe that their hate is justified.
Firstly, the term feminist has no exact meaning. Secondly, when I lived in San Francisco I attended school with quite a few women exactly like the two young ladies in the video. I found that a good portion of the women, the ones I'd consider feminists didn't like these women as all, and felt their tactics to be counter-productive for the most part, which it is. Then several of my best friends who were lesbians didn't like these ladies either, and felt they needed lots of therapy.
Approximately 1:10-1:20 is quoting The SCUM Manifesto by Valerie Solanas which can be found online in its entirety for free. It's actually much worse than what was shown in this vid. It would be very disturbing to me if such a manifesto ever became mainstream.
"Research has shown that men use violence to maintain their position of power over women" so they needed research to find that out? lol but really its not like women use their vagina's, constant threats, nagging, shaming language and other coercive, manipulative tactics to maintain their control over men. no no, lets ignore all that Gunilla Nordenfors
@suchafool990 Of course they need research, their is a whole field called gender studies that spits out insanity after insanity. Their very jobs depends on continuos humbug research.
The same type of feminism swept America in the 70s, but from what my granny says of the time (and how she was treated even by hippies) I can't say I blame feminists for getting crazy like that. But I thought Sweden was better than that (and so no reason for this kind of feminism).
But this could be fringe feminism deceitfully shown as mainstream, too. People do that in the States, too.
Are other types of fungible thinking (eg, "all Jews") common in Sweden?
@JaneCochran This documentary is about extremist feminists. As always there are seldom very few extremists of any kind. As of lately the rational feminism has been adopted by society as a whole as a given but there are sadly still extremist feminists in high position in academia and women shelters for example.
@lordmetroid Feminsm is just wrong. Even the more moderate feminism is wrong on the theoretical level. Society is not a binary of two diffrent genders against each other. Upper class males and females work with each other against the middle/lower classes. Upper class males will grant upper class females privileges against the rest of society, and the upper class females will use them.
Though this whole subject is very nuanced and full of misconceptions, and I have to applaud mr1001nights for the work he has done on this. But the way I see it, anyone who thinks that the problem is "this group", especially when the group was born into that category, has no credibility whatsoever, and it would be bad enough if people just thought like this but no,they have to get together in massive groups and petition the government. Why should I feel bad for someone who acts like a total POS?
A militant Salvation Army is something also not to be desired. A 'militant' anything really. But such examples are hardly the rule in judging charitable organizations as a whole.
Interesting docu.
Expanding my comments from your last video, and quoting from the article you showed in the current video "The common denominator for all these is that most workers are men." Why would that be? Evil feminist conspiracy? Women barred due to gender discrimination (overt as well as subversive) perhaps?
@policechaser Yes, anyone who dares to criticize these loons is a Rush listener. Brilliant response. You're incapable of realizing you're no more thoughtful than the typical Fox viewer and just as incapable of thinking for yourself. But whatever. Keep spouting whatever nonsense you've been spoonfed and blindly accept- all men are evil. LOL!
I guess the word "feminazi" exists for a reason
freeutuber1 1 week ago 3
I wonder where these women got their views from; direct personal experience, or simply living in a misandric echo-chamber?
bennyboy133 2 weeks ago
@bennyboy133 living in a misandric echo-chamber, that is, living in Sweden. A more misandric country would be very difficlut to find. A feminist uthopia.
XxOZONEPARKxX 2 weeks ago
@bennyboy133 They got their views from Radical Feminist theory. For example, in one of the later parts of the documentary, it is revealed that the ROKS organisation's "course material" contains direct quotes from Valerie Solanas' SCUM manifesto (society for cutting up men) which calls for the total extermination of all men.
amido7 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Read the book "The Male in Crisis" by Karl Bednarik. Although written in 1968, it predicts the inevitable destruction of Western society due to the commercialization of sexuality and the breakdown of the traditional male role. It is very depressing to read, but in the last chapter of the book Bednarik provides a solution the problems American civilization has created (if we want to avoid a social catastrophe).
MsDatona 2 weeks ago
What...the..fuck...was that? Seriously I hope that movement is not taking over sweden. They basically want to do to men what happened historically to women in certain parts of the world. I can't describe how sick I felt watching this.
fredguy2 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from mr1001nights
Men are women are equal, but nature, broadly speaking, gave them different roles. Men are creators and destroyers. Women are balancers and nuturers. Without women men tend to destroy. Wtih women men tend to create. It's biological. Feminism exists because now men afford too many artificial privildeges to women and lower standards in some areas so they can participate. So the B Teams replace the A Teams in many situations, hence the decline of the West. So easy to see this.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
@directorcj75 You couldn't have come up with a dafter explanation than that. Men are creators and destroyers? Without women men tend to destroy? This completely silly.
orion00 3 weeks ago
@orion00 Look to the past, when men were far more dominant as a sex. Things were far more unstable and destructive. Men and women are both the wings of the one bird. Men can comfortably live in a cardboard box. It's the woman who demands the stability of a proper home. Men are then the ones to build it. I live and work a lot in 3rd World countries where men are very dominant. They are totally lazy. They need nagging women to make them create. In the West, Dyke women are now destructive.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
@directorcj75 Once again I have to call your bs. Co-relation doesn't imply causation which is one of the core rules which shape a good argument. Societies evolve not because of who runs but because things which don't evolve usually die out. The past was no more unstable or destructive than the present (unless you pick and choose times of war) and men have never been without women in order to test your hypothesis with history .. cont
orion00 3 weeks ago
@orion00 I wonder why you need to insult rather than discuss. Are you to a butch dyke type fo feminist that you feel a need to do this? Of course the past was more destructive ie Dark Ages, Black Death, Crusades, Napoleonic wars, Franco-Prussian War, WW1, WW2 etc - plus conflicts in Asia. Men have never been without women, but women had less say and no vote. Now they have too much to say due to too many regulations, so things have gone the other way and men 's creativity is shackled.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
@directorcj75 I've lived in a 3rd world country for half my life and now I live in the west and your characterizations of both societies is stereotypical at best. The man in my country of birth were no less hardworking than men where I live now. Both places have their good and bad so again your entire argument is rubbish.
orion00 3 weeks ago
@orion00 When looking at the big picture one has to generalise. And the point about generalisations is that they are generally true. People and societies do fit into sterotypical categories. I don't know your country of birth, but I am very widely travelled in 3rd World countries and have lived in many. Anyone who is will say that generally the men are lazy and the women do the unskilled work. Visit any building site and see for yourself. I'm too old and experienced to talk rubbish.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
@directorcj75 "When looking at the big picture one has to generalise." - Sorry but this is just plain wrong. This is the kind of thinking that leads to racism. Especially when one uses anecdotal evidence and assumes it's true for everyone else. Laziness isn't gender specific, it's a type of personality. I've visited building sites, road construction sites and seen men, women and even children working hard. Being old and talking rubbish are not mutually exclusive.
orion00 3 weeks ago
@orion00 Generalising about big picture situations doesn't lead to racisim at all. Insurance companies do it all the time to make accurate predicitions, ie women tend to live longer than men, people live longer in Japan than in India etc. Laziness is genger specific in Asia because Asian countries is patriarchal and male children tend to be spoilled and favoured from birth, which makes them bone lazy when they grow up. I know because I employ so many. I agree with your last point.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
@directorcj75 Generalizing does lead to racism. Anti-Semitic generalizations are what allowed Hitler to carry out genocide, it's the reason why Sikhs were attacked in the aftermath of 9/11 before of their attire etc. Life expectancy has more basis in fact since it relies on empirical study and hard data. Can you show me empirical data supporting the fact that laziness is gender specific? ... cont
orion00 3 weeks ago
@orion00 ...cont I've worked and lived with many hardworking men from third world nations, so what makes your anecdotal evidence more relevant than mine?
orion00 3 weeks ago
@orion00 In Singapore airport returning home to Saigon from India so no time to debate now. However, I will say that generalisms can be misused, as can specifice statistics (which can also tell one anything as politicians know). My empirical data for laziiness IN 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES being gender specific is my years of experience in working in these countries. In the West it's not gender specific. In fact, my argument is that in Western society it's the other way around these days.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
@directorcj75 I'd go a step further and say generalizations are of no use and do more harm than good. In fact, ironically, it's a lazy way to organize one's thoughts. Personal experience falls under anecdotal evidence and not empirical evidence. Anecdotal evidence is never reliable and is the reason why mainstream science and scientific studies shun it or try to avoid it as much as possible.
orion00 2 weeks ago
My only fear is that feminism will destroy western society (via low birth-rates, fewer kids raised with both parents, etc.) before natural selection destroys feminism. In which case we'll be left with many vicious, uncivilized and truly patriachal societies that actually exercise violence against women. And not in the metaphorical sense of the word that so many feminist academics like to use.
Modern feminism requires gov't as a tool to sustain its existence. It's a gov't financed bubble.
dick391 3 weeks ago
@dick391 Feminism has already destroyed Western society. The pendulum has swung too far in favour of women. They are given too many advantages and privileges over men. Men and women are equal, but each tends to be better suited to different roles. Now females, by being given too many soft options, fill too many roles they are less suited to, such as in the military. This means Western countries are now presenting the B Teams, not their A Teams in many situations, hence the decline.
directorcj75 3 weeks ago
Well the one positive take-away here is that most of those women are unlikely to pass their genes onto the next generation. At least not in the same numbers as non-feminists. Over time they gradually "select" themselves out of the gene pool.
Modern feminism is an anomaly in the grand scheme of things. It's only in the past thirty years or so that it has achieved the prominence it has (and only in one part of the world basically). Give it another generation or two and will be gone.
dick391 3 weeks ago
@dick391
That sounds optimistic. Do you believe the political influences will die along with those who don't procreate? (and remember they have the option of sperm banks)
goldsak 2 weeks ago
@goldsak Even with the option of sperm banks, feminist women have fewer kids than non-feminist women. This is not a theoretical; feminists have had access to sperm banks for quite some time. As non-feminists have more children, the ratio of feminists to non-feminists declines. Simple math
You're right, political influence is a different story. Most likely, feminist influence will significantly weaken Western society. As Western civilizt'n declines, so too will feminism's place in world
dick391 2 weeks ago
@dick391 I'm interested in what the birth rates are... Do you have some refs?
goldsak 2 weeks ago
@goldsak Sorry, I have no statistical evidence to offer. Other than the fact that the countries with the lowest birth-rates worldwide also appear to be the most feminist (Western Europe, Canada, U.S., Australia). Also, Gen X’ers and Boomers are more feminist than previous generations and also have fewer children.
Logically speaking; however, it should be pretty easy to see that feminist women make different choices than non-feminists. And those choices ultimately lead to fewer kids.
dick391 2 weeks ago
I must be one of the rare exceptions. I've never used physical violence against a woman or threatened her, yet every women I've dated has slapped me and thrown things at me when she was upset. Every lesbian couple I've known have engaged in violence toward one another. This is anecdotal, of course. My experiences may be unique.
TheForwardGaze 3 weeks ago
@TheForwardGaze You might have more company than you think. Recent psychological studies in the West have suggested that women are instigators in at least half of the reported domestic violence cases. Problem is that society has labelled a man weak for getting assaulted by a woman and a lot of incidents such as these are unreported or not taken seriously. It's probably different in other countries where laws don't protect women and they are subject to abuse.
orion00 3 weeks ago
@TheForwardGaze
The rub is in how what is actually meant by the word 'violence'. Some feminist theory is very loose with language and violence can encapsulate all kinds of things that people would not ordinarily associate with physical violence. One example is the idea of the Male Gaze, where the act of looking lustfully at a female is talked of as an act of violence towards women (because it 'objectifies' them)
goldsak 2 weeks ago
Here is what I have gathered so far about the feminist's conception of the world: "All sex is rape. All men are violent. Women good. Men bad. Men use violence and manipulation to control women. Women would never do the same. Men are callous. Of course, there are exceptions, but you shouldn't let that get in the way of assuming that each individual man is a monster who wants to rape you, beat you, and ultimately sell your body to aliens from outer space who want it for research." Sounds legit.
lamborger 3 weeks ago
@lamborger True feminism is supposed to be equal rights for both sexes; however, it has lost it's way in favour of just one. Not all those who espouse feminism think that way. My fiance` is feminist and supports men's rights as much as I do. I guess I mean to say that not all feminists fall into that category.
orion00 3 weeks ago
So "more dead women, please" is the gist of this video?
weejockpoopongmcplop 4 weeks ago
@weejockpoopongmcplop
Careful gentlemen, don't feed the feminist troll. She lives off of compensational confrontation (from the safety of the net!).
5468764654 4 weeks ago
@5468764654 I may be a troll but I'm no female. It's not my fault the original poster made such a pathetic video that I felt compelled to belittle it within 20 seconds.
weejockpoopongmcplop 3 weeks ago
@weejockpoopongmcplop
The domestic violence expert that you are, how do you feel about the vast majority of western men claiming to have been physically assaulted by the majority of their counterparts in relationships, yet the vast overwhelming majority of domestic violence charges are targeted at men? I'm sure you have some contrived feminist doctrine of denial regarding this.
5468764654 3 weeks ago
@5468764654 I sure do. My "feminist doctrine" is: getting a plate thrown at you because you fucked your girlfriend's sister probably doesn't fall into the same degree of severity as beating your wife black and blue.
Now THAT'S trolling.
weejockpoopongmcplop 3 weeks ago
@weejockpoopongmcplop
You sound INSANE.
5468764654 2 weeks ago
Ideological fanatics! Androphobic "feminism" based upon stereotypical thinking. Some of the respondents suggested "anti-capitalism" as a substitute ideological stereotype. Can't any of these people step outside of stereotypical "-isms" thinking? People who want the seeming certainty of stereotypical thinking are seldom satisfied or happy.
B2Charmed 4 weeks ago
sexy man O_O
SanguineBullet667 4 weeks ago
Don't these women realize that they wouldn't have existed without the sperm cell that comes out of a male. Wtf !!!
moh459 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ufee
You made many claims and you can't explain them without recurring to conspiratory mindset of : A happens, also does B, therefore A happens because of B. Sorry but it breaches all rules of logic. You draw the same comaprison over and over again, one that has no logical sequence or empiric evidence. If you're gonna give me this recycled BS over and over again, lets both stop wasting each other's time. You don't want to answer me, and i am tired of the mantra you keep repeating.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
Some stupid assholes in that video.
grungeface87 1 month ago
Your presentation of the political power of feminism in Swedish politics is very exaggerated. There is absolutely no feministic political power in sweden. If you don't believe me, just look at the election statistics of the swedish feminist party - FI.
sam91004 1 month ago
@sam91004 No the feminist groups do have a disportionate influence on society. Political influence is more than just poltical parties, lobby group have a lot of influence is western societies.
People tend to show more care and concern for woman. So when they form a group that is hysterical, and narcissisticly self interested in their own issues, they take advantage of the white knight, good will factor of men.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
The reason men die in workplaces while women don't is because males are expected to do hard work, and women are deemed to weak, i.e. patriarchy
GodOfTheInternets 1 month ago
@GodOfTheInternets For certain jobs we (correctly and objectively) deem women weaker but also more attractive for others (fashion retail, strippers etc). You could just as easily call that matriarchy. From now on, every time someone claims we live in a patriarchy, I will, for shits and giggles, say "no, we live a matriarchy". You have just as much evidence
mr1001nights 1 month ago 4
Comment removed
DimmedDiamond 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mr1001nights You DON'T "correctly" discriminate African Americans for employment because of the built in stereotypes that they are lazy compared to whites. You DON'T discriminate on sex, color, what have you. You judge by merit, and skill.
DimmedDiamond 1 month ago
@mr1001nights Isn't the patriarchy evident by the over-representation of males in political and corporate authority?
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee
How about a more simple explanation, THEY WORKED FOR IT.
Why not have people of merit regardless of gender, what is your fucking fixation with statistical equality?
Why is it so important to have a certain percentage of XX or XY on any given situation?
You are parrot that repeats empty words, use your fucking head for a change.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 What do you know about my fixations? Where did I talk about statistical equality? I was clearly talking about statistical represention. How is that irrelevant? If you had a nation that was in the realm of 90% black and all the leaders were white, would that not be a blatant indicator of something being wrong with the society or system that appoints leaders?
The case with female representation is only slightly less absurd.
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee You haven't formulated a case for statistical fixation, and you inadvertedly try to put the question on me. Having been you that made the extraordinary claim regarding aptriarchy and female represetantion it is you that needs a adequate explanation.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee "If you had a nation that was in the realm of 90% black and all the leaders were white, would that not be a blatant indicator of something being wrong with the society or system that appoints leaders?"
-That is absolulty fallacious BS, Trying to mix racism and sex is quackery, trying to present them as similar without explaining context or reason. its not a indication of anything and its a horrible analogy to feminist problem. Absurdity is exactly what you seem to fixate on.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 So the fact that men openly dominate decision making positions in society is not an indicator that men dominate decision making positions in society?
You can look at the house of congress, 362 men and 76 women, completely off the charts in proportion to the number of women (51%) and consider that it remains roughly the same after every election (you never see a male dominated congress swing to a female dominated, unlike with the two political parties). No implications?
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee
you never see a male dominated congress swing to a female dominated, unlike with the two political parties.
You paint the picture as tought there is no female voters or that they are forced to cast their vote on males.
So that is about as logical as saying "England comsumes allot of tea, it also as a high amount of obese people, therefore tea causes obesity".
It is also itneresting that those male patriachs seem so keen on cathering to feminine interest, abortion, divorce, etc
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 They can vote for whomever they want, but there are less female candidates, and if you talk to people, there are irrational superstitions, even among women, about women's abilities. I have talked to women who say they would not vote for a woman because they are "too emotional". This is a cultural phenomenon.
ufee 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ufee Why is there less females candidates? ahve you ever stopped to think they might actually not be as interested in political roles?
Very little to no men are baby-sitters, does this mean they are being kept from being baby-sitters or just lack of interest?
"I have talked to women who say they would not vote for a woman because they are "too emotional". This is a cultural phenomenon."
-Thats the subjective opion of a individual, there are been female presidents so your point is mute
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee Again explain why in such traditional and backwards country, where women are indeed treated unequaly like India, has a female president?
Was she not emotional enough? Was also Margeret Tatcher a undercover male in skirt and make-up?
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee Also explain me why in a patriarchical society males of the 18 to 30 age group are the favoured section of population to die a violent death for their country?
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 I'm talking about conscription to army of course.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee
"You can look at the house of congress"
Then again you need to give explanation, in what way does female politicans difer from male ones? Why does a different set of genitalia impart into politics, economy or social problems?
See you say you're not fixated with statistics yet you quote statistics again, lulz, you must be trolling me fo' sure.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 It's not just statistics, it's a repeated phenomenon that the proportion of women remains low election after election.
Would you look at a culture of bacteria in a petri-dish, notice that there are consistently less bacteria near a particular mold, and then claim that absolutely nothing is happening, there is no cause, no explanation?
When statistics are extreme and consistent, to discard them is anti-intellectual.
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee
You are comparing bacteria to people? seriously? I still prefer your comparison with racism, at least that is more efficient in stiring up hatred in the audience to side with the cause.
"... to discard them is anti-intellectual."
-The problem si not statistics, its yours and other peoples subjective itnerpretation of what is just statistics. What truly is anti-intelectual si subjective itnerpretation of generic information and pass it as objective. Yo uare clueless again.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 I'm not comparing bacteria to people, I'm comparing your irrational discard of data to something more generic, where your anti-rationality would be very clear and apparent.
You can not look at a repeated phenomenon like this and claim there is no cause. You can not look at a blue sky and claim that, despite my eyes being bombarded by blue, there is nothing to investigate about the air's ability to shift light into the blue spectrum.
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee But you are not investiganting anything, don't give me that BS, you are jumping to conclusions, thats the oposite of investigation. You already made the illogical jump to a conclusion without thinking twice, thats called prejudiced thinking in correct english, in vulgar english its called bullshitting people.
Oh i guess now i'm a lair since i came back. i couldn't let this one go, it was so fucking ridiculous.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee
You made many claims and you can't explain them without recurring to conspiratory mindset of : A happens, also does B, therefore A happens because of B. Sorry but it breaches all rules of logic. You draw the same comaprison over and over again, one that has no logical sequence or empiric evidence. If you're gonna give me this recycled BS over and over again, lets both stop wasting each other's time. You don't want to answer me, and i am tired of the mantra you keep repeating.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee This will be my last comment on you, google "cum hoc ergo propter hoc".
It might explain more clearly the problem with your line of thinking.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 Providing evidence that a phenomenon exists is not a post-hoc.
Saying "The global economy crashed while men were dominating politics, therefore men being in power is likely why the global economy crashed" is a fallacy.
Saying "There's evidence that men run the world because they sit in positions of power that run the world, with a dominant 80% share" is not a fallacy.
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee Lets imagine that a country that was 90% muslim was "ruled" by a minority of 10% Hindu, what the freaking hell could you draw from this? tha there is a Hindu conspirancy to put down muslims?
See i can produce insane analogies too. No big deal.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ufee Lets imagine that a country that was 90% muslim was "ruled" by a minority of 10% Hindu, what the freaking hell could you draw from this? tha there is a Hindu conspirancy to put down muslims?
See i can produce insane analogies too. No big deal.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 And who is the libertarian-minded individual who googles for videos he agrees with and then vulgarly insults the author of any contrarian comment?
You call me the parrot while you're looking for a chior to tune into.
ufee 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ufee
I didn't insult you, not until i saw your comment back, want offensive? then read your disgusting comaprison of race with gender agenda so typical of feminism.
"And who is the libertarian-minded individual who googles for videos he agrees with and then vulgarly insults the author of any contrarian comment?"
-Nice touch troll you have moved away from crap arguments to take a cheap shot at me. Please do continue.
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee I mean you gotta love the analogy and the implications of it too! somehow you forget that there is roughly half of the population that is female and of that half a portion voted for said males to take power of government. they don't seem bothered by the politicians genitalia.
India as a female president yet they have a cast system that is very brutal to both males and females of lesser roles in society, so, tell exactly how this says anything about patriarchy?
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@ufee What about Margaret Tatcher? Was she secretly a male too?
Nebelung13 1 month ago
@Nebelung13 She got there, but the odds are stacked against women. Considering the following four prime ministers were male, evidence seems to favor the idea that women are less likely to hold positions of power.
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee It's the way capitalism is structured. You lack class analysis and only seem to be concerned with giving women equal opportunity to exploit/control the working class from a position of, as you said, socioeconomic or political authority. Identity politics have no place in the broader socialist tradition. If Hillary Clinton won in lieu of Obama nothing would be different. Maybe a few liberal women would feel empowered but I could care less about upper middle class women gaining power.
crud4 1 month ago
@crud4 I think that's a good criticism. The wider point to be made, which I did not make, is that the population is simply not properly represented in our political system. If they were, it would be comprised of low income individuals, it would have a significant amount of homosexuals, atheists, and so on. I think if you look at the power system, there is evidence of patriarchy, but even stronger evidence of plutocracy. These two descriptions are not mutually exclusive.
ufee 1 month ago
@ufee Capitalism and even representative "democracy" in any system that creates concentrated wealth can never achieve equal political representation let alone social equality. The abolition of hierarchical political and economic structures should be the goal not fighting for women, people of color or gay people to have the chance to climb the hierarchy in order to place themselves in an advantageous position over others. Too many people within the socialist tradition forget that.
crud4 1 month ago
@crud4 And yes I'm a white male but I don't see much privilege in being such. I'd be tempted to chew any feminist out who calls me privileged as I crawl into bed after work with dirty callused hands, sore knees/back and so tiered I can hardly sleep only to wake up the next morning to start it all over again. This isnt to say most large capitalists in America aren't white males but that has fuck all to do with me.I'm not a fan of them either.
crud4 1 month ago
@mr1001nights i think the free market creates this illusion of gender roles. we both (male and females) have the capacity to do the others' jobs. what kind of jobs is the problem. art should be fun and expressive as well as artisan crafts. the harder labor can been done by both genders and males having more testosterone driven brains will compel them to do the latter; and females will chose the more "nesting" style jobs. i believe in equality and freedom of choice. we're just different
gonzopoet00 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
DimmedDiamond 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GodOfTheInternets "The common denominator for all these is that most workers are men." A quote from the article linked. Why would that be? Evil feminist conspiracy? Women barred due to gender discrimination (overt as well as subversive) perhaps?
DimmedDiamond 1 month ago
@GodOfTheInternets 1 + 1 = 4! cause I said so!.
Woman can't do some of the jobs men do. (Unless more woman started taking male growth hormones.) Look up the term apex fallacy.
Only a feminist could use an example of female privilege, as an example of patriarchy.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
@GodOfTheInternets Come to work with me for one week and lift 200 lbs all day whilst crawling, climbing, bending and stooping with 75 lb tool bags tied around your hips with some boss/supervisor driving you to work faster and harder beyond the breaking point every day for 8 to 12 hours 5 days a week, sometimes 7 days a week year round for 30 years. You'll quit after one hour. If not you''l be fired for lack of production. It's capitalism and the push for profits. Now fuck off.
crud4 1 month ago
@GodOfTheInternets
Men die in the workplace because we live in a world that values the safety and lives of women over men. Men are expected to risk their lives so that women don't have to. Men are expected to generate worth through their doings while women's worth, according to society, is granter upon birth. This is no patriarchal society.
5468764654 1 month ago
@5468764654 I read that as "men are expected to generate worth through their dongs".
weejockpoopongmcplop 4 weeks ago
3:30 - many women are turned on by violence. or is that different since it's women?
CandieBarr6669 1 month ago
Hate goes both ways as can be seen from reading the comments.
redpillval 1 month ago
we are in the midst of a huge transformation - going from a patriarchal society to a matriarchal. Men are represented as a pervert, baffoon, peadophile etc etc The male is no longer needed as shown on tv. The feminazi and gay political movements have single handedly destroyed the family and us as individuals. @ 2;18 they both look like men - quite ironic since they hate men ha
your sister in arms :)
Badwolf182 1 month ago
@Badwolf182 Gay moment? Can you please leave the gay movement out of this. Gays are far more decent than feminists.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
Let these fucking bitches pay their own bills and fund their own lifestyles. You feminist cunts can eat my ass. Fuck off bitches.
ZeroToleranceMan1 1 month ago
@ZeroToleranceMan1 can u imagine if this was against blacks or immigrants - there would be an outrage. As a woman I am outraged by these comments - making men into base animals (rapists, violent thugs etc) they are bitches bcoz they are the very ppl who R destroying society
Badwolf182 1 month ago
Not in canada u say, ok look at this site,stepitupontario on the right, blue column, 2nd paragraph. male power is uphelp by rape....this site is controled by the local womens shelter, its director is erin lee todd, she gets funding by going after teen girls and telling them their fathers are violent and abusive. This is from personal experience, that is what they did to mine. took me 2 years to undo the damage. Old hags.
Shewanoh 1 month ago
ugly crazy lesbians
mariacristianamarcus 1 month ago
Woman abuse kids more than men. Woman therefore are biologically inclined to abuse kids. All woman are the same. We should take kids away from the mothers, cause of the abuseful power relationships they hold over them. Woman are a biological mistake.
(Iol turn about is fair play right?)
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
This is an example of female privilege right of the battle. Woman get indulged when they act up. So when they call for genodice against an entire gender, no one even bats an eyelid!
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
"Research has shown that men use violence bla, bla, bla...." What a bunch of grownups idiots!!! If that was true no so-called "research" would be needed; the facts would be obvious. What's very obvious is the degree of indoctrination those women have been exposed to and their inability to think for themselves. If I am oppressed I should know that. I don't need to read it in a book, magazine or research the internet to find that out, or have somebody to tell me that I've been oppressed.
crmarquet 1 month ago
watch?v=K_uRIMUBnvw <<< why do I feel like they're trying to manipulate me into some death cult? Put those men and liberal/radical feminists on an island- like that survival island TV show and watch the madness ensure. I'd give them three days before they cannibalize each other and revert back to shrinking heads and wearing dead skin masks. "and the best at murder are those who preach against it and the best at hate are those who preach love" -Bukowski- He's a feminist right? :)
crud4 1 month ago
Well, they don't call them feminazis for nothing. Consider former professor Mary Daly, who thinks the male population should be drastically cut and that females should rule over males for the sake of the planet. It's total silliness.
prajnasword 1 month ago
@prajnasword it is not silly. It is heinous, revolting.
daimyosama 1 month ago
I don't think they got the memo explaining the SCUM manifesto isn't to be taken literally.
crud4 1 month ago
@crud4 Yes it is. The it is not meant to be taken literally is an feminist excuse for it. The whole who wrote it was an abused child, who decided to blame the entire male gender for her abuse. Any Warhol showed a lot of decency by not pressing charges against her after she shot him. If I was in his shows I would hired some thugs to give her a beating.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
@brownie1982ad Warhol and his group (which included women) were pretentious assholes and I would've shot him if he treated me like some sort of "ironic joke". He's hardly a good example of masculinity anyhow. Funny thing I think he was an asshole bastard and I have one of his pieces as my pic on my profile. Did I mention he was an asshole who kinda pushed her to the brink? A bully with a supporting cast. Nothing worse. I think her book was absurd by the way.
crud4 1 month ago
@crud4 She did hold fucked up ideals though but I think the violent reaction had more to do with the way they treated her within that social sect that was the "factory people".
crud4 1 month ago
Not a pretty one in the bunch haha. I smell bitterness.
laskji 1 month ago
Within 30 years Sweden will be Islamic anyway.
So who cares a fuck!
JosLutgens 1 month ago
Not a very well regarded documentary...
niriop 1 month ago
@niriop
Yeah, is so ruffled up feathers it was banned.
ThePintsizeslasher 1 month ago
@ThePintsizeslasher Not banned, but ruled biased by the media agency
niriop 1 month ago
@niriop the biased media rules something as biased? Thats quite shocking!
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
@niriop by who? Batshit insane feminists who don't like the light of the truth shined on them?
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
@brownie1982ad No, by the neutral Swedish Broadcasting Commission in a 2006 ruling
niriop 1 month ago
@niriop
No, not neutral one comissioner was Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth, who was on the board of ROKS, an organization criticized in the documentary. And it is a well regarded documentary, it won a Gold Spade an award for investigative journalism. Evin Rubar, the driector and interviewer won a crystal award as well.
ThePintsizeslasher 1 month ago
@ThePintsizeslasher One out of how many comissioners? Not convinced; if there was bias somebody high up would have noticed.
"well regarded" The Great Global Warming Scandel is a "well-regarded" documentary by some and won several awards. But they're regarded purely by their aesthetics, and not their contents; they give the audiennce an ideological buzz, but not real facts.
niriop 1 month ago
@niriop
You place far to much faith in government. Even if they did notice the bias what makes you believe they'd do something about it?
The documentary did expose basic hateful and prejudiced ideas held by gov't officials, and one of whom stated that if Rubar were ever abused she would never be welcome in one of their womens shelters. They also exposed the people running the shelters' belief in satanic ritual abuse something I though isolated to stupid christians in the US.
ThePintsizeslasher 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThePintsizeslasher" You place far to much faith in government" Certainly not, I just feel it a valid opinion.
And what makes you feel gvt would be so intent on criticising it?
"if Rubar were ever abused she would never be welcome in one of their womens shelters" Hateful, but somewhat understandable after what Rubar has said (true or not).
"They also exposed the people running the shelters' belief in satanic ritual abuse" Stupid, but thaty doesn't say there wasn't bias.
niriop 1 month ago
Although I disagree with the main premise of these women (most men are by nature violent), I think they have a right to assert themselves and they should be listened to with sincere empathy. If some woman is constantly harassed (or worse) by men and finds it more comfortable to hang around women, who the fuck am I as a white able male to tell her that her suspicions about men are invalid?
ConscientiousMind 1 month ago
@ConscientiousMind
Someone with access to statistics that show that a small number of men rape? Seriously don't be afraid to call people on their bullshit. Watch the full documentary. The people running the womens shelters actually believe in satanic ritual abuse, something I thought was limited to insane evangelical christians in the 80s.
ThePintsizeslasher 1 month ago
@ConscientiousMind Why should they be listended to with empathy? If got mugged a gang of black people, and went around saying all black people are muggers would you listen to me with empathy? You would rightly ignore me. In fact you are just acting on the impulse to show sympathy. empathy for someone just because they are female. These feminists are hateful hysterical cunts, I have no sympathy for most of them.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago 9
hay mang u should look up these videos i saw about a group called ACORN, u won't believe what they found!!!!
jxhensley 1 month ago
Crazy Feminazi logic: In order to prevent men from being oppressive against women, women must use oppression against men. Therefore nothing is solved because the responsibility of violence is just shifted from one party to the other, and the cycle of oppression continues.
epsilon8998 1 month ago
Like what the fuck??? Seriously how could you listen to these individuals without having a complete WHAT THE FUCK moment. Really, anything they are talking about in this video exists only in their own scary minds.
NudistInTheRye 1 month ago
Y U NO LIKE COCKS? o//
greenhell666 1 month ago
Surely these women's feminism isn't representative of feminism in general.
TheLalternative 1 month ago
@TheLalternative NAFALT
amido7 1 month ago
@TheLalternative You must be living on another planet. This feminism is what influences most laws in many countries now, including the US.
heg215 1 month ago
@TheLalternative Certainky not, they are but a small minority.
lordmetroid 1 month ago
See also; the Swedish Islamist nightmare aka pat Condell's channel
gratex 1 month ago
I am a walking dildo looking for a fleshlight LOL
zhohaq 1 month ago 6
@zhohaq LOL
suchafool990 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2 (2) There is a feminist party since 2005/2006 - F! (only around 0,5% in the elections) and our left party is both socialist and feminist. Maybe the documentary had some merits in showing problematic events, rhetoric and theories used by some groups, but it was hardly about mainstream feminism. And feminism is also evolving. In Sweden today it seems to be more influenced by an intersectional perspectiv and queer feminism.
xulfx 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1(2) The documentary is from 2005 and it was somewhat tendentious. A lot have changed in Sweden, the right wing took power in 2006. The bourgeois alliance is now working hard to dismantle our welfare system. Due to this it seems like the feminist issues have come in the background. Some say this documentary was the beginning of a feminist backlash. Hard to say if that is true.
xulfx 1 month ago
Cool reactionary panic film bro
jxhensley 1 month ago
Comment removed
xulfx 1 month ago
Comment removed
xulfx 1 month ago
Wowwwwwwww. but this is a small minority in Sweden, yes? I sure hope so.......
clockworkorange1986 1 month ago
@clockworkorange1986 I saw this documentary when it first aired (swedish state TV) and of course it's a small minority. I even read a book once called "Anarkafeminism" that basically held these very same ideals. Although i would say critique against feminism is a taboo overhere, these groups are indeed minorities. And the reason more men are injured in workplaces, well its more men in the Volvo/Saab factories and heavy industry, just like underpaid nurses are women.
MENJAGVETJUINTE 1 month ago
Ha. With this ideology, there will be an actual war between men and women.
Testosterone does make us more likely to be aggressive. I do not think this is bad. Our species has benefited due to the defense mechanisms of men and women. They hate my biology. They then hate all human life because it takes us both to procreate.
How cute their idiocy is. How cute.
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound Woman are more verbally aggressive than men. Woman are more likely to see other woman as rivals and hate on them.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
@brownie1982ad Yea, that sounds about right. Women and men both agree that they would rather work with men than women simply because it is much easier.
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
It's truly shocking just how ignorant these ladies are, pushing their hate on an entire gender and dolling it all up to make us believe that their hate is justified.
DoItYouWont100 1 month ago
Comment removed
suchafool990 1 month ago
Hey, maybe they're on to something, Scandinavia is the best place to live.
DeePhlat 1 month ago
Firstly, the term feminist has no exact meaning. Secondly, when I lived in San Francisco I attended school with quite a few women exactly like the two young ladies in the video. I found that a good portion of the women, the ones I'd consider feminists didn't like these women as all, and felt their tactics to be counter-productive for the most part, which it is. Then several of my best friends who were lesbians didn't like these ladies either, and felt they needed lots of therapy.
kropotkinbeard1 1 month ago
Approximately 1:10-1:20 is quoting The SCUM Manifesto by Valerie Solanas which can be found online in its entirety for free. It's actually much worse than what was shown in this vid. It would be very disturbing to me if such a manifesto ever became mainstream.
JaneCochran 1 month ago
"Research has shown that men use violence to maintain their position of power over women" so they needed research to find that out? lol but really its not like women use their vagina's, constant threats, nagging, shaming language and other coercive, manipulative tactics to maintain their control over men. no no, lets ignore all that Gunilla Nordenfors
suchafool990 1 month ago 3
@suchafool990 Of course they need research, their is a whole field called gender studies that spits out insanity after insanity. Their very jobs depends on continuos humbug research.
lordmetroid 1 month ago
@suchafool990 Woman use violence too don't forget.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
@suchafool990 women uses violence too.
daimyosama 1 month ago
Why is this happening?
The same type of feminism swept America in the 70s, but from what my granny says of the time (and how she was treated even by hippies) I can't say I blame feminists for getting crazy like that. But I thought Sweden was better than that (and so no reason for this kind of feminism).
But this could be fringe feminism deceitfully shown as mainstream, too. People do that in the States, too.
Are other types of fungible thinking (eg, "all Jews") common in Sweden?
JaneCochran 1 month ago
@JaneCochran This documentary is about extremist feminists. As always there are seldom very few extremists of any kind. As of lately the rational feminism has been adopted by society as a whole as a given but there are sadly still extremist feminists in high position in academia and women shelters for example.
lordmetroid 1 month ago
@lordmetroid Feminsm is just wrong. Even the more moderate feminism is wrong on the theoretical level. Society is not a binary of two diffrent genders against each other. Upper class males and females work with each other against the middle/lower classes. Upper class males will grant upper class females privileges against the rest of society, and the upper class females will use them.
brownie1982ad 1 month ago
Though this whole subject is very nuanced and full of misconceptions, and I have to applaud mr1001nights for the work he has done on this. But the way I see it, anyone who thinks that the problem is "this group", especially when the group was born into that category, has no credibility whatsoever, and it would be bad enough if people just thought like this but no,they have to get together in massive groups and petition the government. Why should I feel bad for someone who acts like a total POS?
ryinski2 1 month ago
Hysterical!
anarchore 1 month ago
A militant Salvation Army is something also not to be desired. A 'militant' anything really. But such examples are hardly the rule in judging charitable organizations as a whole.
Interesting docu.
Expanding my comments from your last video, and quoting from the article you showed in the current video "The common denominator for all these is that most workers are men." Why would that be? Evil feminist conspiracy? Women barred due to gender discrimination (overt as well as subversive) perhaps?
DimmedDiamond 1 month ago
@DimmedDiamond In any case, more regulation, education, and resources are needed in assuring a safe working environment, for all workers.
DimmedDiamond 1 month ago
lololol poor sweden : )
LasagnaIsGood 1 month ago
This is fucked up lol
darthrevan6 1 month ago
These women are mentally ill. Feminism has driven them mad.
ar4216 1 month ago
@ar4216
Id be more tempted to say that their mental issues have been expressed through ultra-feminism
darthrevan6 1 month ago
@ar4216 Is that you, Rush?
:-)
policechaser 1 month ago
@policechaser Yes, anyone who dares to criticize these loons is a Rush listener. Brilliant response. You're incapable of realizing you're no more thoughtful than the typical Fox viewer and just as incapable of thinking for yourself. But whatever. Keep spouting whatever nonsense you've been spoonfed and blindly accept- all men are evil. LOL!
ar4216 1 month ago
Comment removed
policechaser 1 month ago