"Um, yeah. They did take scorn. That;s what happens when you criticize a belief. People will respond to it... so...?"
Thank you for helping my case. They speak out about the discrimination feminism caused and try to balance male and female issues and they are then scorned and kicked out.
They are now proud members of anti-feminist human issues groups.
They're not anti-feminist JUST for those reasons. You can't just highlight everything that fits your views and forget the rest. Liberal feminism, for example.
It doesn't work that way. There are women's studies departments that are all-encompassing, anti-sexist, and anti-discriminatory. You can't just lump together two completely different types of feminism in one word. It's misleading.
Conservatism does not equal Nazism. That's a retarded generalization.
"They're not anti-feminist just for those reasons"
Yes. They are. I have seen the ridicule they take when they speak of domestic violence and rape statistics (the real ones). That is the only reason they are scorned.
It didn't matter what different views they had about feminism. It was the moment they spoke of the damage feminism had done to men that they received the anti-feminist label.
An example of this is the disagreeing pro-porn and anti-porn feminists. They disagree, they insult each other, but none of them refer to the other as anti-feminists.
Any feminist group that speaks of male issues is labeled anti-feminist and they all either become humanists, MRA supporters, or Ifeminists, or IWF.
All are anti-feminist groups. MRA are the only ones who gave themselves the anti-feminist title though.
The rest were branded by current feminists. Odd much?
Sorry, maybe in the second wave. Not anymore. Don't group me into your category of so-called feminism. I am a living proof. I love people, and I am a feminist. Man or woman, doesn't matter.
Second wave, third wave, brand it whatever you like, the bigotry is the same. Any feminist that speaks out about male issues is branded an anti-feminist by the third wave "moderates" and kicked out of the movement.
I mean have you been to third wave websites?
Look at the scorn Christina Hoff Sommers or Wendy McElroy took.
"On your page it says you don't care about common feminist beliefs"
I don't.
"How the hell can you even criticize an entire movement/philosophy when you haven't even thoroughly examined it?"
Believe me, I have. So have many others. The political influential feminists created the discrimination and the "moderates" do not speak one word of protest except to people who criticize the movement.
There are no feminists advocating for a violence against people act, or to help end false rape charges.
And you're right, there is sexist discrimination against men in popular culture.
But I think if we did a meta-analysis of these television shows, we would find more weak, female characters (the "damsel in distress" archetype) than the sloppy, lazy, stupid father. And what did you say? Oh, right. Logic favours the majority.
I said if men and women really believed that those images are what men and women are supposed to be then most of the population would be that way. Turns out it is not. Because most people don't buy the BS. Logic favors the majority.
Look, VERY few credible feminist scholars will say that gender is completely socialization.
And what do you mean by "logic usually favours the majority"? That doesn't prove that femininity and masculinity are somewhat socialized. You really want to believe that social norms don't have any influence on our perception of gender? Really?
Because I think some research has been done in this feild that would prove you utterly wrong.
No, feminism doesn't say that gender socialization is the root of all problems.
And you're doing something that I've seen over and over again in an attempt to criticize feminism: you're grouping together antiquated second-wave feminism with feminism today. That's like criticizing someone for not wearing a seat belt 50 years ago.
It's the same argument I see over and over again. Making sweeping generalizations about individuals who cal themselves feminist. Feminism has incorporated a LOT of different philosophies in the third wave. What you're talking about is Radical feminism.
And sorry but you can't just call discriminatory laws "feminist" because they piss you off. That's backwards logic.
That's actually radical feminism. I recommend reading "Gendering the Vertical Mosaic" as an introduction to more theories that are inherently not anti-male. It's written by Roberta Hamilton.
It depends what you consider a feminist. A woman who "stands up" for "women's rights" can mean a WHOLE lot of different things. An organization that masquerades as a group that fights for women's rights is not necessarily a feminist one. The label "feminist" has been used by the anti-feminist movement to label every woman under the sun, from lobbyists to pro-lifers. What are you fighting against? Man-haters, or feminists?
Feminists: National Organization for Women. VAWA creators (along with Joe Biden who was beaten by his sister and taught by his parents to never defend himself when his attacker is a woman)
Feminists: Feministing. The "enlightened" third wave "moderates" Who are heavy supporters of VAWA and NOW and actively protest anything former feminists such as Sommers, McElroy, and Warren Farrel to name a few, say in support of male issues.
Now whatever "subdivision" you claim to be a part of. When I see them on T.V. and in the papers saying that men are not 99% of all rapists and majority when it comes to committing domestic violence.
When they shun such nonsense as rape culture and patriarchy and makes damn well sure that the feminists who run things know it and make damn the the public knows this then you can at least say "my subdivision of feminism is for equality"
But never say "feminism is about equality" it lost that title
Furthermore, when I see them sponsor a public service announcement depicting female domestic violence as it is nearly equal between heterosexual couples and committed way more in lesbian couples then you can tell me "your subdivision is for equality"
When I see billboards of young boys removed stating "when I grow up I will beat my family" then we can say we are allies.
When I see public service announcements of mothers, who are the prime abusers of children being spread through the media because your "moderate" group of feminists advocated for it to happen. Then you can say the radicals are the minority.
Right now all I see is men are evil and women are victims.
If radicals are the minority, what the hell are the majority doing?
That is NOT radical feminism. Radical feminism is the theory that women's problems today are a direct result of a history of patriarchy.
Why is spreading awareness against abuse patriarchy? That's not man-hate, that's spreading awareness. It's the same argument I hear as, "don't spread awareness breast cancer, that's undermining the awareness of prostate cancer."
Awareness of every social issue involving every gender should be spread in an ideal society.
If you call anti-abuse radical feminism, you have a lot of enemies. It takes more to be a radical feminist. Yes, I am aware of domestic abuse statistics. More female college students beat their boyfriends than the other way around.
Does that any organization who spreads awareness about abuse on females is anti-male? Does that really make any logical sense. No.
You still don't get it and it seems you never will as you are only programed to defend some indoctrinated view the good name of feminism.
Making the public aware of female issues is NOT the problem, however, saying that HUMAN issues are FEMALE issues by demonizing one gender and victimizing the other through propaganda is the problem.
That is what NOW, feministing, and every other main stream politically influential feminist organization has done.
Yeah, but you're saying that anti-female violence always leads to anti-male laws. And that's just not right. Anything they do in your eyes is "discriminatory" to men. Even though men tend to do more physical damage to their partners, MRAs think women's shelters are "discriminatory". This sort of rhetoric just doesn't stand up.
"you're saying anti-female violence always leads to ant-male laws"
No I am saying that feminists have tried and succeeded in the past to convince the entire western world that men were the only ones guilty of domestic violence and that the only time women committed DV was in self defense.
This was an utter lie that worked and is now part of the reason feminist organizations are being sued.
They run domestic violence shelters that shelter only women with children and deny men with children.
Look, your reasoning is that if someone fights for an "oppressed group", it doesn't really matter if that group is oppressed or not-- they will inevitably lead to oppressing another group (in this case single fathers).
And if you think FEMINISTS are responsible for creating the idea that women can't really do harm to their male partners, you are LARGELY oversimplifying things. But I don't think you want to accept that.
"Look, your reasoning is that if someone fights for an "oppressed group"
Neither men nor women are, or have ever been oppressed in the united states. And yeah, I know that any feminist would disagree with that. I already made one insane feminist zealot recant the women oppressed claim and she/he probably made every argument you are about to so go to watch?v=oMzcMATRGmE&feature=channel and view my comments to vella if you want my answers to the most likely points you are going to bring up.
"if you think feminists are responsible for creating the idea that women can't really do harm to their male partners"
I think feminists are responsible for exactly what I said they are. The suppression of real domestic violence stats, The propagation of fake domestic violence stats, and the denial of men into their shelters because they feel that only women are victims of DV.
And this is the problem. Again, you're grouping whatever is bad-- faulty science with something you have a personal bias against, feminists.
Therefore, bad science=feminism.
Is that a logical argument to you? Would it be fair to cherry pick every pro-Democrat website that has faulty science and from that conclude that, "DEMOCRATS LIE"? No.
"And this is the problem. Again, you're grouping whatever is bad--faulty science with something you have a personal bias against, feminists."
No. The problem is that even when facts like the ones I stated in my comment are proven, those that do not want to except those proven facts try to find reasons as to why they are irrelevant.
Your "bad science" are false statistics created by feminists.
The proof of men with children being denied entry is in the lawsuits.
The mandate of the FEMINIST employees of the FEMINIST shelter having to believe that domestic violence victims are only women is on (or was on I don't know if they removed it since they lost the case) the FRONT PAGE of the FEMINIST (not democrat) website.
So again I say it matters not to me if you want to accept the truth about the movement. All that matters is that unbiased people have seen the truth and are acting upon it.
I don't have the exact quote handy but it went some bigotry filled statement that claimed only women are victims of DV.
Furthermore their hiring mandate was that any social worker that applied to work in the shelters had to take an oath and swear they believe only women are victims and men abusers.
You disagreeing with them is irrelevant. Your "subdivision" disagreeing is irrelevant.
The sad truth is if there are any feminists out there that acknowledge male issues and are against the feminists that are the voice of the movement that affects the public and the legal system, they speak not one word of protest.
I am not asking you to stop advocating for women. Just to stop turning a blind eye to the discrimination proven to be born of the feminist movement.
Bernard Chapin already explained his statement. And he also explained how he was misquoted and taken out of context.
He has also, given up on moderates. He cares not that you are insulted by his generalizations because you do nothing to help end the discrimination the ones you call radicals have created. So as I said, if you are tired of the backlash, then help out.
We have stepped up. We stepped up a long time ago.
If you don't like being generalized then handle the bigots within your movement instead of saying they are a minority. They are not minority because they control the voice of the movement.
They control the voice the public hears, therefore they are the voice.
A blog article is nice. I am talking about legal action. And I can assure there are about 40+ past articles on that site that demonize men. One I know of is the site's support of Amanda Hess's "rape culture" article.
Until there are feminists advocating for a VAPA in the government. Default joint custody (NOW has opposed this several times)
Shielding laws that keep those accused of rape out of the media as the accusers are.
Until these and many other things happen, feminism will be opposed.
"That is not radical feminism. Radical feminism is the hteory that women's problems today are a direct result of a history of patriarchy."
Go to any of the feminist organizations I mentioned, the ones with all of the public influence and look up what patriarchy means to them. They are the radicals and they are the voice of feminism.
You and all the other so called moderates are to busy wasting time trying to defend the name of the movement than attack those who tarnish it.
I didn't say it was. I said that these feminists spread one sided views for two sided issues and no one stops them accept anti-feminist human interest groups.
"That's not man hate"
Lying about statistics to paint men as the only domestic violence abusers, child abusers, and rapists isn't man hate? Then what is?
"It's the same argument"
No. You just ignore the argument and hear or read what you want.
I think you're extending any possible implicit message these organizations are trying to send. That's not "feminism's" fault. That's your own view. If you feel alienated and discriminated against, you and the rest of the anti-feminist movement should do something about it.
So far, the pay gap among graduate students still exists, maternity leave is a problem, abortion isn't accessible to many women, even here in Canada, and abuse against women happens.
If that alienates you because you're a man, let me pose the question: is there any way awareness about these issues that can be raised that WON'T leave you feeling alienated and discriminated against?
"If that alienates you because you're a man let me pose the question: is there any way awareness about these issues that can be raised that won;t leave you feeling alienated"
Yeah. Tell the damn truth about DV, rape, false rape accusations, and all the other discrimination men face.
You want to raise awareness about DV, fine. Just don't paint men as the primary and only abusers. Same with rape. Not only men.
Show both sides of the issues instead of demonizing men.
"If you feel that they're "painting men" as the abusers, if it is meaningful, it should impact people's behavior. Do you think this is the case."
It impacted people's behavior alright. It pissed off millions of men and women who knew that no gender had a monopoly on these crimes. It impacted them so much they have refuted the propaganda and policies are beginning to change.
You know who is opposing that change? Yeah you guessed it.
There are women interest groups that don't resort to lies.
There has never been, not one feminist organization that advocated for the truth about domestic violence, child abuse, and rape to be put forth in public service announcements on television, the papers, or billboards.
Instead all feminist organizations with media and political influence will paint men as the only ones who commit these crimes.
That is why your movement is losing when it is sued and it will continue unless those within stop the bigotry.
While many feminist organizations advocate that domestic violence (and indeed, the most physically damaging) happens to WOMEN, I've yet to see evidence that "men are the culprits". That's a very near-sighted view of NOW, or the many anti-violence groups started by MEN.
"and indeed the most physically damaging happens to women"
Women instigate domestic violence more than men, and men are less likely to return that violence. Because men can do more with their bare hands doesn't mean they aren't beaten half to death with blunt objects.
"That's a very near sighted view of NOW"
Have you seen the NOW advocacy against DV?
Have you seen inside a DV shelter?
A DV public service announcement?
When and where have you ever...ever...seen a woman as the culprit?
I am not sending you anything. Me jumping on a search engine and gathering facts that are easily accessible to the world at the feminist famous "prove it" line is over. That is why I make videos.
But you can look up a former feminist turned anti-feminist, Warren Farrel who disproved the (feminist) sexism claim for the wage gap.
Or you can just type in wage gap myth or something like that in google.
Or maybe, if you are up to the challenge. You can look at the pay gap and instead of just thinking sexism, you can ask yourself why there is one and why you think sexism can be the only cause.
The pay gap is a raw pay gap.
It is illegal, let me say it again, illegal to pay someone less for the same job and "time" worked because of race, religion, or sex.
Men make more than men, women more than women, men make more than women, and women more than men.
As for the same profession. A technician working at Microsoft makes less than a technician at Apple.
A simple example but you get the idea.
Just because a study shows men making more than women in some areas doesn't mean it is because men are paying women less because they are women.
Is it sexism that women make more in some areas? No.
If you want sources find them yourself. I am not hear to change your mind about something that has already been refuted. You either believe it or you don't
I am not talking about legitimate female issues I am talking about the utter ignorance of male issues and feminism's attempt at suppressing them. Or explaining them away with ridiculous theories.
And men tend to do more damage to women when DV occurs. Just to let you know.
Yes, yes, yes. DV against men is a serious problem, it needs to be talked about, and it's fucked up. Men's organizations need to do this. Feminists aren't "against" this, per se.
If you are tired of being generalized with radicals. If it pissed you and your moderates off so much then stop getting mad at those the feminist movement has harmed.
Stop protesting those who protest discrimination and get the hell out there and help them protest it instead of trying to explain away every accusation that has a factual basis.
Step up to the radicals and take your damn title of feminism back and kick them the fuck out.
Again, you're generalizing. Since you think you know what a feminist is, you've taken upon yourself to assume that I "get mad at those the feminist movement has harmed", even though you haven't really proven to me that there is harm, that the harm is caused by feminists if there is, or what feminism is according to you.
The personal is political. If I see sexism I'm pointing it out. If there are double standards, I'm against it. I'm not an exception, I'm part of the majority.
"you haven't really proven me that there is harm, that feminists caused the harm"
There is proof all throughout my arguments you just are blind to them.
When I mention to you that there are billboards out right now with young boys smiling on them with the words "when I grow up I will beat my family" beside them you shrug it off as nothing.
That is feminist propaganda and it will be stopped.
"I am part of the majority"
If you are part of the majority then the majority is lazy.
Let one public service announcement actually air depicting the truth about domestic violence and child abuse and feminists will be up in arms in protest screaming sexism this and misogyny that.
Just like they were when those DV organizations were sued.
And by the way, this is why so many women, and organizations (including COMMUNIST Cuba women's organizations) refuse to self-identify with the term "feminist". Because this is the popular conception of feminism. And it's misinformed.
It poses a threat to your value system. It's the same rhetoric against affirmative action. Anti-feminists are scared that men's rights will be curbed when women's rights are earned. Move on.
They choose not to use the word feminist because the information feminism spreads is fabricated and demonizes half the world's population and a lot of women's interest groups would rather show both sides of an issues than just the female side.
Balance. Human issues.
Feminism=one sided. And no one within is doing a damn thing about it.
"Okay, so as long as we're not using the term "feminist" we're in the clear, right?"
I don't think you missed my point but I will explain it anyway.
It doesn't matter if they call themselves feminist or wapolanazuists.
If you spread lies to garner money and support from the government and create laws that discriminate against one group in order to advance another then you will be opposed by those in that group.
"So being pro-choice and advocating it is alright with you, as long as you don't self identify with that term? Yes?"
Women can have all the choices they want, they are called civil liberties. Human rights.
Abortion is sketchy because a father may want the child but he is not carrying it. But the imbalance is placed when the father doesn't want the child but can be forced to support it.
That is not entirely the fault of feminism but I believe it is unjust.
This follows through with discrimination. A lot of MRA folks think that feminism is single-handedly responsible for introducing the idea that female DV doesn't exist. Guess what? This idea has been around a lot longer than feminism has because people tend to think that "she can't do much harm to him". It has a sexist application towards men, and it's sexist in theory towards women.
The gender stereotype that men aren't allowed to be afraid and always need to play Captain Incredible have had serious implications for the legal system, I am not denying that. But again, this has been occurring since before feminism existed. It is a fucked up stereotype, and if people think it is unjust, they should change it.
But don't peg feminism--the easiest target as the reason for this. Stereotypes are an unfortunate part of human cognitive errors.
"don't peg feminism--the easiest target as the reason for this"
I don't peg feminism with the blame of society believing men to be more physically capable than women. As I have already said, I peg feminism with suppressing the truth, spreading lies, and discriminating against men when those who worked in the shelters knew that women commit DV.
Shelters are supposed to be unbiased because they are suppose to support the real facts. They don't because the feminists there mandate that they don't.
You see what I mean? This line of thinking is why many feminists are exposed for the equality of outcome advocates they really are.
For men it's
"If you don't want to pay child support, don't have sex with her."
For women it's
"if you don't want financial responsibilities for a child, get an abortion"
You are blind to the unjust imbalance. If a man wants a child and a woman doesn't, tough shit for the guy. But if a guy doesn't want the responsibilities of a child, tough shit for the guy.
Who ultimately has to have the child? Who delivers it? Not the male, if what I've learned from Biology 12 is correct.
If you want to have a child, discuss it with your partner, it should be mutual. But don't bitch and moan when the girl you slept with doesn't want an abortion. You should have thought about the consequences. And she should have, too. Now you both have to deal with it.
How the hell are "women who forced men to pay child support" a valid reason to criticize a social movement that advocates equality for women? People will do asinine things, whether they are male or female. They will try to take advantage of the law. It's human nature. Why feminism is tied into this, I don't know.
And believe me, everyone is propegating the "deadbeat dad" bullshit, just as they propagate the "slut/virgin complex" bullshit, just like they propagate the "black buffoon" bullshit.
As I have said, they are not the primary cause. But the advantage of a woman is their main goal even if it is at the expense of a man.
Feminists support child support on a large scale and whenever the imbalance of it is challenged a notice is put up quick fast and in a hurry on NOW. I think they call it an action alert or something.
"everyone is propagating the "deadbeat dad" bullshit."
"If you don't want to pay child support, don't have sex with her"
This is yet another discriminatory imbalance that many are working to change. And it will be changed. And just like feminists protested those shelters being sued. Just like NOW opposes joint custody and presenting true facts about DV and rape and the abolishment of alimony, they will protest bringing fairness to parenting rights.
Those protests won't matter for long as more men and women are becoming tired of this bigotry.
"Maybe you should think about your wallet before penetration occurs?"
Maybe women should think about equality before their legs are spread?
Sorry but your double standard mentality will be laughed at in the future when men are no longer being dragged into court and forced to pay for a child they don't want.
Women can get rid of children they don't want through abortion or adoption. But if a woman wants the child the father pays. This will change. Get ready.
"Don't want to pay for child support? Don't have sex!"
Why is it only men who hear this? Can you understand the concept of a double standard or have you not made it that far in school yet?
Women don't have to worry about financial responsibilities when an unwanted pregnancy occurs. They can have all the sex they want but with men it is different. Not because of women but because of a DOUBLE STANDARD in the law.
So in short, yes. If the group you associate with truly advocates for both men and women, or at least does not demonize men. If you present facts without fabricating them, then yes, if you changed your title then you would no longer have to be insulted when feminism is attacked.
"As for anti-racism, all you need to do is look up "affirmative action"
I said infringe on people's rights, meaning take them away. It doesn't.
"And as for Zionism, jfgi"
Yeah so here we are again with you presenting nothing for my argument. However, if you want to bring third world middle eastern countries into this then ok yeah you got me, congratulations.
I've already been there, virtually no one has any civil rights there and anyone can form a war group that gives and takes them away.
So affirmative action is okay, it's not negative prejudice, but feminism is automatically negative prejudice.
My point was pretty clear.
It's hard to get to the center of your argument, but it seems to be that feminism doesn't work anymore because there's no need for it. Women have all the rights they want.
Well what do you say to studies like, "Gender and letters of recommendation for academia", or "How job applicants are disadvantaged by gender-based double standards in a natural setting",
When you criticize feminism as a whole, saying that it's all the same thing, YOU ARE against women's rights. You may say that you are not, but the fact is feminism has been fighting for women's rights on one hand, and at different times, engaged in radical man-hating. The latter is unfortunate. You refuse to acknowledge a difference in these ideologies. That's my problem with you and MRAs. You're so quick to assume what feminism is based on personal experiences.
Some do, some don't. I think what they have a problem with is the underlying misogyny.
Back at you. If you can't deny that there is still sexism in the workplace, then you can't completely discount feminism. But don't group all radical and liberal feminists into one giant category and say they're "different feathers of the same bird". Go to Jezebel and search up "Should Feminism be about equality for males?" and look at the comments people are leaving. Looks very moderate to me.
Sorry, but when I see comments like, "I hope she gets raped" on antimisandry, there's a little tiny bit of underlying sexism there in that comment. Google it for yourself.
Then maybe those who are falsely accused of rape should "take legal action", too.
Yeah ok I agree with you. However if your brother or father or one of your guy friends was accused of rape and you knew for a fact it could not possibly be true but nonetheless they were still arrested with no evidence, put on trial and sent to prison for 20 something years how would you feel toward the accuser?
How would you feel that her identity and past were concealed and his were spread for the world to know? Death threats? Theft? Vandalized property?
I am not saying MRAs are angels, I as a humanist know there are few in my movement, in any movement for that matter because we are all human.
The only thing I have pointed out is that when the bigotry in feminism is exposed in the legal system the first to loudly defend it are the radicals and the first to silently defend it are the moderates.
You can keep advocating for women's rights. It's noble.
I will continue to advocate for men and women's rights. As will MRAs and most anti-feminists
Also, do not undertake another feminist cliche by bringing race into this. It will not work. You haven't technically done it yet but you are edging close.
Then don't warn me not to, unless I actually go ahead and do it. My example was not meant to parallel feminism to the civil rights struggle, it was merely a good example of how people react to movements from a so-called "oppressed group". I just think the reaction is typical.
Am I saying that validates feminism? No. What I am saying is that the backlash is a typical one, and a lot of arguments from that side are just not logical. Like your argument of men having a decision in abortion matters.
"When the accusation is false, then the shit hits the fan."
When the accusation is born the shit hits the fan, bounced around the globe and splatters into the accused face.
Do you really want to compare the hordes of insults, death threats, thefts, destruction of property, "death threats" and everything else that goes along with someone accused of rape?
Why is this? Oh that's right because their faces are plastered over the news before they even know why they have been arrested.
I also find the hypocrisy in this delicious: the video you sent me does exactly what you so ardently warn me not to do. The first argument he makes begins with race. I guess he's pulling a feminist cliché too, huh?
Firstly, I said look at the idiot I wiped the floor with who was the actual one that brought race into the issue.
The poster of the video clearly stated that African Americans (men AND women) were the ones in the USA that were oppressed. And he states his disgust at feminists who try to compare their struggle with the struggle of people who fought a war and died for their freedom.
If you don't want to read what I say, stop replying.
I didn't say he was trying to compare any "anti-feminist struggle to slavery". I was saying that he thinks that "oppression" is something so visible that you have to be tied to a tree, stabbed, or spit on. That's not the way it always works. Things are not as they always appear.
There have been studies done which show a very consistent pattern: employers have a strong bias towards hiring white men.
This isn't what I want to believe, it's true. There's been a good amount of studies done in sociology and psychology that prove that people do NOT have the same opportunities because of discrimination based on their race and gender.
Taking legal action is easier said than done. I would imagine class plays a huge issue here. Income is huge. I don't think most people are willing to go through with it.
That still doesn't mean discrimination isn't alive and well.
I don't think it's feminism. I think it's stupid stereotypes that we all have.
Think about it. Your girlfriend hits you in the face, you call the police, they don't believe you. What's the most reasonable explanation for this?
"She's just a girl. She wouldn't hurt her boyfriend." It's sick and wrong. Do you think feminists are responsible for spreading this stereotype? I think that's possible, but not probable. I think it has a much more deeper rooted history than you think.
This stereotype has been around before feminism has. And some feminists have been trying hard to change it. Feminism has become a sort of malleable, scattered and hodge-podge of ideologies since the 90's. Women have been trying to transgress gender stereotypes since the 70's, and it is a practice that is somewhat still alive today. Transgressing the "butch feminist" stereotype is very alive in feminists who do cabaret and exotic dancing, while other feminists play with dominant gender norms in
other ways. Riot grrrl is a good example of this. The movement which started sometime in the 90's is a good example of how these women and men chose to transgress these gender roles. They are trying to express the idea that there is no way to "be" a woman, per se. There is biology, but to some extent we are socialized from the very beginning to identify as "boy" or "girl", and more often than not this becomes problematic.
If anything, if you take a good and close look at feminism as a movement,
you'll see that if anything, they've been trying to destroy the stupid gender stereotype of "she wouldn't hurt him". It's antiquated bullshit. If anything, I would say this stereotype is pretty anti-feminist. Discrimination therefore isn't a consequence of feminism, but a huge digression for it, or at least its multiple and scattered intentions. The stereotype of "she wouldn't hurt her boyfriend" is pretty offensive to me, because I feel that I can be aggressive, hostile and angry and still
be a woman, and it's very damaging to the man in the case, because he simply isn't believed. The longer we hang on to these social construct of gender, the more fucked we'll be in the long run. Yes, I believe that my brain has differences with that of the average man's. There are biological differences, I know that. But I can be just as aggressive, evil, good, and nurturing as a man to some extent, in different social contexts. Cross-cultural examinations show us more and more that
gender is somewhat of a social construct. There are different ways to be womanly or manly, and we've taken it upon ourselves to adapt one way, and not the other. We need to re-evaluate these.
As I said before feminists did not create that stereotype but they ran with it. It is seen through feminist domestic violence campaigns, public service announcements, and all of their advertisements.
They have lied about facts and...Christ sakes I typed and provided facts for all of this already.
Again I say the proof is in the lawsuits and the fact that the feminists lost and that sadly more lawsuits are still needed.
"Why are we using lawsuits as the ultimate moral compass."
Ok forget the lawsuits then. Answer me this.
Why if feminists don't want to propagate men being the only abusers, as they have done for decades, do they only bombard the public with images, videos, pamphlets, billboards, and other advertisements of only men being abusers.
Why do they deny male victims?
Why do they only hire people that believe women are the only victims?
I don't think they purposefully deny male victims. I think it's very easy to see it that way, but they aren't. I don't think any serious academic department would demonize anyone on purpose.
You could say the same thing about pro-lifers. Are they denying women "choice"? (I hate it when people call them anti-choice, but I'm very pro-choice.) I think their intention is one thing, and it's often misread because people think they have a good idea of what it means to be pro-life.
"I don't think they purposefully deny male victims"
Ok that is your view and you are entitled to it.
However, the facts speak differently than views. They were sued for denying male victims and they were sued for screening employees to see if they believe only women are victims and they were sued for propagating that only men are abusers.
And they lost.
The judge said the evidence of sexism and discrimination was so overwhelming that it was practically an open and shut case.
Also I do not believe in the feminist version of gender socialization.
I was not socialized by society to "identify" as a boy. I am a man because I was born one plain and simple.
There are more than biological differences between men and women. We have biochemical brain differences. We think differently we have different reactions to certain situations. This has been studied but I said myself there are studies on both sides.
But why do you think it is that different societies have such different ways of "being" a man or woman? If it's biologically hard-wired in us all, why did we chose THIS way and not their's?
You have to admit that to at least some extent, gender is s social construction.
I don't know about that. I think some things have stuck. I think the Judeo-Christian narrative is one that has stuck around for a few thousand years. Most individuals in this nation identify as 'Christian', and I think a lot of what the Scriptures had to say about gender norms, for example, have stuck around.
Remember, explicit negative prejudices have decreased in the last few decades, but implicit negative prejudices have increased.
True enough. But judeo christian narrative was not always around and was not all over the world and these things that have stuck were practiced before most religions.
Yes, that's right. I think it's part of the problem, not the entire reason for it. Anytime anyone looks for a single answer to a complex question, they will be wrong.
But how can you say that? The workforce is almost 50% female now. These attitudes are changing. Women, I think, are somewhat straying from traditional roles. I don't know the reason for this, but they are.
What's interesting, though, is that both females and males are ultimately unhappy with their careers.
Yes. Doctors, nurses, social workers, teachers, and etc.
I don't care where a woman wants to work but the fields that women have chosen speak for themselves.
The workhorse, building, or "death jobs" as they are called that were essential for the advancement of technology and civilization have always been dominated by men. In the past it was not considered woman's work but today, when no one is stopping women, the jobs are still 98% male.
You are undervaluing women. It is a common error in the workplace, and sadly it will continue to happen. How many teachers are women? Do you think civilization (or perhaps a pleasant one) would exist without them? What about midwives?
Women ARE essential, just as essential, as men for the advancement of civilization.
No I'm not. I simply said those are the fields dominated by women. Men in those fields make the same as women yet I am not undervaluing them. I am undervaluing the field in comparison to the other fields.
Teaching someone is important but teachers didn't invent and build everything that has advanced civilization they simply gave men and women basic knowledge. After that it was what people did with that knowledge that pushed humanity forward.
No, you aren't undervaluing teaching when you say "they didn't invent and build everything that has advanced civilization, they simply gave men and women basic knowledge."
Basic knowledge is the start of civilization. Teachers are just as important and valuable as the engineer, the scientist, and the poet. Without teachers there WOULD be no engineers to build these "advanced civilizations". It's all connected.
People did, before they taught. People invented, before people were taught how to use inventions.
"without teachers there would be no engineers"
People built, and constructed homes, bridges, and all sorts of things before and after and sometimes without school.
Furthermore, the other reason these professions are valued more are because they are the most dangerous, hence the term "death jobs" and that is one of many reasons why people tend to make more money doing them.
Not true. There was always some sort of math involved in advanced engineering at some point.
Who gets involved in "death jobs" more? Do you think it's an issue of male/female? I think it was Karl Jaspers who said something like, "if you accept one answer to a complex problem, understand that you haven't understood the answer, nor the problem it is attempting to solve."
Why do most people in "death jobs" get involved in these jobs? Because of class and education issues.
No wealthy person is going to go climbing on top of 200 meter high bridge for $16/hour, soldering for 8 hours a day, and coming home missing a finger. This is not just an issue of gender, it is mostly an issue of class and education.
And let me remind you that prostitution is indeed a "death job", only sometimes they can't find your body.
The third wave is LARGLEY NOT anti-male. There are a few anti-male members, but for the most part, they are a VOCAL MINORITY.
It's the equivalent of saying "all Conservatives are White Nationalists". It's a sweeping, uneducated, and mistaken generalization.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"The third wave is largely not anti-male. There are a few anti-male members, but for the most part, they are a vocal minority."
No they are the leaders and the proof is in the lawsuits that are brought up against them and that they lose.
You know what happens to woman haters in anti-feminist movements? They are sent packing.
You know what happens to those who speak of male issues in the feminist movement? They are sent packing.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Um, yeah. They did take scorn. That's what happens when you criticize a belief. People will respond to it.. so..?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Um, yeah. They did take scorn. That;s what happens when you criticize a belief. People will respond to it... so...?"
Thank you for helping my case. They speak out about the discrimination feminism caused and try to balance male and female issues and they are then scorned and kicked out.
They are now proud members of anti-feminist human issues groups.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
They're not anti-feminist JUST for those reasons. You can't just highlight everything that fits your views and forget the rest. Liberal feminism, for example.
It doesn't work that way. There are women's studies departments that are all-encompassing, anti-sexist, and anti-discriminatory. You can't just lump together two completely different types of feminism in one word. It's misleading.
Conservatism does not equal Nazism. That's a retarded generalization.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"They're not anti-feminist just for those reasons"
Yes. They are. I have seen the ridicule they take when they speak of domestic violence and rape statistics (the real ones). That is the only reason they are scorned.
It didn't matter what different views they had about feminism. It was the moment they spoke of the damage feminism had done to men that they received the anti-feminist label.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
An example of this is the disagreeing pro-porn and anti-porn feminists. They disagree, they insult each other, but none of them refer to the other as anti-feminists.
Any feminist group that speaks of male issues is labeled anti-feminist and they all either become humanists, MRA supporters, or Ifeminists, or IWF.
All are anti-feminist groups. MRA are the only ones who gave themselves the anti-feminist title though.
The rest were branded by current feminists. Odd much?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Are you kidding me? "Anti-feminist" is throw around like confetti.
"Anti-porn is anti-feminist". Do you know how many feminists make that argument?
The same goes with pro-life feminists. They get branded with that word ALL the time.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
2:45.
Sorry, maybe in the second wave. Not anymore. Don't group me into your category of so-called feminism. I am a living proof. I love people, and I am a feminist. Man or woman, doesn't matter.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
Second wave, third wave, brand it whatever you like, the bigotry is the same. Any feminist that speaks out about male issues is branded an anti-feminist by the third wave "moderates" and kicked out of the movement.
I mean have you been to third wave websites?
Look at the scorn Christina Hoff Sommers or Wendy McElroy took.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
On your page it says you don't care about common feminist beliefs.
How the hell can you even criticize an entire movement/philosophy when you haven't even thoroughly investigated it?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"On your page it says you don't care about common feminist beliefs"
I don't.
"How the hell can you even criticize an entire movement/philosophy when you haven't even thoroughly examined it?"
Believe me, I have. So have many others. The political influential feminists created the discrimination and the "moderates" do not speak one word of protest except to people who criticize the movement.
There are no feminists advocating for a violence against people act, or to help end false rape charges.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Further more there are plenty "third wave" websites and groups that actively support the discrimination men face and scorn those who protest it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
And you're right, there is sexist discrimination against men in popular culture.
But I think if we did a meta-analysis of these television shows, we would find more weak, female characters (the "damsel in distress" archetype) than the sloppy, lazy, stupid father. And what did you say? Oh, right. Logic favours the majority.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
I said if men and women really believed that those images are what men and women are supposed to be then most of the population would be that way. Turns out it is not. Because most people don't buy the BS. Logic favors the majority.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Look, VERY few credible feminist scholars will say that gender is completely socialization.
And what do you mean by "logic usually favours the majority"? That doesn't prove that femininity and masculinity are somewhat socialized. You really want to believe that social norms don't have any influence on our perception of gender? Really?
Because I think some research has been done in this feild that would prove you utterly wrong.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
Morals are socialized. Femininity and Masculinity are not.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
No, feminism doesn't say that gender socialization is the root of all problems.
And you're doing something that I've seen over and over again in an attempt to criticize feminism: you're grouping together antiquated second-wave feminism with feminism today. That's like criticizing someone for not wearing a seat belt 50 years ago.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"No, feminism doesn't say gender socialization is the root of all problems"
No. But it does claim that it is the reason why men and women have been men and women throughout history, which is a complete lie.
"you're grouping together antiquated second-wave feminism with feminism today"
Feminism today, creates new laws that discriminate against men and supports the old ones created by its predecessors.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Um, no, "feminism" doesn't claim that either.
It's the same argument I see over and over again. Making sweeping generalizations about individuals who cal themselves feminist. Feminism has incorporated a LOT of different philosophies in the third wave. What you're talking about is Radical feminism.
And sorry but you can't just call discriminatory laws "feminist" because they piss you off. That's backwards logic.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Um, no, "feminism" doesn't claim that either."
Um, yes. It does. It claims that through patriarchy men and women are socialized to act the way they do.
"Making sweeping generalizations about individuals who cal themselves feminist"
You hear the same argument because those individuals within the movement who don't protest the bigotry of the movement are no better than the bigots.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
That's actually radical feminism. I recommend reading "Gendering the Vertical Mosaic" as an introduction to more theories that are inherently not anti-male. It's written by Roberta Hamilton.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"And sorry but you can't just call disciminatory laws "feminist" because they piss you off. That's backwards logic."
It is forward logic when those laws were created and supported by feminists, and feminist supporters, so I will call them as I see them thank you.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
It depends what you consider a feminist. A woman who "stands up" for "women's rights" can mean a WHOLE lot of different things. An organization that masquerades as a group that fights for women's rights is not necessarily a feminist one. The label "feminist" has been used by the anti-feminist movement to label every woman under the sun, from lobbyists to pro-lifers. What are you fighting against? Man-haters, or feminists?
Learn the difference.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"It depends what you consider a feminist"
Feminists: National Organization for Women. VAWA creators (along with Joe Biden who was beaten by his sister and taught by his parents to never defend himself when his attacker is a woman)
Feminists: Feministing. The "enlightened" third wave "moderates" Who are heavy supporters of VAWA and NOW and actively protest anything former feminists such as Sommers, McElroy, and Warren Farrel to name a few, say in support of male issues.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Both of these organizations, along with several others have scorned those who protest male discrimination.
Here are some more.
Feminist run domestic violence shelters in Virgina: The Family Services Protection Board. Sued for discrimination and bigotry towards men.
Another feminist run domestic violence shelter organization in California, also sued.
Both lost. Both discriminated. Both are run by feminists who fabricate facts and create insane theories to demonize men.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Radicals? More like the common feminists to me seeing as how they receive government funding and are run by the current leaders of the movement.
The difference has been learned well. Maybe you should study it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Now whatever "subdivision" you claim to be a part of. When I see them on T.V. and in the papers saying that men are not 99% of all rapists and majority when it comes to committing domestic violence.
When they shun such nonsense as rape culture and patriarchy and makes damn well sure that the feminists who run things know it and make damn the the public knows this then you can at least say "my subdivision of feminism is for equality"
But never say "feminism is about equality" it lost that title
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Furthermore, when I see them sponsor a public service announcement depicting female domestic violence as it is nearly equal between heterosexual couples and committed way more in lesbian couples then you can tell me "your subdivision is for equality"
When I see billboards of young boys removed stating "when I grow up I will beat my family" then we can say we are allies.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
When I see public service announcements of mothers, who are the prime abusers of children being spread through the media because your "moderate" group of feminists advocated for it to happen. Then you can say the radicals are the minority.
Right now all I see is men are evil and women are victims.
If radicals are the minority, what the hell are the majority doing?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
That is NOT radical feminism. Radical feminism is the theory that women's problems today are a direct result of a history of patriarchy.
Why is spreading awareness against abuse patriarchy? That's not man-hate, that's spreading awareness. It's the same argument I hear as, "don't spread awareness breast cancer, that's undermining the awareness of prostate cancer."
Awareness of every social issue involving every gender should be spread in an ideal society.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
If you call anti-abuse radical feminism, you have a lot of enemies. It takes more to be a radical feminist. Yes, I am aware of domestic abuse statistics. More female college students beat their boyfriends than the other way around.
Does that any organization who spreads awareness about abuse on females is anti-male? Does that really make any logical sense. No.
Men's organizations need to step up and fight.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"if you call anti-abuse radical feminism"
You still don't get it and it seems you never will as you are only programed to defend some indoctrinated view the good name of feminism.
Making the public aware of female issues is NOT the problem, however, saying that HUMAN issues are FEMALE issues by demonizing one gender and victimizing the other through propaganda is the problem.
That is what NOW, feministing, and every other main stream politically influential feminist organization has done.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"If you call anti-abuse radical feminism, you have alot of enemies"
I don't call anti-abuse radical feminism.
I call demonizing men modern feminism.
"Yes I am aware of domestic abuse statistics"
Guess what, the public isn;t because of feminist propaganda. Propaganda you and your moderates don't openly protest.
"Does that any organization who spreads awareness about abuse on females anti-male?"
You keep asking the same question which I answered before your first response.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Yeah, but you're saying that anti-female violence always leads to anti-male laws. And that's just not right. Anything they do in your eyes is "discriminatory" to men. Even though men tend to do more physical damage to their partners, MRAs think women's shelters are "discriminatory". This sort of rhetoric just doesn't stand up.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"you're saying anti-female violence always leads to ant-male laws"
No I am saying that feminists have tried and succeeded in the past to convince the entire western world that men were the only ones guilty of domestic violence and that the only time women committed DV was in self defense.
This was an utter lie that worked and is now part of the reason feminist organizations are being sued.
They run domestic violence shelters that shelter only women with children and deny men with children.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Look, your reasoning is that if someone fights for an "oppressed group", it doesn't really matter if that group is oppressed or not-- they will inevitably lead to oppressing another group (in this case single fathers).
And if you think FEMINISTS are responsible for creating the idea that women can't really do harm to their male partners, you are LARGELY oversimplifying things. But I don't think you want to accept that.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Look, your reasoning is that if someone fights for an "oppressed group"
Neither men nor women are, or have ever been oppressed in the united states. And yeah, I know that any feminist would disagree with that. I already made one insane feminist zealot recant the women oppressed claim and she/he probably made every argument you are about to so go to watch?v=oMzcMATRGmE&feature=channel and view my comments to vella if you want my answers to the most likely points you are going to bring up.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"if you think feminists are responsible for creating the idea that women can't really do harm to their male partners"
I think feminists are responsible for exactly what I said they are. The suppression of real domestic violence stats, The propagation of fake domestic violence stats, and the denial of men into their shelters because they feel that only women are victims of DV.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
And this is the problem. Again, you're grouping whatever is bad-- faulty science with something you have a personal bias against, feminists.
Therefore, bad science=feminism.
Is that a logical argument to you? Would it be fair to cherry pick every pro-Democrat website that has faulty science and from that conclude that, "DEMOCRATS LIE"? No.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"And this is the problem. Again, you're grouping whatever is bad--faulty science with something you have a personal bias against, feminists."
No. The problem is that even when facts like the ones I stated in my comment are proven, those that do not want to except those proven facts try to find reasons as to why they are irrelevant.
Your "bad science" are false statistics created by feminists.
The proof of men with children being denied entry is in the lawsuits.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
The mandate of the FEMINIST employees of the FEMINIST shelter having to believe that domestic violence victims are only women is on (or was on I don't know if they removed it since they lost the case) the FRONT PAGE of the FEMINIST (not democrat) website.
So again I say it matters not to me if you want to accept the truth about the movement. All that matters is that unbiased people have seen the truth and are acting upon it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
It was on their website front page.
I don't have the exact quote handy but it went some bigotry filled statement that claimed only women are victims of DV.
Furthermore their hiring mandate was that any social worker that applied to work in the shelters had to take an oath and swear they believe only women are victims and men abusers.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Where?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
I gave you the name of the organization. Look it up.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"Anything they do in your eyes is discriminatory to men"
I did not say that. I have made clear through every comment I have typed where feminism has created discrimination against men.
These are facts that cannot be denied. Yet still you deny them by saying "it depends on what you define as feminist"
The entire world views these bigots as feminists. They self identify as feminists and they protest anyone that speaks out about male issues.
That is the harm they do to men, women, and families
Jmnzz 2 years ago
You disagreeing with them is irrelevant. Your "subdivision" disagreeing is irrelevant.
The sad truth is if there are any feminists out there that acknowledge male issues and are against the feminists that are the voice of the movement that affects the public and the legal system, they speak not one word of protest.
I am not asking you to stop advocating for women. Just to stop turning a blind eye to the discrimination proven to be born of the feminist movement.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"Men's organizations need to step up and fight"
What the HELL do you think has been going on for the last 3 decades?
Men's Rights Activists spoke out against the discrimination men face first.
Who scorned them?
Who protested them?
NOW and other feminist organizations. They denied (still do) male discrimination even exists.
Now more men and women, MRA, Humanist and just plain anti-feminist are speaking up.
Who protests? Who denies?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Yeah, when they say things like, "We must verbally oppose feminist until our flesh oxidizes into dust."
that crosses the line. That's by Bernard Chapin.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
Bernard Chapin already explained his statement. And he also explained how he was misquoted and taken out of context.
He has also, given up on moderates. He cares not that you are insulted by his generalizations because you do nothing to help end the discrimination the ones you call radicals have created. So as I said, if you are tired of the backlash, then help out.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
We have stepped up. We stepped up a long time ago.
If you don't like being generalized then handle the bigots within your movement instead of saying they are a minority. They are not minority because they control the voice of the movement.
They control the voice the public hears, therefore they are the voice.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Look at Jezebel's "should feminism be about equality for males?"
This is one of the most popular feminist websites out there. Read the article.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
A blog article is nice. I am talking about legal action. And I can assure there are about 40+ past articles on that site that demonize men. One I know of is the site's support of Amanda Hess's "rape culture" article.
Until there are feminists advocating for a VAPA in the government. Default joint custody (NOW has opposed this several times)
Shielding laws that keep those accused of rape out of the media as the accusers are.
Until these and many other things happen, feminism will be opposed.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"That is not radical feminism. Radical feminism is the hteory that women's problems today are a direct result of a history of patriarchy."
Go to any of the feminist organizations I mentioned, the ones with all of the public influence and look up what patriarchy means to them. They are the radicals and they are the voice of feminism.
You and all the other so called moderates are to busy wasting time trying to defend the name of the movement than attack those who tarnish it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"Why is spreading awareness of abuse patriarchy?"
I didn't say it was. I said that these feminists spread one sided views for two sided issues and no one stops them accept anti-feminist human interest groups.
"That's not man hate"
Lying about statistics to paint men as the only domestic violence abusers, child abusers, and rapists isn't man hate? Then what is?
"It's the same argument"
No. You just ignore the argument and hear or read what you want.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I think you're extending any possible implicit message these organizations are trying to send. That's not "feminism's" fault. That's your own view. If you feel alienated and discriminated against, you and the rest of the anti-feminist movement should do something about it.
So far, the pay gap among graduate students still exists, maternity leave is a problem, abortion isn't accessible to many women, even here in Canada, and abuse against women happens.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
If that alienates you because you're a man, let me pose the question: is there any way awareness about these issues that can be raised that WON'T leave you feeling alienated and discriminated against?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"If that alienates you because you're a man let me pose the question: is there any way awareness about these issues that can be raised that won;t leave you feeling alienated"
Yeah. Tell the damn truth about DV, rape, false rape accusations, and all the other discrimination men face.
You want to raise awareness about DV, fine. Just don't paint men as the primary and only abusers. Same with rape. Not only men.
Show both sides of the issues instead of demonizing men.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Then maybe someone should.
Interest groups are just that: interest groups. They want to better their position in society, and often it is legitimate.
If you feel that they're "painting men" as the abusers, if it is meaningful, it should impact people's behaviour. Do you think this is the case?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"If you feel that they're "painting men" as the abusers, if it is meaningful, it should impact people's behavior. Do you think this is the case."
It impacted people's behavior alright. It pissed off millions of men and women who knew that no gender had a monopoly on these crimes. It impacted them so much they have refuted the propaganda and policies are beginning to change.
You know who is opposing that change? Yeah you guessed it.
There are women interest groups that don't resort to lies.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
There has never been, not one feminist organization that advocated for the truth about domestic violence, child abuse, and rape to be put forth in public service announcements on television, the papers, or billboards.
Instead all feminist organizations with media and political influence will paint men as the only ones who commit these crimes.
That is why your movement is losing when it is sued and it will continue unless those within stop the bigotry.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I don't think that's right.
While many feminist organizations advocate that domestic violence (and indeed, the most physically damaging) happens to WOMEN, I've yet to see evidence that "men are the culprits". That's a very near-sighted view of NOW, or the many anti-violence groups started by MEN.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"and indeed the most physically damaging happens to women"
Women instigate domestic violence more than men, and men are less likely to return that violence. Because men can do more with their bare hands doesn't mean they aren't beaten half to death with blunt objects.
"That's a very near sighted view of NOW"
Have you seen the NOW advocacy against DV?
Have you seen inside a DV shelter?
A DV public service announcement?
When and where have you ever...ever...seen a woman as the culprit?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
How about a DV pamphlet? Ever see women as the culprit?
What about billboards? It used to always be men on billboards but now there are small boys with quotes next to their smiling faces stating:
"When I grow up I will rape my girlfriend."
"When I grow up I will beat my wife"
It's sickening.
The narrow view here is not mine.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"That's not feminisms fault"
They created the laws, the support them, and they are trying to make more.
If the creators of the discrimination are not at fault, then who is?
"That's your own view"
It is the correct view and trying to defend hypocrisy with hypocrisy is pointless.
"So far the pay gap"
So far, sexism as the cause of the pay has been refuted and will remain as such.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Um, no. It hasn't. Most studies done on a large-scale show a pay gap within grad students for the same profession.
I'd like to see the evidence you're talking about. Send it to my inbox.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Um, no. It hasn't"
Um. Yes. It has.
I am not sending you anything. Me jumping on a search engine and gathering facts that are easily accessible to the world at the feminist famous "prove it" line is over. That is why I make videos.
But you can look up a former feminist turned anti-feminist, Warren Farrel who disproved the (feminist) sexism claim for the wage gap.
Or you can just type in wage gap myth or something like that in google.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Or maybe, if you are up to the challenge. You can look at the pay gap and instead of just thinking sexism, you can ask yourself why there is one and why you think sexism can be the only cause.
The pay gap is a raw pay gap.
It is illegal, let me say it again, illegal to pay someone less for the same job and "time" worked because of race, religion, or sex.
Men make more than men, women more than women, men make more than women, and women more than men.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
As for the same profession. A technician working at Microsoft makes less than a technician at Apple.
A simple example but you get the idea.
Just because a study shows men making more than women in some areas doesn't mean it is because men are paying women less because they are women.
Is it sexism that women make more in some areas? No.
If you want sources find them yourself. I am not hear to change your mind about something that has already been refuted. You either believe it or you don't
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"Maternity leave, abortion..."
I am not talking about legitimate female issues I am talking about the utter ignorance of male issues and feminism's attempt at suppressing them. Or explaining them away with ridiculous theories.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
How is that the fault of the feminists?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"How is that the fault of feminists?"
I think this question is answered in the post that spawned the question.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
And men tend to do more damage to women when DV occurs. Just to let you know.
Yes, yes, yes. DV against men is a serious problem, it needs to be talked about, and it's fucked up. Men's organizations need to do this. Feminists aren't "against" this, per se.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
If you are tired of being generalized with radicals. If it pissed you and your moderates off so much then stop getting mad at those the feminist movement has harmed.
Stop protesting those who protest discrimination and get the hell out there and help them protest it instead of trying to explain away every accusation that has a factual basis.
Step up to the radicals and take your damn title of feminism back and kick them the fuck out.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Again, you're generalizing. Since you think you know what a feminist is, you've taken upon yourself to assume that I "get mad at those the feminist movement has harmed", even though you haven't really proven to me that there is harm, that the harm is caused by feminists if there is, or what feminism is according to you.
The personal is political. If I see sexism I'm pointing it out. If there are double standards, I'm against it. I'm not an exception, I'm part of the majority.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"you haven't really proven me that there is harm, that feminists caused the harm"
There is proof all throughout my arguments you just are blind to them.
When I mention to you that there are billboards out right now with young boys smiling on them with the words "when I grow up I will beat my family" beside them you shrug it off as nothing.
That is feminist propaganda and it will be stopped.
"I am part of the majority"
If you are part of the majority then the majority is lazy.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Yeah, there are.
There are pro-life billboards advocating to, "take my hand, not my life."
Freedom of speech.
If masculinists have a problem with it, they should speak up.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"If masculinists have a problem with it, they should speak up"
They do. So do humanists. So do MRAs. So do former feminists turned anti-feminists.
You know who supports those one sided propaganda machines though? Yes I think you do.
I have seen plenty of pro abortion advertisements. That issue is balanced.
Where are the signs of young girls with saying
"when I grow up I will beat my husband"
"when I grow up I will abuse my children"
Where are they? Where is the "equality" of the sexes?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"Freedom of speech"
That is a weak defense.
Let one public service announcement actually air depicting the truth about domestic violence and child abuse and feminists will be up in arms in protest screaming sexism this and misogyny that.
Just like they were when those DV organizations were sued.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
And by the way, this is why so many women, and organizations (including COMMUNIST Cuba women's organizations) refuse to self-identify with the term "feminist". Because this is the popular conception of feminism. And it's misinformed.
It poses a threat to your value system. It's the same rhetoric against affirmative action. Anti-feminists are scared that men's rights will be curbed when women's rights are earned. Move on.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
They choose not to use the word feminist because the information feminism spreads is fabricated and demonizes half the world's population and a lot of women's interest groups would rather show both sides of an issues than just the female side.
Balance. Human issues.
Feminism=one sided. And no one within is doing a damn thing about it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Okay, so as long as we're not using the term "feminist", we're in the clear, right?
So being pro-choice and advocating it is alright with you, as long as you don't self-identify with that term? Yes?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Okay, so as long as we're not using the term "feminist" we're in the clear, right?"
I don't think you missed my point but I will explain it anyway.
It doesn't matter if they call themselves feminist or wapolanazuists.
If you spread lies to garner money and support from the government and create laws that discriminate against one group in order to advance another then you will be opposed by those in that group.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"So being pro-choice and advocating it is alright with you, as long as you don't self identify with that term? Yes?"
Women can have all the choices they want, they are called civil liberties. Human rights.
Abortion is sketchy because a father may want the child but he is not carrying it. But the imbalance is placed when the father doesn't want the child but can be forced to support it.
That is not entirely the fault of feminism but I believe it is unjust.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
There is the problem.
This follows through with discrimination. A lot of MRA folks think that feminism is single-handedly responsible for introducing the idea that female DV doesn't exist. Guess what? This idea has been around a lot longer than feminism has because people tend to think that "she can't do much harm to him". It has a sexist application towards men, and it's sexist in theory towards women.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
The gender stereotype that men aren't allowed to be afraid and always need to play Captain Incredible have had serious implications for the legal system, I am not denying that. But again, this has been occurring since before feminism existed. It is a fucked up stereotype, and if people think it is unjust, they should change it.
But don't peg feminism--the easiest target as the reason for this. Stereotypes are an unfortunate part of human cognitive errors.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"don't peg feminism--the easiest target as the reason for this"
I don't peg feminism with the blame of society believing men to be more physically capable than women. As I have already said, I peg feminism with suppressing the truth, spreading lies, and discriminating against men when those who worked in the shelters knew that women commit DV.
Shelters are supposed to be unbiased because they are suppose to support the real facts. They don't because the feminists there mandate that they don't.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I do not advocate taking away abortion rights but I do advocate giving men the same right to give up responsibility for an unwanted child.
Men currently do not have that right and the proof is in my latest video.
But anyway as I said the title does not matter. The actions are what matter. This is what I have been saying this entire time.
Men and women should be equal under the law, not granted rights at the expense of the rights of someone else.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Yeah, men don't have to go through those 40 weeks. My body, my choice.
If you don't want to pay child support, don't have sex with her. If she uses that to her advantage, you have NO ONE to blame but yourself.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
You see what I mean? This line of thinking is why many feminists are exposed for the equality of outcome advocates they really are.
For men it's
"If you don't want to pay child support, don't have sex with her."
For women it's
"if you don't want financial responsibilities for a child, get an abortion"
You are blind to the unjust imbalance. If a man wants a child and a woman doesn't, tough shit for the guy. But if a guy doesn't want the responsibilities of a child, tough shit for the guy.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Who ultimately has to have the child? Who delivers it? Not the male, if what I've learned from Biology 12 is correct.
If you want to have a child, discuss it with your partner, it should be mutual. But don't bitch and moan when the girl you slept with doesn't want an abortion. You should have thought about the consequences. And she should have, too. Now you both have to deal with it.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Now you both have to deal with it"
No. Only the woman does. The guy has no options until the woman decides them.
"It should be mutual"
It soon will be.
"But don't bitch and moan when the girl you slept with doesn't want an abortion."
Ok, as long as the girl doesn't bitch and moan when I don't give her a cent.
You see how that works? Consequences for both. Options for both. It is a little something called equality.
Get ready for it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
There are women who force men to pay child support for children that aren't even theirs so the "don't have sex with her" argument is beyond weak.
Furthermore many feminists help propagate the "deadbeat dad" bullshit because some men walk out on the responsibilities of raising a child.
What exactly is a woman doing if not abandoning those responsibilities before the child is even born?
A man who doesn't want the child is a cowardly deadbeat.
A woman is empowered.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
How the hell are "women who forced men to pay child support" a valid reason to criticize a social movement that advocates equality for women? People will do asinine things, whether they are male or female. They will try to take advantage of the law. It's human nature. Why feminism is tied into this, I don't know.
And believe me, everyone is propegating the "deadbeat dad" bullshit, just as they propagate the "slut/virgin complex" bullshit, just like they propagate the "black buffoon" bullshit.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Why feminism is tied into this, I don't know."
As I have said, they are not the primary cause. But the advantage of a woman is their main goal even if it is at the expense of a man.
Feminists support child support on a large scale and whenever the imbalance of it is challenged a notice is put up quick fast and in a hurry on NOW. I think they call it an action alert or something.
"everyone is propagating the "deadbeat dad" bullshit."
Not those who see the hypocrisy in it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
"If you don't want to pay child support, don't have sex with her"
This is yet another discriminatory imbalance that many are working to change. And it will be changed. And just like feminists protested those shelters being sued. Just like NOW opposes joint custody and presenting true facts about DV and rape and the abolishment of alimony, they will protest bringing fairness to parenting rights.
Those protests won't matter for long as more men and women are becoming tired of this bigotry.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
In short.
In an unwanted pregnancy, women can say "my body my choice"
Well soon, in an unwanted pregnancy, men will be able to say "my wallet my choice."
That is equality.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Maybe you should think about your wallet before penetration occurs?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Maybe you should think about your wallet before penetration occurs?"
Maybe women should think about equality before their legs are spread?
Sorry but your double standard mentality will be laughed at in the future when men are no longer being dragged into court and forced to pay for a child they don't want.
Women can get rid of children they don't want through abortion or adoption. But if a woman wants the child the father pays. This will change. Get ready.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
How is that discriminatory? Don't want to pay for child support? DON'T HAVE SEX!
That easy.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"How is that discriminatory?"
How are you that blind?
"Don't want to pay for child support? Don't have sex!"
Why is it only men who hear this? Can you understand the concept of a double standard or have you not made it that far in school yet?
Women don't have to worry about financial responsibilities when an unwanted pregnancy occurs. They can have all the sex they want but with men it is different. Not because of women but because of a DOUBLE STANDARD in the law.
That easy.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
That double standard, that gives only men that unwanted responsibility is supported by feminists.
Gee, I wonder why?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
So in short, yes. If the group you associate with truly advocates for both men and women, or at least does not demonize men. If you present facts without fabricating them, then yes, if you changed your title then you would no longer have to be insulted when feminism is attacked.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
So ditto for the Zionist movement,
anti-apartheid,
anti-racism.
All of these movements are naturally demonizing to out-group members?
Are you serious?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"anti racism"
Where are the laws that ant-racism groups make that infringe upon the rights of racist (everyone) groups on the planet?
"zionist movement"
Am I serious? Are you serious? Again what laws have they created that infringe on people's civil rights?
Where do any of these groups do what feminism does, create laws that take away someone's civil rights.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
As for anti-racism, all you need to do is look up "affirmative action".
And as for Zionism, jfgi.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"As for anti-racism, all you need to do is look up "affirmative action"
I said infringe on people's rights, meaning take them away. It doesn't.
"And as for Zionism, jfgi"
Yeah so here we are again with you presenting nothing for my argument. However, if you want to bring third world middle eastern countries into this then ok yeah you got me, congratulations.
I've already been there, virtually no one has any civil rights there and anyone can form a war group that gives and takes them away.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
So affirmative action is okay, it's not negative prejudice, but feminism is automatically negative prejudice.
My point was pretty clear.
It's hard to get to the center of your argument, but it seems to be that feminism doesn't work anymore because there's no need for it. Women have all the rights they want.
Well what do you say to studies like, "Gender and letters of recommendation for academia", or "How job applicants are disadvantaged by gender-based double standards in a natural setting",
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
The center of my argument is simple. I have made it simple.
You keep trying to advocate for women's rights thinking I am against them. You keep trying to put forward the legitimacy of feminism for doing this.
What I am (and have always been) saying is that I support advocacy for women's rights.
What I do not support is lying, hiding facts, and creating laws and policies that take away someone's rights.
Feminism has done this. It is proven.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
When you criticize feminism as a whole, saying that it's all the same thing, YOU ARE against women's rights. You may say that you are not, but the fact is feminism has been fighting for women's rights on one hand, and at different times, engaged in radical man-hating. The latter is unfortunate. You refuse to acknowledge a difference in these ideologies. That's my problem with you and MRAs. You're so quick to assume what feminism is based on personal experiences.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
Feminism protests those who advocates for male issues. It is proven.
That is my argument. I did not say all feminists are bigots. I did not say all feminists hate men.
If you want to re-read (or actually read) what I have said then you are welcome to.
I am not blaming feminism for the world's problems, just the ones I pointed out and I stated why and how.
The reason why you keep ignoring this is not beyond me, it is just annoying.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Some do, some don't. I think what they have a problem with is the underlying misogyny.
Back at you. If you can't deny that there is still sexism in the workplace, then you can't completely discount feminism. But don't group all radical and liberal feminists into one giant category and say they're "different feathers of the same bird". Go to Jezebel and search up "Should Feminism be about equality for males?" and look at the comments people are leaving. Looks very moderate to me.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"the underlying misogyny"
Pissed off men calling women names is not misogyny.
"If you can't deny that there is still sexism in the workplace, then you can't completely discount feminism"
Did my words "it is illegal to pay someone less because of race, gender, or religion" just fly over your head?
Sure sexism exists, but if someone is paid less because of it legal action can be and is taken.
So again, no sexism wage gap.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Sorry, but when I see comments like, "I hope she gets raped" on antimisandry, there's a little tiny bit of underlying sexism there in that comment. Google it for yourself.
Then maybe those who are falsely accused of rape should "take legal action", too.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"when I see comments on antimisandry"
Yeah ok I agree with you. However if your brother or father or one of your guy friends was accused of rape and you knew for a fact it could not possibly be true but nonetheless they were still arrested with no evidence, put on trial and sent to prison for 20 something years how would you feel toward the accuser?
How would you feel that her identity and past were concealed and his were spread for the world to know? Death threats? Theft? Vandalized property?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I am not saying MRAs are angels, I as a humanist know there are few in my movement, in any movement for that matter because we are all human.
The only thing I have pointed out is that when the bigotry in feminism is exposed in the legal system the first to loudly defend it are the radicals and the first to silently defend it are the moderates.
You can keep advocating for women's rights. It's noble.
I will continue to advocate for men and women's rights. As will MRAs and most anti-feminists
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Then do that. Men experience sexism, but your enemy is not the feminists. You're wasting your time.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
Also, do not undertake another feminist cliche by bringing race into this. It will not work. You haven't technically done it yet but you are edging close.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Then don't warn me not to, unless I actually go ahead and do it. My example was not meant to parallel feminism to the civil rights struggle, it was merely a good example of how people react to movements from a so-called "oppressed group". I just think the reaction is typical.
Am I saying that validates feminism? No. What I am saying is that the backlash is a typical one, and a lot of arguments from that side are just not logical. Like your argument of men having a decision in abortion matters.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"a lot of arguments from that side are just not logical"
You mean like default 50/50 custody?
How about keeping those accused of rape out of the media like the accuser is?
Oh no wait, admitting EVERYONE to domestic violence shelters and not lying about statistics are the none logical ones right?
"Like your argument of men having a decision in abortion matters."
I clearly said that women can abort whatever the hell they want.
I said men should have the ONLY decision with THEIR money.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
When the accusation is false, then the shit hits the fan.
Do you mean false accusations like the one at Hofstra, where Men's Daily News refers to her as "cheapened", and Peyser calls her a "whore"? That one?
Look up what Hofstra means on Urban Dictionary.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"When the accusation is false, then the shit hits the fan."
When the accusation is born the shit hits the fan, bounced around the globe and splatters into the accused face.
Do you really want to compare the hordes of insults, death threats, thefts, destruction of property, "death threats" and everything else that goes along with someone accused of rape?
Why is this? Oh that's right because their faces are plastered over the news before they even know why they have been arrested.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
All of this BEFORE and AFTER the verdict is innocent?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I also find the hypocrisy in this delicious: the video you sent me does exactly what you so ardently warn me not to do. The first argument he makes begins with race. I guess he's pulling a feminist cliché too, huh?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"I guess he's pulling a cliche too, huh?"
Firstly, I said look at the idiot I wiped the floor with who was the actual one that brought race into the issue.
The poster of the video clearly stated that African Americans (men AND women) were the ones in the USA that were oppressed. And he states his disgust at feminists who try to compare their struggle with the struggle of people who fought a war and died for their freedom.
If you don't want to read what I say, stop replying.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
He did not in anyway try and compare any anti-feminist struggle to slavery nor did he try and garner support that way.
Guess who has?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Denial. That's your favourite.
I didn't say he was trying to compare any "anti-feminist struggle to slavery". I was saying that he thinks that "oppression" is something so visible that you have to be tied to a tree, stabbed, or spit on. That's not the way it always works. Things are not as they always appear.
There have been studies done which show a very consistent pattern: employers have a strong bias towards hiring white men.
So what the hell is that? A coincidence?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"there has been a study"
There is always a study on everything.
White men hold the majority of jobs in this country. What the hell is that? A coincidence?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
So you're discounting what I said, before you even read it, and you accuse the feminists of "false science"?
No, it isn't. It's discrimination. Would you agree?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"So you're discounting what I said, before you read it"
No.
"No, it isn't. It's discrimination. Would you agree?"
In the past sure. As I said blacks, men and women, were oppressed. Today, everyone has the same opportunity to get the same job as everyone else.
If there is a case where someone is not hired or paid less because of race, gender, religion or anything along those lines, legal action can be taken.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
But that isn't true.
This isn't what I want to believe, it's true. There's been a good amount of studies done in sociology and psychology that prove that people do NOT have the same opportunities because of discrimination based on their race and gender.
Taking legal action is easier said than done. I would imagine class plays a huge issue here. Income is huge. I don't think most people are willing to go through with it.
That still doesn't mean discrimination isn't alive and well.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Taking legal action is easier said than done."
No. You sue the person who discriminated you because of racism or sexism. Easy.
"There's been a good amount of studies done that prove"
Both what you believe and what I believe.
"That still doesn't mean discrimination isn't alive and well"
Finally we agree on something. Maybe someday we can agree that feminism caused some of it.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I don't think it's feminism. I think it's stupid stereotypes that we all have.
Think about it. Your girlfriend hits you in the face, you call the police, they don't believe you. What's the most reasonable explanation for this?
"She's just a girl. She wouldn't hurt her boyfriend." It's sick and wrong. Do you think feminists are responsible for spreading this stereotype? I think that's possible, but not probable. I think it has a much more deeper rooted history than you think.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
This stereotype has been around before feminism has. And some feminists have been trying hard to change it. Feminism has become a sort of malleable, scattered and hodge-podge of ideologies since the 90's. Women have been trying to transgress gender stereotypes since the 70's, and it is a practice that is somewhat still alive today. Transgressing the "butch feminist" stereotype is very alive in feminists who do cabaret and exotic dancing, while other feminists play with dominant gender norms in
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
other ways. Riot grrrl is a good example of this. The movement which started sometime in the 90's is a good example of how these women and men chose to transgress these gender roles. They are trying to express the idea that there is no way to "be" a woman, per se. There is biology, but to some extent we are socialized from the very beginning to identify as "boy" or "girl", and more often than not this becomes problematic.
If anything, if you take a good and close look at feminism as a movement,
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
you'll see that if anything, they've been trying to destroy the stupid gender stereotype of "she wouldn't hurt him". It's antiquated bullshit. If anything, I would say this stereotype is pretty anti-feminist. Discrimination therefore isn't a consequence of feminism, but a huge digression for it, or at least its multiple and scattered intentions. The stereotype of "she wouldn't hurt her boyfriend" is pretty offensive to me, because I feel that I can be aggressive, hostile and angry and still
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
be a woman, and it's very damaging to the man in the case, because he simply isn't believed. The longer we hang on to these social construct of gender, the more fucked we'll be in the long run. Yes, I believe that my brain has differences with that of the average man's. There are biological differences, I know that. But I can be just as aggressive, evil, good, and nurturing as a man to some extent, in different social contexts. Cross-cultural examinations show us more and more that
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
gender is somewhat of a social construct. There are different ways to be womanly or manly, and we've taken it upon ourselves to adapt one way, and not the other. We need to re-evaluate these.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
As I said before feminists did not create that stereotype but they ran with it. It is seen through feminist domestic violence campaigns, public service announcements, and all of their advertisements.
They have lied about facts and...Christ sakes I typed and provided facts for all of this already.
Again I say the proof is in the lawsuits and the fact that the feminists lost and that sadly more lawsuits are still needed.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
No, they definitely did not. They hate it sometimes.
Why are we using lawsuits as the ultimate moral compass?
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"Why are we using lawsuits as the ultimate moral compass."
Ok forget the lawsuits then. Answer me this.
Why if feminists don't want to propagate men being the only abusers, as they have done for decades, do they only bombard the public with images, videos, pamphlets, billboards, and other advertisements of only men being abusers.
Why do they deny male victims?
Why do they only hire people that believe women are the only victims?
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I don't think they purposefully deny male victims. I think it's very easy to see it that way, but they aren't. I don't think any serious academic department would demonize anyone on purpose.
You could say the same thing about pro-lifers. Are they denying women "choice"? (I hate it when people call them anti-choice, but I'm very pro-choice.) I think their intention is one thing, and it's often misread because people think they have a good idea of what it means to be pro-life.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"I don't think they purposefully deny male victims"
Ok that is your view and you are entitled to it.
However, the facts speak differently than views. They were sued for denying male victims and they were sued for screening employees to see if they believe only women are victims and they were sued for propagating that only men are abusers.
And they lost.
The judge said the evidence of sexism and discrimination was so overwhelming that it was practically an open and shut case.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Also I do not believe in the feminist version of gender socialization.
I was not socialized by society to "identify" as a boy. I am a man because I was born one plain and simple.
There are more than biological differences between men and women. We have biochemical brain differences. We think differently we have different reactions to certain situations. This has been studied but I said myself there are studies on both sides.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Yeah, I know that. I'm not disagreeing with you.
But why do you think it is that different societies have such different ways of "being" a man or woman? If it's biologically hard-wired in us all, why did we chose THIS way and not their's?
You have to admit that to at least some extent, gender is s social construction.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
*is a
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
There is some basis in what you say but in falls in line with my belief of morals.
In the middle east chivalry was almost non existent. In Japan, the far east it was somewhat accepted.
In the west it was dominant.
The key similarity, however, is that women were put in the role of homemaker and men as provider/protector/builder/leader
Am I saying every man is born a natural better leader than a woman? No. Just that these civilizations, with their differences, had core similarities.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Peoples morals, what they believe to be right and wrong changed with the times.
It was once believed it was right for men and women to be restricted to these roles and now it is not. It is believed that both can be accepted.
But the fact remains that the majority of men and women tend to still harbor these traits of the past.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
I don't know about that. I think some things have stuck. I think the Judeo-Christian narrative is one that has stuck around for a few thousand years. Most individuals in this nation identify as 'Christian', and I think a lot of what the Scriptures had to say about gender norms, for example, have stuck around.
Remember, explicit negative prejudices have decreased in the last few decades, but implicit negative prejudices have increased.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
True enough. But judeo christian narrative was not always around and was not all over the world and these things that have stuck were practiced before most religions.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Yes, that's right. I think it's part of the problem, not the entire reason for it. Anytime anyone looks for a single answer to a complex question, they will be wrong.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
But how can you say that? The workforce is almost 50% female now. These attitudes are changing. Women, I think, are somewhat straying from traditional roles. I don't know the reason for this, but they are.
What's interesting, though, is that both females and males are ultimately unhappy with their careers.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"The workforce is almost 50% female"
Yes. Doctors, nurses, social workers, teachers, and etc.
I don't care where a woman wants to work but the fields that women have chosen speak for themselves.
The workhorse, building, or "death jobs" as they are called that were essential for the advancement of technology and civilization have always been dominated by men. In the past it was not considered woman's work but today, when no one is stopping women, the jobs are still 98% male.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
And this is where the problem is.
You are undervaluing women. It is a common error in the workplace, and sadly it will continue to happen. How many teachers are women? Do you think civilization (or perhaps a pleasant one) would exist without them? What about midwives?
Women ARE essential, just as essential, as men for the advancement of civilization.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"you are undervaluing women"
No I'm not. I simply said those are the fields dominated by women. Men in those fields make the same as women yet I am not undervaluing them. I am undervaluing the field in comparison to the other fields.
Teaching someone is important but teachers didn't invent and build everything that has advanced civilization they simply gave men and women basic knowledge. After that it was what people did with that knowledge that pushed humanity forward.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
No, you aren't undervaluing teaching when you say "they didn't invent and build everything that has advanced civilization, they simply gave men and women basic knowledge."
Basic knowledge is the start of civilization. Teachers are just as important and valuable as the engineer, the scientist, and the poet. Without teachers there WOULD be no engineers to build these "advanced civilizations". It's all connected.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
People did, before they taught. People invented, before people were taught how to use inventions.
"without teachers there would be no engineers"
People built, and constructed homes, bridges, and all sorts of things before and after and sometimes without school.
Furthermore, the other reason these professions are valued more are because they are the most dangerous, hence the term "death jobs" and that is one of many reasons why people tend to make more money doing them.
Jmnzz 2 years ago
Not true. There was always some sort of math involved in advanced engineering at some point.
Who gets involved in "death jobs" more? Do you think it's an issue of male/female? I think it was Karl Jaspers who said something like, "if you accept one answer to a complex problem, understand that you haven't understood the answer, nor the problem it is attempting to solve."
Why do most people in "death jobs" get involved in these jobs? Because of class and education issues.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
No wealthy person is going to go climbing on top of 200 meter high bridge for $16/hour, soldering for 8 hours a day, and coming home missing a finger. This is not just an issue of gender, it is mostly an issue of class and education.
And let me remind you that prostitution is indeed a "death job", only sometimes they can't find your body.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
Nor is it legal.
Somethingreallycool 2 years ago
"prostitution is a death job"
Yeah because it is illegal, which I don't agree with. And it does not advance civilization.
"no wealthy person"
Yeah because they have money. Most wealthy people are born wealthy unless they make themselves wealthy by getting taking initiative.
Jmnzz 2 years ago