the feminisim you adhere to is a minority , pinegrove, like many , many of us have grown in response to the prevelant feminisim , if feminisim doesnt exist in its current form , pinegrove wouldnt exist .
MRA videos make men suicidal. Seriously I watched a 20 minute video and came close to jumping of a bridge. They basically say that all women want to do fuck up our lives and that they want to control our brains etc and legions of disenfrachised men like myself fall for it and mistake all feminists for the devil. they are doing more damage than anyone else and creating the gender gap they are protesting. By telling yourself you are being demonized over and over you believe it.
@Adroitism Most of these men that are in the MRA movement have been affected very badly by the gender bias laws , hence will naturally make their rants very depressing. I , as an equalist believe in equal rights, for both genders, and in my research I have seen such male bias laws. So as much as I hate the depressing nature of MRAs, they are trying make a point; in a very distasteful way, but a point nonetheless.
@SickMouth If you watch his videos, he views women as... *people*! Equally flawed by nature, but their flaws have been exacerbated by feminism - women have learned to expect all the benefits of patriarchy, with none of the obligations.
Quite frankly, the majority of you are spoiled children, with an utter inability to think rationally, or hold responsibility. This is not innate, and I know plenty of counter-examples - they are the exceptions which prove the rule.
@Aurini Back it up with evidence or GTFO. Pointing out the fact that my reproductive rights are being attacked by my government is not being spoiled. It's an advocation of my own interests.
Now, if you have proof that most women are the way you say, then perhaps I'll engage you -- but if you post another comment without the proof I've requested, I'm honestly just going to write you off as a misogynist. Anyone who calls most women "spoiled" is a dumbfuck, honestly.
@SickMouth While 'spoiled' isn't exactly a measurable term, I can provide a great example of women en aggregate behaving in a non-consciencious manner: dalrock wordpress com 2011 12 20 is-frivolous-divorce-overstated-in-the-manosphere
70% of divorces are initiated by the woman, and what evidence there is strongly suggests frivolous reasons. Regardless of what you think about marriage vows, breaking them - particularly when you get $ out of the bargain - shows one to be dishonest.
@Aurini I couldn't access the link after inserting the periods...and citing a blog is unwise. But even if I were to concede it, how many women get divorced every year *worldwide?* How can you prove that this has nothing to do with only *our* culture? How many women are lesbian or bisexual who can't get divorced from their female partners because they can't get married to them in the first place? How does this at all prove that most women are gold-digging dishonest people?
@SickMouth Very irritating that YT doesn't allow URLs; the d in 'overstated' breaks, but if you replace it you get the correct address; alternatively googling [dalrock "is frivolous divorce overstated in the manosphere"] should yield the proper result
I cite the blog because it links to the raw data, and explores it thoroughly. Seriously, you should read it; it is not an MRA conspiracy blog, it is pro-marriage (with caveats).
@Aurini I WOULD read it if the link actually worked. Why cite the blog rather than the link IN the blog, anyhow? Why not lead me directly to the freakin' information itself???
@SickMouth The article sites statistics from various Western countries - those infected by feminism.
Lesbian and gay relationships are not comparable to heterosexual; I say this as a bisexual. Lesbians have far higher incidents of DV, gays are far less likely to get married. Common sense knows they are different.
What it shows is that *modern* women are unable to hold true to their word. It is one of many examples of female disfunction. It is an example of misandry.
@Aurini It's not an article, it's a blog. A blog is not reliable. And the statistics need to come from a reliable source. If you can't give me a URL that works, I'm not going to engage you. You can try PMing it to me, but I still googled it and couldn't find it. Why should I take your argument seriously? You are also not backing up your claims about homosexual couples, and if you do so, you may just give me another dud link...
I actually came across this guy before ZOMGistcriss serendipitously favorited one of your videos which subsequently led me to your excellent channel.
The impression I got of him is that he sees women as objects of pleasure and domestic maintenance, and anyone suggesting otherwise is assaulting his rights. He has the right to drive about in his monster truck with a gun in one hand and his dick in the other. He has the right to fuck. He has the right to a sandwich.
I read a story about two women, a mother and daughter. How nice. Both trying to extort a car and money out of man and they said they would accuse him of rape if he didn't. The man ended up buying them a car. Then they tried to get more. Eventually they got caught and got the obligatory feminist slap on the wrist. Like usual. Must have been bipolar. So tell me that isn't evil. But I know feminists won't take any accountability. That's enough for now anyways. I have plenty more.
@Bisquack Link to the article, with proof that this happens because of "feminists" rather than just a society that promotes greed. I'll give you one last chance to make a claim that's back by evidenciary support.
I have a question for you to think over. If you're a feminist who supports men's equality - and there are a lot of feminists like you - then why is every, single feminist movement, or legislative push, about raising women up, while putting men down? Domestic violence by a woman get's the man kicked out of his home - consensual sex is illegal if she changes her mind two days later.
Can you think of one example where feminists stood up for men?
@Aurini The recent push by the Feminist Majority for the FBI to redefine rape was successful, and benefits all rape victims including male victims. Unless you think that men can't be raped. And that last statement about a woman getting to call consentual sex rape if she decides it was a bad idea? Not true. That wouldn't get any time in court. Go educate yourself about rape and its definition under the law, and how its treated in the legal system.
@SM I could throw that 'asinine' comment right back at you.
Primary aggressor laws are written in an equally gender neutral way - and yet (obviously) in practice, they lead to the arrest of abused men, and no-drop prosecutions are a travesty of justice.
Rape was perfectly clearly defined already; this expansion of the def'n (which will be used selectively) overturns the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'.
As an entitled princess, you don't have to fear the cops; I do
Just as I was beginning to develop a glimmer of respect for your ability to reason, you engage in the precise sort of 'trollish' name-slinging you make a point of banning, by regulated comments, and stated policy.
Rape was already illegal - of women and men - this new law will see more innoncents locked up for false accusations, but there will be nothing done for men who are raped. Read between the lines; stop buying everything at face value.
@Aurini No, sir. The legal definition of rape according to the FBI was, from 1929 up until this year,"the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will." This does not include men, obviously. newschannel10 (dot) com / story / 16465878/fbi-revises-legal-definition-of-rape
@SickMouth I was wrong; however, this legislation is still questionable:
"The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object... without the consent of the victim."
In Japan, schoolchildren will prank eachother by trying to shove their index fingers up the other's anus. This would be criminalized under this, as would dozens of other non-rape situations. I expect rampant abuse of this legislation, and doubt it will do much to protect men.
@Aurini OH, I get it -- so because children do something, that makes it okay?? No. Unless the kids involved have made it clear that they don't mind surprise butt-fingering to their group of friends, and have set up parameters so that they all agree on when, where, and how they are comfortable with participating in this, it's still a form of rape.
@SickMouth Please try and stay focussed on the point.
The point is that this 'scandalous' (and relatively harmless) behaviour is NOT rape. Somebody who engages in this - even an adult - does not deserve to be locked up in a place where real rape happens (and is almost never prosecuted).
You are criminalizing non-criminal behaviour; it's the same as equating child-rape-videos with 17yos posing in the mirror. Your over-regulation is evil, cruel, and destructive.
A rape prison sentence will destroy a person; a rape will severely harm a person; having a finger shoved into your butt, as a prank, without your consent is less damaging than consistent taunting by bullies.
You're trying to equate a youthful prank to a foul-smelling knife-point rape in an alley. That's ridiculous. I suppose I was 'raped' when my highschool football coach slapped my butt during a game?
@Aurini WHO said that all rape has the same effects?? NO ONE! Continue reading shit into my words that aren't there, really. It's quite amusing. Not all rape occurs at knife-point in an alley, and every person responds differently. They should have the right to press charges in any situation. And if you had been made uncomfortable by your coach slapping your ass, you could have charged him with sexual harassment -- but because you didn't mind, you have the choice to NOT do that!
@SickMouth Do you really want the cops involved in any situation where somebody feels 'uncomfortable'? Do you have any idea how destructive the state's involvement is, where it is unwarranted? The cops and social workers are an evil - perhaps the lesser of two evils, but an evil nonetheless.
What if a couple of gay men discussing gay sex makes me uncomfortable? A couple kissing on their wedding day? Where does the rabbithole end?
@Aurini You don't get it. Talking does not constitute as a violation of someone's ability to consent to a sexual act or to being touched sexually without their consent! Also, sexual harassment CAN be verbal. You're taking my argument down a slippery slope, and it's not working for you.
@Aurini NOW did at one point criticize the draft as sexist against women. Also, it was mostly feminists who called on the FBI to expand the legal definition of rape, and DEMANDED that they include men in that definition. There are your examples.
@SickMouth The letter of the law, and the practice of the law, are two separate things, as James Ball so strongly articulated. If NOW criticized it, then it wasn't evil enough for them; and I have yet to see a feminist who will give up privilege for equality.
Also, you haven't replied to the article which I sent you. It demonstrates how women will use and mistreat loyal men, while men don't do the same in return, not to the same degree.
@Aurini I'm still looking over the data!! Or do you not actually want me to examine it, and for me to just take your word? Yeah, right. Give me a second to actually LOOK at your evidence, for christ's sake!
@jenlokken Are you sure PG33 is not spending too much time obsessing about how much women suck?
It's called constructive criticism, not "obsession." If I were obsessed my channel would be devoted to him. Now go bother someone else with your dense questions.
It is so common & predictable for people to view the whole world according to their personal experiences. That's the impression I get from MRAs who deny that feminists have any legitimate complaints. Yet they won't hesitate to point out the disadvantages they have as men. I agree with many of their claims about unfair treatment, but why do they think they're the only ones who are being abused? And how could they lump equity feminists, like Camille Paglia & Christina Hoff Sommers, with rad fems?
@prschuster "And how could they lump equity feminists, like Camille Paglia & Christina Hoff Sommers, with rad fems?" They don't! They are heroes to many MRAs, including myself. I consider them humanists because of their fair dealings. Even if they self-identify as feminists.
The rad fems are the hate-mongering berserkers of the feminist movement.The other hyphenated types of feminists,who may hate men less, consolidate their gains.Other women reap those gains feeling both oppressed and entitled!
@prschuster You hold the same views I do. Men have legitimate complaints, but these MRAs blame all feminists of all schools everywhere for the few ills men suffer, and say that they're the sole source of these ills, when most of the time feminists aren't the source of those ills -- it's traditional ideas about gender that are promoted not by feminists, but just by society in general. Demonizing one thing and calling it "the enemy" is intellectually dishonest and lazy, IMO.
@SickMouth I posted on a facebook page about Valerie Solanas. You can read my criticisms about her misandry if you go there. And you can see how I was bombarded with the wrath of Lilith. Then you can review the way MRAs have responded to my comments about mysogyny in the men's movement. Isn't it eerie how similar those diametrically opposed extremes are.
@prschuster The radical feminists and the MRAs who constantly bitch about feminism behave very similarly. They both believe that there's only one cause of the suffering of their gender, and they have ONE target that they demonize as the root of all evil, when the issues the genders face are MUCH more complex than that. It's intellectual laziness and dishonesty, and it reveals how little they care about the actual issues, and much they care about just pointing fingers.
@SickMouth This is the problem with extremist and radical views in general. I've learned from experience that the most purist proponents of any cause tend to be very narrow in their undrstanding, and anger or resentment hijacks their brains to give them tunnel vision. You can't reason with an anger person. There'as no such thing as angry nuance.
@SickMouth Ultra-radical views, which tend to feed off of anger & resentment, are really survival tactics. They draw upon more primitive parts of the brain that are geared for self defense. Critical thinking is not needed when you are fighting for your survival. The object of survival mode is to identify the enemy and destroy him (rad fems) or her MRAs). This, I think, describes to a T why these people have such tunnel vision.
@SickMouth "MRAs blame all feminists of all schools everywhere for the few ills men suffer"I would dispute the few ills part, but ignoring that,the difference is one of perception.If the radicals only make up a tiny proportion of the whole,but have disproportionate influence,then it is reasonable to criticise feminism, since that is the banner they operate under.
Both pg33 and myself are admirers of Christina Hoff Sommers. I even subscribe to lacigreen, even though I don't always agree with her.
It's got nothing to do with sexism or crazy, it's got to do with BIAS.
A man claims he likes talking to women, he's a big feminist and his research shows talking to women makes you happier.
And yes, Bernard would have accepted a study that stated that talking to men makes you happier; as would I. Not because we're sexist, but because there's no gain in releasing such results. In fact, have pro-male results is usually BAD for you. Fired, funding cut, and more such consequences usually follow.
@3DMaster Oh please. If this author was "a big feminist," why would Bernard even consider his work? And if this data was collected reliably, would Bernard still accept it? I think not. The author may or may not be biased, but there's no doubt that Bernard is biased. If you can back up the claim that "pro-male" results cause cuts to funding and such, I'd be more inclined to believe you. Besides, gender studies departments are hardly well-funded in the first place.
I have also watched a number of his videos and it turns out the Mr. Clean is shameless to attack respectable academic scholars without logic, but instead he just uses words like "mangina" "socialist" etc.
The ONLY people that will believe him are people who believe in his bullshit to begin with. It's just like the 700 club, the only people who take them seriously are people who believe in the same BS.
@Eceoes Pretty much! He's an incredibly reprehensible person. He doesn't upload videos about legitimate men's issues that sex-positive feminists address -- it's all anti-feminist crap, as if radical feminists are the root of all that is wrong with the world. -_-
@SickMouth But they are the root of whats wrong with the world. Well western society anyways and any other society they sunk their fangs in. I'm totally anti feminist. But on the flipside I do like seeing the destruction that this is causing. I just say thats a result of feminism. I will always be against you and fighting against your rights. Fuck equality. It will never happen.
@Bisquack PROVE that they're the root of all evil in the world. Seriously. I'd love to see you try and back that claim up. Meanwhile, sex-pozzie feminists like me are going to keep making sure that people are treated decently. You said, "fuck equality, it will never happen." Well then, if you don't believe that everyone deserve equal rights, then YOU don't deserve YOUR rights.
@SickMouth Well prove to me that it isn't. What rights do I have anyways? Do I have any rights when it comes to being a father? Equality is way too broad and is not logical or possible with all the different people and religions and cultures out there. They conflict with each other. How are you going to make them all equal? It's impossible. And feminist equality most men realize actually means female privilege. The term feminism itself is sexist.
@Bisquack I'm not the one making the claim, and being intellectually honest, I don't have to prove a negative. In regard to the term "feminism" -- women didn't have equal rights under the law, and so the FEMinist movement was created because FEMALE citizens weren't satisfied with the way they were being treated. They couldn't vote or own property or pursue a decent level of education. The name hasn't changed, but the cause has. Now feminists examine multiple facets of gender issues.
@Bisquack So if you want to call us "gender egalitarians," you can do that too. But arguing semantic aspects such as what we label ourselves isn't important. What's important is what we DO. So either respect our work, or just go on bitching about how equality is impossible. It's that kind of attitude that makes it more difficult to achieve equality -- but we look at it different, and the result is that people are suffering less.
Mr. Clean- I mean Pinegrove is very obnoxious. He tries to come off as someone who is intellectual and as someone who is part of a "right's Movement". In reality, he is someone with an oldschool agenda, just like Paul Elam, just like Manwomanmyth, just like any other MRA.
He is not part of a "rights movement" he is just part of a backlash against feminism.
@Eceoes "oldschool agenda" The last thing MRAs want is a return to traditional values. Chivalrous disposability isn't our bag! Your confusing us with fundamentalist religious types! Congrats for being able to name a few MRAs. You obviously haven't listened to much of what they say though.
I think we need to be able to generalise and stereotype to cover broad realities, we cant only talk about the women who do the wrong thing. A generalisation is based on majority fact or perception. Like cats generally have 4 legs, when we knpw no all do, so are born with less or lose one etc. But the generalisation is valid and appropriate.
@wardawk Then I get to generalize MRAs the way that most people see them on YouTube -- they are militant, misogynistic insecure heterosexual white males who are homophobic and transphobic, who hide behind a message of men's rights in order to try to make their crusade seem admirable, when in reality they only want to keep women down. There. Is that fair?
@SickMouth Nope a generalisation must be majority fact or perception, so as that isnt the case for the MRM but is the case for Femsluts then you cant follow our suit without being wrong at the same time that we are right. Life is not fair.
@wardawk That IS a majority perception. Majority fact? No. That's not what a generalization is. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You're obviously too biased to have any kind of fair conversation. You do not get to have it one way and not the other. Tah tah, asshole.
I dont think we are in the same choir just yet. Some of your points are valid to me, others are not, infact some are dialectically opposed to by ethos.
@wardawk If you post a comment like that, you have to explain yourself. And if you say that men suffer more than women, I'm going to not take you seriously right off of the bat.
@SickMouth Men suffer more in some areas, women in others. But the Feminist movement is failing to represent women because its leader and direction are controlled by lesbians. MRA have no hope of competing with Feminism because its controls the Domestic Violence Industry to fund its anti-male agenda. Women are waking up to areas where Feminism is failing them. You dont need to be in Feminism the Movement to be a good feminist.
@SickMouth No because the MRM isnt a corrupted lesbian run organisation. Feminism is a hate group, but individual feminists are just that individuals, being misled for sure but not all inherently bad.
@wardawk If you don't have to use logic or evidence to support your claim that "feminism is a corrupted lesbian organization," then I don't have to use logic or evidence to support my claim that the MRM is a misogynistic organization of men who are homophobic and transphobic, who are so insecure in their masculinity that they have to blame strong women for all of society's problems. Oh, but, individual MRA's can be okay. But the ENTIRE MOVEMENT IS EVIL! -_-
@SickMouth Obviously our opinions differ on the issue, but I am not about to get into debate with you when you cant be convinced otherwise I think. But you only need to look at many parts of the Feminist movement ands things like the SCUM manifesto and the majority of Lesbians who run the movement. Women are realising that being feminist and being involved with the aparatus called the Feminist Movement isnt necessary to establish equality. Feminism doesnt represent women.
@wardawk See, that's the problem with people like you. You assume that I haven't looked this shit up, or that I have NO IDEA about "what feminism really is." I can give you all the information on the different schools of feminism, but you won't care because you want to continue to drink the hateful MRA kool-aid. And if you have evidence that feminism is evil or whatever, YOU are responsible for providing ME with that evidence.
@SickMouth No I have not assumed you didnt look it up, I am concentrating on the fact that many good frminists may not be full aware how deep and how much control and direction the fanatic feminists have within the Movement, hate full things like making t-shirts for littl girls with the slogan "Boys are stupid. Throw rocks at them" (violence), or the SCUM manifestos idea's on sorting out or cuting up men. The Femnazi wants men redundant and regualated to menial dnagerous tasks for society.
@wardawk And moderate and sex-positive feminists like me, who are the MAJORITY, are fighting against those things. YOU ARE PREACHING TO THE CHOIR HERE, PAL. Stop it.
By the way I am happier speaking to males. Does that make me sexist? If I prefer speaking to females does that make me sexist against males? No matter what is chosen some sex is left out and that is the point.Just because someone prefers the conversation of one sex or the other does not make them sexist. Interfering or denying the rights of a sex is sexism, lets not get it twisted and assume that Bernard is sexist for having a pro-male opinion for which he has the right to have and express.
@jarredf30 And yet he doesn't like the fact that the author of the book prefers to talk to women. Did you even watch the video? I said I don't CARE if you have a preference. But Bernard shames people who prefer to talk to women. Does that make him sexist? Hmmm...
The book he quotes is not a peer reviewed scientific article(although the book may be quoting one for which I do not know) if the book is not going to provide citations to those studies then he has every right to question them and even if they are published he can question them because that is what we as scientists do in order to determine the best possible(although not complete or perfect) answers to our questions.
People with doctorates can be wrong. Questioning a study (whether scientific or not) is part of the scientific method and is not sexism.In the school of psychology,sociology,anthropology,physics,or biology, questioning the validity of a study is good science no matter what that studies conclusion. Bernards questions were sarcastic due to the absurd findings of these (scientific studies). If these scientists provide evidence and further studies in support, then he may be wrong but not sexist.
@jarredf30 In the video I made the same statement -- it's okay to question the findings of data. But then he goes on to basically implying that all women are nagging, whining, bitching, self-absorbed golddiggers. He thinks talking to women making others happier is impossible because women are self-absorbed, overly-sensitive, selfish creatures. THAT is where I disagree with him. See my point?
If those few privileges didn't have such a great impact on today's society, I wouldn't have a problem with them either. But when you have a massively biased family court system, gestapo like VAWA, equal outcomes for unequal work loads, unequal prison time for equal crime, 94% of maintenance rulings going to women even when the wage gap has been debunked beyond doubt. And I could go on. I especially liked when Hilary Clinton says the greatest victims in war are women. Dieing in war= male exclusif
@nickb275 Moderate/sex-positive feminists are concerned with everything you just mentioned, in general. As for war -- ever heard of "comfort women?" In the western world, sure -- men get the short end of the stick in certain circumstances, just as women get the short end of the stick in others. Both sexes suffer because of gender inequality. In the middle east and many parts of Asia, women have it much worse than men. When speaking of feminism, I don't keep it western-centric.
@pinegrove33 is the biggest joke I have come across on youtube thus far. He's a libertarian who blocks and removes dissenting people because he can't defend himself.
@whatnameisavailablee That's pretty much what he did to me, because I respectfully challenged his views. And once he couldn't defend his beliefs anymore because I pointed out his hypocrisy, he blocked me and, as butthurt as ever, told me that I'd "oppressed" him. Psh...
I don't understand this woman, if she is a lesbian... who cares? What is she complaining about? Why does she hate men so much? Why do lesbian feminists hate men all the time? I mean... what the hell, live your life, be a lesbian, find yourself a girlfriend and stop judjing others. Why are you so hateful? Why are you so sexist agains males? If you are sad, miserable and angry just deal with your own problems without attacking an entire group. I mean... you hate all men?? wtf? Are you mad? Grow up
but maybe you are, both of you, because you see, most men AND women don't want to spend the rest of their lives bashing the opposit sex. You wrote that you DO "hate men who hate women", but there are also women who hate men, so you are just giving a blind eye to the whole thing, ignoring that there are many women who are misandric, and you only care about men who hate women. That sounds as a double standard to me. Most of us, men and women, don't want to hate just anyone.
@clinjastoshi Who ever said that I don't hate women who hate men? Seriously, if you continue to assume things about me just because I call myself a feminist, you'll be blocked. It's obvious that you're not interested in actually understanding my position or having a discussion.
Oh you can block me if you want, after all this is your site, so do as you wish, it's only showing that most feminists aren't prepared for freedom of speech, democracy and liberty. If you impose censorship only because people have different opinions, do as you want. However I do see the paradox in your arguments. You write that you hate men who hate women, and you also hate women who hate men. So why be a feminist and not a masculist? I am neither, because it doesn't make any sense.
@clinjastoshi It does make sense. Feminism fought for and achieved many things for me. If it weren't for feminism, I would not be permitted to vote or work. Feminism was the original movement for equal rights for the sexes. I also call myself a humanist.
You say it doesn't make sense, but what REALLY doesn't make sense is how you assumed that I am a lesbian who hates men just because I of how I choose to label myself. And then you say, "stop judging others." Yeah...
well you are not being entirely honest since it was a question, read my comment: "Is she a lesbian?"
However I don't care about your sexual orientation. You write that feminism has done a lot for you and women, well that's just selfish isn't it. We should promote a way of thinking which helps all humans, not only women. So basically feminists are women who care about women and help women, that has nothing to do with altruism and has a lot to do with selfishness. But you ARE judging.
@clinjastoshi Again, you assume that a feminist can't also be OTHER things. Did you not read the part of my last comment that said, "I also call myself a humanist"?? Just because you're a feminist doesn't mean you're not a humanist as well, because certain schools of feminism are a PART of humanism.
So in that regard, YOU are judging. You are assuming things about feminists that are unfounded.
Ok so why can't you be a feminis, a humanist and a masculist?
Why can't you just go for humanism and promote equality for all? Women AND men? Don't humanist promote egalitarism? isn't egalitarism equality for all? Why the need for feminism, and why not feminism AND mascuslim? I fail to see the logic there. plus, If you say that you are a humanist, that would itself include feminism and mascuslim, since it is promoting equality for all, so including women. What is wrong with egal.sm?
@clinjastoshi Why should we do away with moderate feminism if it agrees with principles of humanism? Why do you care? Why are you so concerned with how we choose to label ourselves?
1. The simple fact that you write "moderate feminism" clearly means that there is a "non-moderate one".
2. The fact that it agrees with the principles of humanism makes it irrelevant to those who find in humanism the principles of equaity, respect, tolerance and freedom.
3. I am concerned with the way we choose to lable ourselves because words are extremely important, otherwise we lose logic, rational thinking an respect for a decent democratic debate. There's no need for femsm if you're a humst
@clinjastoshi I'm sorry that you think feminism is worthless and unnecessary -- humanism can't focus on very specific issues all the time and tackle all of the minute details all the time, and many humanists may be pro-life -- while many feminists aren't. Then there'd be a divide between pro-life and pro-choice humanists. You can't avoid division. People DISAGREE on things. So don't blame feminism for division and partisan dealings. Blame the fact that people DISAGREE.
But of course people disagree, that's the beauty of democracy. So, are you prepared to accept the fact that many people, both men and women, disagree on feminism, and have the democratic right to reject it if they find it to be worthless, unnecessary and irrelevant? Bear in mind that in the future people will find humanism far more necessay than feminism because it is much more inclusive than feminism. But yes people do disagree. That's precisely what I am doing here. I disagree.
@clinjastoshi I love how you characterize feminism as not inclusive...do your research.
I never said I don't "accept" that people won't agree with me, but I won't accept it without first pointing out why I disagree. Feminism is good because it gives more focused and centralized attention to issues concerning sexism. Civil rights activism is good because it gives more focused and centralized attention to issues concerning racism. See my point?
The sad thing is that I did my research, and I found a lot of hatred, misandry, shaming tactics, blame game, false statistics, male bashing and so on. Most laws in America are incredibly sexist, much more than here in Europe. Most american laws are entirely tilted in favour of women, mothers and wives, leaving american men in a condition of a second class citizen. Feminism is just wrong, american feminism is a fascist ideology. No wonder so many people inyour country are so concerned
So what if you did your research on nazism, and say you found the very same things I put in my last comment, and you were horrified by those things, how would you react if I wrote: "Then you only did research on the negative aspects, and not the positive. Now get to work on that". I don't think you can possibly save only the good bits of a corrupted ideology, and leave the "inconvenient ones" out of the picture. What would you think of a serial rapist who was also an excelnt dentis?
@clinjastoshi You made a very invalid comparison. Feminism originated as a movement for equal rights for women, who DID NOT have the rights that men had. Nazism originated as a movement for genocide. You are a brainwashed, biased fool who doesn't care to look at anything objectively.
well offending me the feminist way is clearly going to help this debate, isn't it. However nazism didn't start as a movement for genocide at all, so you should study history a little harder, genocide came later in the early 40s, some 15 years after the birth of the nazi movement, so you should look at things more objectively. Most men today say that feminism is a fascist movement because it is slowly getting to the point where men are usually shamed, blamed and disciminated against.
@clinjastoshi And then there's the OTHER faction of feminism, called MODERATE feminism (as opposed to the RADICAL feminism that you continue to cite). Moderate feminism and sex-positive feminists fight for men's rights and men's social benefits as well. That's why I told you to do your research. And when someone says "research," know that they mean UNBIASED and reliable sources. Look up moderate feminism and sex-positive feminism.
what you are writing is in part true, however I wonder how radical feminism started and why was there ever the need for such a hateful thing as radical feminism. You can't really deny that most radical feminists were and are completely anti-male, which is not going to help anyone. Is the slutwalk "sex-positive" feminism? Or is the VAWA sex-positive feminism? Plus, are "sex-positive" feminists fighting against radical feminism? Are they against anti-male laws? Are they helping men?
@clinjastoshi Why there was ever "a need" for it? It just HAPPENED. There are extreme factions of every movement that's ever existed. There are extremist Muslims and vegetarians and nationalists. Every movement has it's psychotic, crazy assholes. No one denied that they are anti-male. Anyhow, not evey sex-positive supports the things you mentioned, but some do. Sex-positives are against anti-male laws and take every opportunity to help men. Look up KrissyTheWorldWithin and Divinity33372.
ok so I really hope "sex-positive" feminists are going to fight against the VAWA, misandry, and are going to make sure that 50% of those who win a divorce case, alimony, or child custody, are going to be men, since in America the great majority of those who win a trial are always women, and talk about discrimination (and that clearly shows the great damage radical feminism has done in Usa). Do positive feminists know that 97% of blue collar, construction workers in theStates are men?
@clinjastoshi Seriously, can you stop preaching? I KNOW all the stuff you're telling me. I'm not an ignorant fool like pinegrove33. Quit with the preaching or gtfo.
@SickMouth Just because he is preaching , does not mean you have justification to tell him to GTFO. What about the others on here who might not know about that information, have you no respect. he did not even flame you.
@Manoffriendship I can indeed. He makes arguments from ignorance, and continues to harp on me about things that he KNOWS I already know, even AFTER I point out that he is assuming a crap ton of things about me and what I believe. It's not "flaming," but it is obnoxious and pompous and presumptuous. You tell me to be respectful, even though HE isn't being respectful to ME? Am I to understand that you're advocating a double-standard here???
@SickMouth I am not trying to argue or have double standards, but his posts do suggest logic and facts have been well researched. I don't see why you felt you had to tell him to gtfo rather than telling him whether feminists will fights discrimination against men, because this still occurs. How can you call him presumptuous when he stated facts, which are true. Now he did not show disrespect in his tone, and bringing up the nazism was odd, but he still kept in conventions of a proper debate.
@Manoffriendship He has not done his research, because he says that feminists like me don't do anything to help men, and that we don't fight against things like VAWA and child custody -- when we DO fight against those injustices. I have fought with feminists to try to end these things that are not fair to men, and he said that we don't try to do that. He is NOT informed about what we do. I have every right to tell him to stop being one-sided.
@SickMouth His facts are correct. But it is good to know that you have done something about men's rights. So, out of curiosity, how come radical feminists cannot see your view point. I mean for some reason they seem to be the ones dominating. You guys should do something cool like over throw them, because unlike radical feminists, you are for equal rights. I am not asking this to start any anger, I am genuinely curious.
@Manoffriendship They are the ones dominating because they are the ones who capture the public's attention. Hateful and offensive rhetoric stick in the minds of the people better, and when they hear the sex-positives, the like to call us "dirty hippies" or they stick us in the same box with the radical fems. We're doing whatever we can. Radical feminists, just like these hateful YouTube MRAs, have issues with the opposite sex.
@SickMouth It's a mistake to think that MRAs view all feminists as the same. We view some as more culpable and offensive than others. Some like Christina Hoff Sommers are practically loved by many MRAs.
How many of pinegrove33's videos have you watched? I don't think you appreciate his satirical style! Have you watched any of manwomanmyth's videos? If so,what do you make of the points they make?
There is mistreatment of both sexes throughout the world.Western perceptions are often biased though!
@SickMouth "Radical feminists, just like these hateful YouTube MRAs, have issues with the opposite sex." No we have issues with feminism, but we don't confuse feminism with women in general. Pinegrove33 has said this himself in many of his videos!
However, the cost-benefit analysis of having relations with women today, causes increasing numbers of men to have less and less to do with them. BTW I do generally prefer talking to women as well!
well, first he was quoting the author and secondly he is correct in saying that conversations with women are not as interesting than with men.... men talk about so much more than women do.
@o0POSH0o Where was he quoting the author directly?
And secondly, your statement about women proves just how much of an ignorant asswipe you are. I can't be kind about this -- pinegrove and his followers, the majority of whom seem to be just as vapid as you, base their beliefs and opinions on stereotypes and conspiratorial propaganda.
Do us all a favor and stop reading books authored by the likes of Ann Coulter..
Since when are men more interesting than women? I've nearly fallen asleep listening to men. All they talk about is sports, cars, and women. Women talk about art, science, and politics. Women are better communicators/thinkers. Blame the universe.
@AirForceGirl05 Eh, generalizations either way aren't fair. Some men talk about sports and cars, and some women talk about clothes and celebrity gossip, all four of which I find banal. We have to deal with everyone on an individual basis. This is where Pinegrove and others like him are failing -- they generalize.
@Oozingmachismo24 I really think those who try to bring this up as an area where feminists are retreating into their female privilege are full of crap. Most feminists I know realize it as a fundamentally sexist requirement, but these feminists are also anti-war and will not fight for anything but elimination of the draft. It's not a gender issue to them, but a political one -- and they oppose it on all fronts.
@Oozingmachismo24 Also, there's a large number of feminists that HAVE spoken out against the "traditional" draft. The National Organization for Women (NOW) passed a resolution in 1980 opposing males-only draft registration as discriminatory and the ACLU's Women's Rights Project provided aid to the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case Rostker v. Goldberg, in which the plaintiff unsuccessfully challenged males-only draft registration.
@Oozingmachismo2 And if I recall our laws correctly (ERA), there is nothing that prohibits Congress from drafting women. Besides, there's hardly any likelihood that a draft will happen in the future -- so feminists aren't concerning themsleves with this issue full-time. Right now they're tackling more prevalent matters, like our culture of sexual assualt victim-balming. If the draft becomes a REAL issue, REAL soon, they will turn their attention to it.
Implying in many videos that we are all vain, bitchy, vapid, emasculating, evil demon seductresses".
No, you're wrong here. He's stating this to be case for only the women he is quoting. He isn't implying this to be true of all women. Just the ones he is quoting.
And who are the specific women whom he is quoting? If you can't answer that, YOU are the wrong one here. That video had NO mention of specific, individual women, and invoking "personal experience" as proof of ANYTHING against statistics is flat out ignorant.
I think most of your objections are fair, but I have serious doubts about this "research study" too. People use the word "scientific" much too loosely these days - science requires a hypothesis with reasoned justification, or you can fall into the trap of magical thinking.
Given that how a conversation makes you feel should logically depend entirely upon the content and tone of the conversation, I'd be extremely wary of accepting the idea that talking to women but not men makes you happy.
@AJTheFriendlyTaoist It's fine to question the reliability of a study and its data. It's when you have no basis to question the data and you just don't LIKE the data -- that's just denial.
@AJTheFriendlyTaoist The problem with your last paragraph lies in the apparent assumption that emotional reactions have a basis in logic. I haven't read the study yet, but I'm willing to bet it wasn't put in as absolute terms as you state. Might there be errors in how the study was constructed or could it have been too small? Quite possibly. It certainly should be looked at with a certain degree of skepticism. All studies should. But the charge of "magical thinking" seems unjustified.
@Maxdwolf It is textbook magical thinking: "I was doing this when that happened, so that was caused by this". It's not science. There's no guarantee whatsoever that the basis of the study had anything to do with the result because there's no reasonable hypothesis to explain what you should expect and why.
These days far too many people give the weight of science to experimentation that's just "let's see what happens when..." and while that can be interesting, it's not automatically science.
Pinegrove has an audience, he strikes a cord with a fairly large number of men. He brings up a necessary points, if it is buried under his politics. I don't think his opinions on women are necessarily bad, as plenty of women hold equally as bizarre views of men. I think maybe more feminists should watch his videos they may see their reflection in him. He is a crusader just the same, but a crusader for someone else's cause, specifically not your cause. Your disagreement is inevitable.
@TselkeNoddles I think he strikes a cord with a large number of angry and prejudiced men -- not just the average man. As a feminist, legitimate men's issues ARE of concern to me and to claim otherwise is speculative and judgmental. I've never claimed that he and other MRAs don't have legitimate concerns. However, his blatant sexism (implying in many videos that we are all vain, bitchy, vapid, emasculating, evil demon seductresses) make him comparable to radfems -- the very people he opposes.
@SickMouth I think there is a major difference however between Pinegrove and the Radfems as you call them. Pinegroves holds no power, no legitimacy in common culture. "Radfems" have vaunted teaching positions and can affect public policy, they can speak in the media and have an aura of legitimacy, they can write tomes for which many young people must read and study, "radfems" have power, Pinegrove does not.
@TselkeNoddles All of the male politicians who are, as we speak, trying to take away a woman's reproductive rights, who are trying to make women prove to the government that they didn't cause their own misacarriages, have much more power right now than any radfem. Explain that.
@SickMouth Simple, not everyone who is against abortion is male. In fact I recall being in relatively small class on a college campus. The question of abortion came up (note the class was overwhelmingly female, including the instructor, me and one other were the only males out of a class of 20) and I, the evil male devil instrument of the Patriarchal conspiracy person with a penis, didn't think abortion should be illegal. Radfems have institutional power in the media and the universities (cont-)
@SickMouth (continued) however people like Pinegrove have little actual power. Pinegrove only holds sway if the masses of people who listen to him ever actually take action. Pinegrove only has power and sway when things like tea party activism happen. In the vein the world of business is more the institutions you should look to to find your male devils.
@SickMouth Lol, where exactly are these evil female-suppressing male politicians trying to take away women's reproductive rights? Are you talking about anti-abortionists? If so, they are not trying to take away your 'reproductive rights', they believe that abortion is MURDER and that murder is ILLEGAL, stop victimizing yourself. Most politicians, if anything, are incredibly biased towards women's groups and cater to their sexist VAWA-esque policies.
@SickMouth If it's 'your own body', then why did it take something for somebody else's body to grow in your body? Some people think murdering a living, breathing thing is OPPRESSION. Whatever, I'm not debating abortion with you and I'm not even necessarily anti-abortion.
The difference is that you have legions of feminazi's lined up to support your garbage pseudo-equality 'movement' but men have nothing. Men are FAR more oppressed than women have ever been and the backlash is only starting.
@TheAryoBarzan87 Men owned and controlled everything until maybe a decade ago -- and in many respects, they still do. The dominant group makes the rules. Any "oppression" that men face was created BY men, FOR men.
@SickMouth Also, 95% of the oppression men suffer from was created by women. These stupid broads that advocate genital mutilation of males and tell men they need to 'act like a man' when they are oppressed are the true oppressors. But don't worry, our numbers grow everyday and there will be a violent backlash towards you feminazi's very soon in the future.
@TheAryoBarzan87 You're not backing up your claims with any evidence. Where did you get the 95% figure? No, sir. The "guy rules" and the impossible male ideal was created by the dominant group throughout human history, which is MEN. Women weren't even listened to throughout the vast majority of human history, so why would any "rules" for manhood that they made up be taken seriously. You're looking for excuses to hate women, and you need to do your research.
@SickMouth The reason women 'weren't listened to' in society is because men were the ones that PRODUCED things. You know, that car you drive, the house you live in, were all originally invented by men during a time when physical labor was a must. Therefore, as any bio/anthro textbook will teach you, men provided income and women took care of the household. It only made sense for men to make laws on income since it was men EARNING it. And please, women are people, they can be criticized too.
@TheAryoBarzan87 Women had no political, economic or social power. Otherwise, they WOULD HAVE done other things besides take care of the household. They were denied any opportunities to education. And besides, it doesn't matter if men produced things -- that doesn't justify not listening to half of the human population, and treating them like they are stupid and only good for cooking and cleaning.
@TheAryoBarzan87 And since you're not backing up your argument with any real logic or evidence, whilst my arguments are backed up by logic that you have not refuted very well at all -- you have ONE comment left to prove how women created all of the oppression that men face, and how men NEVER oppressed women. Go ahead, prove it. If you can't you're blocked because you're not concerned with actual historical fact -- you're only concerned with blaming women for everything.
the feminisim you adhere to is a minority , pinegrove, like many , many of us have grown in response to the prevelant feminisim , if feminisim doesnt exist in its current form , pinegrove wouldnt exist .
angelusuk1a 1 week ago
@angelusuk1a Wrong! The majority of feminists are moderate, and this pathetic excuse isn't fooling anyone.
SickMouth 1 week ago
MRA videos make men suicidal. Seriously I watched a 20 minute video and came close to jumping of a bridge. They basically say that all women want to do fuck up our lives and that they want to control our brains etc and legions of disenfrachised men like myself fall for it and mistake all feminists for the devil. they are doing more damage than anyone else and creating the gender gap they are protesting. By telling yourself you are being demonized over and over you believe it.
Adroitism 1 week ago
@Adroitism Most of these men that are in the MRA movement have been affected very badly by the gender bias laws , hence will naturally make their rants very depressing. I , as an equalist believe in equal rights, for both genders, and in my research I have seen such male bias laws. So as much as I hate the depressing nature of MRAs, they are trying make a point; in a very distasteful way, but a point nonetheless.
Manoffriendship 1 week ago
seeing that red bar really pissed me off -_- shared on my facebook :)
animalhugger43 2 weeks ago
42% of all Statistics are made up!!!
UnderseaCaveman 1 month ago
@SickMouth If you watch his videos, he views women as... *people*! Equally flawed by nature, but their flaws have been exacerbated by feminism - women have learned to expect all the benefits of patriarchy, with none of the obligations.
Quite frankly, the majority of you are spoiled children, with an utter inability to think rationally, or hold responsibility. This is not innate, and I know plenty of counter-examples - they are the exceptions which prove the rule.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini Back it up with evidence or GTFO. Pointing out the fact that my reproductive rights are being attacked by my government is not being spoiled. It's an advocation of my own interests.
Now, if you have proof that most women are the way you say, then perhaps I'll engage you -- but if you post another comment without the proof I've requested, I'm honestly just going to write you off as a misogynist. Anyone who calls most women "spoiled" is a dumbfuck, honestly.
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth While 'spoiled' isn't exactly a measurable term, I can provide a great example of women en aggregate behaving in a non-consciencious manner: dalrock wordpress com 2011 12 20 is-frivolous-divorce-overstated-in-the-manosphere
70% of divorces are initiated by the woman, and what evidence there is strongly suggests frivolous reasons. Regardless of what you think about marriage vows, breaking them - particularly when you get $ out of the bargain - shows one to be dishonest.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini I couldn't access the link after inserting the periods...and citing a blog is unwise. But even if I were to concede it, how many women get divorced every year *worldwide?* How can you prove that this has nothing to do with only *our* culture? How many women are lesbian or bisexual who can't get divorced from their female partners because they can't get married to them in the first place? How does this at all prove that most women are gold-digging dishonest people?
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth Very irritating that YT doesn't allow URLs; the d in 'overstated' breaks, but if you replace it you get the correct address; alternatively googling [dalrock "is frivolous divorce overstated in the manosphere"] should yield the proper result
I cite the blog because it links to the raw data, and explores it thoroughly. Seriously, you should read it; it is not an MRA conspiracy blog, it is pro-marriage (with caveats).
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini I WOULD read it if the link actually worked. Why cite the blog rather than the link IN the blog, anyhow? Why not lead me directly to the freakin' information itself???
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth The article sites statistics from various Western countries - those infected by feminism.
Lesbian and gay relationships are not comparable to heterosexual; I say this as a bisexual. Lesbians have far higher incidents of DV, gays are far less likely to get married. Common sense knows they are different.
What it shows is that *modern* women are unable to hold true to their word. It is one of many examples of female disfunction. It is an example of misandry.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini It's not an article, it's a blog. A blog is not reliable. And the statistics need to come from a reliable source. If you can't give me a URL that works, I'm not going to engage you. You can try PMing it to me, but I still googled it and couldn't find it. Why should I take your argument seriously? You are also not backing up your claims about homosexual couples, and if you do so, you may just give me another dud link...
SickMouth 1 month ago
I actually came across this guy before ZOMGistcriss serendipitously favorited one of your videos which subsequently led me to your excellent channel.
The impression I got of him is that he sees women as objects of pleasure and domestic maintenance, and anyone suggesting otherwise is assaulting his rights. He has the right to drive about in his monster truck with a gun in one hand and his dick in the other. He has the right to fuck. He has the right to a sandwich.
He's a thoughtful scholar.
devourerofbabies 1 month ago
@devourerofbabies What we need is more democracy and freedom so you can force him to live like a good Liberal.
Aurini 1 month ago
How could you say that I am against MRAs????? Of ALL things????
:o
J0k3r4U 2 months ago
@J0k3r4U I never did... -_-
SickMouth 2 months ago
@SickMouth You said it on the other girl's video...
J0k3r4U 2 months ago
I read a story about two women, a mother and daughter. How nice. Both trying to extort a car and money out of man and they said they would accuse him of rape if he didn't. The man ended up buying them a car. Then they tried to get more. Eventually they got caught and got the obligatory feminist slap on the wrist. Like usual. Must have been bipolar. So tell me that isn't evil. But I know feminists won't take any accountability. That's enough for now anyways. I have plenty more.
Bisquack 2 months ago
@Bisquack Link to the article, with proof that this happens because of "feminists" rather than just a society that promotes greed. I'll give you one last chance to make a claim that's back by evidenciary support.
SickMouth 2 months ago
I have a question for you to think over. If you're a feminist who supports men's equality - and there are a lot of feminists like you - then why is every, single feminist movement, or legislative push, about raising women up, while putting men down? Domestic violence by a woman get's the man kicked out of his home - consensual sex is illegal if she changes her mind two days later.
Can you think of one example where feminists stood up for men?
Aurini 2 months ago
@Aurini The recent push by the Feminist Majority for the FBI to redefine rape was successful, and benefits all rape victims including male victims. Unless you think that men can't be raped. And that last statement about a woman getting to call consentual sex rape if she decides it was a bad idea? Not true. That wouldn't get any time in court. Go educate yourself about rape and its definition under the law, and how its treated in the legal system.
SickMouth 2 months ago
@SM I could throw that 'asinine' comment right back at you.
Primary aggressor laws are written in an equally gender neutral way - and yet (obviously) in practice, they lead to the arrest of abused men, and no-drop prosecutions are a travesty of justice.
Rape was perfectly clearly defined already; this expansion of the def'n (which will be used selectively) overturns the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty'.
As an entitled princess, you don't have to fear the cops; I do
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini LOL you idiot! The definition was expanded to INCLUDE MEN!!! Or wait, you believe that men can't be raped, right?
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth *sigh*
Just as I was beginning to develop a glimmer of respect for your ability to reason, you engage in the precise sort of 'trollish' name-slinging you make a point of banning, by regulated comments, and stated policy.
Rape was already illegal - of women and men - this new law will see more innoncents locked up for false accusations, but there will be nothing done for men who are raped. Read between the lines; stop buying everything at face value.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini No, sir. The legal definition of rape according to the FBI was, from 1929 up until this year,"the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will." This does not include men, obviously. newschannel10 (dot) com / story / 16465878/fbi-revises-legal-definition-of-rape
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth I was wrong; however, this legislation is still questionable:
"The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object... without the consent of the victim."
In Japan, schoolchildren will prank eachother by trying to shove their index fingers up the other's anus. This would be criminalized under this, as would dozens of other non-rape situations. I expect rampant abuse of this legislation, and doubt it will do much to protect men.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini OH, I get it -- so because children do something, that makes it okay?? No. Unless the kids involved have made it clear that they don't mind surprise butt-fingering to their group of friends, and have set up parameters so that they all agree on when, where, and how they are comfortable with participating in this, it's still a form of rape.
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth Please try and stay focussed on the point.
The point is that this 'scandalous' (and relatively harmless) behaviour is NOT rape. Somebody who engages in this - even an adult - does not deserve to be locked up in a place where real rape happens (and is almost never prosecuted).
You are criminalizing non-criminal behaviour; it's the same as equating child-rape-videos with 17yos posing in the mirror. Your over-regulation is evil, cruel, and destructive.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini Those children, if they are consenting, are not being raped. If they are not consenting, it's rape. It's just that simple.
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth That's ridiculous.
A rape prison sentence will destroy a person; a rape will severely harm a person; having a finger shoved into your butt, as a prank, without your consent is less damaging than consistent taunting by bullies.
You're trying to equate a youthful prank to a foul-smelling knife-point rape in an alley. That's ridiculous. I suppose I was 'raped' when my highschool football coach slapped my butt during a game?
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini WHO said that all rape has the same effects?? NO ONE! Continue reading shit into my words that aren't there, really. It's quite amusing. Not all rape occurs at knife-point in an alley, and every person responds differently. They should have the right to press charges in any situation. And if you had been made uncomfortable by your coach slapping your ass, you could have charged him with sexual harassment -- but because you didn't mind, you have the choice to NOT do that!
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth Do you really want the cops involved in any situation where somebody feels 'uncomfortable'? Do you have any idea how destructive the state's involvement is, where it is unwarranted? The cops and social workers are an evil - perhaps the lesser of two evils, but an evil nonetheless.
What if a couple of gay men discussing gay sex makes me uncomfortable? A couple kissing on their wedding day? Where does the rabbithole end?
You're inviting a monster into your house.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini You don't get it. Talking does not constitute as a violation of someone's ability to consent to a sexual act or to being touched sexually without their consent! Also, sexual harassment CAN be verbal. You're taking my argument down a slippery slope, and it's not working for you.
SickMouth 1 month ago
@Aurini NOW did at one point criticize the draft as sexist against women. Also, it was mostly feminists who called on the FBI to expand the legal definition of rape, and DEMANDED that they include men in that definition. There are your examples.
SickMouth 1 month ago
@SickMouth The letter of the law, and the practice of the law, are two separate things, as James Ball so strongly articulated. If NOW criticized it, then it wasn't evil enough for them; and I have yet to see a feminist who will give up privilege for equality.
Also, you haven't replied to the article which I sent you. It demonstrates how women will use and mistreat loyal men, while men don't do the same in return, not to the same degree.
Aurini 1 month ago
@Aurini I'm still looking over the data!! Or do you not actually want me to examine it, and for me to just take your word? Yeah, right. Give me a second to actually LOOK at your evidence, for christ's sake!
SickMouth 1 month ago
Are you sure that you are not spending too much time obsessing about pinegrove 33?
jenlokken 2 months ago
@jenlokken Are you sure PG33 is not spending too much time obsessing about how much women suck?
It's called constructive criticism, not "obsession." If I were obsessed my channel would be devoted to him. Now go bother someone else with your dense questions.
SickMouth 2 months ago
It is so common & predictable for people to view the whole world according to their personal experiences. That's the impression I get from MRAs who deny that feminists have any legitimate complaints. Yet they won't hesitate to point out the disadvantages they have as men. I agree with many of their claims about unfair treatment, but why do they think they're the only ones who are being abused? And how could they lump equity feminists, like Camille Paglia & Christina Hoff Sommers, with rad fems?
prschuster 2 months ago
@prschuster "And how could they lump equity feminists, like Camille Paglia & Christina Hoff Sommers, with rad fems?" They don't! They are heroes to many MRAs, including myself. I consider them humanists because of their fair dealings. Even if they self-identify as feminists.
The rad fems are the hate-mongering berserkers of the feminist movement.The other hyphenated types of feminists,who may hate men less, consolidate their gains.Other women reap those gains feeling both oppressed and entitled!
dalriada842 2 months ago
@prschuster You hold the same views I do. Men have legitimate complaints, but these MRAs blame all feminists of all schools everywhere for the few ills men suffer, and say that they're the sole source of these ills, when most of the time feminists aren't the source of those ills -- it's traditional ideas about gender that are promoted not by feminists, but just by society in general. Demonizing one thing and calling it "the enemy" is intellectually dishonest and lazy, IMO.
SickMouth 2 months ago
@SickMouth I posted on a facebook page about Valerie Solanas. You can read my criticisms about her misandry if you go there. And you can see how I was bombarded with the wrath of Lilith. Then you can review the way MRAs have responded to my comments about mysogyny in the men's movement. Isn't it eerie how similar those diametrically opposed extremes are.
prschuster 2 months ago
@prschuster The radical feminists and the MRAs who constantly bitch about feminism behave very similarly. They both believe that there's only one cause of the suffering of their gender, and they have ONE target that they demonize as the root of all evil, when the issues the genders face are MUCH more complex than that. It's intellectual laziness and dishonesty, and it reveals how little they care about the actual issues, and much they care about just pointing fingers.
SickMouth 2 months ago
@SickMouth This is the problem with extremist and radical views in general. I've learned from experience that the most purist proponents of any cause tend to be very narrow in their undrstanding, and anger or resentment hijacks their brains to give them tunnel vision. You can't reason with an anger person. There'as no such thing as angry nuance.
prschuster 2 months ago
@SickMouth Ultra-radical views, which tend to feed off of anger & resentment, are really survival tactics. They draw upon more primitive parts of the brain that are geared for self defense. Critical thinking is not needed when you are fighting for your survival. The object of survival mode is to identify the enemy and destroy him (rad fems) or her MRAs). This, I think, describes to a T why these people have such tunnel vision.
prschuster 2 months ago
@SickMouth "MRAs blame all feminists of all schools everywhere for the few ills men suffer"I would dispute the few ills part, but ignoring that,the difference is one of perception.If the radicals only make up a tiny proportion of the whole,but have disproportionate influence,then it is reasonable to criticise feminism, since that is the banner they operate under.
Both pg33 and myself are admirers of Christina Hoff Sommers. I even subscribe to lacigreen, even though I don't always agree with her.
dalriada842 2 months ago
@scamoosh Then you don't understand the origins of the feminist movement. And if you'd cite your sources for those claims you made, I'd engage you.
SickMouth 3 months ago
It's got nothing to do with sexism or crazy, it's got to do with BIAS.
A man claims he likes talking to women, he's a big feminist and his research shows talking to women makes you happier.
And yes, Bernard would have accepted a study that stated that talking to men makes you happier; as would I. Not because we're sexist, but because there's no gain in releasing such results. In fact, have pro-male results is usually BAD for you. Fired, funding cut, and more such consequences usually follow.
3DMaster 3 months ago
@3DMaster Oh please. If this author was "a big feminist," why would Bernard even consider his work? And if this data was collected reliably, would Bernard still accept it? I think not. The author may or may not be biased, but there's no doubt that Bernard is biased. If you can back up the claim that "pro-male" results cause cuts to funding and such, I'd be more inclined to believe you. Besides, gender studies departments are hardly well-funded in the first place.
SickMouth 3 months ago
what type of crazies has he dated?
GraceAnnHawkins 4 months ago
@GraceAnnHawkins That's what I'd like to know, too.
SickMouth 4 months ago
I have also watched a number of his videos and it turns out the Mr. Clean is shameless to attack respectable academic scholars without logic, but instead he just uses words like "mangina" "socialist" etc.
The ONLY people that will believe him are people who believe in his bullshit to begin with. It's just like the 700 club, the only people who take them seriously are people who believe in the same BS.
Eceoes 5 months ago
@Eceoes Pretty much! He's an incredibly reprehensible person. He doesn't upload videos about legitimate men's issues that sex-positive feminists address -- it's all anti-feminist crap, as if radical feminists are the root of all that is wrong with the world. -_-
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth But they are the root of whats wrong with the world. Well western society anyways and any other society they sunk their fangs in. I'm totally anti feminist. But on the flipside I do like seeing the destruction that this is causing. I just say thats a result of feminism. I will always be against you and fighting against your rights. Fuck equality. It will never happen.
Bisquack 2 months ago
@Bisquack PROVE that they're the root of all evil in the world. Seriously. I'd love to see you try and back that claim up. Meanwhile, sex-pozzie feminists like me are going to keep making sure that people are treated decently. You said, "fuck equality, it will never happen." Well then, if you don't believe that everyone deserve equal rights, then YOU don't deserve YOUR rights.
SickMouth 2 months ago
@SickMouth Well prove to me that it isn't. What rights do I have anyways? Do I have any rights when it comes to being a father? Equality is way too broad and is not logical or possible with all the different people and religions and cultures out there. They conflict with each other. How are you going to make them all equal? It's impossible. And feminist equality most men realize actually means female privilege. The term feminism itself is sexist.
Bisquack 2 months ago
@Bisquack I'm not the one making the claim, and being intellectually honest, I don't have to prove a negative. In regard to the term "feminism" -- women didn't have equal rights under the law, and so the FEMinist movement was created because FEMALE citizens weren't satisfied with the way they were being treated. They couldn't vote or own property or pursue a decent level of education. The name hasn't changed, but the cause has. Now feminists examine multiple facets of gender issues.
SickMouth 2 months ago
@Bisquack So if you want to call us "gender egalitarians," you can do that too. But arguing semantic aspects such as what we label ourselves isn't important. What's important is what we DO. So either respect our work, or just go on bitching about how equality is impossible. It's that kind of attitude that makes it more difficult to achieve equality -- but we look at it different, and the result is that people are suffering less.
SickMouth 2 months ago
This video is brilliant.
Mr. Clean- I mean Pinegrove is very obnoxious. He tries to come off as someone who is intellectual and as someone who is part of a "right's Movement". In reality, he is someone with an oldschool agenda, just like Paul Elam, just like Manwomanmyth, just like any other MRA.
He is not part of a "rights movement" he is just part of a backlash against feminism.
Eceoes 5 months ago
@Eceoes "oldschool agenda" The last thing MRAs want is a return to traditional values. Chivalrous disposability isn't our bag! Your confusing us with fundamentalist religious types! Congrats for being able to name a few MRAs. You obviously haven't listened to much of what they say though.
dalriada842 2 months ago
I think we need to be able to generalise and stereotype to cover broad realities, we cant only talk about the women who do the wrong thing. A generalisation is based on majority fact or perception. Like cats generally have 4 legs, when we knpw no all do, so are born with less or lose one etc. But the generalisation is valid and appropriate.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk Then I get to generalize MRAs the way that most people see them on YouTube -- they are militant, misogynistic insecure heterosexual white males who are homophobic and transphobic, who hide behind a message of men's rights in order to try to make their crusade seem admirable, when in reality they only want to keep women down. There. Is that fair?
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth Nope a generalisation must be majority fact or perception, so as that isnt the case for the MRM but is the case for Femsluts then you cant follow our suit without being wrong at the same time that we are right. Life is not fair.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk That IS a majority perception. Majority fact? No. That's not what a generalization is. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You're obviously too biased to have any kind of fair conversation. You do not get to have it one way and not the other. Tah tah, asshole.
SickMouth 5 months ago
I dont think we are in the same choir just yet. Some of your points are valid to me, others are not, infact some are dialectically opposed to by ethos.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk If you post a comment like that, you have to explain yourself. And if you say that men suffer more than women, I'm going to not take you seriously right off of the bat.
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth Men suffer more in some areas, women in others. But the Feminist movement is failing to represent women because its leader and direction are controlled by lesbians. MRA have no hope of competing with Feminism because its controls the Domestic Violence Industry to fund its anti-male agenda. Women are waking up to areas where Feminism is failing them. You dont need to be in Feminism the Movement to be a good feminist.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk You haven't provided and proof to back up these claims.
SickMouth 3 months ago
The Feminist movement is the problem, individual feminists may be good or bad, but the driving forces behind the doctrine of feminism is man hating.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk Then I can say the same about the MRM.
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth No because the MRM isnt a corrupted lesbian run organisation. Feminism is a hate group, but individual feminists are just that individuals, being misled for sure but not all inherently bad.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk If you don't have to use logic or evidence to support your claim that "feminism is a corrupted lesbian organization," then I don't have to use logic or evidence to support my claim that the MRM is a misogynistic organization of men who are homophobic and transphobic, who are so insecure in their masculinity that they have to blame strong women for all of society's problems. Oh, but, individual MRA's can be okay. But the ENTIRE MOVEMENT IS EVIL! -_-
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth Obviously our opinions differ on the issue, but I am not about to get into debate with you when you cant be convinced otherwise I think. But you only need to look at many parts of the Feminist movement ands things like the SCUM manifesto and the majority of Lesbians who run the movement. Women are realising that being feminist and being involved with the aparatus called the Feminist Movement isnt necessary to establish equality. Feminism doesnt represent women.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk See, that's the problem with people like you. You assume that I haven't looked this shit up, or that I have NO IDEA about "what feminism really is." I can give you all the information on the different schools of feminism, but you won't care because you want to continue to drink the hateful MRA kool-aid. And if you have evidence that feminism is evil or whatever, YOU are responsible for providing ME with that evidence.
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth No I have not assumed you didnt look it up, I am concentrating on the fact that many good frminists may not be full aware how deep and how much control and direction the fanatic feminists have within the Movement, hate full things like making t-shirts for littl girls with the slogan "Boys are stupid. Throw rocks at them" (violence), or the SCUM manifestos idea's on sorting out or cuting up men. The Femnazi wants men redundant and regualated to menial dnagerous tasks for society.
wardawk 5 months ago
@wardawk And moderate and sex-positive feminists like me, who are the MAJORITY, are fighting against those things. YOU ARE PREACHING TO THE CHOIR HERE, PAL. Stop it.
SickMouth 5 months ago
By the way I am happier speaking to males. Does that make me sexist? If I prefer speaking to females does that make me sexist against males? No matter what is chosen some sex is left out and that is the point.Just because someone prefers the conversation of one sex or the other does not make them sexist. Interfering or denying the rights of a sex is sexism, lets not get it twisted and assume that Bernard is sexist for having a pro-male opinion for which he has the right to have and express.
jarredf30 5 months ago
@jarredf30 And yet he doesn't like the fact that the author of the book prefers to talk to women. Did you even watch the video? I said I don't CARE if you have a preference. But Bernard shames people who prefer to talk to women. Does that make him sexist? Hmmm...
SickMouth 5 months ago
The book he quotes is not a peer reviewed scientific article(although the book may be quoting one for which I do not know) if the book is not going to provide citations to those studies then he has every right to question them and even if they are published he can question them because that is what we as scientists do in order to determine the best possible(although not complete or perfect) answers to our questions.
jarredf30 5 months ago
People with doctorates can be wrong. Questioning a study (whether scientific or not) is part of the scientific method and is not sexism.In the school of psychology,sociology,anthropology,physics,or biology, questioning the validity of a study is good science no matter what that studies conclusion. Bernards questions were sarcastic due to the absurd findings of these (scientific studies). If these scientists provide evidence and further studies in support, then he may be wrong but not sexist.
jarredf30 5 months ago
@jarredf30 In the video I made the same statement -- it's okay to question the findings of data. But then he goes on to basically implying that all women are nagging, whining, bitching, self-absorbed golddiggers. He thinks talking to women making others happier is impossible because women are self-absorbed, overly-sensitive, selfish creatures. THAT is where I disagree with him. See my point?
SickMouth 2 months ago
love this debate you are very rational love how you refute opinions
poweroftheatom 6 months ago
@poweroftheatom Thank you. :) And also, thanks for subbing. Hope to hear more of your thoughts soon.
SickMouth 6 months ago
wow the hate! I didn't know disagreeing now a sin!
poweroftheatom 6 months ago
If those few privileges didn't have such a great impact on today's society, I wouldn't have a problem with them either. But when you have a massively biased family court system, gestapo like VAWA, equal outcomes for unequal work loads, unequal prison time for equal crime, 94% of maintenance rulings going to women even when the wage gap has been debunked beyond doubt. And I could go on. I especially liked when Hilary Clinton says the greatest victims in war are women. Dieing in war= male exclusif
nickb275 6 months ago
@nickb275 Moderate/sex-positive feminists are concerned with everything you just mentioned, in general. As for war -- ever heard of "comfort women?" In the western world, sure -- men get the short end of the stick in certain circumstances, just as women get the short end of the stick in others. Both sexes suffer because of gender inequality. In the middle east and many parts of Asia, women have it much worse than men. When speaking of feminism, I don't keep it western-centric.
SickMouth 6 months ago
Sorry but most studies dealing with social gender issues appear to be B.S. ..Taken with a grain of salt
Eugenepwnsyou1 6 months ago
@Eugenepwnsyou1 Unless you can explain why they aren't reliable, why should I believe you?
SickMouth 3 months ago
Pinegrove33 is a moron.
AirForceGirl05 7 months ago
@pinegrove33 is the biggest joke I have come across on youtube thus far. He's a libertarian who blocks and removes dissenting people because he can't defend himself.
whatnameisavailablee 7 months ago
@whatnameisavailablee That's pretty much what he did to me, because I respectfully challenged his views. And once he couldn't defend his beliefs anymore because I pointed out his hypocrisy, he blocked me and, as butthurt as ever, told me that I'd "oppressed" him. Psh...
SickMouth 7 months ago
I don't understand this woman, if she is a lesbian... who cares? What is she complaining about? Why does she hate men so much? Why do lesbian feminists hate men all the time? I mean... what the hell, live your life, be a lesbian, find yourself a girlfriend and stop judjing others. Why are you so hateful? Why are you so sexist agains males? If you are sad, miserable and angry just deal with your own problems without attacking an entire group. I mean... you hate all men?? wtf? Are you mad? Grow up
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi You are a presumptuous fool.
1. I am in a committed relationship with a man.
2. I don't hate all men. I just hate men who hate women -- Pinegrove33 would be one of them.
3. If I am sexist for criticizing MRAs, then Pinegrove33 is sexist for criticizing feminists. You can't have it one way and not the other.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
but maybe you are, both of you, because you see, most men AND women don't want to spend the rest of their lives bashing the opposit sex. You wrote that you DO "hate men who hate women", but there are also women who hate men, so you are just giving a blind eye to the whole thing, ignoring that there are many women who are misandric, and you only care about men who hate women. That sounds as a double standard to me. Most of us, men and women, don't want to hate just anyone.
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Who ever said that I don't hate women who hate men? Seriously, if you continue to assume things about me just because I call myself a feminist, you'll be blocked. It's obvious that you're not interested in actually understanding my position or having a discussion.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
Oh you can block me if you want, after all this is your site, so do as you wish, it's only showing that most feminists aren't prepared for freedom of speech, democracy and liberty. If you impose censorship only because people have different opinions, do as you want. However I do see the paradox in your arguments. You write that you hate men who hate women, and you also hate women who hate men. So why be a feminist and not a masculist? I am neither, because it doesn't make any sense.
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi It does make sense. Feminism fought for and achieved many things for me. If it weren't for feminism, I would not be permitted to vote or work. Feminism was the original movement for equal rights for the sexes. I also call myself a humanist.
You say it doesn't make sense, but what REALLY doesn't make sense is how you assumed that I am a lesbian who hates men just because I of how I choose to label myself. And then you say, "stop judging others." Yeah...
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
well you are not being entirely honest since it was a question, read my comment: "Is she a lesbian?"
However I don't care about your sexual orientation. You write that feminism has done a lot for you and women, well that's just selfish isn't it. We should promote a way of thinking which helps all humans, not only women. So basically feminists are women who care about women and help women, that has nothing to do with altruism and has a lot to do with selfishness. But you ARE judging.
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Again, you assume that a feminist can't also be OTHER things. Did you not read the part of my last comment that said, "I also call myself a humanist"?? Just because you're a feminist doesn't mean you're not a humanist as well, because certain schools of feminism are a PART of humanism.
So in that regard, YOU are judging. You are assuming things about feminists that are unfounded.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
Ok so why can't you be a feminis, a humanist and a masculist?
Why can't you just go for humanism and promote equality for all? Women AND men? Don't humanist promote egalitarism? isn't egalitarism equality for all? Why the need for feminism, and why not feminism AND mascuslim? I fail to see the logic there. plus, If you say that you are a humanist, that would itself include feminism and mascuslim, since it is promoting equality for all, so including women. What is wrong with egal.sm?
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Who EVER said I wasn't?? Seriously, you're a presumptous person...
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
so why on earth do you need feminism? Isn't humanism enough for all?
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Why should we do away with moderate feminism if it agrees with principles of humanism? Why do you care? Why are you so concerned with how we choose to label ourselves?
SickMouth 7 months ago
1. The simple fact that you write "moderate feminism" clearly means that there is a "non-moderate one".
2. The fact that it agrees with the principles of humanism makes it irrelevant to those who find in humanism the principles of equaity, respect, tolerance and freedom.
3. I am concerned with the way we choose to lable ourselves because words are extremely important, otherwise we lose logic, rational thinking an respect for a decent democratic debate. There's no need for femsm if you're a humst
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi I'm sorry that you think feminism is worthless and unnecessary -- humanism can't focus on very specific issues all the time and tackle all of the minute details all the time, and many humanists may be pro-life -- while many feminists aren't. Then there'd be a divide between pro-life and pro-choice humanists. You can't avoid division. People DISAGREE on things. So don't blame feminism for division and partisan dealings. Blame the fact that people DISAGREE.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
But of course people disagree, that's the beauty of democracy. So, are you prepared to accept the fact that many people, both men and women, disagree on feminism, and have the democratic right to reject it if they find it to be worthless, unnecessary and irrelevant? Bear in mind that in the future people will find humanism far more necessay than feminism because it is much more inclusive than feminism. But yes people do disagree. That's precisely what I am doing here. I disagree.
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi I love how you characterize feminism as not inclusive...do your research.
I never said I don't "accept" that people won't agree with me, but I won't accept it without first pointing out why I disagree. Feminism is good because it gives more focused and centralized attention to issues concerning sexism. Civil rights activism is good because it gives more focused and centralized attention to issues concerning racism. See my point?
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
The sad thing is that I did my research, and I found a lot of hatred, misandry, shaming tactics, blame game, false statistics, male bashing and so on. Most laws in America are incredibly sexist, much more than here in Europe. Most american laws are entirely tilted in favour of women, mothers and wives, leaving american men in a condition of a second class citizen. Feminism is just wrong, american feminism is a fascist ideology. No wonder so many people inyour country are so concerned
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Then you only did research on the negative aspects, and not the positive. Now get to work on that.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
So what if you did your research on nazism, and say you found the very same things I put in my last comment, and you were horrified by those things, how would you react if I wrote: "Then you only did research on the negative aspects, and not the positive. Now get to work on that". I don't think you can possibly save only the good bits of a corrupted ideology, and leave the "inconvenient ones" out of the picture. What would you think of a serial rapist who was also an excelnt dentis?
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi You made a very invalid comparison. Feminism originated as a movement for equal rights for women, who DID NOT have the rights that men had. Nazism originated as a movement for genocide. You are a brainwashed, biased fool who doesn't care to look at anything objectively.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
well offending me the feminist way is clearly going to help this debate, isn't it. However nazism didn't start as a movement for genocide at all, so you should study history a little harder, genocide came later in the early 40s, some 15 years after the birth of the nazi movement, so you should look at things more objectively. Most men today say that feminism is a fascist movement because it is slowly getting to the point where men are usually shamed, blamed and disciminated against.
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi And then there's the OTHER faction of feminism, called MODERATE feminism (as opposed to the RADICAL feminism that you continue to cite). Moderate feminism and sex-positive feminists fight for men's rights and men's social benefits as well. That's why I told you to do your research. And when someone says "research," know that they mean UNBIASED and reliable sources. Look up moderate feminism and sex-positive feminism.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
what you are writing is in part true, however I wonder how radical feminism started and why was there ever the need for such a hateful thing as radical feminism. You can't really deny that most radical feminists were and are completely anti-male, which is not going to help anyone. Is the slutwalk "sex-positive" feminism? Or is the VAWA sex-positive feminism? Plus, are "sex-positive" feminists fighting against radical feminism? Are they against anti-male laws? Are they helping men?
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Why there was ever "a need" for it? It just HAPPENED. There are extreme factions of every movement that's ever existed. There are extremist Muslims and vegetarians and nationalists. Every movement has it's psychotic, crazy assholes. No one denied that they are anti-male. Anyhow, not evey sex-positive supports the things you mentioned, but some do. Sex-positives are against anti-male laws and take every opportunity to help men. Look up KrissyTheWorldWithin and Divinity33372.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
ok so I really hope "sex-positive" feminists are going to fight against the VAWA, misandry, and are going to make sure that 50% of those who win a divorce case, alimony, or child custody, are going to be men, since in America the great majority of those who win a trial are always women, and talk about discrimination (and that clearly shows the great damage radical feminism has done in Usa). Do positive feminists know that 97% of blue collar, construction workers in theStates are men?
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@clinjastoshi Seriously, can you stop preaching? I KNOW all the stuff you're telling me. I'm not an ignorant fool like pinegrove33. Quit with the preaching or gtfo.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth
I'm not preaching, I was just saying. Have a nice day
clinjastoshi 7 months ago
@SickMouth Just because he is preaching , does not mean you have justification to tell him to GTFO. What about the others on here who might not know about that information, have you no respect. he did not even flame you.
Manoffriendship 5 months ago
@Manoffriendship I can indeed. He makes arguments from ignorance, and continues to harp on me about things that he KNOWS I already know, even AFTER I point out that he is assuming a crap ton of things about me and what I believe. It's not "flaming," but it is obnoxious and pompous and presumptuous. You tell me to be respectful, even though HE isn't being respectful to ME? Am I to understand that you're advocating a double-standard here???
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth I am not trying to argue or have double standards, but his posts do suggest logic and facts have been well researched. I don't see why you felt you had to tell him to gtfo rather than telling him whether feminists will fights discrimination against men, because this still occurs. How can you call him presumptuous when he stated facts, which are true. Now he did not show disrespect in his tone, and bringing up the nazism was odd, but he still kept in conventions of a proper debate.
Manoffriendship 5 months ago
@Manoffriendship He has not done his research, because he says that feminists like me don't do anything to help men, and that we don't fight against things like VAWA and child custody -- when we DO fight against those injustices. I have fought with feminists to try to end these things that are not fair to men, and he said that we don't try to do that. He is NOT informed about what we do. I have every right to tell him to stop being one-sided.
SickMouth 5 months ago
@SickMouth His facts are correct. But it is good to know that you have done something about men's rights. So, out of curiosity, how come radical feminists cannot see your view point. I mean for some reason they seem to be the ones dominating. You guys should do something cool like over throw them, because unlike radical feminists, you are for equal rights. I am not asking this to start any anger, I am genuinely curious.
Manoffriendship 5 months ago
@Manoffriendship They are the ones dominating because they are the ones who capture the public's attention. Hateful and offensive rhetoric stick in the minds of the people better, and when they hear the sex-positives, the like to call us "dirty hippies" or they stick us in the same box with the radical fems. We're doing whatever we can. Radical feminists, just like these hateful YouTube MRAs, have issues with the opposite sex.
SickMouth 3 months ago
@SickMouth It's a mistake to think that MRAs view all feminists as the same. We view some as more culpable and offensive than others. Some like Christina Hoff Sommers are practically loved by many MRAs.
How many of pinegrove33's videos have you watched? I don't think you appreciate his satirical style! Have you watched any of manwomanmyth's videos? If so,what do you make of the points they make?
There is mistreatment of both sexes throughout the world.Western perceptions are often biased though!
dalriada842 2 months ago
@SickMouth "Radical feminists, just like these hateful YouTube MRAs, have issues with the opposite sex." No we have issues with feminism, but we don't confuse feminism with women in general. Pinegrove33 has said this himself in many of his videos!
However, the cost-benefit analysis of having relations with women today, causes increasing numbers of men to have less and less to do with them. BTW I do generally prefer talking to women as well!
dalriada842 2 months ago
well, first he was quoting the author and secondly he is correct in saying that conversations with women are not as interesting than with men.... men talk about so much more than women do.
o0POSH0o 7 months ago
@o0POSH0o Where was he quoting the author directly?
And secondly, your statement about women proves just how much of an ignorant asswipe you are. I can't be kind about this -- pinegrove and his followers, the majority of whom seem to be just as vapid as you, base their beliefs and opinions on stereotypes and conspiratorial propaganda.
Do us all a favor and stop reading books authored by the likes of Ann Coulter..
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth He quoted the author at the beginning of the video.
o0POSH0o 7 months ago
@o0POSH0o Yes he did. I never contested that...
SickMouth 7 months ago
@o0POSH0o
Since when are men more interesting than women? I've nearly fallen asleep listening to men. All they talk about is sports, cars, and women. Women talk about art, science, and politics. Women are better communicators/thinkers. Blame the universe.
AirForceGirl05 7 months ago
@AirForceGirl05 Eh, generalizations either way aren't fair. Some men talk about sports and cars, and some women talk about clothes and celebrity gossip, all four of which I find banal. We have to deal with everyone on an individual basis. This is where Pinegrove and others like him are failing -- they generalize.
SickMouth 7 months ago
why doesn't feminism address the selective service? A policy should be uniform or not exist at all. So get on it feminists
Oozingmachismo24 7 months ago
@Oozingmachismo24 I really think those who try to bring this up as an area where feminists are retreating into their female privilege are full of crap. Most feminists I know realize it as a fundamentally sexist requirement, but these feminists are also anti-war and will not fight for anything but elimination of the draft. It's not a gender issue to them, but a political one -- and they oppose it on all fronts.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@Oozingmachismo24 Also, there's a large number of feminists that HAVE spoken out against the "traditional" draft. The National Organization for Women (NOW) passed a resolution in 1980 opposing males-only draft registration as discriminatory and the ACLU's Women's Rights Project provided aid to the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case Rostker v. Goldberg, in which the plaintiff unsuccessfully challenged males-only draft registration.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@Oozingmachismo2 And if I recall our laws correctly (ERA), there is nothing that prohibits Congress from drafting women. Besides, there's hardly any likelihood that a draft will happen in the future -- so feminists aren't concerning themsleves with this issue full-time. Right now they're tackling more prevalent matters, like our culture of sexual assualt victim-balming. If the draft becomes a REAL issue, REAL soon, they will turn their attention to it.
SickMouth 7 months ago
Implying in many videos that we are all vain, bitchy, vapid, emasculating, evil demon seductresses".
No, you're wrong here. He's stating this to be case for only the women he is quoting. He isn't implying this to be true of all women. Just the ones he is quoting.
shmiggen 8 months ago
And who are the specific women whom he is quoting? If you can't answer that, YOU are the wrong one here. That video had NO mention of specific, individual women, and invoking "personal experience" as proof of ANYTHING against statistics is flat out ignorant.
SickMouth 8 months ago
I think most of your objections are fair, but I have serious doubts about this "research study" too. People use the word "scientific" much too loosely these days - science requires a hypothesis with reasoned justification, or you can fall into the trap of magical thinking.
Given that how a conversation makes you feel should logically depend entirely upon the content and tone of the conversation, I'd be extremely wary of accepting the idea that talking to women but not men makes you happy.
AJTheFriendlyTaoist 8 months ago 3
@AJTheFriendlyTaoist It's fine to question the reliability of a study and its data. It's when you have no basis to question the data and you just don't LIKE the data -- that's just denial.
SickMouth 8 months ago
@SickMouth I agree with you there.
AJTheFriendlyTaoist 8 months ago
@AJTheFriendlyTaoist The problem with your last paragraph lies in the apparent assumption that emotional reactions have a basis in logic. I haven't read the study yet, but I'm willing to bet it wasn't put in as absolute terms as you state. Might there be errors in how the study was constructed or could it have been too small? Quite possibly. It certainly should be looked at with a certain degree of skepticism. All studies should. But the charge of "magical thinking" seems unjustified.
Maxdwolf 8 months ago
@Maxdwolf It is textbook magical thinking: "I was doing this when that happened, so that was caused by this". It's not science. There's no guarantee whatsoever that the basis of the study had anything to do with the result because there's no reasonable hypothesis to explain what you should expect and why.
These days far too many people give the weight of science to experimentation that's just "let's see what happens when..." and while that can be interesting, it's not automatically science.
AJTheFriendlyTaoist 8 months ago
Pinegrove has an audience, he strikes a cord with a fairly large number of men. He brings up a necessary points, if it is buried under his politics. I don't think his opinions on women are necessarily bad, as plenty of women hold equally as bizarre views of men. I think maybe more feminists should watch his videos they may see their reflection in him. He is a crusader just the same, but a crusader for someone else's cause, specifically not your cause. Your disagreement is inevitable.
TselkeNoddles 8 months ago
@TselkeNoddles I think he strikes a cord with a large number of angry and prejudiced men -- not just the average man. As a feminist, legitimate men's issues ARE of concern to me and to claim otherwise is speculative and judgmental. I've never claimed that he and other MRAs don't have legitimate concerns. However, his blatant sexism (implying in many videos that we are all vain, bitchy, vapid, emasculating, evil demon seductresses) make him comparable to radfems -- the very people he opposes.
SickMouth 8 months ago
@SickMouth I think there is a major difference however between Pinegrove and the Radfems as you call them. Pinegroves holds no power, no legitimacy in common culture. "Radfems" have vaunted teaching positions and can affect public policy, they can speak in the media and have an aura of legitimacy, they can write tomes for which many young people must read and study, "radfems" have power, Pinegrove does not.
TselkeNoddles 8 months ago
@TselkeNoddles All of the male politicians who are, as we speak, trying to take away a woman's reproductive rights, who are trying to make women prove to the government that they didn't cause their own misacarriages, have much more power right now than any radfem. Explain that.
SickMouth 8 months ago
@SickMouth Simple, not everyone who is against abortion is male. In fact I recall being in relatively small class on a college campus. The question of abortion came up (note the class was overwhelmingly female, including the instructor, me and one other were the only males out of a class of 20) and I, the evil male devil instrument of the Patriarchal conspiracy person with a penis, didn't think abortion should be illegal. Radfems have institutional power in the media and the universities (cont-)
TselkeNoddles 8 months ago
@SickMouth (continued) however people like Pinegrove have little actual power. Pinegrove only holds sway if the masses of people who listen to him ever actually take action. Pinegrove only has power and sway when things like tea party activism happen. In the vein the world of business is more the institutions you should look to to find your male devils.
TselkeNoddles 8 months ago
@SickMouth Lol, where exactly are these evil female-suppressing male politicians trying to take away women's reproductive rights? Are you talking about anti-abortionists? If so, they are not trying to take away your 'reproductive rights', they believe that abortion is MURDER and that murder is ILLEGAL, stop victimizing yourself. Most politicians, if anything, are incredibly biased towards women's groups and cater to their sexist VAWA-esque policies.
TheAryoBarzan87 7 months ago
@TheAryoBarzan87 If I need to stop victimizing myself, then so do men like Pinegrove. Period.
It doesn't matter if you think abortion is murder -- if you take away my rights to my own body, it's OPPRESSION.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth If it's 'your own body', then why did it take something for somebody else's body to grow in your body? Some people think murdering a living, breathing thing is OPPRESSION. Whatever, I'm not debating abortion with you and I'm not even necessarily anti-abortion.
The difference is that you have legions of feminazi's lined up to support your garbage pseudo-equality 'movement' but men have nothing. Men are FAR more oppressed than women have ever been and the backlash is only starting.
TheAryoBarzan87 7 months ago
@TheAryoBarzan87 Men owned and controlled everything until maybe a decade ago -- and in many respects, they still do. The dominant group makes the rules. Any "oppression" that men face was created BY men, FOR men.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth Also, 95% of the oppression men suffer from was created by women. These stupid broads that advocate genital mutilation of males and tell men they need to 'act like a man' when they are oppressed are the true oppressors. But don't worry, our numbers grow everyday and there will be a violent backlash towards you feminazi's very soon in the future.
TheAryoBarzan87 7 months ago
@TheAryoBarzan87 You're not backing up your claims with any evidence. Where did you get the 95% figure? No, sir. The "guy rules" and the impossible male ideal was created by the dominant group throughout human history, which is MEN. Women weren't even listened to throughout the vast majority of human history, so why would any "rules" for manhood that they made up be taken seriously. You're looking for excuses to hate women, and you need to do your research.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@SickMouth The reason women 'weren't listened to' in society is because men were the ones that PRODUCED things. You know, that car you drive, the house you live in, were all originally invented by men during a time when physical labor was a must. Therefore, as any bio/anthro textbook will teach you, men provided income and women took care of the household. It only made sense for men to make laws on income since it was men EARNING it. And please, women are people, they can be criticized too.
TheAryoBarzan87 7 months ago
@TheAryoBarzan87 Women had no political, economic or social power. Otherwise, they WOULD HAVE done other things besides take care of the household. They were denied any opportunities to education. And besides, it doesn't matter if men produced things -- that doesn't justify not listening to half of the human population, and treating them like they are stupid and only good for cooking and cleaning.
SickMouth 7 months ago
@TheAryoBarzan87 And since you're not backing up your argument with any real logic or evidence, whilst my arguments are backed up by logic that you have not refuted very well at all -- you have ONE comment left to prove how women created all of the oppression that men face, and how men NEVER oppressed women. Go ahead, prove it. If you can't you're blocked because you're not concerned with actual historical fact -- you're only concerned with blaming women for everything.