The things that they say would trigger outrage if it was said against women. Women say they want to be respected yet they disrespect us quite a bit too.
I always do. I did in this thread. You claimed feminists stand for equality, and I asked how often have you heard feminists complain about the, "sentencing gap," as apposed to how many times have you heard feminists complain about the, "wage gap." I mean the wage gap is only estimated to be 2 to 15 percent and the sentencing gap is greater than 63 percent. So you would think, feminists would complain about the sentencing gap at least as often as the wage gap, that is if they stand for equality-right????
These feminists stand for equality and speak for all women everywhere? I claim shenanigans. [video=youtube;FWxAljFlb-c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWxAljFlb-c[/video]
Their is a legitimate case for feminism. Unfortunately you also have a lot of people involved who are frothing at the mouth. Here's the best thing for everyone regardless of race or gender, treat everyone the same.
The loudness of radicals exaggerate their numbers for any group they represent. The sort of reasoning presented here by people who think femenists are all "she-woman, man-haters" is same reasoning that opponents of any group place on that group in an attempt to reverse the roles of "victim/oppressor." And maybe you're not the oppressor, but if you think feminism is no longer needed, then the ignorance is strong with you. External example would be how blacks have fought (and continue to fight) for civil rights. Opponents (or other apathetic individuals who simply say "racism is dead, no need to fight anymore), pick out examples where blacks shout hate speech against white people, or call for their "genocide", and then opponents say, "See? See how they hate white people? They say they're fighting for equality, but what they really want is superiority." *note: this is how "Bob's Mantra" got started and is still being fueled: because of myth. Another example would be the right's fueling of the myth of the Gay Agenda. Again pulling out examples that support their claims, but upon research you could see these examples are useless. The bottom line is that feminism stands for equality. Period. Even you can find evidence of fems showing their hate for men, even if you can find me a mountain of evidence to support that claim, it does nothing to tell me that "feminism is not needed". Again, someone pointed out that many of the women in the pictures on the site posted in the original post, show that... THEY ARE FEMINISTS! And then scrolling down through that site, a lot of claims are simply wrong and unobservant. Stupid would be the actual word I could use there. Things like "I don't need feminism because feminists tell me to be afraid of men." WTF?! Are you kidding me? I get tired of this demonization, and it happens on both sides. Liberals and conservatives. This demonization bullcrap is not solving anything, just polarizing this nation further. Right now it's conservatives, and it's only because the democrats are in the White House. Now conservatives have an opportunity to pull out the victim card. "See? Liberals hate us. They're oppressing us! Telling us they only care about equality, but what they want is superiority, and our genocide!" Seriously. Cut it out. I will admit, that the problem that legitimizes these claims, is that when radicals say something crazy and just outright nasty, the group that they claim to represent, makes no effort to distance themselves from said radicals. Again, happens on both sides. When the anti-gay stuff happened in Uganda, the silence from conservatives was deafening. And don't get me started on the conservative love affair with Putin. The thing is though, that the website given in the original post actually is proof of real feminists fighting against radicals. They just don't realize it. Here's a major fact, FACT, to help them out: there is a difference between "feminism" and "misandry", and the ladies on that website need to see and in turn actually use it. Ladies, if you believe in equality, you are a FEMINIST! Own it! These radicals, guess what? NOT FEMINISTS! They are MISANDRISTS, and you need to throw it in their faces. You're only fueling these radicals by continuing to further your myths about feminism. Instead, know what feminism actually is, and actually hurt radicals where it counts by taking their beloved title: feminist. They aren't feminists, they're misandrists. Know where that line is drawn, and then you'll see the true colors. Not just from the radical left but also from the conservatives who are posting these myths about what they think feminism is.
Have you heard feminists complaining about the sentencing gap??? Have you heard of feminists complaining about the wage gap??? Because the sentencing gap is over 63% and feminists claim the wage gap is between 2% to 15% so feminists must complain about the sentencing gap at least as often as they complain about the wage gap-that is if they stand for equality like you claim-right?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
I marvel at men obsessed with feminism. They mustn't have any meaningful men's business of their own to attend to. Feminism
Here in this very thread there are multiple people claiming feminism stands for equality. Hopefully, someday this modern feminism will be known for what it most often is, a supremacist hate movement bcs just as the Klu Klux Klan was once a politically correct supremacist hate movement, modern feminism today is a politically correct supremacist hate movement.
Radical feminism does not stand for equality. And those women are NOT FEMINISTS. And here is a woman who very critical of feminists in a civil and logical manner: [video=youtube;d-N9daqANcw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-N9daqANcw&list=PLdQUefqn9pXwOnynOOedhMyL W1Rbl1zPz[/video]
Fall asleep with your finger on the Question mark key? FYI, I did not press the "reply" button on this thread without reading through all the posts here. So I know that this was a point you had already brought up. I will note that it was a very good point, but deals with the issue of "double standards". Pointing out double standards is a noble deed that only goes so far until it just becomes annoying. It gets to a point where I question the motive. Are you: a. pointing out this double standard, to tell feminists that if they really preach equality that they should be more vocal about gender equality in all cases? or b. pointing out this double standard to further an agenda to prove that feminism is wrong? Given your consistent tone throughout this thread I'm going with the latter. That being said, though I did not explicitly reference your "sentencing gap" example, I was hoping the content of my post here dealt with that. So I'll repeat myself in hopes that you'll understand: If "feminism" is a quest for gender equality, and women who call themselves "feminists" show signs that they don't care about male equality, and even imply (or outright blatantly proclaim) that women should be superior to men, they are not "feminists", they are misandrists. This is simple fact. It's saying that a dog is a dog, not a cat. It's that simple. You are right, feminists should be more vocal about the "sentencing gap" and other inequality issues that actually make males the victim. But that simple truth does not create any damning evidence to the necessity of feminism. Again I will repeat something else I stated in my first response: the women who are featured in the website you posted in your original post, are feminists whether they know it or not.
So all the countless women in this video sexually and physically assaulting all the men in this video peacefully and passively protecting their church aren’t actually feminists their misandrists??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUb9Yb2ucZI ….and this um… feminist dictionary is in reality a misandrist dictionary?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? From 'A feminist Dictionary', edited by Kramarae and Triechler, Pandora Press, 1985: MALE:...represents a variant of or deviation from the category of female. The first males were mutants...the male sex represents a degeneration and deformity of the female. MAN:...an obsolete life form... an ordinary creature who needs to be watched...a contradictory baby-man...
Sorry but this is just pure out and out generalization, picking on specific things and then assigning them to all and sundry .. it is intellectually dishonest and you know it, and as the other poster has already said your issue is not with feminism not pointing put the lack of equality for men is somethings, it is to take this inequality and use it as a big stick to beat feminism over the head with regardless of whose head gets caved in. Does the feminist movement have radical elements .. of course it does, just as any other group does.
The reason there is such a thing as generalizations is because they're generally true. For example biologists study fruit flies and what they discover in the study of fruit flies they use to make generalizations about all animals. Of course, generally there are exceptions. For example, there was even a Nazi who saved Jews, but generally the majority of Nazis did not save the Jews.
You really can't do that. For example, you can't have an intelligent conversation about science or history with someone who is mentally handicapped with an IQ of 79. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't treat people with dignity and grace.
Appeal to hasty generalization People often commit Hasty Generalizations because of bias or prejudice. For example, someone who is a sexist might conclude that all women are unfit to fly jet fighters because one woman crashed one. People also commonly commit Hasty Generalizations because of laziness or sloppiness. It is very easy to simply leap to a conclusion and much harder to gather an adequate sample and draw a justified conclusion. Thus, avoiding this fallacy requires minimizing the influence of bias and taking care to select a sample that is large enough. One final point: a Hasty Generalization, like any fallacy, might have a true conclusion. However, as long as the reasoning is fallacious there is no reason to accept the conclusion based on that reasoning. Women (or men) are not fruit flies. Reductio ad Hitlerum
Negative generalisations against men are grist for the mill of feminism. Feminism isn`t about equality, or respect for each other as human beings. Feminism is a place for beta types to bemoan their own shortcomings, in the guise of their agenda of hate. Real women don`t need feminism.
Yet again another person who equates a radical section of a group as being the over all ideology for them all, and as such is nothing more than an appeal to hasty generalization and a fallacy. I offer you a chance to gain some knowledge. Radical feminism - http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Radical_feminism Feminism - http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Feminism In some cases, similar quotes are either fabricated or mined. One of the most common is "All men are rapists" or "All sex is rape," usually misattributed to Catharine MacKinnon, Marilyn French, or some other feminist figure of your choice.[34] According to MacKinnon, the quote misattributed to her was "made up by the pornography industry in an attempt to undermine her credibility,"[35] and although Marilyn French did actually write the phrase attributed to her, what is usually not mentioned is that it was said in the person of a fictional character (based on Valerie Solanas) in French's novel The Women's Room.[36] Most feminists agree that all of these viewpoints are somewhat excessive, to say the least.
The countless women cheering on the many women sexually and physically assaulting those men peacefully and passively protecting their church in that video are a large "sample size," from which to draw a conclusion.
A woman who takes responsibility for her short comings rather than blaming them on the imaginary, "patriarchy".
There is also a difference between communism and despotism. What I'm missing is why, in either case, a reasonable person would find the difference noteworthy.
So a "real" man would be a man who takes responsibility for his short comings rather than blame them on the imaginary matriarchy, the courts, and feminists ?
