^^ This describes my own beliefs, and many of my experiences, very well. There are lunatics on both sides of the debate, no doubt.
Feminism and it's impact on today's society
- Thread starter IrenaShav
- Start date
I agree with you. I think that "feminism" has made women in general less feminine than before, but I believe that men naturally still prefer feminine women over less feminine ones.
I believe that a lot of women who display dominant "masculine" behavior and lack of femininity are not naturally dominant, but rather do it because they're following recent trends, same as they're following fashion trends.
This kind of behavior is for example encouraged by today's mainstream media in a way that a lot of newer popular tv shows depict women and girls chasing after men as mainstream behavior.
If you look at a mating ritual of any of the animal species, you will never see a dominant female humping a gentle male. It is rather an exception than a rule.
Humans are the only species in which this kind of behavior is common, it only became common very recently for the first time in known history, and I believe it's mostly due to recent trends and propaganda.
Humans have the same basic natural instincts as all other species, but a lot of them if not the most, choose to follow trends rather than their own instincts.
Well post some pictures that you like (memes etc.), if you find some that describe your opinion on the subject well enough.
Last edited:
I agree with you that it's great how women now have many options that they didn't have before. On the other hand it has somehow raised society's expectations on women, and now a "successful woman" should be an excellent worker, housewife and mother, which is almost impossible. Not enough time for that. So I'm saying that "feminism" can sometimes be a double-edged sword.
Last edited:
Feminism is a supremacist movement that either fabricates issues or presents them as mainly affecting women in order to attract public support and funding for their political aims. I do not have the time to post about this in detail but will mention that they have suppressed the extensive domestic violence research showing equal rates of perpetration by men and women, as well as of wartime rape against men and male rape in general (the rates of perpetration are equal (see page 28) but only rape carried out by men is legally called rape). They even sent death threats and bomb threats to Erin Pizzey, the founder of the first women's shelter in the UK (and the world, if I am not mistaken), killed her dog and forced her to flee the UK, after she released a book on women who abuse their partners. The situation is hardly better today, and as a result of this censorship smokescreen, misandry is rampant in the media, although the internet is thankfully providing a safe haven for men to discuss their predicaments.
I don't care what benefits you have gained from feminism, that you can get other people to pay for your birth control or get lower sentences when you commit crimes because of feminism. Feminism is a vile ideology and has always been so.
I don't care what benefits you have gained from feminism, that you can get other people to pay for your birth control or get lower sentences when you commit crimes because of feminism. Feminism is a vile ideology and has always been so.
Defending primaloath might not be the smartest thing to do, but I'll risk it anyway.
I think the feminist movement has created a political and cultural climate in which it's impossible to discuss problems that mostly affect men without being labelled a misogynist. I personally don't share his overwhelming hatred for feminism, but what primaloath says is basically true. According to at least one study, the instigators of nonreciprocal domestic violence were women in around 70 percent of all cases, but there are few domestic abuse shelters that will accept male victims. This problem isn't taken seriously by the media. If you're "lucky" enough to come across a male victim of domestic violence on television, chances are you're watching a sitcom. It's not just domestic violence, though. Men commit suicide much more frequently than women; the ratio of male to female suicide victims in OECD countries is about 3:1. I could go on about the problems men face in all areas of society. If feminism was truly about equality between men and women, doing something about these problems would be a top priority. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be. In order to achieve true equality, we need to understand that men and women face problems of equal magnitude, and that they all need to be dealt with. Currently, the feminist movement is not doing a very good job in that regard.
That being said, I realize that feminism is a very broad ideology, and that not all feminists are misandric. Some of the first people to openly discuss men's issues were actually women involved in the feminist movement of the 70's (Erin Pizzey, for example).
I think the feminist movement has created a political and cultural climate in which it's impossible to discuss problems that mostly affect men without being labelled a misogynist. I personally don't share his overwhelming hatred for feminism, but what primaloath says is basically true. According to at least one study, the instigators of nonreciprocal domestic violence were women in around 70 percent of all cases, but there are few domestic abuse shelters that will accept male victims. This problem isn't taken seriously by the media. If you're "lucky" enough to come across a male victim of domestic violence on television, chances are you're watching a sitcom. It's not just domestic violence, though. Men commit suicide much more frequently than women; the ratio of male to female suicide victims in OECD countries is about 3:1. I could go on about the problems men face in all areas of society. If feminism was truly about equality between men and women, doing something about these problems would be a top priority. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be. In order to achieve true equality, we need to understand that men and women face problems of equal magnitude, and that they all need to be dealt with. Currently, the feminist movement is not doing a very good job in that regard.
That being said, I realize that feminism is a very broad ideology, and that not all feminists are misandric. Some of the first people to openly discuss men's issues were actually women involved in the feminist movement of the 70's (Erin Pizzey, for example).
Hey, now more women can die in battle:
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-lift-ban-women-front-line-combat-jobs-205333602.html
Great news!
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-lift-ban-women-front-line-combat-jobs-205333602.html
Great news!
Gktr, the aim of feminism has never been equality. If it were, Barack Obama would not be admitting that title ix is all about getting more women than men in education, and saying there was a long way to go (he is heavily financed by feminists). Feminist judges would not be calling for their peers to give women lighter sentences than men and feminist members of parliament would not be calling for women's prisons to be shut down or be converted into men's prisons. The family court judges (who are, no surprise, feminists) would not be awarding sole custody to mothers the vast majority of the time and awarding child support / alimony that equals or exceeds the ex-husband's income, even when he ends up being sent to prison because he is understandably unable to pay it. Emmeline Pankhurst would not have been so keen on shaming men into going to war without ever campaigning for these disenfranchised men's right to vote. Yet they have all done these things because they wanted to grab privileges by way of social and political bullying, and only recently have they started to be seriously challenged.
The very idea that one has to defend someone who points out that a political movement has committed crimes and engaged in corruption to the extent that feminism has is worth exploring for insights. Who are the people that would attack such a person? What would motivate them? What mindset do they have that enables them to employ the feminist shaming tactics they are infamous for?
Dig a little further and you will find that feminism is really social and psychological abuse, perpetrated by cowards under the veneer of victimhood, with the aim of gaining social influence and political power. Sure, there are definitely some naive people among them, but it is these naive people's responsibility to either withdraw from the movement or oppose its evil majority.
The very idea that one has to defend someone who points out that a political movement has committed crimes and engaged in corruption to the extent that feminism has is worth exploring for insights. Who are the people that would attack such a person? What would motivate them? What mindset do they have that enables them to employ the feminist shaming tactics they are infamous for?
Dig a little further and you will find that feminism is really social and psychological abuse, perpetrated by cowards under the veneer of victimhood, with the aim of gaining social influence and political power. Sure, there are definitely some naive people among them, but it is these naive people's responsibility to either withdraw from the movement or oppose its evil majority.
Im so glad that us fighting forces can now be weakened whenever a female soldier decides she doesn't want to fight on the front lines she can just get pregnant and go back home.
That response sounds a little flippant like all women are thinking 'at least I have that get-out-free card' and suggests that they're not committed to the forces at all.
I think a lot of women don't consider getting pregnant a viable solution to their troubles much of the time.
I think most women see it as a bodily function to be used at the appropriate time.
Will have to just hide like Dr Cox in Platoon.
It may have seemed flippant but I didn't mean it in that way. The fact is that when you are on the front line, every soldier counts. I've seen too many women decide things were too hard when in the rear lines and take the pregnancy way out, I can just imagine how they might be on the front lines. They don't even need to decide to get pregnant, it just seems to happen... Somehow by magic... Young, best shape of their lives, horny men and women living in tents together.... I just don't get how it happens.
leave it to the arm chair warriors to think this is a great idea.
Getting pregnant solves everything. (eye roll.) Also, joining the army is a great solution for getting out of massive amounts of consumer debt (talk about wanting a get out of jail free card. jeeze.) Everyone knows that's what makes a real fighting man and strengthens the forces.
And... Cowards? These people actually want to fight in combat, the are asking to.
And... Cowards? These people actually want to fight in combat, the are asking to.
The problem is that to most people, feminism is synonomous with the emancipation of women, and the vast majority of all feminists want actual gender equality. By attacking the feminist ideology in general instead of the unfair treatment of men it has brought about, you come across as a male chauvinist who doesn't want women to vote. Antagonizing half the population isn't going to help your cause even if it's just, which I believe fighting discrimination is regardless of whom it affects.
I don't have any problem with women who are committed to their military career being on the front line. We've never had a ban on women serving in front-line combat jobs where I live, and it seems to work out just fine. We do however have enforced conscription of men. How is it fair that I had choose between military service, community service, or prison?
[MENTION=6824]Gktr[/MENTION]
If you don't mind me asking, which did you go for?
I had a Danish friend who was likely, but not certain, to be called up to do national service. He would have had the choice between military and some kind of admin work.
I wonder how much you would do in the military? You'd be barely trained by the time the service period was over. Might get you fitter though - wouldn't be so bad.
Screwing if anything major kicked off whilst you were in there though. That would suck.
If you don't mind me asking, which did you go for?
I had a Danish friend who was likely, but not certain, to be called up to do national service. He would have had the choice between military and some kind of admin work.
I wonder how much you would do in the military? You'd be barely trained by the time the service period was over. Might get you fitter though - wouldn't be so bad.
Screwing if anything major kicked off whilst you were in there though. That would suck.
I went for military service in the navy. It was actually a rather nice experience, but I still think enforced conscription is wrong. If anything major kicks off (i.e. we get attacked by another country), all men between the ages of 18 and 60 have to serve anyway, so whether or not you're doing your military service at the time doesn't really matter.
Last edited:
Well, that's not fair at all, and obviously, your country needs to fix that little problem. In my country, we have a 100% volunteer military, and for some reason, there are women who volunteer to make the military their career, so they can put on that uniform and become a target for every whack job in the middle east, and I'm sure those geniuses don't care whether or not women are approved for combat positions. Obviously, (again) women should be able to pass the same physical requirements as men, and if an individual can't pass those requirements, then they shouldn't do those combat positions. But if you can do the job and have passed whatever tests you have to pass to show you can do the job, and if you are already a target and are getting shot at already anyway, it is really just a technicality as far as I can tell.
Let me get this right......
So hypothetically speaking, if a middle eastern country invaded the US and started exploiting its oil and other resources (after bombing all the infrastructure, including baby milk factories, into piles of rubble), any US person who shot at the invading army would by your definition be a 'whack job'....is that right?
gktr said:
Only 14% of women consider themselves feminists, according to the most recent UK survey I am aware of, and the most popular antifeminist speaker on YouTube (girlwriteswhat) is a woman. Her most popular video, Feminism and the Disposable Male, actually has 500,000 views. I think people's attitudes are changing for the better, and even the feminists themselves are having a hard time arguing that "anti-feminist" means "anti-woman" or "male Chauvinist" or what have you.
It would be interesting to hear just how many feminists would actively support women being drafted.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ive_service.html?fb_ref=sm_fb_plugin_activity
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ive_service.html?fb_ref=sm_fb_plugin_activity