Red Pill Documentary
- Thread starter Reason
- Start date
I actually don't see how feminism and men's rights are mutually exclusive. We could have both you know.
My problem with equating feminism with equal rights is that, at least to me, the notion of feminism as an equal rights movement stem from a time where women didn't have rights. In today's western civilization I simply don't think that's the case anymore. Sure there are inequalities all over the place, everyone oppresses everyone. The notion that FEMenism should be a collective term for equality for both sexes is just beyond me.
On another note, when the debate dilutes into the definition of a term I think it's a good time to stop using that term. Instead of talking about feminism which apparently mean so many different things, talk about the actual matters at hand. Are you for abortion, are you for equal pay, are you for quotation, etc. etc.
On another note, when the debate dilutes into the definition of a term I think it's a good time to stop using that term. Instead of talking about feminism which apparently mean so many different things, talk about the actual matters at hand. Are you for abortion, are you for equal pay, are you for quotation, etc. etc.
Well technically we do have both.
The doc has very little to do with these things... although I don't know what quotation is
As a species, we are.
But aside from technicalities, what does that look like to you?
Quota seem to be the correct translation. The idea that men and women should be equally represented in a field or work place.
Not shouting down speeches and theories and ideas from and about MRAs would be a decent start. Once the ideas start flowing it's only a matter of time until the people bungle their one-eyed way to a solution.
EDIT: and crushing the notion that men have it so easy and that women literally do everything in our society would be nice.
- Sep 28, 2008
- 41,232
- 246,606
- 4,281
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 954 so/sx
I haven't seen this doc recently enough to remember the exact quote. Someone in the doc said that even the title of the movement "Feminism" tells us that this is a movement about women, for women, and is anti-maleness. (I suppose i could have heard this somewhere else). So what is the value of pursuing feminism? If we are to pursue both feminism and men's rights, why keep them both as battling philosophies?
People say Feminism is outdated because women have earned the right to vote. What other rights were women looking for back then? Did they get those rights, and if so why do they continue the movement? Feminism, imo, has evolved into the "I sexually identify as an attack helicopter" movement. Why is this useful?
I don't remember if that's from the doc either. To answer your question I never suggested they should be continued as competing philosophies but rather that no one be left behind. Men shouldn't get longer prison sentences for the same crimes that women comitt and women shouldn't be paid less than a man. Men shouldn't face legal reprisals for expressing a non-threatening opinion just because some woman finds it threatening in her imagination only and women should be able to serve in the military if they are physically capable of doing the job. Also everyone can identify as whatever gender they want- I don't care.
Let's include everybody and be fair.
Feminists do actually have some points, the crazies just scream craziness over them so you might not have heard.
Full disclosure, I have not seen the documentary. I don't think I plan to see it.
As a progressive I'm immediately suspicious of all this what I call "the backlash". Conservatives, who oppose progressive ideas anyway, seek to bolster their position by trying to convince everyone positions held by a tiny minority on the fringe are somehow representative of a whole social movement. The most radical feminist postion becomes the position of all feminists and anyone who supports feminism. Now all of the sudden reasonable ideas like equal pay for equal work and having workplaces free of sexual harassment are deemed to be radical by association.
The railing against politcal correctness is an example. What does "political correctness" mean? It turns out "political correctness" is anything that conservatives don't like, a catch all phrase.
Yes men can be feminists. It turn out the patriarchy and this whole idea that men must be the sole providers and protectors of their familes wasn't very good for us either. How about the idea that "real men shouldn't show emotion? It caused a lot of stress to meet an expectation not grounded in reality. If you didn't fit into the sterotype of the "macho man" you fell short and were considered less of a man than those "real men" Who really wants to do back to those times? Maybe the MAGA crowd, but not me.
Se what Trudeau say about this, I think I agree
As a progressive I'm immediately suspicious of all this what I call "the backlash". Conservatives, who oppose progressive ideas anyway, seek to bolster their position by trying to convince everyone positions held by a tiny minority on the fringe are somehow representative of a whole social movement. The most radical feminist postion becomes the position of all feminists and anyone who supports feminism. Now all of the sudden reasonable ideas like equal pay for equal work and having workplaces free of sexual harassment are deemed to be radical by association.
The railing against politcal correctness is an example. What does "political correctness" mean? It turns out "political correctness" is anything that conservatives don't like, a catch all phrase.
Yes men can be feminists. It turn out the patriarchy and this whole idea that men must be the sole providers and protectors of their familes wasn't very good for us either. How about the idea that "real men shouldn't show emotion? It caused a lot of stress to meet an expectation not grounded in reality. If you didn't fit into the sterotype of the "macho man" you fell short and were considered less of a man than those "real men" Who really wants to do back to those times? Maybe the MAGA crowd, but not me.
Se what Trudeau say about this, I think I agree
Um... What? The documentary doesn't at all support any of that. You are making assumptions about something you haven't even bothered watching. If you read through the posts in this thread, you will see a discussion of what the documentary actually did entail. A documentary directed by a woman... And I am saying these things, as a woman. Why the heck would I think men should be the sole providers or not display emotion? That's not what this is about. You think I don't want equal pay or a workplace free of sexual harassment? Try to wrap your mind around the fact that I very much so want that, along with equality for everyone. That's the simple point that's trying to be made here, that rights for one group or another are not mutually exclusive.
If you have read any of my posts, you should be able to see that I am not "a conservative" or part of "the MAGA crowd." This is yet another leap and assumption.
Believing that there are biases against one group does not automatically mean I don't think there are also biases against another group. How can we have a dialogue if you haven't tried to listen to everyone's voice?
- Dec 29, 2009
- 5,536
- 22,536
- 3,498
- MBTI
- INFJ
Honestly ? Give it a watch. My only proviso is that it shouldn't be anything that becomes divisive. But to dismiss the legitimate concerns of men doesn't help anyone.
It really does need to be about equal rights. Because that's the right thing yes? Big picture, is women's rights, their road to gender equality, I'm 100% for that. To me that's the only way to improve life.
But it can't be by stamping over men who essentially agree with that.