What's your view on feminism?

[Smith John]

 

Well, if the whole point was equal rights in the first place, then what is the fuss about?

The fact women don't really have equal rights? They still yet paid less than men even in the same roles, are subject to the lion's share of sexism and sexual harassment, are under-represented in senior roles. They might legally have equal rights but they certainly don't societally.

So what's your position on equality rights between men and women when it comes to being a parent in this country?

[katrina andrea]

This thread is actually revolting

 

 

 

The real and true definition of feminism is the belief of equality for all - no discrimination over sex, gender, sexual preferences, race etc

Everyone should be a feminist.

[I cucked Alex Jones]

This thread was a real gem.

[hornedturtle]

This thread is actually revolting

 

 

 

The real and true definition of feminism is the belief of equality for all - no discrimination over sex, gender, sexual preferences, race etc

Everyone should be a feminist.

that would be fine....if man and woman where made equal, however they are not.

[sivispacem]

 

This thread is actually revolting

 

 

 

The real and true definition of feminism is the belief of equality for all - no discrimination over sex, gender, sexual preferences, race etc

Everyone should be a feminist.

that would be fine....if man and woman where made equal, however they are not.

Equal doesn't mean identical.

[Smith John]

So sivis, would you say father's rights are equal to that of mother's rights in this country?

[Mr. House]

So sivis, would you say father's rights are equal to that of mother's rights in this country?

He's probably ignoring you because of the rather obvious stool pigeon you're throwing up there.

[Smith John]

 

So sivis, would you say father's rights are equal to that of mother's rights in this country?

He's probably ignoring you because of the rather obvious stool pigeon you're throwing up there.Oh f*ck...not you again

 

Stool pigeon? Do you even know what that means, Junior?

 

I thought we were speaking about equal rights between differing human genders, correct?

[Frank Brown]

 

 

Feminism seems to be a big deal. I was surprised to see parking spots for women only a month ago for the first time in my entire life.

What? You have got to be sh*tting me.

 

 

Yes it was on a highway (Autobahn) rest area in southern Germany. There were a couple of parking spots directly in front of the shop/restaurant that were only for women. They were also a bit larger than the other parking spaces. Actually, that doesn't really bother me.

 

What really bothers me, are the female quotas for leading positions in companies, which left wing parties want to introduce. These quotas would be discrimination of men by law. But there are also many woman that don't want to get those jobs because of quotas.

 

 

They have those in a lot of places. China has started doing that, too. It might be because more women go to the shops than men? Or that women bring children along with them?

 

I'm not entirely sure.

 

 

Well, if the whole point was equal rights in the first place, then what is the fuss about?

The fact women don't really have equal rights? They still yet paid less than men even in the same roles, are subject to the lion's share of sexism and sexual harassment, are under-represented in senior roles. They might legally have equal rights but they certainly don't societally.

 

 

The pay-gap statistic is a bit wonky to say the least.

 

I don't disagree with you about the sexism and sexual harassment, but, with regards to senior roles, do women need to be equally represented? Wouldn't it make the most sense to have the most qualified person in a specific role? If women are overlooked for senior positions just because they are women, then I'd understand your argument. Not to mention that there are also other positions, aside from CEO, which can be considered senior roles and that women do occupy. Most of the rankings that show women in Fortune 500 businesses only show CEO positions, and not other C-level executives.

[Mr. House]

I don't disagree with you about the sexism and sexual harassment, but, with regards to senior roles, do women need to be equally represented? Wouldn't it make the most sense to have the most qualified person in a specific role? If women are overlooked for senior positions just because they are women, then I'd understand your argument. Not to mention that there are also other positions, aside from CEO, which can be considered senior roles and that women do occupy. Most of the rankings that show women in Fortune 500 businesses only show CEO positions, and not other C-level executives.

Women are overlooked for senior positions, as are ethnic minorities. Having a quota specifically aimed at hiring a woman or minority of the same skill level may be ham fisted in some respects, but it proves to be effective in at least redressing the balance whilst such discrimination still is part of society. It may be 'unfair' to the white guy who didn't get the job, but said white guy has a higher base chance of getting the job anyway. No company or government organisation is going to hire a notably lower qualified candidate simply to meet equality numbers. The same sort of process is applied to university applications for some prestigious universities in relation to minorities and lower income students.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Myron

[Smith John]

"White man" this, "White man" that; you really harbour a prejudice against white people, huh Dixon?

[Tyler]

Don't make this thread about your personal issues with another member. Make a post relating to the discussion or don't post in this topic.

[Smith John]

Pretty sure the post I made at the top of this page was completely on topic, yet the only response I received was that of aggravation.

[Nlwt]

I recently had to do some sociology essays on feminism and there are feminists that want equal rights for men and women, and then there's Radical Feminists that want females to be the more dominant in society. I don't mind feminists, but I can't f*cking stand Radical Feminists; the biggest hypocrites out there.

[GTA_stu]

Plenty of people are disadvantaged towards getting senior positions in companies, it's not just non-white people and women. Not all white males are advantaged either. Ugly people and short people are also statistically far less likely to get a top job. A tall handsome black guy probably has a far better chance than some short white guy with a face like a bag of smashed crabs. Quotas are BS.

 

.

[shhhhhhhhh]

While I think that OPs list contains a bit of bullsh*t, I think feminism is bullsh*t too. Men and women aren't equal. They are not made the same and they don't operate in the same way. Do I think one is superior to the other? No. But in this case "what's good for the goose" is not always good for the gander.

Since everyone seems to want to bring up work equality though I'll toss in my thoughts about that too. Job positions and pay should be based on ability to perform the job(education/physical performance/experience/etc).

[sivispacem]

Lucchese- absolutely. I see no reason why men should have less parental rights than women. That doesn't necessarily mean mandating exactly the same treatment he cause the needs tend to differ, but to be honest that kind of thing should be addressed on an individual basis anyway.

 

MissAmy- allow me to repeat my earlier comment. Being different has nothing to do with equality. An equal society doesn't necessarily mandate the exact same treatment for different individuals.

[Mr. House]

While I think that OPs list contains a bit of bullsh*t, I think feminism is bullsh*t too. Men and women aren't equal. They are not made the same and they don't operate in the same way. Do I think one is superior to the other? No. But in this case "what's good for the goose" is not always good for the gander.

Since everyone seems to want to bring up work equality though I'll toss in my thoughts about that too. Job positions and pay should be based on ability to perform the job(education/physical performance/experience/etc).

Well sweetheart, as I already said, the main crux of this whole feminism lark is/was to transform male dominated systems into a one that attempts to focus on your abilities rather than gender. In fact, the reason why there are laws and social programmes in place specifically for females is because the whole movement understood the obvious difference in the sexes and the need to establish such programmes/laws in a fair society e.g. Reproductive rights and abortion laws. These movements were also important to attempt to discourage misogynistic assholes like me calling women sweetheart, but you can't win everything.

[The Pizza Delivery Guy]

There's no need for feminism, there is no need for patriarchy. Equality should be spread across all races, sexualities, and especially gender.

[DEALUX]

The real and true definition of feminism is the belief of equality for all - no discrimination over sex, gender, sexual preferences, race etc

Everyone should be a feminist.

Except that that is obviously not the definition because you can see right away—from the word "feminism"— that it is a movement that focuses on women's rights. If it were about what you say then it would be called something like humanism. Feminists seem to think that sexism is an issue almost unique to women and hence why it deserves special attention. As far as I can tell that is a completely unjustified claim because men seem to encounter similar amounts of sexism. Also, the problem with feminism as a movement is the lack of empirical evidence for their claims (even their core claims such as the patriarchy). It seems to rely exclusively on anecdotal evidence and poorly interpreted statistics.

 

Here's how feminists generally interpret statistics: you can take the fact that most prison inmates are male (most of the time over 90%) for example. A feminist would automatically interpret that as sexism if that majority of inmates were female, but in reality there are far more complicated explanations to be found that may in fact have to do with human biology (or more specifically sexual dimorphism).

 

Edit: The mere fact that males are paid better in some domains or are more likely to get high-up job positions isn't evidence of sexism in and of itself. This is the kind of logic that creationists invoke when they try to prove the existence of god. It's downright laughable for people who claim to seek the truth. You still haven't found the actual cause of these facts.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Criѕtian

[Niobium]

WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE POOR, OPPRESSED, STRAIGHT CIS-GENDERED WHITE MEN?????

 

Btw, I think this video is very funny:

 

 

Edited July 28, 2014 by nobum62

[CricKetVarble]

As a man, I will agree that women have some very big advantages. Especially when it comes to education and the justice system. Divorce court is a joke because of how much it favors women. When my parents got divorced, my mom got a lot she probably didnt deserve. The house, one of the cars, not to mention my father has to pay child support he really can't afford. But at the same time women are discriminated against a lot. When it comes to athletics, jobs, and not to mention the amount of pressure every woman has to be thin and beautiful. One thing I dislike is women who think they deserve more than what they do and think all men are just a bunch of asshole pigs (Statistics show women cheat on men more than the other way around). Im all for equality, but a lot of feminists want to just take control of everything.

[shhhhhhhhh]

The fact is that everyone is going to be discriminated against at some point for some reason. Someone is always going to be offended by something. Someone is always going to cross a line. Someone is always going to say "that's not fair". There isn't just one group or individual that is being discriminated at any point in time. It happens to everyone. It's life. You can let it beat you down, you can try to change it or you can suck it up and deal. Every person is a victim at some point. Stop thinking it's just you. And I'm using "you" as a blanket term because again, there's always that one person that takes everything so personally.

[Clem Fandango]

Also, the problem with feminism as a movement is the lack of empirical evidence for their claims (even their core claims such as the patriarchy). It seems to rely exclusively on anecdotal evidence and poorly interpreted statistics.

Right, an entire academic discipline relies exclusively on sh*t they heard through the grapevine and an inability to read statistics.

 

 

 

A feminist would automatically interpret that as sexism if that majority of inmates were female, but in reality there are far more complicated explanations to be found that may in fact have to do with human biology (or more specifically sexual dimorphism).

I like how pages after pages of rigorous analysis is apparently simplistic, but "we're from mars, their from venus" is apparently a "far more complicated" explanation.

 

 

 

You still haven't found the actual cause of these facts.

Actually anyone who talks about gender issues has some understanding of the pay-gap, rather than just calling overt sexism and calling it a day.

 

 

 

Except that that is obviously not the definition because you can see right away—from the word "feminism"— that it is a movement that focuses on women's rights.

Actually, if you hear anything at all about men's issues, it's probably from a feminist. If not, its at an event organised and paid for by feminists. Feminists aren't hostile to men's issues, they're literally the only people who give a f*ck.

 

Your ignorance is shocking.

So sivis, would you say father's rights are equal to that of mother's rights in this country?

Where would we be without you to regurgitate bog standard right-wing talking points that have nothing to do with the conversation?

Edited July 29, 2014 by Melchior

[DEALUX]

Right, an entire academic discipline relies exclusively on sh*t they heard through the grapevine and an inability to read statistics.

 

I like how pages after pages of rigorous analysis is apparently simplistic, but "we're from mars, their from venus" is apparently a "far more complicated" explanation.

 

Actually anyone who talks about gender issues has some understanding of the pay-gap, rather than just calling overt sexism and calling it a day.

 

Actually, if you hear anything at all about men's issues, it's probably from a feminist. If not, its at an event organised and paid for by feminists. Feminists aren't hostile to men's issues, they're literally the only people who give a f*ck.

 

Your ignorance is shocking.

So sivis, would you say father's rights are equal to that of mother's rights in this country?

Where would we be without you to regurgitate bog standard right-wing talking points that have nothing to do with the conversation?

Anecdotal evidence is still evidence just not very good evidence. It's not strong empirical evidence. As for statistics, I haven't seen a single conclusive feminist interpretation of any statistic.

 

If that is your understanding of sexual dimorphism then I'm afraid there is no place for you in this discussion. You have the simplistic mind of a creationist trying to prove evolution false. There are clear differences between men and women, especially when it comes to physical strength. There could be psychological differences as well.

 

Some understanding, maybe, but it's not so easy to explain why women are paid less. Also, there are in fact bogus studies floating around, such as this one.

 

Ever heard of the MRA? I'm not saying that they are hostile towards men's issues. I'm saying that they are mostly concerned about themselves.

 

Enlighten me.

 

It does have something to do with the conversation. If a man gets a woman pregnant he has no right to decide to abort the baby if the mother wants to keep it.

[Smith John]

Lucchese- absolutely. I see no reason why men should have less parental rights than women. That doesn't necessarily mean mandating exactly the same treatment he cause the needs tend to differ, but to be honest that kind of thing should be addressed on an individual basis anyway.

But can we honestly say that the courts don't favour women quite substantially when it comes to custody during messy separations? Why campaign groups like "Fathers for Justice" exist?

 

@Melchior

 

This is a topic about feminism, correct? And feminism is supposed to represent equality between men and women, correct? My questions relating to equality rights in regards to child custody has everything to do with the subject. And "right-wing"? I'm "right-wing" because I don't believe fathers have equal rights to that of women in this particular matter? I've long understood the self-admitted "radical leftist" nature of your views, but even this attack is a load of dross.

[Clem Fandango]

Anecdotal evidence is still evidence just not very good evidence. It's not strong empirical evidence. As for statistics, I haven't seen a single conclusive feminist interpretation of any statistic.

Perhaps you should reread what I wrote. If you can't see what's ridiculous about scores of academics being unable to apply statistics and deal with empirical evidence, then I don't know what to say.

 

 

 

There are clear differences between men and women

Nobody is denying that humans are sexually dimorphic. But all of the disparity between the two genders can't be explained with reference to that fact.

 

 

 

Some understanding, maybe, but it's not so easy to explain why women are paid less.

Right, but how does this address my point?

 

 

 

Ever heard of the MRA?

They're more about covert misogyny (to the point that MRA affiliated websites are considered hate groups by various organisation) than actually dealing with men's issues. If you think those unshaven c*nts have their fedoras in a twist over bias against men in custody battles, you have another thing coming.

 

Do you, as a man, feel represented by MRAs?

 

 

 

I'm not saying that they are hostile towards men's issues. I'm saying that they are mostly concerned about themselves.

So your problem is that they don't spend enough time dealing with issues that effect you? How about the fact that men who do deal with men's issues are supported almost solely by feminist organisations? How much more money would you like them to spend on you and your issues?

This is a topic about feminism, correct? And feminism is supposed to represent equality between men and women, correct? My questions relating to equality rights in regards to child custody has everything to do with the subject. And "right-wing"? I'm "right-wing" because I don't believe fathers have equal rights to that of women in this particular matter? I've long understood the self-admitted "radical leftist" nature of your views, but even this attack is a load of dross.

 

You're right-wing because you're attempting to use the very existence of men's issues to undermine women's efforts to gain equality. It's standard middle class, cenre-right fare.

[Smith John]

Oh for f*ck's sake...I'm not trying to undermine women's rights for equality. I'm attempting to utilise a thread devoted to discussion about the equal rights of men and women to discuss what I believe to be the fact that men do not have have equal rights when it comes to children. If that makes me "right-wing" in your neo-leftist world, then so be it. Perhaps I should start my own "Maleism" thread, because we all know how that would go...

 

Now I'm not going to entertain this needless little flame-bait any further unless you actually have something to say on my initial issue.

[DEALUX]

Perhaps you should reread what I wrote. If you can't see what's ridiculous about scores of academics being unable to apply statistics and deal with empirical evidence, then I don't know what to say.

 

Nobody is denying that humans are sexually dimorphic. But all of the disparity between the two genders can't be explained with reference to that fact.

 

They're more about covert misogyny (to the point that MRA affiliated websites are considered hate groups by various organisation) than actually dealing with men's issues. If you think those unshaven c*nts have their fedoras in a twist over bias against men in custody battles, you have another thing coming. Do you, as a man, feel represented by MRAs?

 

So your problem is that they don't spend enough time dealing with issues that effect you? How about the fact that men who do deal with men's issues are supported almost solely by feminist organisations? How much more money would you like them to spend on you and your issues?

I've seen enough bullsh*t coming from mainstream feminism that it doesn't seem that much of a ridiculous idea. I also think that there is little evidence for the core claims of feminism. As it currently stands, I have no reason to believe that the patriarchy is real. I've seen no conclusive evidence to prove that it is real.

 

I never said that it accounts for all of it, but feminists generally tend to disregard this fact about humans because to a lot of people it isn't politically correct to acknowledge these differences. I've seen feminists deny sexual dimorphism altogether.

 

My point was that there are other movements or organizations that focus on men's rights. I expected the MRA to be just as crazy as mainstream feminism. Extreme behavior inspires an extreme response.

 

No. My original point was that feminism is mostly or pretty much exclusively about women's rights. It's in the name and it's not surprising since feminists basically blame men for all sexism. The patriarchy is a system built by men after all, right?

[LOES]

I kinda thought it was advocating for female equality, but the modern feminists or "feminazis" make feminism into something that advocates for superiority over male rights.

 

In many situations, who's the victim? Females. The suspect? The male. Even though this is more likely, the situations which are reversed gives no aid or credibility to the guys wronged by females

 

Same goes for divorce- alimony payments and child support/ custody- traditionally the male loses in every aspect

Edited July 29, 2014 by LOES