Feminism and why it's bad.

[LordAshur]

How does it feel to call people racist or sexist? Or fascist? Because looking at the nonsensical reasons you have to do so and the fact that you still keep doing it, it must feel pretty damn good.

I'll reiterate:

You can't take away something that isn't there to begin with. The point is that we have two situations here - cultures in which most women women want to be (and are) equal and cultures where most women don't want to be equal and all are unequal. The women in cultures with no gender equality who want to be equal are the only opressed group here, everyone else is (or in the case of western women - should be) happy.

And what can we do for those actually opressed? Absolutely nothing. So the point would be that feminism in the west is useless bitching for the sake of useless bitching.

Or are you suggesting that some idiot whining about the sexism in video games or flashing her tits at Putin actually makes a difference for those who might legitimatelly be considered opressed?

 

[Sander]

How does it feel to call people racist or sexist? Or fascist? Because looking at the nonsensical reasons you have to do so and the fact that you still keep doing it, it must feel pretty damn good.

Bruh, you've been arguing for several posts that women in general should be denied choices because some of them don't want them. That's pretty fucking sexist.

Or are you suggesting that some idiot whining about the sexism in video games or flashing her tits at Putin actually makes a difference for those who might legitimatelly be considered opressed?

I read your post. If you think gender equality exists in the west, you are wrong. And the fact that it's worse elsewhere does nothing to change that fact.

How exactly do you think bitching about people pointing out problematic aspects of their culture helps women's equality, or anything?

 

[Tagaziel]

@Tagaziel Achoo and Rabbi Tuckman from Robin Hood Men In Tights aren't stereotypes?

No, they're caricatures of certain aspects of Jewish culture, caricatured by a Jew.

 

[Hassknecht]

Yeah, Achoo was hilariously jewish. Dave Chappelle is known for his awesome portrayal of jewish characters.
Like those guys:

Can't get more jewish than this:

I guess jewish is the new black!


Yeah, I'll show myself out.

 

[LordAshur]

Bruh, you've been arguing for several posts that women in general should be denied choices because some of them don't want them. That's pretty fucking sexist.

Alright then. If what I have been arguing in my posts constitutes sexism, then I'm a sexist. And I don't feel the least bit guilty for it. Happy?

I read your post. If you think gender equality exists in the west, you are wrong. And the fact that it's worse elsewhere does nothing to change that fact.

How exactly do you think bitching about people pointing out problematic aspects of their culture helps women's equality, or anything?

It could sooner be argued that men are the opressed ones in western society.

I don't have such an overglorified view of myself to think that my forum conversation on any matter is going to make a difference in the real world. Because that's exactly what it is - a conversation, and it serves precisely the noble cause it's supposed to - passing my time.

 

[Atomkilla]

I have a serious question here - how do feminists actually aim to change things and what are the long term goals (actual goals, "fighting for gender equality" doesn't cut it), and again, how do they plan to achieve them?


And yes, this is a serious question, as bias-free as possible. It may sound condescending and such, but no, I'm seriously asking - because most of the people who label themselves feminists and such that I've talked about regarding the subject had a hard time to put it in layman's terms - let alone make an actual statement and a proper, over-encompassing (or at least, as encompassing as possible) response to the question asked.

 

[Crni Vuk]

You mean things havn't changed already?

 

[Hassknecht]

Well, basic equal rights are more or less done, I think, at least in western countries. Obviously Sander and Tagaziel will disagree, but men and women are equal by law in most of the first world. The problem is that society is not only defined by law, and society changes way slower than law.
The goal is to try to get society to change faster than that.

 

[Atomkilla]

The goal is to try to get society to change faster than that.

Okay, that's fine...in theory.
But in practice?

In my personal experience, most of the people who try to "hasten" this change are quite inept at communicating their ideas forward, only creating an even bigger gap of misunderstanding and mistrust between their ideological concerns and goals and the people to whom their trying to put forward their ideas too. Most of the people, not all.

So how to fix that?

 

[Hassknecht]

The goal is to try to get society to change faster than that.

Okay, that's fine...in theory.
But in practice?

In my personal experience, most of the people who try to "hasten" this change are quite inept at communicating their ideas forward, only creating an even bigger gap of misunderstanding and mistrust between their ideological concerns and goals and the people to whom their trying to put forward their ideas too. Most of the people, not all.

So how to fix that?

Well, gain as much political influence as possible and put more laws in place. For example, women quotas in upper management, laws against hatespeech and things like that. People are then supposed to get used to "total equality" and realise that it's actually not bad.

 

[Atomkilla]

Well, gain as much political influence as possible and put more laws in place. For example, women quotas in upper management, laws against hatespeech and things like that. People are then supposed to get used to "total equality" and realise that it's actually not bad.

But where does hate speech begin and where does free speech end?

 

[Dr Fallout]

One of the reasons I can't believe sexism, feminism nowadays is something I've summed up here...

Two middle aged ladies, reasonably well off are talking to each other in a Parisian cafe. They seem to be quite animated, spilling their coffee and making a fuss.
Lady 1: It's a disgrace I tell you! I get treated like... like... (she starts crying)... like a woman!
Lady 2: I know what you mean, always cleaning the dishes and sewing. It's oppression that's what it is!

In a land far away, more accurately Somalia, a line of slaves trudge through the desert sand. They are beaten often if they are slow. They are oppressed and suffering. Some die of exhaustion but the others keep going on, ignoring the poor soul who died.

It's a bit exaggerated but it's what I see. No literally, I saw two women go on about feminism like the above two.

 

[Moosick]

so basically nobody should question that which we perceive to be negative, that which infringes on one's basic liberties (however constructed and irrational they may be) because somewhere somebody else has it worse?

what wonderful, rational thought

even nietzsche would find that attitude tedious

moralising /on/ moralising

EDIT: note to sober self - observe thread - don't comment!

 

[Dr Fallout]

so basically nobody should question that which we perceive to be negative, that which infringes on one's basic liberties (however constructed and irrational they may be) because somewhere somebody else has it worse?

what wonderful, rational thought

even nietzsche would find that attitude tedious

moralising /on/ moralising

No, it's more like 'Fuck first world problems. There's shit out there that's worse then fighting for feminism (how much more do you want?), Gay rights (let's make massive parades for the right to fuck somebody else!) and some more.'

This goes to the government, 'There's shit out there that's worse then trying to stop gay rights (what's the point? The just want sex and love, what do YOU get out of it), feminism (just make laws to equal wages, done and dusted) and some more'.

 

[Akratus]

That argument doesn't fly. It's the monkeysphere.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Interesting thing but I find it better to still try help people. I find there is an importance order to things in terms that we should deal with.

 

[Crni Vuk]

so basically nobody should question that which we perceive to be negative, that which infringes on one's basic liberties (however constructed and irrational they may be) because somewhere somebody else has it worse?

what wonderful, rational thought

even nietzsche would find that attitude tedious

moralising /on/ moralising

No, it's more like 'Fuck first world problems. There's shit out there that's worse then fighting for feminism (how much more do you want?), Gay rights (let's make massive parades for the right to fuck somebody else!) and some more.'

This goes to the government, 'There's shit out there that's worse then trying to stop gay rights (what's the point? The just want sex and love, what do YOU get out of it), feminism (just make laws to equal wages, done and dusted) and some more'.

Have you ever been in a situation like coming out of your closet and admiting to your closest friends/family that your gay?

Yes. I know it. I get it. I understand where this frustration is coming from. It is tiresome to hear this always over and over again, like a mantra, that gays should have the same rights, that sexism should not happen etc. Because on the surface it feels like we would be already there. Truth be told though, we are not. And you can believe me that.

But when you actually realize how much homophobia and sexism still exists under the surface and in some cases also openly than I still feel that there is a lot of work to be done here. I mean it sure is thank god not like 1950s anymore where you could end up killing your self while under heavy drugs as homosexual. But there are still a lot of issues. And those can be even quite dramatic, when you look at the current situation of homosexual soldiers. Or the status of marriage in most western nations which usually is a very good way to getting all those ugly people out of their caves saying their true thoughts, you know the kind of people that say stuff like, "you know I do not haave ANY issues with homosexuals and I do not hate them but (insert your homophobic argument)"

I do like the idea that we live in this so called englighted century with all that free rights and such. But there happens simply way to much shit to say that we are there yet. Not as long you have still shit like that happening:



Equal rights my ass. And to believe that our way of life/thinking has absolutely zero effect on other cultures, is also somewhat naive.



I still find it amazing that it needs a Brit who's not a journalist to give americans a decent news coverage ...

 

[Akratus]

Anyone who's not a hundred percent pro gay rights needs a stern talking to.

 

[Dr Fallout]

Anyone who's not a hundred percent gay rights needs a stern talking to.

If you don't support gay rights or show ONE FUCKING LITTLE PIECE of not TOTALLY agreeing with Gays... YOU'RE A FUCKING BACKWARDS PIECE OF SHIT.

That's today! Yay! The thing is both sides are fucking stupid. The government for trying to ban (what do you get out of it) and the gay rights activist for being so upfront for it (for the love of god [pun not intended] why do you care about sex and love so much). Both sides just have it blown way out of size. We should be worrying about the political stability and suffering in the Middle East and Africa, not making so much noise for sex/love rights.

 

[Akratus]

Anyone who's not a hundred percent gay rights needs a stern talking to.

If you don't support gay rights or show ONE FUCKING LITTLE PIECE of not TOTALLY agreeing with Gays... YOU'RE A FUCKING BACKWARDS PIECE OF SHIT.

Hey man, I get where you're coming from. I was merely presenting my opinion that gay rights isn't really negotiable morally, from my perspective. I get why you're mad, it's because the people on this forum really aren't great at debating. It frustrates you to the point of calling me that. Anyone else on this forum would probably not be understandable to such a post, but I get it. My post wasn't really aimed at you at all. But it's my fault for making too simple, too lackluster a post. I mean, of course you're pro gay-rights. If anyone isn't on here I wouldn't shed a tear if they got banned for it.

Hopefully no one else jumps on you for that post. Anyway, I agree that as far as moral neccessities go, not killing people and having a fair non violent, unopressive democratic society is more important than gay rights by itself. Although this is all in the 'very important' zone for societal development.

You know I think the most poignant point we can take away from all the recent political discussions on NMA is that America ruins everything. You are completely correct, both sides are at far too many times very stupid. I'll share a little secret. It's party politics. None of those people are doing it to fight for a cause, they are doing it to fight people they don't agree whith which makes them feel good. It's what Sander and Tagaziel's entire mindset consists of psychologically, at least when it comes to political """discussions""", and is why I find them caricatures. It's also why these debates are pointless and the only winning move is not to play.