What is a feminist, what is feminism, and what is a 'feminazi'? Do you know what they are?

Those who are against feminism: what DO you want?

a reply to: Pitou

This is obviously a rhetorical question, I'm sure we both know.
I'll approach it honestly though.
Ask a different person, get a different answer.
And you may and probably won't get a completely honest answer.
Same with those who are for feminism.
Same with everything.

For me, I want equality.
You know, egalitarianism.
And I don't see feminism providing it.
As I said, the name alone rules out any sense of equality.
It's like if I started a racial equality movement and caused it caucasianism.
I should, and would be laughed out off any soapbox I happened to get upon.
But feminism is promising equality in spades.
But not providing any framework that actually lends it's self to that aim.
The framework it provides in fact, demonizes men, teaches women they are victims of men.
Everything a man does is PATRIARCHY and fundamentally meant to oppress women.
Even killing pixelated women in a game were you can kill LITERALLY everyone *male or female, black or white or what-have-you, etc etc etc* you come accross.
Just killing them is significant though and a sign that you, at least deep down, hate women.
Ms. Sarkeesian brought us that rather nice bit of garbage.
This is all unless of course, the man supports feminism.
In which case he's a second class reformed savage of a citizen and potential threat if he acts out.

Let me ask you this, why does it seem like no one is allowed to critisize feminism?
Even the extreme misandric ones?
Point out they exist, all you get is a "Not all feminists are like that.".
Which is then forgotten until you have to point it out again.
Usually after getting an earfull of generalizations about men.

And before you say we are.
You obviously aren't noticing the title of misogynist etc etc etc bestowed upon any male who does.

Not that I'm much of an expert, or any sort of expert really.
I think there are two types of feminism, there's the sort that seeks equality, mutual respect.
Then there is the sort that has become embittered by the misogyny practiced by the ruling elite for so long, that pervades all strata of society that actually seeks to empower women beyond the median, to make the female the ruler, the arbiter.

It's much the same with race equality, there are those who seek equality and those who seek to disempower the "other" due to being put down for so long.

I don't understand how misogyny or misanthropy works. We all have family, friends etc of either sex...Unless we are really unlucky.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Well there are groups that promote racial equality that are race specific.
And I fail to see how feminism can't be criticised, I've read post after post on different threads just on this website criticising feminism and feminists.

a reply to: WilsonWilson

It isn't condoned however.
And you certainly don't see feminists offering any criticism of even extreme feminists.
Women that do are ousted, and men that do get called basement dwellers, misogynists, neckbeards and etc.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Actually, no. I was sincerely curious, perhaps it didn't communicate well. Thanks for answering

Everything a man does is PATRIARCHY and fundamentally meant to oppress women.

Anyone who believes that is a misanthrope/misandrist and probably holds some kind of grudge. Not a healthy thought.

Let me ask you this, why does it seem like no one is allowed to critisize feminism?

I don't know, does it seem that way? I mean, here and everywhere I see a lot of discussion and criticism going on. I myself actually criticised feminism I think on page 2, and if criticism is just and correct I see no reason to shut such a discussion down or anything. As of yet, there're many many people online who are openly anti-feminist, the manosphere really is a thing Perhaps it seems as if it's not allowed because people object and disagree but such is the nature of the internet and discussion. I can even imagine a certain level of contempt and disgust as those who are anti-feminist sometimes harbour and express pretty reprehensible views. They aren't just anti-feminist, but also anti-decency. There're several sides to all that.

Even the extreme misandric ones?
Which is then forgotten until you have to point it out again.
Usually after getting an earfull of generalizations about men.

I don't know of many actually misandric feminists let alone extremely misandric ones, but I stopped following the movement some while ago. Obviously I don't support misandry. The generalisations about men- what are they?

And before you say we are.
You obviously aren't noticing the title of misogynist etc etc etc bestowed upon any male who does.]

It'd be wrong imo to call someone a misogynist because he objects to misandry alone. If there's not more to the story than that I agree that's not a way to treat someone.

a reply to: SprocketUK

I don't understand how misogyny or misanthropy works. We all have family, friends etc of either sex...Unless we are really unlucky.

That's exactly what I've been wondering about as well! When you interact with people, men and women, you see the individuality of each person. Hal isn't like Jack at all, Patricia isn't like Christina in the slightest. I think such forms of hatred/contempt require a certain blindness? To that individuality?

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Well as a feminist myself I can categorically state that I don't support any kind of radical feminist thinking that looks to promote the rights of women over men.
And considering some of the nasty mysogynistic things that have been said by men about feminists on this very website, is it that surprising there are sexist ignorant women that would say the same things. Ignorance and bigotry is not restricted to either gender.

a reply to: Pitou

Anyone who believes that is a misanthrope/misandrist and probably holds some kind of grudge. Not a healthy thought.

Yet it's omnipresent in feminist thinking.
To varying degrees I'll grant you.
Women get a pass, because of bad men, it's been stated multiple times in this thread alone.
The criticism is nowhere near even for both equally stupid viewpoints *misandry or misogyny*.

I don't know, does it seem that way? I mean, here and everywhere I see a lot of discussion and criticism going on. I myself actually criticised feminism I think on page 2, and if criticism is just and correct I see no reason to shut such a discussion down or anything. As of yet, there're many many people online who are openly anti-feminist, the manosphere really is a thing
Perhaps it seems as if it's not allowed because people object and disagree but such is the nature of the internet and discussion. I can even imagine a certain level of contempt and disgust as those who are anti-feminist sometimes harbour and express pretty reprehensible views. They aren't just anti-feminist, but also anti-decency. There're several sides to all that.

Yet, I have multiple times been called all those things and more.
Merely for voicing dissent.
And, while yes, it is personal sampling in that I haven't seen this criticism.
I welcome proof to the contrary.

I don't know of many actually misandric feminists let alone extremely misandric ones, but I stopped following the movement some while ago. Obviously I don't support misandry. The generalisations about men- what are they?

I recommend you do some looking around.
There are some quite vehement, not to mention loud, ones out there.
Things to the effect men are obsolete.
Things to the effect men are merely genetically broken females.
Etc etc etc.
From women, who ironically enough, have their views taught in woman's studies classes.
I would dig them up.
But I am at work, and about to go home.

It'd be wrong imo to call someone a misogynist because he objects to misandry alone. If there's not more to the story than that I agree that's not a way to treat someone.

As I have said, I am supposedly a misogynist for not supporting feminism.

A feminist is a lady that makes her husband sleep in the wet patch.

a reply to: SprocketUK

It's much the same with race equality, there are those who seek equality and those who seek to disempower the "other" due to being put down for so long.

When you really analyse it, it all comes down to a grass roots mentality...normally at the roots of all movements that spring up as a result of an injustice stemming from a basic polarising issue, whether it is leftist or rightist political views, gay or straight relationships, black or white race, male or female, fat or thin or just about any other issue that affects many people in a polar way, almost always starts with a degree of militancy displayed by the grass roots movers and shakers.

It's a fact that the two camps you mention, those who just want an egalitarian society, mutual respect and so on, Versus those who seek to diminish the standing of those they consider the dominant or oppressive polar opposite will include these militant attitudes.

It basically means there are two camps on each 'side', where one camp wants a peaceful and cooperative relationship with the 'other side' for the mutual benefit of all concerned, and the other more militant camp are basically out for revenge and to punish the other side for their oppression.

Both camps are equally valid and reasonable Human responses, just that the punish and revenge brigade only do more harm to their original cause than anything else, as they perpetuate pointless conflict and the bad feelings that result.

That's my opinion anyway.

It always starts off small, and then grows into something monstrous. Yes you are equal to men, and there fore you are acceptable to the same down falls as well. This is were the problem arises as most women in power will deny that they will fall into the same trappings as men and start treating men, as men were treating women years ago. Same story with most equality issues. a reply to: cuckooold

How about liberating the Divine Feminine in men too? The kundalini must rise from the base to the crown in each person. Base chakra omega, crown chakra alpha. (not meant to encourage transgenderism because if people's energies are balanced it wouldn't be necessary).
Politically speaking though, how many here know that the author of the great women's lib book, The Feminine Mystique" was communist even as she helped pioneer the modern women's movement. Yes, Betty Friedan, a communist activist. Who knew.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: jjsr420
Simply because the life is growing in a woman's body, doesn't mean the male shouldn't have a choice.

Why not? Who decides what will happen to the sperm in the male's body? The male. What happens in the female body is ultimately her choice. When men can bear and birth children, then they can choose whether or not they want to.

I happen to believe that a man should have an option to release responsibility of an unplanned pregnancy. But not to force a woman to have a child she doesn't want to have. That's slavery.

Sorry, you're wrong, sex comes with responsibilities, full stop. Don't want a baby, don't have sex. Want sex? Accept the outcome. This isn't even a gender issue, but your example of sperm is just ridiculous. You have just as much right to choose what to do with your EGGS. Once it's fertilised, that's a shared responsibility between you and the man and there should be a shared decision making process afterwards.

I nearly chimed in with your last post, equally ridiculous. As you have glossed over many of the points and I can't get to your link from work, I'm going to assume (apologies if wrong) they were the BEST examples of apparent inequality could muster.

Get with the times, I have never in my life seen gender inequality, complained about by any woman I've ever known, other than those who can't get out of the past. Yes, times may have been harder in the past, not any more. Stop beating the drum, it just gives what was achieved by feminism in the past when it was needed a bad name.

a reply to: Pitou

I don't know of many actually misandric feminists let alone extremely misandric ones,

Well during the election cycle of 2008 I watched liberal feminist types in the media slam Sarah Palin because she is a strong conservative women, and Progressives really hate strong conservative women who can hunt for food or sport, be elected as a governor of a state, and keep her man all at once.....all without losing conservative values. They hated her because she didn't capitulate to their death wish of unborn children who have disabilities. And yet Sarah achieved many of the things that feminists say they have been working towards....the hatred is pure political ideology. Not only do radical fems insist everyone agree with their opinions, they have pure hatred for those who don't capitulate to their desires and demands.
Sandra Fluke is another example of misguided feminism, demanding that others pay for her contraception. And the Democrat Party trotted her out in 2012 as the ideal icon of their party. It is too bad that many women could not or would not see through the veneer of that.

Yes, women are now doing all the horrible things that they decried in men on the political scene, they lust after power and positions of power, and can be ruthless and even diabolical(Valerie Jarrett comes to mind), or liars(Hillary Clinton on Benghazi) and people suffer or die because of it.

Yes, there is very little that men do that women cannot do better!!!!

This is not to say that we should return to the time when women could not vote.... we shouldn't, because women should have equal opportunity, equal pay, etc. But if we cannot do that with respect, then what's the point? If we oppress others, or look on while others are oppressed, then are we any better? How can any woman look on while women in other countries are forced to cover their faces head to toe, told they cannot drive, have hot oil thrown in their faces, etc? Well you say its another country and who are we to enforce our ideas on them.... and yet Sharia Law is being slowly introduced into our own country or into the UK. Think about that, of all the cacophony of voices, why no one will stand up against the domination of women in these places? Do you want this to happen here in the States too, after all women have worked for? Why the silence then?

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: jjsr420

What about the Amazons, or the many, many Queens that have ruled nations?

Do you think that the fact that there have been queens and women warriors in our past means women have always been treated as equals to men and been treated equally by men?

In the same way you think because there have been times in history woman have been subjugated means they have for the vast majority of history, no?

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

I had a discussion with my boss about a job she applied for in the 90's where she turned up for her first day wearing an engagement ring, that she don't have at the time of her interview, he told her to her face he wouldn't have employed her if he'd known. She was almost more shocked he admitted it to her,than the fact he actually held that opinion.
7 years ago I was dragged into 2 meetings where the sole discussion was about removing me from my job as I was pregnant.
I would class these as gender inequality issues.

a reply to: diggindirt

I LOVE my tools

IMO when any movement first begins, there's a stronger force of extreme, to get the ball rolling. Eventually it levels off. So yeah, there were those, in that period - in the beginning, not very accepting of choosing family over career.

But, to continue using the extreme figures from that period to "pound nails" is devolutionsry. I mean, seriously, it's been 40 years --- a lot has happened. There has been a lot of positive change.

In our high school there was a girl who played trumpet. They wouldn't let her in the band, because a trumpet is a man's instrument. They wouldn't let us do certain sports because we might endanger our "baby making" organs. I don't think pants were allowed until after I graduated. It sucked. And I was in a more progressive area, Los Angeles.

Ahhhh, I wanted to be in the archaeology field. Unfortunately, odd medical issues kept me from pursuing a college degree. Good for you.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: ErgoTheAbsurd

Remember, men were helping them. Men had to fight for the right to vote too... it didn't just appear out of nowhere.

Men - feminist men - helped them. Because why? Why did they need help?

:-)

That is what is hurting so much the discussion is people want to take their situation *now* and project backward what they believe the intent was rather than trying to understand the actual mindset and intentions of the people they are criticizing.

Women don't understand history? Women don't understand intent? Women don't understand men? :-)

I have a sense that this discussion only makes sense for you if it's about women not understanding men - and in fact feminism for you must mean that most feminists are blaming men and history. I promise - it is about much more than just this

Women - even feminists - like men. Love men. Respect men. None of this precludes them from having a hankering for self determination

I understand that this desire (as far as you're concerned) really messes up the family unit

I wish you could answer this one question: why did women have to fight for the right to vote?

Did they? From what I can see, the suffrage movement started ~1850 and first place to give women the vote was in 1881, by 1922 it was everywhere.

Now considering there was an entirely different culture at the time and, a movement by one group does not equal an entire gender even wanting that, that seems like a pretty good turn around. Times were different, many women simply would not have been interested in voting. It would have taken a while to get the ball rolling. So how much fighting can you really say happened.

a reply to: WilsonWilson

Well, I'm talking from my experience and in the 90's I was a small child, so I won't doubt it. But right now, in this time, I haven't seen any inequality towards women. There ARE issues where I think men are treated unfairly however, especially with regards to children.

I am not bashing you, but the point is, as I see it, in your position, you would at least have a choice to not work and care for your future child. I'm not saying it's right you were treated unfairly, as you clearly wanted to work, but men don't have these options open to them. I mean, sure they do, they don't have to work, but are considered losers and won't get the same support from society if they choose this path.