"Feminism is useless in the first world"

Feminism is so broad, I don't even think Feminists even understand what the whole movement is anymore. Germanine Greer, the architect and pioneer behind the movement doesn't believe that trans-women should be identified as women, and therefore they are not feminists.May someone kindly explain to me why that is the case?

Point being she doesn't have to argue on behalf of everyone, what you are saying goes back on everything you just argued. Why can't she have her own opinion at the end of the day and still be respected?

This is why there's no point in starting feminist threads anymore @IAmNero

loll Greer didn't invent feminism, she's a radical feminist and most liberal feminists wouldn't agree with her views

No, feminism is the promotion of equality of the sexes. This is why people speak so critically - they don't understand what the damn thing even is!

If you genuinely believe that feminism is the promotion of equality between genders them you're a moron, the dictionary definition is far from the actual agenda

How does it contradict? Would you say the same thing about the Prime Minister? Probably not. Why? Because he represents the country. It doesn't work like that. Her opinion should be respected but she cannot misrepresent a movement and expect to receive no criticism.

He represents the country for being the Prime Minster, however you don't seem to acknowledge his position about whether we should remain in the EU or not. As a result, you can see his cabinet/party has descended into chaos because so many opinions have divided where the government is aiming to go. Just don't use him as an example again.

I agree with you when she should receive criticism for her opinions however she, like many important individuals such as the Suffragettes have got feminism in the West to where it is in today IMO. Therefore she represents a part of the movement, as some would still be inclined to agree with her. You can't just say that she 'misrepresent' a movement because you don't represent everyone to begin with.

I really don't think you understand my point. You're largely arguing the same thing.

Everyone should have equal rights, but that does not mean everyone are equal. I still open doors for women so they may walk first, but I have the right to decline such etiquette.

Similarly, as a man I would help a woman with a flat tyre, but it could be argued since it's equal rights it's equal problems too. That's where the difference comes in where I think aggressive feminist movements can get under a guy's skin.

For me, I was brought up in the sense that everyone has equal opportunity, but not everyone is equal. Men and women are inherently different and we should complement each other in society by harnessing our stronger genetic traits. I can change the tyre (any woman can too) but it's likely she will be better at consoling a young child or infant (that doesn't mean I can't do it either).

If any of that made sense anyway.

I disagree.

If you genuinely believe that feminism is the promotion of equality between genders them you're a moron, the dictionary definition is far from the actual agenda

A double X chromosome, breasts and a vagina, and high oestrogen levels don't give magic powers over infants.

Beyond actual childbearing and breastfeeding, and general muscle make up because of testosterone levels, and ease of peeing standing up, there isn't really that much I can think of that is genetic differences. I'd certainly fare better with the tyre than the child, but that's due to my socialisation and not my biology.

What's the feminist agenda then, given that you know so much?

I mean, my agenda is to get lunch, finish working and then go home and drink gin...

It's a fair point, but it reinforces the fact that not everyone are equal in a different way. I was trying to get at chances are 9/10 times males will be physically stronger than their female counterparts. Women may or may not be stronger emotionally or whichever, it boils down to the individual eventually as you say.

That is where we use common sense and say "Hey, I am a man but I'm more of an intellectual than a mechanic, and you lady are a wrestler, could you help me with this wrench?" Such situations are rare though.

Such situations are rare because we make them so. Nobody expects me to be able to change a tire, I might get dirty or break a nail and can't I just phone daddy or my boyfriend for that...
My dad insisted I know how to change a tire, check my oil, check the radiator levels etc. He also insists my brother will know when he reaches the same age.

Other than I would probably ask you to lift something because of your better muscle development or reach something because you're more likely to be tall, and you would need a female to bear a child because you can't do it, the rest of the differences are social and not biological.

Note: I'm obviously simplifying here, there are probably some biological differences I'm missing here, and I would appreciate knowing what they are so I can use that in the structure of my argument. But the point is that most of these "key differences" between males and females and socialised, not biological.

Do we really though?

I mean, you are using anecdotal evidence to back up your point..

Which is all you can do. It happens a lot - all of the things she has described. I know so many people who have experienced similar issues. Feminism isn't just about legal issues. Social attitudes towards women and men are still absolutely ****.

I don't think anyone makes them so any more than women themselves.