Why do feminists hate women?
I know this seems like a silly statement to make but i really think sometimes that feminists hate women.
I say this because the modern feminist movement seems to be obsessed with mimicking the activities of men while actively denigrating their own personalities. Instead of ridiculing the absurd behaviours of men feminists seem to want to get involved.
The tag line of feminism seems to be "If men can do it women can do just as well, if not better!!"
Feminism wants women to believe that their natural femininity is somehow demeaning. That being female is a weakness and that the only way they can express their femininity is if they directly compete with men at their own games. It seems to deny the very essence of femininity.
For example, feminists always go on about the lack of women in boardrooms yet boardrooms are part of the corporate structure which is an expression of the male personality. It was created by men. Surely instead of trying to compete with men in this area a true feminist would be looking for alternatives that are an expression of the female personality.
Women and men are different. Their brains are literally hardwired differently.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/02/men-women-brains-wired-differently
Feminism denies this reality and makes women feel ashamed to be themselves.
I say this because the modern feminist movement seems to be obsessed with mimicking the activities of men while actively denigrating their own personalities. Instead of ridiculing the absurd behaviours of men feminists seem to want to get involved.
The tag line of feminism seems to be "If men can do it women can do just as well, if not better!!"
Feminism wants women to believe that their natural femininity is somehow demeaning. That being female is a weakness and that the only way they can express their femininity is if they directly compete with men at their own games. It seems to deny the very essence of femininity.
For example, feminists always go on about the lack of women in boardrooms yet boardrooms are part of the corporate structure which is an expression of the male personality. It was created by men. Surely instead of trying to compete with men in this area a true feminist would be looking for alternatives that are an expression of the female personality.
Women and men are different. Their brains are literally hardwired differently.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/02/men-women-brains-wired-differently
Feminism denies this reality and makes women feel ashamed to be themselves.
(edited 10 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Why do people assume that all feminists are the same? It just means people who campaign for women's rights. There are many different viewpoints within feminism and saying 'feminists say this, and they're wrong' is just like saying 'sociologists say this, and they're wrong'. In any field, there will be a diverse range of ideas, and many feminists would agree with you that encouraging women to fit into dominant male roles is not promoting gender equality, but merely perpetuating an unwanted social system.
Actually there's conflicting evidence about the male brain female brain thing.
I agree though that some feminists are rude to more "feminine" women and try to make them feel ashamed for it, which is ridiculous. It should be about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome
I agree though that some feminists are rude to more "feminine" women and try to make them feel ashamed for it, which is ridiculous. It should be about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome
Original post by Tyrion_Lannister
Actually there's conflicting evidence about the male brain female brain thing.
I agree though that some feminists are rude to more "feminine" women and try to make them feel ashamed for it, which is ridiculous. It should be about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome
I agree though that some feminists are rude to more "feminine" women and try to make them feel ashamed for it, which is ridiculous. It should be about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome
Agreed. Also, as a feminist, do you also feel that maybe a reason why feminism falters is because there tends to be some conflicting ideals within the movement?
Original post by Ade9000
Agreed. Also, as a feminist, do you also feel that maybe a reason why feminism falters is because there tends to be some conflicting ideals within the movement?
I think feminism is very broad, and it's hard to say whether it is sucessful or not because different branches define success differently. I was really happy with the LibDem suggestions for maternity leave reforms for example, but others were pissed off. So for me that's working, for others it isn't
Sometimes those that try to help with feminism are the root of the problem. Take for example Labour's ridiculous policy of all women shortlists... Now for me; that's ridiculously offensive to women. It's suggesting they need help to get there by making it so no men can top them. Not to mention the men know they've got there because they have breasts...
Any sane and rational being would hate feminism. Men and women are inherently and biologically different, our bodies have different functions and are built differently. Feminists disregard this blatant fact. Until a feminist passes GCSE biology, we will have this underclass known as "feminists" who will use all and any argument to 'prove' that women are 'equal' to men, and with some extremists claiming they superior to men. They aren't, all humans are equal in rights and deserve to be treated fairly regardless of sex, race or disability.
We are not equal. On average a male will be stronger than a female. On average a women is better than multi tasking than men. These inequalities should be celebrated, not criminalised. All humans are special and have their individual brilliance, feminists just want to drag humans down to the lowest denominator.
The only equality we should have is in rights, in respect and in opportunities. Women and men should not be 'positively discriminated' against, or any other condescending term. Everyone should have the ability to achieve, but if a women cant get to become a CEO of a company because men are better than her at her job, so be it. That is fairness. The same way a man cant get to the top of the healthcare industry/ service sector, because women are better.
We are not equal. On average a male will be stronger than a female. On average a women is better than multi tasking than men. These inequalities should be celebrated, not criminalised. All humans are special and have their individual brilliance, feminists just want to drag humans down to the lowest denominator.
The only equality we should have is in rights, in respect and in opportunities. Women and men should not be 'positively discriminated' against, or any other condescending term. Everyone should have the ability to achieve, but if a women cant get to become a CEO of a company because men are better than her at her job, so be it. That is fairness. The same way a man cant get to the top of the healthcare industry/ service sector, because women are better.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by the mezzil
Any sane and rational being would hate feminism. Men and women are inherently and biologically different, our bodies have different functions and are built differently. Feminists disregard this blatant fact. Until a feminist passes GCSE biology, we will have this underclass known as "feminists" who will use all and any argument to 'prove' that women are 'equal' to men, and with some extremists claiming they superior to men. They aren't, all humans are equal in rights and deserve to be treated fairly regardless of sex, race or disability.
We are not equal. On average a male will be stronger than a female. On average a women is better than multi tasking than men. These inequalities should be celebrated, not criminalised. All humans are special and have their individual brilliance, feminists just want to drag humans down to the lowest denominator.
The only equality we should have is in rights, in respect and in opportunities.
We are not equal. On average a male will be stronger than a female. On average a women is better than multi tasking than men. These inequalities should be celebrated, not criminalised. All humans are special and have their individual brilliance, feminists just want to drag humans down to the lowest denominator.
The only equality we should have is in rights, in respect and in opportunities.
But why treat male children different to female children?
I can't help thinking that if children weren't told their roles as males and females - the difference between "girl" toys and "boy" toys - many problems could disappear in a generation or two. Brains are not man-made computers, constructed out of fixed circuits and wires; they're molded, relatively easily, with experience. Neural pathways change. Perhaps if female children are placed into situations in which the parents expect females to be, their brains adapt to those situations.
Original post by MangoFreak
But why treat male children different to female children?
I can't help thinking that if children weren't told their roles as males and females - the difference between "girl" toys and "boy" toys - many problems could disappear in a generation or two. Brains are not man-made computers, constructed out of fixed circuits and wires; they're molded, relatively easily, with experience. Neural pathways change. Perhaps if female children are placed into situations in which the parents expect females to be, their brains adapt to those situations.
I can't help thinking that if children weren't told their roles as males and females - the difference between "girl" toys and "boy" toys - many problems could disappear in a generation or two. Brains are not man-made computers, constructed out of fixed circuits and wires; they're molded, relatively easily, with experience. Neural pathways change. Perhaps if female children are placed into situations in which the parents expect females to be, their brains adapt to those situations.
What do you mean by 'treat male differently to female children'?
And no, males and females have roles. This is why we have a penis and a vagina. This is where sociology contradicts cold hard scientific fact. Male and Female children NEED to be told why they have different sexual organs, and why males are on average stronger than females, and why on average a female is better at doing several things at once.
If you want to remove the stigmatism by society towards 'male and female' toys you need to start with adults themselves, who are often bigoted and narrow minded. A child needs empathy and role models that are sympathetic, and not forceful of gender stereotypes. If a male child wishes to play with Barbie dolls then that is okay, likewise if a female child want to play with a construction kit. But they NEED to be told why a male builder will be, on average, stronger than a female builder. Likewise for a male child trying on dresses that are made for female bodies. It is okay to do this, but it does not fit well on the body for a reason.
(edited 10 years ago)
I never understood the 'it's not natural' argument. If it wasn't natural for some women to want these things, why would they campaign for them? Why are the people standing up for 'natural femininity' almost always male?
Some feminists are insane - I'll grant you that - but the vast, moderate majority of 'gender equalists' just want gender to not be an issue. That's the only way that people can truly follow their 'natural essence'.
Some feminists are insane - I'll grant you that - but the vast, moderate majority of 'gender equalists' just want gender to not be an issue. That's the only way that people can truly follow their 'natural essence'.
Original post by MangoFreak
But why treat male children different to female children?
I can't help thinking that if children weren't told their roles as males and females - the difference between "girl" toys and "boy" toys - many problems could disappear in a generation or two. Brains are not man-made computers, constructed out of fixed circuits and wires; they're molded, relatively easily, with experience. Neural pathways change. Perhaps if female children are placed into situations in which the parents expect females to be, their brains adapt to those situations.
I can't help thinking that if children weren't told their roles as males and females - the difference between "girl" toys and "boy" toys - many problems could disappear in a generation or two. Brains are not man-made computers, constructed out of fixed circuits and wires; they're molded, relatively easily, with experience. Neural pathways change. Perhaps if female children are placed into situations in which the parents expect females to be, their brains adapt to those situations.
Research with monkeys shows that female monkeys choose 'girly' toys and male monkeys 'masculine' toys.
Monkeys are not subject to any external social pressure regarding choice in toys but they still conform to stereotype.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Octohedral
I never understood the 'it's not natural' argument. If it wasn't natural for some women to want these things, why would they campaign for them? Why are the people standing up for 'natural femininity' almost always male?
Some feminists are insane - I'll grant you that - but the vast, moderate majority of 'gender equalists' just want gender to not be an issue. That's the only way that people can truly follow their 'natural essence'.
Some feminists are insane - I'll grant you that - but the vast, moderate majority of 'gender equalists' just want gender to not be an issue. That's the only way that people can truly follow their 'natural essence'.
I never understood why nature has anything to do with anything. It's an effective argument when arguing for gay rights, etc. I don't dispute that, if it convinces or shames those in support of discrimination, I'm fine with it. But I don't see how something being natural makes it more acceptable, and I don't see how something being unnatural makes it less acceptable. Nature has no bearing on something's acceptability
Original post by the mezzil
What do you mean by 'treat male differently to female children'?
And no, males and females have roles. This is why we have a penis and a vagina. This is where sociology contradicts cold hard scientific fact. Male and Female children NEED to be told why they have different sexual organs, and why males are on average stronger than females, and why on average a female is better at doing several things at once.
If you want to remove the stigmatism by society towards 'male and female' toys you need to start with adults themselves, who are often bigoted and narrow minded. A child needs empathy and role models that are sympathetic, and not forceful of gender stereotypes. If a male child wishes to play with Barbie dolls then that is okay, likewise if a female child want to play with a construction kit. But they NEED to be told why a male builder will be, on average, stronger than a female builder. Likewise for a male child trying on dresses that are made for female bodies. It is okay to do this, but it does not fit well on the body for a reason.
And no, males and females have roles. This is why we have a penis and a vagina. This is where sociology contradicts cold hard scientific fact. Male and Female children NEED to be told why they have different sexual organs, and why males are on average stronger than females, and why on average a female is better at doing several things at once.
If you want to remove the stigmatism by society towards 'male and female' toys you need to start with adults themselves, who are often bigoted and narrow minded. A child needs empathy and role models that are sympathetic, and not forceful of gender stereotypes. If a male child wishes to play with Barbie dolls then that is okay, likewise if a female child want to play with a construction kit. But they NEED to be told why a male builder will be, on average, stronger than a female builder. Likewise for a male child trying on dresses that are made for female bodies. It is okay to do this, but it does not fit well on the body for a reason.
There's no reason to think that different sex organs should lead to different societal roles. That's bordering on the foolish. Do you KNOW why males are on average stronger than females? I'm willing to bet the reason is something that could be changed, but regardless, averages in this case mean very little. I say this often, you could probably just as easily stratify the population based on attributes such as hair or eye colour, or skin colour, and find that on average, one group is stronger than the other. Who cares? That group should not be immediately consigned to a certain role in life.
Original post by imtelling
Research with monkeys shows that female monkeys choose 'girly' toys and male monkeys 'masculine' toys.
Monkeys are not subject to any external social pressure but they still conform to stereotype.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html
Monkeys are not subject to any external social pressure but they still conform to stereotype.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html
Regardless, those females who choose to exhibit more "masculine" tendencies should hardly be delegated to a "feminine" role against their will, and males who choose to exhibit "feminine" tendencies shouldn't be forced into "masculine" roles.
I would still be wary applying results with monkeys to human children.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by MangoFreak
There's no reason to think that different sex organs should lead to different societal roles. That's bordering on the foolish. Do you KNOW why males are on average stronger than females? I'm willing to bet the reason is something that could be changed, but regardless, averages in this case mean very little. I say this often, you could probably just as easily stratify the population based on attributes such as hair or eye colour, or skin colour, and find that on average, one group is stronger than the other. Who cares? That group should not be immediately consigned to a certain role in life.
There's no reason to think that different sex organs should lead to different societal roles. That's bordering on the foolish. Do you KNOW why males are on average stronger than females? I'm willing to bet the reason is something that could be changed, but regardless, averages in this case mean very little. I say this often, you could probably just as easily stratify the population based on attributes such as hair or eye colour, or skin colour, and find that on average, one group is stronger than the other. Who cares? That group should not be immediately consigned to a certain role in life.
No, social roles as in housewife or the submissive girlfriend, to the other end where the man should always hold the door open etc etc. These are obviously silly and outdated.
Males are stronger than females due to evolution. Men were always the hunters and fighters, so developed stronger Jaws, stronger muscles, stronger bones etc. Now it would be nice to think we could wish away these differences, but we can't, so we may as well accept them. That is the point I am making. Feminists don't seem to understand that men and women are physically not equal. That does not mean men should all be warriors and women all nurses, but it is not difficult to understand why they are better at those jobs.
Likewise, it is not racist to point out the best sprinters in the world are black, and the best people to withstand the cold are white. These differences should be celebrated.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by imtelling
Research with monkeys shows that female monkeys choose 'girly' toys and male monkeys 'masculine' toys.
Monkeys are not subject to any external social pressure regarding choice in toys but they still conform to stereotype.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html
Monkeys are not subject to any external social pressure regarding choice in toys but they still conform to stereotype.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/24/gender-toys-children-toy-preferences-hormones_n_1827727.html
So let them choose for themselves. No one's saying there's a problem with more boys playing with boys toys, but let them choose without pressuring them
Original post by SoftPunch
Repped - all I wanted to say. I'm not a feminist for that reason that women are physically weaker than men; yet when women is hit back feminists complain..... but isn't equality is what you were asking for? So surely embrace that - it's part of it. 
As a feminist, I think a man should be able to hit a woman back if she starts a fight. Dont speak for us
Original post by SoftPunch
Repped - all I wanted to say. I'm not a feminist for that reason that women are physically weaker than men; yet when women is hit back feminists complain..... but isn't equality is what you were asking for? So surely embrace that - it's part of it.
All humans are special, but we are simply not equal. People should have equal opportunities, rights and respect. But men and women are simply not equal, and do not have the same abilities... Sometimes it IS BECAUSE you are a girl you can't fight in the same league and do 12 rounds in the ring with Kimbo Slice.
It is just absurd.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by MangoFreak
Regardless, those females who choose to exhibit more "masculine" tendencies should hardly be delegated to a "feminine" role against their will, and males who choose to exhibit "feminine" tendencies shouldn't be forced into "masculine" roles.
I would still be wary applying results with monkeys to human children.
I would still be wary applying results with monkeys to human children.
Of course. No one should be forced into roles. But, modern feminism shames those women who do want to conform to stereotype.
I suppose the most absurd example of this is the disdain feminism has for stay at home mums.
Barely a week goes by without a feminist venting their fury at stay at home mums. Just last month a feminist wrote a piece called "I look down on young women with husbands and kids and i'm not sorry"
http://thoughtcatalog.com/amy-glass/2014/01/i-look-down-on-young-women-with-husbands-and-kids-and-im-not-sorry/
These feminists are angry at women for being, well, women.
The monkey research says that its not social conditioning which makes male and females choose different toys but rather biological differences; in particular differences in the hormone testosterone.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Tyrion_Lannister
As a feminist, I think a man should be able to hit a woman back if she starts a fight. Dont speak for us
Oh, I will speak if I want. I obviously didn't mean every single one, but it would be ignorant not to get that in the first place. Also, this country is as equal as it can be - why don't feminists go over to Saudi Arabia and protest their rights there?
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
