'I don't need feminism because...' Watch

This discussion is closed.
dead sheep eater
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#181
Report 3 years ago
#181
(Original post by AntisthenesDogger)
What confuses you? He was for the equality of women societally. So am I. So is OP. We're not feminists. Neither was Mill. Mill's ideals on a tonality of many other spheres is opposed to the usual idioms of feminist thought, not to mention "feminism" used in unison with Mill is by definition anachronistic. Didn't exist.

Posted from TSR Mobile
So this is all about semantics? Mill was by all accounts what is now described as a liberal feminist, whether or not the term was used at the time matters very little.
0
AntisthenesDogger
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#182
Report 3 years ago
#182
(Original post by dead sheep eater)
So this is all about semantics? Mill was by all accounts what is now described as a liberal feminist, whether or not the term was used at the time matters very little.
Everything is about semantics. If you want to generalise then fine, but do it by accord of well observed axioms. This is not it. Mill was not a liberal feminist and if in a juxtaposition to modern thought he'd be right leaning.

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
dead sheep eater
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#183
Report 3 years ago
#183
(Original post by AntisthenesDogger)
Everything is about semantics. If you want to generalise then fine, but do it by accord of well observed axioms. This is not it. Mill was not a liberal feminist and if in a juxtaposition to modern thought he'd be right leaning.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Well observed axioms? Left-right division refers to the French Revolution, by his standards he went against the status quo and promoted a form of economic democracy in his economic writings; most consider him to be centre-left or centre-right on the basis of his moderate support for capitalism; regardless he was still a believer in the view that women's rights would lead to increased happiness in society, which makes him a feminist by modern standards.
0
dead sheep eater
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#184
Report 3 years ago
#184
(Original post by Legilimency)
You and I seem to have different ideas of what femnism advocates and therefore also different opinions about how well Mills' ideas and the ideas of feminism marry up.
Your views are accepted to by most iirc. He sounds like he has a personal crusade against feminism.
0
AntisthenesDogger
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#185
Report 3 years ago
#185
(Original post by dead sheep eater)
You sound like a pseudointellectual to be honest. Well observed axioms? Left-right division refers to the French Revolution, by his standards he went against the status quo and promoted a form of economic democracy in his economic writings; most consider him to be centre-left or centre-right on the basis of his moderate support for capitalism; regardless he was still a believer in the view that women's rights would lead to increased happiness in society, which makes him a feminist by modern standards.
Left-right division is not as simply deduced as "Refers to the French revolution" and I'd argue against this too, though the relavency of this point is blunted for you and me as it's not pertinent; you were nonchalant about semantics now you claim it on something as spurioisly void as "left-right " divide. He was a believer in equality. That does not equate feminism.You just concurred he is agreed upon to be center left or right. Not liberal as is the deviation (fyi) from the conceptualisation of what liberal meant In Mills time, where it was still the same conception of libertie from the fence revolution - not the same divide you've claimed.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#186
Report 3 years ago
#186
Oh goody. Another excuse to wip out the cats against feminism.

1
HigherMinion
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#187
Report 3 years ago
#187
(Original post by louieee)
This thread is full of people explaining this, backing it up with endless statistics which you just casually disregard as false.
Listen. You haven't provided me with anything to go on yet, nothing I could possibly disregard. The feminist oppression dream of a rape culture in the UK is demonstrably false, and is another fear tactic used by feminists to paint men as evil as a whole and remove their power and emasculate them.

Instead of getting mad at me, and I admit I am not the most diplomatic of chaps, why not just answer my point? I believe the problem is there is no actual quantifiable end to "gender equality", because if one sex starts doing better in an aspect of life, the other side must be artificially boosted.

This is all I'm asking, and it's very telling when you come out all guns blazing with ad hominem and walls of QQ text. You're writing very emotionally and letting this artificial injustice cloud your rational judgement.

Now, keep a cool head and tell me what gender equality you are looking to achieve.
0
louieee
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#188
Report 3 years ago
#188
(Original post by HigherMinion)
Listen. You haven't provided me with anything to go on yet, nothing I could possibly disregard. The feminist oppression dream of a rape culture in the UK is demonstrably false, and is another fear tactic used by feminists to paint men as evil as a whole and remove their power and emasculate them.

Instead of getting mad at me, and I admit I am not the most diplomatic of chaps, why not just answer my point? I believe the problem is there is no actual quantifiable end to "gender equality", because if one sex starts doing better in an aspect of life, the other side must be artificially boosted.

This is all I'm asking, and it's very telling when you come out all guns blazing with ad hominem and walls of QQ text. You're writing very emotionally and letting this artificial injustice cloud your rational judgement.

Now, keep a cool head and tell me what gender equality you are looking to achieve.

oh idk maybe it's because everytime someone provides you with evidence you just disregard it, and I'm not gonna waste any more time explaining something to someone who will just lie it away, pretending that it's all false?
0
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#189
Report 3 years ago
#189
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I don't need feminism because I don't think it's democratic to bar one half of the population from standing for Parliament on account of their gender, nor respectful of the ability of the other half to succeed without a patronising leg-up from the state.
You can be both a feminist and be against positive discrimination.
0
louieee
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#190
Report 3 years ago
#190
(Original post by louieee)
Supporting equality as a whole still makes you a feminist though! I advocate the rights of everyone within significant aspects of their life when they are treated unfairly, discriminated against, or otherwise at a disadvantage. So yes, I am a feminist, because I advocate women's rights, and yes I'm an advocate of LGBT rights, and I also advocate black rights too!!! Is a masculinist is someone who advocates men's rights, then I guess I'm one of those as well! By very definition of the word feminist, I couldn't fit it any better. I do support everyone's rights, but unfortunately there isn't a word for that so I have to label myself with the words that do exist, even if they are for very specific groups of people, but that doesn't stop me from being that thing, if you advocate women's rights and believe in gender equality then by it's very definition you are a feminist, because nowhere in the definition does it state that you can't support anyone else's right too. I think this is what you're not understanding.




I'm a feminist (because I advocate women's rights and believe in gender equality) and there's no-one in the world who's rights I disregard, so I don't understand why the majority of people don't identify as feminist too, unless they're either sexist or just don't advocate anyone's rights (even slightly) because they're simply lazy. Like literally, most people I know believe that the sexes are equal, and they'll even sometimes say something about the unfairness of something to do with females (I heard a a bunch of guys talking about how bad it is that girls have to pay so much for tampons, it was very awkward to witness tbh. Likewise they all accept that women deserved the right to vote and they couldn't believe that it was difficult for them to be given it). But if I approached them and asked if they were feminists, they'd all bloody retch and mock the world to hell. But why? They fit the definition perfectly, so why don't they identify as it? Because they don't understand what it means, they don't understand that feminism isn't this exclusive "woman supreme" bundle of beliefs that prevent people from supporting any other group of people, incapable of acknowledging mens' drawbacks. And that's my problem, all of this anti-feminism is bull**** and the girls on that front page have some really pathetic, ignorant views and I can't believe that there are open-minded, educated people shooting down something which so clearly should be the norm
(Original post by lasertown)
Posted from TSR Mobile



100% agree. Also, I don't know why the other user said the last part wasn't clear, it made pefect sense.
could you please reply to this because it explains everything about how I feel and at this moment in time I can't see how someone could feel differently to this.

also -




(Original post by Blaq_widow)
You can't impose on other people what they identify as. Many people justifiably don't feel feminism adequately fights for the rights of both genders or even all members of the same gender. It doesn't speak to all women and being dismissive of that and insisting 'they don't understand feminism' rather than addressing it says everything that's wrong with it.


either of you feel free to elaborate on this last point please.
0
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#191
Report 3 years ago
#191
(Original post by tupper_ware)
I agree, though there are still issue's to sort out in the west, they're not comparable to the massive problem's women in other parts of the world still face. I'm not going to tell anyone they're not a 'proper' feminist for not focusing more on these issues, but in my opinion lot's are going about it wrongly. :rolleyes:
Well men in third world countries face bigger problems than having to compete with positive discrimination schemes. So why don't you stop moaning about it?

You can use that reasoning to shut down any discussion on anything. It is a lazy argument.
0
AntisthenesDogger
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#192
Report 3 years ago
#192
(Original post by Legilimency)
It shouldn't really matter though, should it? The user in question should be able to respond respectfully even if my view wasn't accepted by most. It's relly unfortunate, this whole thing. Frankly sad, I must say - genuinely.
Why? I respect poignancy. Not offal. It's not as though I personally dislike you, but what you enunciated.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
_sahara
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#193
Report 3 years ago
#193
This is not my tumblr account or post, but it is something I find incredibly interesting and appropriate regarding some parts of this discussion. I saw this thread appear on my SR homepage and remembered also seeing the following post on tumblr some time ago, so I'm intrigued as to what people on this website will make of it.

http://dumbledoresarmy-againstbigotr...inist-internet
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#194
Report 3 years ago
#194
(Original post by ClickItBack)
Also worth noting that men are much more likely to be physically assaulted than women are to be sexually assaulted - but you don't see constant refrains about 'assault culture' or plaintive cries about victim blaming nonsense on that topic.

I think the reason there might be that there isn't one. When's the last time you saw someone say that men should avoid going out at night, drinking or travelling on their own so that they don't get assaulted?
0
username1602603
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#195
Report 3 years ago
#195
(Original post by louieee)
Feminism doesn't fight for the rights of both genders, hence why I said people aren't restricted to being a feminist only. They can also advocate men's rights too. And I'm sorry but your last point is really rather quite unclear.
Well you've pretty much admitted that feminism isn't truly about equality so there you go. As for my last point, you accused women like the ones in the OP of 'not knowing the definition of feminism' instead of considering why it is that they felt differently. It's an ignorant attitude that a lot of feminists have hence why many women don't want to affliate with them.
1
HigherMinion
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#196
Report 3 years ago
#196
(Original post by louieee)
oh idk maybe it's because everytime someone provides you with evidence you just disregard it, and I'm not gonna waste any more time explaining something to someone who will just lie it away, pretending that it's all false?
I want to believe, I really do. Except I am more sceptical than just taking a woman's word for it. If you can actually give me some proof (instead of saying 1in5 or muh wage gap).

But those examples didn't answer my question, anyway. It was this: to what end have you achieved gender equality? What qualifies for equality?
0
TurboCretin
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#197
Report 3 years ago
#197
(Original post by Green_Pink)
I think the reason there might be that there isn't one. When's the last time you saw someone say that men should avoid going out at night, drinking or travelling on their own so that they don't get assaulted?
People don't generally consider this to be as much of an issue for men - there's a mentality that boys are less likely to be picked on in the first place, and can take care of themselves if they are. If a guy was to go out to a particularly dodgy part of London by himself at night alone, at that point you might tell him to take a taxi instead of walking.
0
Observatory
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#198
Report 3 years ago
#198
(Original post by ClickItBack)
Men commit the vast majority of crimes, and particularly violent crimes.

The vast majority of men are straight.

Therefore it is neither sexist, nor an indication of a 'rape epidemic culture' that women are sexually assaulted in much higher numbers than men.

Also worth noting that men are much more likely to be physically assaulted than women are to be sexually assaulted - but you don't see constant refrains about 'assault culture' or plaintive cries about victim blaming nonsense on that topic.

Bad, violent criminals will always exist and they will always be mostly male. For men, this means they will always be at risk of physical assault; for women, they will always be at risk of sexual assault. The sooner they get over that and accept it, the better for their own sakes.
Almost all the people who make the arguments you're criticising are simultaneously rejecting almost identical arguments themselves on the race and crime issue.

Blacks, in the US and the UK, are disproportionately responsible for crime, especially violent crime. In that case, too, most of the victims are also black, but the spillover to other races is nonetheless still higher than the spillover of other races' criminal activity to blacks.

If they reasoned consistently from their feminist principles, the same people arguing that 'rape culture' is a problem that needs to be suppressed would be arguing that 'black culture' is a problem that needs to be suppressed. People who argue for skewed burdens of proof to increase rape conviction rate would be arguing for skewed burdens of proof to increase black conviction rate. People who argue that male students should be forced to attend political meetings where they are told not to rape people would argue that black students should be forced to attend political meetings where they are told not to mug people or jack cars, etc.

Most people would (rightly) consider this to be a return to Jim Crow and utterly repugnant. They do not seem to see the analogy with their own position.

In fact the position the "social justice" people actually take on that issue is to deny that higher black crime rate even exists, arguing instead that the statistics are a result of a byzantine social conspiracy on the basis that the crime rate should be expected to be the same for everyone.
1
HigherMinion
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#199
Report 3 years ago
#199
(Original post by Observatory)
If they reasoned consistently from their feminist principles

In fact the position the "social justice" people actually take on that issue is to deny that higher black crime rate even exists, arguing instead that the statistics are a result of a byzantine social conspiracy on the basis that the crime rate should be expected to be the same for everyone.
+1

However, they are using their feminist principles consistently: they believe anything that breaks the balance of man/woman black/white, etc. is a matter of injustice, a social construct and institutional racism. The problem is they deny reality on so many levels.

It's all about that oppression. Feminists don't want to listen to man nor nature.
0
ClickItBack
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#200
Report 3 years ago
#200
(Original post by Green_Pink)
I think the reason there might be that there isn't one. When's the last time you saw someone say that men should avoid going out at night, drinking or travelling on their own so that they don't get assaulted?
I do think plenty of advice is given to men re: not travelling in dodgy areas late, by themselves and while drunk.

And no one takes such advice as victim blaming or (ineffectually) demands that criminality cease to exist so as to permit him to do so with no risk.

If fewer prescriptions are made to men, it is certainly not because they are any less likely to be a victim of crime than women are.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (147)
27.68%
No (384)
72.32%

Watched Threads

View All