Turn on thread page Beta

Would you rather date a feminist or a meninist? watch

    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teddyplanet)
    I believe that would be 'egalitarianism'. It makes literally no sense when people say 'feminism' is equality for both genders.
    It literally says that it advocates for women's rights so that 'both the genders are on equal grounds', idk how much more sense I need to make to you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    It literally says that it advocates for women's rights so that 'both the genders are on equal grounds', idk how much more sense I need to make to you.
    Surely if one wants everyone to be equal, that is simply egalitarianism. *shrugs* Sorry. I don't believe in just 'men's' rights and 'women's' rights. I believe in human rights.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    you do realise that Feminism means equality for both genders, right?
    lol no it doesn't

    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    It literally says that it advocates for women's rights so that 'both the genders are on equal grounds', idk how much more sense I need to make to you.
    Too bad that definition is fiction. If only real life feminists followed it
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Wouldn't date either, both groups are annoying as **** and talk rubbish.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I wouldn't consider myself to be either tbh. (Not sure Meninistem is real or just a joke) However, I'm certainly not a feminist. As they don't want equality for men and women. You always hear them make big issues of the words we use and petty things. Such as you shouldn't call the police. Policemen it should always be police officer. You never hear feminists complain that women reccive more lenient jail sentences. Men reccive 63% higher sentences for the same crime on average. It's hypocritical. I don't believe feminists today want equality. They want female domination. I want equality. I certainly don't want male to be above or women to be above. They also say that parliament should be made up of 50% of women. Absolutely not. That's basically saying you should vote for someone because of their gender. That's not equality. Your candidacy for elected office, should be based on ability not your gender.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    you do realise that Feminism means equality for both genders, right?
    No, you're getting confused with Meninism.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meninism)
    ...even the most radical feminists are listened to...
    Actually they're dismissed as feminazi's
    even the moderate ones
    basically just anyone who puts 'women' and 'rights' in the same sentence

    sh** I just did
    forgive me ...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by teddyplanet)
    Surely if one wants everyone to be equal, that is simply egalitarianism. *shrugs* Sorry. I don't believe in just 'men's' rights and 'women's' rights. I believe in human rights.
    In an ideal world, yes we coud call it egalitarianism. However by calling it feminism you're pointing out where one of the problems is and why the world is not egalitarian.

    Feminism is actively seeking egalitarianism by elevating the rights of women in society to the equal level of men. There are other issues to address to succeed in egalitarianism, but feminism deals with this one.

    It's like seeing a cardiologist when you've got heart problems. Saying "egalitarianism" is like saying "no, equal health for the WHOLE BODY" when really, it's the heart that needs help to be as healthy as the rest of you.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChickenMadness)
    lol no it doesn't

    Too bad that definition is fiction. If only real life feminists followed it
    see that's exactly what most people don't understand, feminism isn't ''annoying'', feminists (the genuine ones at least) don't scream ''TO HELL WITH MEN!LET'S GET RID OF THEM!!1'', and if they do, please know that they are, in no way, feminists. Feminism supports both the genders, but women are way more oppressed and need advocation because society is pretty messed up. So, if you think that actual feminists are annoying and extreme and want to slaughter men (that's the picture you have in mind, I guess?), and that feminists ( the genuine ones) are fictional, please don't.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Feminist is probably desirable
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doctor_Einstein)
    No, you're getting confused with Meninism.
    Oh man, look around you, hear what everyone's saying, and then say that one more time. Just do it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    you do realise that Feminism means equality for both genders, right?
    The only problem is that it presupposes that all instances of inequality are in favour of men and against women. In this society, that is far from true. That is why in first world countries such as the UK and the US, it is outdated and no longer needed. Because it has turned to **** like the pay gap (which has been proven not to be because of sexism), "manspreading" and cat-calling in the streets. It just shows they have run out of worthwhile things to fight against in these countries.

    -From a pro equality, none-feminist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I ****ing hate feminists, don't think Meninism exists.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    you do realise that Feminism means equality for both genders, right?
    Christ, I hate this myth.

    Let's take a history lesson.

    FIRST WAVE FEMINISM: Suffragettes. "Votes For Women", and so on. What you don't learn in your whitewashed history lessons about these shrill, irritating harpies is that women were voting at least as early as the 1840s. Because the voting law was based upon property, not sex - women who owned property could, and did, vote pre-first-wave feminism. Suffragettes wanted special treatment for women.

    SECOND WAVE FEMINISM: This was the 1960s, a period of immense social change. What the second-wave feminists wanted was freedom for women. Lots of freedom - freedom to get abortions, freedom to wear what they liked, and so on. Nothing wrong with that, depending on your point of view - but the society they architected was one which disproportionately favoured women by allowing men to go on protecting them as they were instinctively inclined to do, while also claiming vast swathes of societal freedoms and setting themselves up for cushy bull**** jobs in academia while men continued to break their backs building the society they want to rule.

    THIRD WAVE FEMINISM: Fat, ugly, frumpy, lesbianic middle-class "educated" (read: women's studies BA) women who have a massive chip on their shoulder and loathe the Y chromosome. It isn't enough that men sit at the top and bottom of society, actively warping society to serve the women's desires through sexist rape laws, sexist court systems and so on. Now women also have to be at the top of society, and men confined strictly to the bottom. This has stopped even pretending to be about equality of the sexes, it's female supremacy.

    How anyone can call themselves a feminist in this day and age is beyond me.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Neostigmine)
    In an ideal world, yes we coud call it egalitarianism. However by calling it feminism you're pointing out where one of the problems are and why the world is not egalitarian.

    Feminism is actively seeking egalitarianism by elevating the rights of women in society to the equal level of men. There are other issues to address to succeed, but feminism deals with this one.

    It's like seeing a cardiologist when you've got heart problems. Saying "egalitarianism" is like saying "no, equal health for the WHOLE BODY" when really, it's the heart that needs help to be as healthy as the rest of you.
    Which is well needed in places like Iran and India. But this is the UK, last time I checked and there are so many instances of inequality against both sexes that it makes no sense to just focus on "raising the status" of one.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Good Doctor)
    The only problem is that it presupposes that all instances of inequality are in favour of men and against women. In this society, that is far from true. That is why in first world countries such as the UK and the US, it is outdated and no longer needed. Because it has turned to **** like the pay gap (which is not a thing), "manspreading" and cat-calling in the streets. It just shows they have run out of worthwhile things to fight against in these countries.

    -From a pro equality, none-feminist.
    Okay,this is what I had been talking about earlier, those people are, in no way, feminists. They just call themselves one. Also, pay gap does exist, I don't know about places like UK, but in third world countries, it does.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    Okay,this is what I had been talking about earlier, those people are, in no way, feminists. They just call themselves one. Also, pay gap does exist, I don't know about places like UK, but in third world countries, it does.
    Yeah but feminists don't care about third-world countries, they only care about themselves. So that isn't relevant, only here is - and there is no pay gap in the United Kingdom. Nor the United States.

    And don't just say "they're not true feminists" - that's intellectually bankrupt, you're shifting the goalposts because you have no actual response and you're trying to shift yourself away from realising that you're complicit in the misandry and institutional sexism of a bunch of braindead middle-class man-haters.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jape)
    Yeah but feminists don't care about third-world countries, they only care about themselves. So that isn't relevant, only here is - and there is no pay gap in the United Kingdom. Nor the United States.

    And don't just say "they're not true feminists" - that's intellectually bankrupt, you're shifting the goalposts because you have no actual response and you're trying to shift yourself away from realising that you're complicit in the misandry and institutional sexism of a bunch of braindead middle-class man-haters.
    My friend, if they're not what a feminist actually is , then they are not feminists, what else do you want me to call them? Also, ''feminists don't care about third-world countries'', are there not women living and working in third-world countries, don't they care about their pay gap? And for last time, I don't 'hate men'? I've said what I had to now. *sigh*
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    Okay,this is what I had been talking about earlier, those people are, in no way, feminists. They just call themselves one. Also, pay gap does exist, I don't know about places like UK, but in third world countries, it does.
    Yes, there is a general pay gap, where women on average earn less than men. But this is not down to sexism. At least not in the US where that study that is endlessly parroted for finding that "women earn 77 cents for every man's dollar". That same study that is used by feminists so many times even said that pretty much all of the gap comes from socio-economic factors rather than sexism. These include the fact that men choose to go into higher paying fields like STEM while women do not. Even in medical professions women are more likely to choose lower paying areas such as pediatrics than men, Men are more likely to do more dangerous jobs (that come with higher pay because of the danger). Men work on average 10-20% more overtime (it was somewhere between 10 and 20 per-cent, I don't remember the exact figure). Women choose to stay at home to look after children more often than men and are generally less career-driven than men. There is no evidence that it is down to employers choosing to pay women less due to their gender.

    In countries like ours, including the US, it is illegal to pay someone less or more because of their gender. And not only that, think about it in terms of economics. It just doesn't make sense, considering the job market today. If employers paid women less because of their gender to do the same job men would, wouldn't they be in much much higher demand on the job market? Paying your workers less to do the same job would result in more profit, wouldn't it?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thesarcasticone)
    My friend, if they're not what a feminist actually is , then they are not feminists, what else do you want me to call them? Also, ''feminists don't care about third-world countries'', are there not women living and working in third-world countries, don't they care about their pay gap? And for last time, I don't 'hate men'? *sigh*
    I didn't say you hate men. I'm saying you're passively supporting people who do by defending them.

    I'm sure the women in third-world countries care. It's just a shame that the western feminists, who have no actual problems to be solving and could be using all their institutional sway to help out, don't seem to care at all.

    But they are what a feminist actually is, so you ought to call them that. I'm saying that when you've got a perfectly ordinary, generic feminist (think misandrists like Laurie Penny or Bell Hooks) you can't say "they're not true feminists" just because it damages people's perceptions of your ridiculous ideology.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: September 15, 2015
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.