Why are you against feminism? Watch

Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#81
Report 3 years ago
#81
(Original post by queen-bee)
We are the majority of the victims of sexual/physical abuse
depends what is qualified as, if generalised to violent crime then sexual, yes, physical, no. But then of course "it's not something you an really complain to men about, it's just the way you were built."

then there's the pay gap issue,
It's not the 80s anymore


men being much more preferable in terms of an open position(at work) etc
Well, depending on the basis it's either:
"being less well qualified is not something you can really complain to men about" or, I suspect more likely "probably having a child in future is not something you can really complain to men about, it's just the way you were built"
Attached files
2
quote
reply
Borgia
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#82
Report 3 years ago
#82
Because feminists have no clue anymore.

Ban page 3
Free the nipple

Ban lad culture
Ignore rape gangs because that would be racist

Women are as physically capable as men
Violence against women is more of an issue, even if more men died (Elliot Rodger)


etc...
1
quote
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#83
Report 3 years ago
#83
(Original post by queen-bee)
Most men are in top positions,most women aren't
blatantly false, most men being in the top positions means, assuming we restrict it to working age, something like 10m men being in "top positions", unless your idea of a "top position" has really low standards it's pretty trivially false, I shall address what you actually meant in the next post since you will obviously make it again, maybe correctly this time.
0
quote
reply
queen-bee
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#84
Report 3 years ago
#84
So many future Elliot Rogers turn outs,on this thread! SMH 😬
0
quote
reply
queen-bee
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#85
Report 3 years ago
#85
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
depends what is qualified as, if generalised to violent crime then sexual, yes, physical, no. But then of course "it's not something you an really complain to men about, it's just the way you were built."


It's not the 80s anymore



Well, depending on the basis it's either:
"being less well qualified is not something you can really complain to men about" or, I suspect more likely "probably having a child in future is not something you can really complain to men about, it's just the way you were built"
I can understand being built to make carry babies but being built to be abused at the hands of men?!!!
0
quote
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#86
Report 3 years ago
#86
(Original post by queen-bee)
We are the majority of the victims of sexual/physical abuse,then there's the pay gap issue,men being much more preferable in terms of an open position(at work) etc
You said that men do not face any problems in society. Do you or do you not accept that men also face problems?
0
quote
reply
NameerK
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#87
Report 3 years ago
#87
If it was referred to as something like "genderism", or "gender equality", or "menism", and it stood for the exact same thing that feminists claim it stands for, I'm sure a lot more men would be on board. the name itself implies that the concept is exclusively aimed to serve the needs of under privileged, or rather (as in most cases) so called "under privileged" women. Not people. But WOMEN.
Feminists overlook the fact that in majority of households, men are the primary earning members, so obviously they need more money since they need to provide for entire families. Secondly, why don't feminists encourage women to work in fields such as construction, sewage cleaning, sweeping etc?
The actual answer is because men are more physically strong, and are naturally suited to tasks that require heavy physical exertion. Similarly, women are better suited for household chores, like cooking and raising kids and I have no idea why women consider this offensive in any manner.
I'm good friends with a gay couple, and regularly hang with them, but the food they cook is usually terrible. No, I'm not saying all men suck at cooking,, but everyone I know does, so I'd say most men are.
Lastly, where are the rights to parenthood, or support for sexual assault for males? Such issues are common, and due males who fall victim don't want to admit it. Why are you against stereo types promoted by video games and other media, which show women as half naked (not a big fan of nudity myself), beautiful damsels in distress, but don't care when guys like Nathan Drake, Jin Kazama, Bruce Wayne, Mark Whalberg, Dwayne Johnson etc set unbelievably high physical and fitness standards for men?
1
quote
reply
Zeldaintheflesh
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#88
Report 3 years ago
#88
(Original post by DiddyDec)
I love this
0
quote
reply
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#89
Report 3 years ago
#89
(Original post by queen-bee)
It means they are still at the top of their game
Victim complex. I provided a rational explanation which you have failed to rebut.
0
quote
reply
Dandaman1
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#90
Report 3 years ago
#90
(Original post by limetang)
...

Well, unless you count the patriarchy meetings we go to where we all smoke fine cigars and drink port, but you're not meant to know about that.
Sshhhhhh! That's supposed to be a secret!
0
quote
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#91
Report 3 years ago
#91
(Original post by queen-bee)
I can understand being built to make carry babies but being built to be abused at the hands of men?!!!
It's not so much built to be abused, more built in such a way as to be more susceptible to abuse by men and less able to abuse men, on the whole, or at least not in the same ways, particularly rape, our legal definition of it aside. So we have that it is a lot easier for a man to be a rapist than a woman, and a woman is easier to be raped than a man, on average.

Next you take that the vast majority of people are heterosexual (or repress their homosexual side), that much is indisputable, the exact figure is up for question (but irrelevant).

Now, coming back to the first point, we could reasonably say that, because of this, outside a relationship (and in a relationship too, but we'll keep that in the separate category of domestic abuse, at least for the time being) a man is far more likely to attempt criminal acts of a sexual nature, especially if they target the vulnerable they're more likely to succeed than a female.

So what we get when we combine 2 and 3 is that due to the differences between men and women, men are more likely to target women than women are going to target men (we shall assume that woman vs woman and male vs male cancel each other out, more or less, although this is a faulty assumption to make based on some reading that I have done in the past, in fact, as far as domestic abuse is concerned, woman vs woman is more likely than male vs male), or, more relevantly, men are more likely to be aggressors than women. Then we take from 2 that the men are highly likely to target women, and then from 1 we can take that when they try they will have a higher success rate.

The last bit is a bit of a mess but gives the argument, although not as rigorously as it could be done.
0
quote
reply
Dandaman1
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#92
Report 3 years ago
#92
(Original post by queen-bee)
We are the majority of the victims of sexual/physical abuse,then there's the pay gap issue,men being much more preferable in terms of an open position(at work) etc
Women do comprise the majority of sexual partner violence victims, but not by a very large margin. More than 40% of sexual partner violence victims in the US are male (according the the US CDC), and more than a third of people admitted to hospital in Canada due to domestic violence related injuries are male (although I believe that figure is about 10 years old).

The pay gap issue I addressed in another post. Labour statistics in North America strongly suggest it concerns married women with children. Working women with no family commitments earn approximately the same wage as the average full-time working man. Part-time workers see no gender pay gap at all (married or otherwise). The difference in mean salary almost entirely comes down to womens' choices; not discrimination (which has been illegal -- and closely monitored by labour unions -- for decades).
0
quote
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#93
Report 3 years ago
#93
(Original post by Dandaman1)
Women do comprise the majority of sexual partner violence victims, but not by a very large margin. More than 40% of sexual partner violence victims in the US are male (according the the US CDC), and more than a third of people admitted to hospital in Canada due to domestic violence related injuries are male (although I believe that figure is about 10 years old).
I addressed this is another thread.
Taking domestic abuse as a whole (things get pushed one way or another when specifying the nature of the abuse, eg due to legal definition of rape you get it almost all man vs woman) in the UK you're looking at ~45% male victims ~55% female, not really enough confidence to say it's tending towards 50:50, not at an appreciable rate anyway, but can say it's not tending away. Similar in the US, in Canada it's looking to be about 50:50, same in Australia and the likes.

When you take sexual and violent crime in the US, based on a fairly sizeable sample and extrapolating to the entire population, something like 17m women are raped (including attempted) and something like 3m for males, but when you look at the violent crime section it's far worse for men. Ever single instance had it worse for men except for hair pulling (not surprising) and I think maybe one other (marginally). Something like 90% of the women who were raped (again, including attempted) were victims of other crimes already, so despite having a massive "advantage" on the rape front, males were still, when considering both sets, worse off, something like 65m vs 67m
0
quote
reply
noramaria
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#94
Report 3 years ago
#94
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Because I don't make such a genetic fallacy. It may be strictly defined as such, but surely by that definition feminism is somewhat superfluous, after all, there are going to be many more movements out there wanting the same objective, and ones that don't have such an implicitly sexist name; then when you consider that these days there is minimal indication that it is a movement for equal rights it really isn't worth bothering with.

We have equal [enough] rights in the West, so western feminism is largely pointless, the standard response to this is "well, this isn't true in other parts of the world!" The thing is, how many of the people who declare this actually work for the betterment of women in other parts of the world? How many of them want to raise women above men in the west, either by trying to give women extra rights, or surpressing the rights of men?

Beyond that you get that they claim to want equal rights for men and women, but asymmetrically support equivalent movements. The prime example is FGM, while it may be more severe than MGM there was still a massive focus on FGM, and not GM as a whole; where you get a "problem" faced by both men and women you will see feminism, for the most part, not fighting against injustice x, but fighting against injustice x vs women.

Then you get that the moderates allow the radicals to become the public face of feminism, which is hardly a good thing, and then the radicals go all hypocritical. See: professor, was it Taylor(?), the Rosetta scientist who was aggressively targeted for the shirt he was wearing on a very very stupid basis, yes, it was a horrible shirt, no, it was not "misogynistic". These exact same people would get in a flap if you made any comment based upon what they were wearing, they took a HUMAN achievement and tried to use it to forward their SEXIST agenda.


Since this post was right in front of me, I suggest you go and look at the secondary analysis of the gender pay gap, published I believe annually by the Department for Culture Media & Sport. If it is annual this year's should be published in the next few months, otherwise here is last year's. Now, take a look at that and tell me what conclusions you draw from it?

It's not just pay gaps but respect and equality in all areas of life
0
quote
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#95
Report 3 years ago
#95
(Original post by noramaria)
It's not just pay gaps but respect and equality in all areas of life
Respect is earned, not given.
0
quote
reply
noramaria
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#96
Report 3 years ago
#96
(Original post by DiddyDec)
Respect is earned, not given.
so it's okay to treat everyone really bad because they haven't earned respect?
0
quote
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#97
Report 3 years ago
#97
(Original post by noramaria)
so it's okay to treat everyone really bad because they haven't earned respect?
Surely if you treat everyone really badly then you are treating everyone equally. Therefore they have all gained equality to each other.
0
quote
reply
queen-bee
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#98
Report 3 years ago
#98
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
It's not so much built to be abused, more built in such a way as to be more susceptible to abuse by men and less able to abuse men, on the whole, or at least not in the same ways, particularly rape, our legal definition of it aside. So we have that it is a lot easier for a man to be a rapist than a woman, and a woman is easier to be raped than a man, on average.

Next you take that the vast majority of people are heterosexual (or repress their homosexual side), that much is indisputable, the exact figure is up for question (but irrelevant).

Now, coming back to the first point, we could reasonably say that, because of this, outside a relationship (and in a relationship too, but we'll keep that in the separate category of domestic abuse, at least for the time being) a man is far more likely to attempt criminal acts of a sexual nature, especially if they target the vulnerable they're more likely to succeed than a female.

So what we get when we combine 2 and 3 is that due to the differences between men and women, men are more likely to target women than women are going to target men (we shall assume that woman vs woman and male vs male cancel each other out, more or less, although this is a faulty assumption to make based on some reading that I have done in the past, in fact, as far as domestic abuse is concerned, woman vs woman is more likely than male vs male), or, more relevantly, men are more likely to be aggressors than women. Then we take from 2 that the men are highly likely to target women, and then from 1 we can take that when they try they will have a higher success rate.

The last bit is a bit of a mess but gives the argument, although not as rigorously as it could be done.

You sound like a rape/domestic violence expert
0
quote
reply
noramaria
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#99
Report 3 years ago
#99
(Original post by DiddyDec)
Surely if you treat everyone really badly then you are treating everyone equally. Therefore they have all gained equality to each other.
i think that everyone should be treated with respect and equality no matter what their age, and equality is about having the same right as everyone no matter who you are
0
quote
reply
DiddyDec
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#100
Report 3 years ago
#100
(Original post by noramaria)
i think that everyone should be treated with respect and equality no matter what their age, and equality is about having the same right as everyone no matter who you are
I agree, everyone should be treated with respect as long as they show you the same respect.

Equality has been for the most part been gained in western society. Women have more legal rights than men, they have the same opportunities as men and they get paid the same as men for doing the same work.
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
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

Do you like exams?

Yes (140)
18.47%
No (459)
60.55%
Not really bothered about them (159)
20.98%

Watched Threads

View All