Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Is it any more bigoted to hate on feminists than homosexuals? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ipoop)
    It isn't bigoted to hate on them for specific reasons however, generalising and hating based on the generalisation is bigoted but not as bigoted as homosexuality. Although, a bigot is a bigot is a bigot...
    I wasn't talking about people hating on my beliefs for specific reasons...It was all about generalisations.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bestofyou)
    did you actually just say that Kelly?

    I am a male yet I don't harp on about how I should be paid more for having a ****.

    My female friends don't ***** about how things have to be like this or that, they don't go ballistic if someone made a kitchen or a sandwich joke.

    What does this mean? It means not every female is a feminist.

    What does that mean? It means that feminism is not wired into the female brain at birth.

    What does that tell us? It shows that feminism is a choice.

    What does this mean for feminism? It means, as I stated in my post when I very clearly pointed the obvious differences between feminism and homosexuals, that feminism is a social ideology that people choose to support.

    You have made a statement on a parallel to:

    'Hey, don't blame the racists for being racist. It isn't their fault they were born that way'

    You have such a poor case here it actually counts as a negative case. Even worse than no case.
    I agree that they are very different pieces of bigotry, but I felt it would challenge people a lot more to use that comparison rather than a better one (one that art goblin made about communists, which had crossed my mind but would've made the thread a lot less controversial if it was in the first post).

    If you said: Racists are bigots, that wouldn't be bigotry.
    If you said racists all racists have inadequate genitalia and are misplacing their anger about it towards other 'races' then that would be bigotry.

    Note: I might choose to support and be vocal about feminism, but I really can't will myself to not be a feminist in my beliefs. Now that might change if someone makes an argument that changes my opinion. But until I come across such an argument, I can't will my beliefs to change.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Oh absolutely, I have no problem with people critiquing different areas of the feminist movement, but there are such diverse and different areas, you simply can't make a broad sweeping statement unless it is the definition of what feminism is.
    I don't know really... As someone whose knowledge of feminism exists only over the internet, I find myself ending up critiquing the movement as a whole. Although I hold the views of a feminist (following it's definition), it isn't a movement I'd want to be associated with/a label I would like to have placed upon me :dontknow:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    It is definitely bigoted, but whether it is more bigoted is harder to say. My opinion is that it is - whilst being intolerant of homosexuality is simply being intolerant, being intolerant against feminism is being intolerant of tolerance itself.
    What? So, not believing in female supremacy is bigoted? I'm not going to like women that hate men the same way as I don't like racism or homophobia, calling that bigotry isn't wrong, it's plainly and simply true, helping women is not an issue for me, they don't deserve to get raped or sexually harassed, but neither do men!
    Why should only one apply and not the other? Feminists only care about heterosexual women and lesbians they don't care about gays or hetro men or the transgender community, so why should I even pretend to like them? It's almost like me saying that I care about you as long as your born with a vagina and breasts, and no it's not right last time I checked feminists wanted to ban urinals based on sexism, do you hear men say you must use a urinal because it's sexist against menl? That's just ridiculous, I'm not going to support a group of misandric people who have an extreme hate for me because of my testicles.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jreid1994)
    What? So, not believing in female supremacy is bigoted?
    This is a straw-man; feminism is not the same as female supremacy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    This is a straw-man; feminism is not the same as female supremacy.
    So national castration day and banning urinals is something that I should now support? Sure.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kelly.zheroes)
    Straight male, straight female, gay male, gay female. Four sexual orientations, based on gender and whether you are straight or gay. Sorry if this is confusing. I'm not sure where your definition of feminism comes from - not one I've heard before, or seen in any dictionary.

    Well done Kelly, you just proved you have no idea what you are talking about and that you are likely 14yrs old.

    'Straight males is not a sexual orientation, it is a bloody type of person. Straight and Gay are the only two types of sexual orientations you mentioned, throwing in extra words doesn't make them an orientation. I could easily say there are 6 kinds of sexualities, Straight black man, Gay lion, Gay robot, Straight white women, Straight cat women and Gay Doctor.

    "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes"
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

    I am failing to see anything even closely related to sexual orientation here. You have no idea.



    No, you are saying that - you quoted me, so you know I said something different.
    Alright! Oh please, stop that! Stop your singing! Stop your singing this instant, young man! I will not have this in my studio! That's just a terrible, terrible, terrible... terrible "That's Amore". You have failed conclusively! It's over! And there is nothing that you can do, here in this room... that can turn that around. Nothing you can do that can make up for what you just did to "That's Amore." How the **** is this the case here? You have completely rendered any respectability you have in this argument into nothing.

    For a start you quoted me if you bother to go back and check, I therefore take everything you now say with an entire barrel of salt, in fact I don't take it with any salt, I don't even touch what you say. As i said, all respect for your argument went out the window with this post.

    Second point, which again shows you have no idea what you are talking about, if you go back to the initial point that I made you will find it was stating how nobody is born a feminist, then you countered that by saying all females are born feminists. Now you have taken a complete U-turn and said the opposite? Make up your mind daughter! Spreading manure about what I said doesn't work on the internet as there is a record of all the previous comments.

    To clarify... someone can be born gay, and their lives would be particularly affected by gay rights issues. Someone can be born female and their lives would be particularly affected by feminist issues.
    No...just no.

    Being gay doesn't automatically mean you are going to be interested in gay rights, it is a choice. Being gay isn't, being involved in gay rights is...this really isn't a hard concept to grasp.

    Someone born female is even less likely to be involved in female rights for many reasons, one being that females are not a minority and in this modern world face much less discrimination. Most of my female friends or the young females in my family couldn't tell me the first thing about feminist issues. It doesn't bloody well matter if they are affected by them or not. Being affected by something doesn't mean that you are going to school yourself in these issues.

    Right now I am currently being affected by issues in London made by a conservative government, doesn't make me a tory though does it. Nor does it make me interested in British politics in any way.

    Women today for the large part have equal rights to men. The things they do not have equal rights in are for a reason. For example sports prize money, the men get more because they generate a higher revenue through TV viewing or whatever. Yet feminists (the bad kind) kick up a fuss about this every year.

    I'm not saying that discrimination is gone. However it isn't just females. Even in Northern Ireland discrimination against Catholics still exists, however it isn't as big an issue since it is a minority that discriminate now as opposed to a majority like it used to be.


    Don't do it then - you invented this point, not me. Personally, I would support righteous causes across all four segments - that would be the egalitarian thing to do.

    Only the four segments? What about Gay Lions? Don't they deserve equal rights? Everytime I am on safari I see Gay Lions getting raped, beat up, made to eat with the lion cubs, spat on etc. I find it disgusting that you don't support gay lion rights. I suppose that the rights of straight female komodo dragons are also not one of your 'four elite segments' then?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    I'm not claiming it doesn't exist, I'm claiming it's a minority and to tarnish all feminists with the same brush is bigoted. Because I am all for gender equality, I think if a dad wants to stay at home he most certainly should be able to. Though that one is perhaps more in my interests being a man who is likely in the relationship to be the one at home more.
    Whether it's a minority or not, it's a very vocal one. Most people who are in favour of true equality don't actually go around loudly proclaiming to anyone who will listen that they are feminists, as opposed to those who are for women's advantage over men - indeed, the word 'feminism' is a misnomer if it isn't for women's advantage, but equality. Perhaps equalism? I dunno :confused:

    Unfortunately, as you have alluded to, "feminism" is a very broad term. While your particular branch seems relatively sensible, there are plenty of other people and groups who self define as feminists who range from being simply ignorant to outright sexist themselves.

    Women do themselves no favours when they claim that it's only the female sex that is discriminated against, and close their eyes and ears to blatant sexism and discrimination when it's in their favour.

    Just last night I was debating with a supposed feminist who likes to pretend that DV and spousal abuse against men by their partners does not exist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Whether it's a minority or not, it's a very vocal one. Most people who are in favour of true equality don't actually go around loudly proclaiming to anyone who will listen that they are feminists, as opposed to those who are for women's advantage over men - indeed, the word 'feminism' is a misnomer if it isn't for women's advantage, but equality. Perhaps equalism? I dunno :confused:

    Unfortunately, as you have alluded to, "feminism" is a very broad term. While your particular branch seems relatively sensible, there are plenty of other people and groups who self define as feminists who range from being simply ignorant to outright sexist themselves.

    Women do themselves no favours when they claim that it's only the female sex that is discriminated against, and close their eyes and ears to blatant sexism and discrimination when it's in their favour.

    Just last night I was debating with a supposed feminist who likes to pretend that DV and spousal abuse against men by their partners does not exist.
    Shh, my best friends brother's ex was the real victim, especially when she put out cigarettes in his arm...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jreid1994)
    So national castration day and banning urinals is something that I should now support? Sure.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Do you have an opinion on this issue or are you only interested in misrepresenting the opinions of others?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    Whether it's a minority or not, it's a very vocal one. Most people who are in favour of true equality don't actually go around loudly proclaiming to anyone who will listen that they are feminists, as opposed to those who are for women's advantage over men - indeed, the word 'feminism' is a misnomer if it isn't for women's advantage, but equality. Perhaps equalism? I dunno :confused:

    Unfortunately, as you have alluded to, "feminism" is a very broad term. While your particular branch seems relatively sensible, there are plenty of other people and groups who self define as feminists who range from being simply ignorant to outright sexist themselves.

    Women do themselves no favours when they claim that it's only the female sex that is discriminated against, and close their eyes and ears to blatant sexism and discrimination when it's in their favour.

    Just last night I was debating with a supposed feminist who likes to pretend that DV and spousal abuse against men by their partners does not exist.
    Feminism started off as being for women's rights because women were so greatly oppressed. It has evolved with cultural changes. So the name might be misleading at a very first glance, but if you would subscribe to it as being woman's interests only then you'd be committing the genetic fallacy.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It all depends what's coming out of the feminist's mouth. The same is true of what comes out of a homosexual's mouth. I hate it when some ******** pulls a 'I'm an anti-fascist, so you have to agree with me or you're a fascist, racist, nazi, supremacist, ****ing **** ****er'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    ...WHAT?!?! You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what's been said and/or what bigotry is.
    And you don't seem to realise that 'bigotry' is irrelevant to the context of a view point. Don't bother bringing moral judgement into a opinions; the view may be unsubstatied, illogical and downright stupid, but in no way can it be 'wrong' or 'bigotted'. What you don't seem to understand is that your views may be construed as bigoted by anyone else.

    I have no problem with people judging my beliefs and views. In fact it's something I encourage so long as it's done using critical reasoning. Even when it's not done with those things I don't see that as bigotry.
    Of course you do, hence you wouldn't have bothered taking a hissy fit and made a thread about this.

    On the other hand NAZIism is based on bigotry. When I'm judging NAZI's for being bigots, that is necessarily something they believe. That Jews and communists should be killed. That there is a superior race. etc.
    Nazism is still an ideology as much as feminism is. Ergo you can't try to make feminism a different type of view from anything else, it's still a view. Basic Humistic principle in philosophy in that you cannot infer and 'ought' from an 'is', and you have attempted to make nazism a different type of thing from feminism when in actuality it the same thing in that it is an opinion. If you cannot stand someone having a different opinion from you then you should not be able to stand having an opinion of your own.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Feminism started off as being for women's rights because women were so greatly oppressed. It has evolved with cultural changes. So the name might be misleading at a very first glance, but if you would subscribe to it as being woman's interests only then you'd be committing the genetic fallacy.
    We know feminism started off as being for women's rights. However what you have been taking great pains to tell us is that this is no longer the case, and that it means women who are for equality with men. But this is only because of the way that you personally define 'feminism'.

    The problem with the word 'feminism' is that it means many things to different people, to some it still means womens rights, to others it means equality, and to yet others still it represents the idea that women are better than men.

    You see it time and time again, many women who claim feminism, even if they are in favour of equality (and not female superiority) are only interested in rectifying the inequalities where it is currently skewed against women, and either ignoring or pretending that that the inequalities that men face aren't relevant to their cause.

    This isn't just anecdotal either, it's across the board. There is a very vocal condemnation of anything that could be seen as even slightly disadvantaging women vs men, but when it's the other way around, there is hardly a peep - e.g. women's car insurance.

    Taking that example, I have even seen women claim that arguments based purely on the fact that they happen to possess a vagina justify their own cheaper premiums - when I brought the feminism argument into it, they quickly shut up.

    Which just typifies my example that many feminists who are arguing for equality are all for it when it's to their advantage, but aren't so much in favour should it come down to rectifying an inequality currently running very much in their favour.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marcusfox)
    We know feminism started off as being for women's rights. However what you have been taking great pains to tell us is that this is no longer the case, and that it means women who are for equality with men. But this is only because of the way that you personally define 'feminism'.

    The problem with the word 'feminism' is that it means many things to different people, to some it still means womens rights, to others it means equality, and to yet others still it represents the idea that women are better than men.

    You see it time and time again, many women who claim feminism, even if they are in favour of equality (and not female superiority) are only interested in rectifying the inequalities where it is currently skewed against women, and either ignoring or pretending that that the inequalities that men face aren't relevant to their cause.

    This isn't just anecdotal either, it's across the board. There is a very vocal condemnation of anything that could be seen as even slightly disadvantaging women vs men, but when it's the other way around, there is hardly a peep - e.g. women's car insurance.

    Taking that example, I have even seen women claim that arguments based purely on the fact that they happen to possess a vagina justify their own cheaper premiums - when I brought the feminism argument into it, they quickly shut up.

    Which just typifies my example that many feminists who are arguing for equality are all for it when it's to their advantage, but aren't so much in favour should it come down to rectifying an inequality currently running very much in their favour.
    Bingo. This is my point exactly, it's a very broad term. Many people use the word, and many people abuse it as well.

    I'm not saying every feminist is what I'd term, a respectable feminist, many aren't. But there are also a great many who are.

    Which gets me back to the point of this thread, it's bigoted to make generlisations about feminists, we're just so diverse.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kiss)
    And you don't seem to realise that 'bigotry' is irrelevant to the context of a view point. Don't bother bringing moral judgement into a opinions; the view may be unsubstatied, illogical and downright stupid, but in no way can it be 'wrong' or 'bigotted'. What you don't seem to understand is that your views may be construed as bigoted by anyone else.



    Of course you do, hence you wouldn't have bothered taking a hissy fit and made a thread about this.



    Nazism is still an ideology as much as feminism is. Ergo you can't try to make feminism a different type of view from anything else, it's still a view. Basic Humistic principle in philosophy in that you cannot infer and 'ought' from an 'is', and you have attempted to make nazism a different type of thing from feminism when in actuality it the same thing in that it is an opinion. If you cannot stand someone having a different opinion from you then you should not be able to stand having an opinion of your own.
    :facepalm2: .

    Your "argument" is reliant upon the private language argument. You're using the word 'bigot' incorrectly. Everything else that follows is reliant upon that, making your whole argument incorrect.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    Do you have an opinion on this issue or are you only interested in misrepresenting the opinions of others?
    Lol your even Swedish and you didn't hear about feminists trying to ban urinals? Haha

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    So recently I was told that all feminists are stupid amongst other crude and idiotic claims.

    I attempted to have the posts removed but the mods weren't sure if they could justify it (which is fair enough). Nothing was said in terms of bigotry or comparisons.

    The question that thus pops into my mind is:

    If you said all feminists have a anti men agenda and necessarily are lacking in intellect which is corrupting society, would that be any more bigoted than to say that all gays have a necessarily anti marriage agenda and are corrupting society?

    Now there are many parallels between the oppression of women and homosexuals. But this isn't about women, this is about feminists. So that doesn't include all women and includes many men as well.

    And even if it isn't as bigoted, is it still bigoted?

    Surely if someone makes those claims about feminists, and I'm a feminist, then they're making such claims about me based on a very loose and open term. There are many different types of feminists standing for different things, there are many different and diverse people claiming to be feminists.

    Edit: Many would argue that being a homosexual is something that you embody as well, and don't have a choice in. I personally don't feel like I have a choice in my beliefs as a feminist. But as gender equality has come much further than sexuality equality (there's probably a better term for that but it's not coming to me right now) and as a result the embodiment is something that's more sensitive. Because if gender equality hadn't advanced to the level it's at at the moment I think there would still be a strong embodiment feeling in being a feminist.



    Homosexuality is an intrinsic part of an individual.

    Being a feminist is (you'd like to think, though this obviously isn't the case some of the time) an 'informed' position upon something.


    I think, given that 'we all have opinions' it's much more acceptable to be 'bigoted' against something that a person has thought about, and decided to affiliate themselves with, than against a person that just happens to be gay, black, female, whatever. Something that just is.

    Most of us nice, 'liberal' 'Westerners' have absolutely no problem with the branch of feminism that strives for equality of the sexes. People take issue with the more aggressive and vitriolic 'feminists'. It should be obvious to any decent, non man-hating feminist that the average person has no issue with them; just as people generally have no issue with the average Muslim, only the fundamentalists that advocate intolerable violence and other such bull****.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    How can you compare the two when homosexuals are far more ostracised in society over something they can't change; denied of jobs for example. Just because someone disagrees with a feminist or the idea of feminism doesn't mean they're a bigot
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Bingo. This is my point exactly, it's a very broad term. Many people use the word, and many people abuse it as well.

    I'm not saying every feminist is what I'd term, a respectable feminist, many aren't. But there are also a great many who are.

    Which gets me back to the point of this thread, it's bigoted to make generlisations about feminists, we're just so diverse.
    While that may be true, where I think many people have a problem with feminism is when the label is attached to very vocal campaigns for not only equality of opportunity for women in the workplace, but equality of outcome, even going so far as to suggest quotas, which is ironic, because that is exactly what feminism opposes, someone getting the opportunity simply because they have a penis (or vagina).

    You wouldn't have any trouble finding feminist backed campaigns in the name of improving opportunity for women or for many other perceived female disadvantage, but you will have to look a little harder to find campaigns in the name of feminism (for example) for more funding and support for male victims of partner abuse or even feminists campaining for more expensive car insurance.

    I certainly haven't heard of any.
 
 
 
Poll
Which web browser do you use?
Useful resources

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

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