Turn on thread page Beta

Misandry and female privilege in the way we are taught to form relationships watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    What kind of oppression it is changes from society to society. Sometimes it's class, sometimes gender, sometimes racial, etc. But the common theme is that a state's army is generally made up of its privileged and dominant population, not its oppressed and marginalised population, due to the obvious power than an army possesses.
    Very interesting point.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    You're boring now. You don't see loads of ranty feminist threads on here, just ones whingeing about feminism.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    the common theme is that a state's army is generally made up of its privileged and dominant population, not its oppressed and marginalised population, due to the obvious power than an army possesses.
    Male privilege in war.......Thanks for the perspective.

    Name:  smashed-up-german-trench-on-messines-ridge-with-dead-soldiers-battle-gjg80w.jpg
Views: 324
Size:  87.9 KBAttachment 616214616216Attachment 616214616216616200
    Attached Images
      
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    Male privilege in war.......Thanks for the perspective.
    Yawn. Doing the same back with pictures of massacred women isn't difficult:







    For reference, the first is from a massacre at Skede, Latvia, in 1941, in the early stages of the Holocaust, the second is from the Rape of Nanking in 1937, and the third from the My Lai massacre in 1968. In all three cases, the killers were predominantly conscripts. I very much doubt the victims felt how great it was that they weren't the ones being conscripted.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Must be great being a 9 year old girl married off to some old pedo. What power she possesses! :moon:
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    What kind of oppression it is changes from society to society. Sometimes it's class, sometimes gender, sometimes racial, etc. But the common theme is that a state's army is generally made up of its privileged and dominant population, not its oppressed and marginalised population, due to the obvious power than an army possesses.
    What about conscription and wage slave soldiers?

    In modern wars it was often the working class that would get ferried off to fight as the grunts.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Yawn. Doing the same back with pictures of massacred women isn't difficult:







    For reference, the first is from a massacre at Skede, Latvia, in 1941, in the early stages of the Holocaust, the second is from the Rape of Nanking in 1937, and the third from the My Lai massacre in 1968. In all three cases, the killers were predominantly conscripts. I very much doubt the victims felt how great it was that they weren't the ones being conscripted.
    You seem to have forgotten what you were arguing here. Let me remind you. You are arguing the subject of men being sent off to war and whether that is sexist or not. You made the argument that men are sent to war because they are privileged .....In reply to your comment about soldiers being privileged I showed you pictures questioning the stupidity of that claim.....you reply with pictures of women suffering in war? did anyone say that women don't suffer in war?.....what argument are you replying to? Does making sense mean anything to you?

    I tend to avoid replying to some folk on this forum. The nature of your replies might help you understand why I haven't addressed any of your comments in this thread so far but the utter ridiculousness of your claim that sending men off to war is a privilege was just too tempting....
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabertooth)
    Must be great being a 9 year old girl married off to some old pedo. What power she possesses! :moon:
    Wrong thread i think.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    Wrong thread sweetheart.
    You are in the wrong country, buddy. Try Saudi Arabia; more up your street.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabertooth)
    You are in the wrong country, buddy. Try Saudi Arabia; more up your street.
    You want to kick people out of this country? based on what? them disagreeing with you? or something else? what is this questionable tone that I'm picking up form your two comments in this thread? did you read this thread at all or are you confused with a different thread or are you here just to abuse and bully people with you derogatory comments? Questioning sexism in the way we approach relationships makes me not british? How dare you!!?!!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    You want to kick people out of this country? based on what? them disagreeing with you? or something else? what is this questionable tone that I'm picking up form your two comments in this thread? did you read this thread at all or are you confused with a different thread or are you here just to abuse and bully people with you derogatory comments? Questioning sexism in the way we approach relationships makes me not british? How dare you!!?!!
    Wanting to treat women more like possessions and less like independent people makes your views closer to those of men in countries like Saudi Arabia than Britain. I didn't say I wanted to "kick you out" I said SA is more up your street. And yes I read (and laughed at) your ridiculous, sexist views in this thread and pretty much every other thread you have made on this board.

    I think it's fairly clear that my first post was challenging your assertion that women hold the power in relationships when in many parts of the world, and formerly in the west not too long ago (and still in many cases), women hold zero power in relationships.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabertooth)
    Wanting to treat women more like possessions and less like independent people makes your views closer to those of men in countries like Saudi Arabia than Britain. I didn't say I wanted to "kick you out" I said SA is more up your street. And yes I read (and laughed at) your ridiculous, sexist views in this thread and pretty much every other thread you have made on this board.

    I think it's fairly clear that my first post was challenging your assertion that women hold the power in relationships when in many parts of the world, and formerly in the west not too long ago (and still in many cases), women hold zero power in relationships.
    You have clearly not read this thread as your comments and your erroneous conclusions have nothing to do with the topic being discussed not even remotely so. What is clear however is that you have come on this thread to abuse me personally. you've made that clear in your last reply.....

    P.s. I challenge anyone to find a single comment that I have left on this thread no in this entire forum stating, no, even implying, that women should be treated as possessions....
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    You have clearly not read this thread as your disgusting comments and your erroneous conclusions have nothing to do with the topic being discussed not even remotely so. What is clear however is that you have come on this thread to abuse me personally. you've made that clear in your last reply.....it is also clear that you have read the complaint that I have made about you and are now trying do some damage control for your inexcusable behaviour .....

    P.s. I challenge anyone to find a single comment that I have left on this thread no in this entire forum stating, no, even implying, that women should be treated as possessions.... You are dispicapble. Who in the world are you to tell me to leave my own country?!?! This behaviour might be acceptable in your part of the world but it sure as hell isn't here.
    Oh a complaint? I'm scared. I have no access to post reports just as an FYI

    I read the thread. Then I looked into your post and thread history. I've never seen anyone jump to such angry conclusions and so quickly, might that be part of your trouble with forming relationships with women?

    You completely fail to address my point btw, women until VERY RECENTLY in the West were treated as possessions. I forget the exact wording but you made out that in the 1000 year history of world religions it has always been the case that women were very much in the relationship driving seat, so to speak. This is complete bull. In the West, yes, Christianity has modernized but in many countries (even many in Africa despite your assertions) women are still treated as property. 9 year olds are given to old pedos in the likes of Yemen (although recently this has been cracked down on a little), where is the woman's "power" and "privilege" there? I suppose she should be happy to be impregnated as soon as she hits puberty and not be allowed to leave the house or indeed do very much without a male escort? What privilege! As for the West, ever heard of a dowry? Men got paid to take women, whichever family gives the biggest bribe gets rid of their useless daughter first.

    And again I did not tell you to leave your country, I made out that you'd fit in better with your "despicable" views in the likes of Saudi Arabia.

    Not my fault you can't read between the lines and need everything spelled out to you. I thought Brits were meant to understand sarcasm? :dunce:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sabertooth)
    Oh a complaint? I'm scared. I have no access to post reports just as an FYI

    I read the thread. Then I looked into your post and thread history. I've never seen anyone jump to such angry conclusions and so quickly, might that be part of your trouble with forming relationships with women?

    You completely fail to address my point btw, women until VERY RECENTLY in the West were treated as possessions. I forget the exact wording but you made out that in the 1000 year history of world religions it has always been the case that women were very much in the relationship driving seat, so to speak. This is complete bull. In the West, yes, Christianity has modernized but in many countries (even many in Africa despite your assertions) women are still treated as property. 9 year olds are given to old pedos in the likes of Yemen (although recently this has been cracked down on a little), where is the woman's "power" and "privilege" there? I suppose she should be happy to be impregnated as soon as she hits puberty and not be allowed to leave the house or indeed do very much without a male escort? What privilege! As for the West, ever heard of a dowry? Men got paid to take women, whichever family gives the biggest bribe gets rid of their useless daughter first.

    And again I did not tell you to leave your country, I made out that you'd fit in better with your "despicable" views in the likes of Saudi Arabia.

    Not my fault you can't read between the lines and need everything spelled out to you. I thought Brits were meant to understand sarcasm? :dunce:
    What point did I fail to address? Amongst other things that have nothing to do with the topic being discussed in this thread, you accused me of wanting women to be treated like possessions and I replied by challenging you to reference me a single comment in this thread or forum where I stated or even implied such a thing...

    And now you are attacKing my Personal life. I'm happily married I'll have you know.

    You know what? I think it's best we leave it here.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    Male privilege in war.......Thanks for the perspective.
    Rape has been one of the most widespread forms of crimes against humanity arising from war throughout history, and you pretend it's males that suffer more.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    Wrong thread i think.
    Literally the thread topic.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    Male privilege in war.......Thanks for the perspective.

    Name:  smashed-up-german-trench-on-messines-ridge-with-dead-soldiers-battle-gjg80w.jpg
Views: 324
Size:  87.9 KBAttachment 616214616216Attachment 616214616216616200
    *PATRIARCHY KLAXON*
    Men in government in sent other men into wR because of the gender roles as men as the tough protector. Women weren't sent because their gender role was one of a soft person more suited to raising children. It's the same reason they're not on the front lines in a lot of cases today.

    Back to the topic at hand, if you're going to focus on what happened to men in history that aren't you to make your point, you can't ignore the fact that a man could legally force his wife to have sex with him in the UK until recently (the 90s, I think) and that historically it was regularly that the women were married off by their fathers in order to join families together.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    Literally the thread topic.
    This thread and its topic and its author has touched a nerve ... it threatens and questions everything that you stand for and that scares you and your ilk.

    p.s. the abuse that I've gotten so far in this thread does nothing but give me determination in what I am doing. I will let my comments speak for what I stand for and yours and those of your compatriots speak for what you stand for.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CookieButter)
    This thread and its topic and its author has touched a nerve ... it threatens and questions everything that you stand for and that scares you and your ilk.

    p.s. the abuse that I've gotten so far in this thread does nothing but give me determination in what I am doing. I will let my comments speak for what I stand for and yours and those of your compatriots speak for what you stand for.
    I'm not sure what nerve you think you've touched. I'm not scared, I am confused as to why you don't seem to have the same historical context as the rest of us. Are you in a parallel universe?

    If you feel there has been abuse, please use the report button, the CT will address that!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    I am confused as to why you don't seem to have the same historical context as the rest of us. Are you in a parallel universe?
    You are very confused that much we both agree about....

    Lets just explain a couple of basic concepts of logic. These will help clarify things for you. On this planet and in this reality people who hold different beliefs to you might not agree with you about history. Do you understand this basic concept? Just incase you don't, allow me to elaborate...You are a feminist. I am not. You have your own interpretation of history which feminists like you will agree with. I am not a feminist. Therefore, I might disagree with you and your interpretations of history and people who disagree with feminism, like me are going to disagree with you too. That's how basic logic works on this planet, in this reality, this 'universe'.

    OK.....now that we've got this out of the way, lets deal with your interpretation of history but before we do that I need to address one more thing...I'm not debating you here. As I explained before, i believe that debating feminists is often (as I believe is the case with you) a total waste of time......but these replies they are not only for you but for everyone that might want to read them.... and so I am going to address these issues for everyone else that might want to consider them from my perspective.

    1. You claim that "patriarchy says that men (should) pick a woman to be their wife". That the patriarchy puts the onus on the man to make the move.

    Patriarchy, just incase you might not know, is (putting it simply) a feminist principle which claims that men rule over the world and are in a state of privilege which they use to subjugate and disadvantage women.

    Ask yourself the following question:

    Who benefits from men making the move? Do men benefit from this culture or women? Well as a result of this culture men are exposed to rejection whilst women are protected from rejection. Men as a result of this culture are taught to bow and crawl on all fours and present women with gifts, diamonds and jewellery in order to please women and gain their approval. Women are not.

    So who is being disadvantaged here? The one doing the bowing or the one being bowed to? The one seeking approval or the one being sought for approval? the one facing rejection or the one being protected from rejection? of course common sense entails that the one doing the bowing and the one seeking approval and the one facing rejection is the one who is in a state of disadvantage whilst the other who is protected form these things is in a state of privilege.

    Clearly we see that women are in a state of privilege as a result of this culture. This is not agreeable with patriarchy. This disproves patriarchy which preaches the opposite that men are in a state of privilege and women in a state of disadvantage. So this is not patriarchy.

    This addresses your first point.

    2. You claim that "In general, (men) used to get rejected by the woman's father, or oldest brother."

    That is a good example of a distortion of history. Approval has ALWAYS been ultimately sought from women. In some parts of the world men sought approval from the woman through the father not from the father....so the approval was given by the women and not the parent. This culture is inscribed in the main religions of the world. Men have to seek approval directly or indirectly from women. The oldest religion that teaches this principle is Judaism, which by conservative estimates is over 3000 years old. So 3000 years ago men were obliged by religion to seek out approval from women.

    What else did you say in your comment?

    3. "Of course, since it was realised that women are people, the woman has been able to say no to the man".

    When in history, anywhere on this planet, in this reality, in this 'universe' were women not recognised as people? How could a gender that is not viewed as human be worthy of protection at the expense of a human's life? throughout history men have been taught to protect and put their lives on the line for women....in what reality would it make sense for a human being to be taught to give up their life to a protect a non-human? why would a man be raised to die for a woman if she was considered a no-worth non-human. Throughout history religions have worshiped female gods...women have lead armies in the west and the east...sheba, boadicea, cleopatra, Aisha etc...how could people allow themselves to be lead by inferior non-humans? Do you feminists think at all before you write your nonsense? Do you understand why I tell you that you live in an alternate reality? because your interpretations do not conform with our reality.....they do not make sense...they are illogical...and all it takes is two seconds worth of thought to refute everything about everything that you claim....

    4. You claim that "we've still got this patriarchal idea of wooing and being a gentleman along with the equal notion that the woman gets to make her own choice."

    This is not a patriarchal idea. Like I explained before; patriarchy states that men are in a state of privilege and women in a state of disadvantage...who benefits from this culture of gentlemenly behavior? who benefits from wooing? WOMEN!!!!!! how could it be a patriarchal idea if women come out on top as a result of it? does making sense mean anything to you feminists?
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,354

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
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

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.