'Men's Rights' et al communities becoming more extreme
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Cryoraptor
Wow, you've devolved into total troll behaviour. These are obvious attempts at getting an emotional reaction out of me. I'm not taking the bait. I don't know how you could seriously claim that I'm not handling it when clearly I'm not becoming emotionally invested. You're obviously baiting for an emotional reaction.
Lol you can't handle it because you are calling me a troll for doing something that you did yourself. I really don't care if you have an emotional reaction or not, my point is your double standards is what shows you can't handle it.
Original post by Joe312
Lol you can't handle it because you are calling me a troll for doing something that you did yourself. I really don't care if you have an emotional reaction or not, my point is your double standards is what shows you can't handle it.
Okay then, you're clearly trolling at this stage. How am I being emotional lmfao?
Original post by Cryoraptor
Okay then, you're clearly trolling at this stage. How am I being emotional lmfao?
I just said, it's not about you being emotional. It's about the fact that you called me a troll for doing what you did, which shows you have double standards as you are happy to call me emotional but think it's trolling for me to do it back to you.
Original post by Joe312
I just said, it's not about you being emotional. It's about the fact that you called me a troll for doing what you did, which shows you have double standards as you are happy to call me emotional but think it's trolling for me to do it back to you.
I wasn't trolling or baiting for an emotional response though, that's the difference.
Original post by Cryoraptor
I wasn't trolling or baiting for an emotional response though, that's the difference.
Yeah neither was I.
Original post by Cryoraptor
I wasn't trolling or baiting for an emotional response though, that's the difference.
I'm sure you genuinely thought I was being emotional.
At the time, I too genuinely thought that you were being emotional.
You just can't seem to accept that I could have had the same genuine thought that you did.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by Cryoraptor
Except men and women have the same rights and in fact women have more rights than men now. There are no disparities, that's the point of why the patriarchy is a complete myth and why modern feminism is fundamentally a lie.
I'm not talking about disparities in rights, I'm talking about economic, political and social disparities.
Original post by Cryoraptor
Okay, either you are trolling, or you're exhibiting the hive mind stupidity of feminism.
I literally made a comment where I said that MRA and Incel can be and often is as toxic and cancerous as feminism can be, ergo I'm not misogynist. How can I be 'the other extreme'? 'ThOsE tHaT aRe NoT wItH uS aRe AgAiNsT uS'. Come on, you sound like the retarded SJWs who call everyone they disagree with a Nazi.
I literally made a comment where I said that MRA and Incel can be and often is as toxic and cancerous as feminism can be, ergo I'm not misogynist. How can I be 'the other extreme'? 'ThOsE tHaT aRe NoT wItH uS aRe AgAiNsT uS'. Come on, you sound like the retarded SJWs who call everyone they disagree with a Nazi.
Looks like we agree, there are toxic cancerous people on both sides.
Original post by Cryoraptor
There is no patriarchy today because men and women have equal opportunities. Equality of outcome is a complete lie and fraud and not equality at all. Significantly more women are in the field of medicine yet feminists rightfully never make issue of it and demand that it be exactly representative of the population. The world doesn't work like that.
And obviously men and women are going to be raised differently. That's because they are biologically very different beings. A sex-neutral upbringing or life just doesn't exist. It's biologically impossible. It's like trying to raise a cat and a dog in exactly the same way.
Yes, society and societal constructs exist, but so does biology.
And obviously men and women are going to be raised differently. That's because they are biologically very different beings. A sex-neutral upbringing or life just doesn't exist. It's biologically impossible. It's like trying to raise a cat and a dog in exactly the same way.
Yes, society and societal constructs exist, but so does biology.
Look I'm not the kind of feminist who believes in equality of outcome or that biology plays no role in the economic, political and social disparities. However I think that part of the disparity is still because of the lingering effects of patriarchy.
Granting equality of opportunity doesn't do anything to undo the centuries of conditioning our culture went through regarding women being second class citizens.
For example, just freeing black people from slavery when they had no money, no education, etc, and just saying 'good luck, you've got freedom of opportunity now!' isn't good enough. And that's why we still have racial disparities.
Same goes for gender disparities, though I agree there is some room for biological explanation there while there isn't for race, however since female representation keeps increasing, it looks like we've still got a way to go before we reach the levels of disparity that biology accounts for. So until then, patriarchy still has an impact as the cause of some of the current disparities.
Original post by Cryoraptor
You're missing the wider point. Their point is that suffragettes are deified, which includes their insane behaviour, and that behaviour being deified is a good testament to why modern feminism is so ****ing toxic and aggressive.
If you could find a way to acknowledge the trauma which influenced their insane behaviour, we might be able to agree that they shouldn't be deified, I just don't like your whitewashing of those underlying causes.
Original post by Pinkisk
Nationalist socialism = The world is run by a system created by Jews to enslave and oppress white people for the beneficence of Jews.
Feminism = The world is run by a system created by men out to enslave and oppress women for the beneficence of men.
Feminism = The world is run by a system created by men out to enslave and oppress women for the beneficence of men.
Let's take a step back a bit and compare/contrast feminism and nazism. (And please try to refrain from hysterical responses or exaggerations as we navigate through this.) For the sake of the argument, I will accept your following characterisations:
N: The world is run by a system created by Jews to enslave and oppress white people for the beneficence of Jews.
F: The world is run by a system created by men out to enslave and oppress women for the beneficence of men.
Let's also put them in an equal timeframe - early 20th century.
To start with,
1. Do you believe there is any evidence for claim N?
2. Do you believe there is any evidence for claim F?
Original post by Pinkisk
Feminism is an ideology based on marxist, communist principles. This is not a misinterpretation of feminism.
Of course this is a misrepresentation. You're only defining one particular strand of feminism that suits your agenda. There are feminists who do not even subscribe to it as an ideology (with core concepts borrowed from Marxism, postmodernism etc.) but retain the ethos of it as a movement and part of the liberal drive of the 19th century (e.g. Wollstonecraft). Just as there are "classical" liberals who do the same for liberalism (vs. e.g. neoliberalism).
Original post by Cryoraptor
Feminism has had some good bits, but 3rd wave is total garbage that should be disregarded as the trolls they are.
3rd wave feminists do not want equality, they want to cause chaos and get attention.
I actually agree with this. And that extends to the whole "Critical Theory" drive, including critical race theory (CRT) and just about every postmodern movement. The 90s was a ****ing awful decade for social science.
However, just as CRT doesn't represent the equal rights movement for ethnic minorities (or negate the progress made), 3rd wave feminism doesn't represent equal rights for women and the progress made by previous feminists.
EDIT: but saying "feminism has had some good bits" is a serious understatement.
(edited 4 years ago)
I think @Pinkish may have given up.
For all his talk of feminism which was considerable. We did not hear hardly anything about his actual views on the MrM.
I was kinda hoping for him to admit they are pretty crap.
If anyone wants to defend them without bringing up feminism I'd be happy to hear it.
For all his talk of feminism which was considerable. We did not hear hardly anything about his actual views on the MrM.
I was kinda hoping for him to admit they are pretty crap.
If anyone wants to defend them without bringing up feminism I'd be happy to hear it.
Original post by adam271
I think @Pinkish may have given up.
For all his talk of feminism which was considerable. We did not hear hardly anything about his actual views on the MrM.
I was kinda hoping for him to admit they are pretty crap.
If anyone wants to defend them without bringing up feminism I'd be happy to hear it.
For all his talk of feminism which was considerable. We did not hear hardly anything about his actual views on the MrM.
I was kinda hoping for him to admit they are pretty crap.
If anyone wants to defend them without bringing up feminism I'd be happy to hear it.
Do you mean defend some of their goals or defend their actual movement cause I feel like I could do the former but not the latter..
Original post by adam271
I think @Pinkish may have given up.
For all his talk of feminism which was considerable. We did not hear hardly anything about his actual views on the MrM.
I was kinda hoping for him to admit they are pretty crap.
If anyone wants to defend them without bringing up feminism I'd be happy to hear it.
For all his talk of feminism which was considerable. We did not hear hardly anything about his actual views on the MrM.
I was kinda hoping for him to admit they are pretty crap.
If anyone wants to defend them without bringing up feminism I'd be happy to hear it.
Yes I've been waiting for him to respond more directly to you on this on-topic point.
I suspect that all his talking points against feminism come from MRM. He comes across as more of zealous ideologue than anyone else on here.
Original post by ThomH97
That article doesn't give any examples, it's just a robot unaware of context deciding between "toxic" and "healthy". And the robot was coded by someone with an already made opinion and point to prove.
Not to say it's incorrect, but the evidence is trivial.
Not to say it's incorrect, but the evidence is trivial.
That's a valid concern (regarding Google’s Perspective API). I'd like to learn more about how it operates before commenting. For anyone else interested:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.08914 (the original paper submitted by Google's researchers)
https://conversationai.github.io/ (the datasets used to classify 'toxicity')
Original post by Joe312
But the suffragettes are not celebrated by feminists for their support of the white feather movement..
I don't avoid it Joe. You have a condition called cognitive dissonance that all feminists that I have come across have. No matter what justification I give you you will do your utmost to try to dismiss it no matter how true it may be.
In regard to your question here. I will answer it with another question. Would it be OK for me to support Hitler and build statues for him and name roads and colleges and universities after him if I did not support his Holocaust? Would that be OK?
What does it say about feminism that it espouse a group of people involved in the murder of tens of thousands, dismissing the murder of these people in favour of other matters? If this argument is true. It is an insult to feminism not a vindication of its actions.
Original post by Joe312
The difference is that racism is factually false but patriarchy is factually true.
This is not a counter argument. Both principles are fundamentally based on a generalised interpretation of life that ascribes negative attributes to an entire group of people based on a biological characteristic. The principles are by definition racist/sexist. Even if it is true, developing an ideology that rests on a principle of generalisation against a group of people based on a biological characteristic is discriminatory by definition....and this is not the point of our argument here which you have changed. We are not debating whether or not "the patriarchy" is true. You asked for an example of a link between feminism and its violence towards men. I gave you one, the patriarchy. Saying that the patriarchy is true does not rebut my argument. Please stick to the point of argument.
Original post by Joe312
Lol you sound like a member of the KKK complaining about being persecuted for your religion because you're not allowed to kill black people anymore.
Fighting for equality for men and women is not sexist against men nor does it require violence.
Fighting for equality for men and women is not sexist against men nor does it require violence.
many feminist theorists disagree with you on this topic. Please do not resort to Godwin's law. Its a shallow tactic.
Original post by Joe312
There are different kinda of feminism. I don't think it makes sense for men to have an equal say to a woman regarding abortion because it's the woman's body. Men and women should have equal control over their own bodies. That's the equality feminism fights for. Why do you think men should, in addition to that, get some control over the woman's body..? That would be unequal, because you aren't advocating for women to have some control over men's bodies.
Equality does not care that its woman's body. Equality is a state whereby EVERYONE has the same exact rights irrespective of their differences. If mothers are allowed a say in abortion, in equality, fathers would be allowed that same right. Anything less than this would be discrimination in equality.
Feminism, contrary to your claims, clearly does not support universal equality. You are justifying the reason why in this reply of yours. This argument of yours corroborates that feminism is not for equality where equality does not benefit women. Furthermore, you did not address the matter of equity feminists.
Original post by Joe312
Regardless, I'm politically liberal, I think people should have control over their own bodies and that therefore that's the kind of equality we should strive for.
Having control of your body is a matter of personal autonomy not equality. Equality is a state where everyone has the same exact rights. In the context of equality, this justification of yours does not make sense. Additionally, what you are arguing here is that in feminism personal autonomy for women trumps equality. As in, you are, without realising it, with all due respect, proving my point.
Original post by Joe312
Lol you're such an impressive guy! Imagine how far up your own ass you have to be to end a debate point with something as masturbatory as this lol.
I am not a guy and thank you for the insults. I will let them speak for what feminism stands for and my choice of language, I will let that speak for what I stand for.
(edited 4 years ago)
Original post by Pinkisk
I’d just ignore someone like him, clearly bathing in his own ignorance.
The OP is correct that the alt right views among men are becoming more prominent however some of these views are fair. The rise is men’s rights activism is ultimately the counter culture (cause and effect) to the rise of ‘progressive’ liberalism which in many ways has moved beyond equality to actively attempting to destroy social and gender norms.
It’s not a movement I am part of but I certainly have sympathy for some of their views.
It’s not a movement I am part of but I certainly have sympathy for some of their views.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- EPQ suggestions - Pharmacy related
- Applying for Politics and/or International Relations? Here are some helpful readings!
- Muslim females can I get your opinions
- Stonebride college
- How can I become obsessed with chemistry ??
- Israel strikes Isfahan and other sites
- She's my best friend, and I want to help her
- Third Subject for Chemistry
- Harvard in-text-citations - is this correct?
- Spelling errors in personal statement
- Make it More Camping-ey !!
- Make it More Running- ey !!
- Make it More Pasta-ey !!
- Cognitive Interview pros and cons
- Biologist Meike Stoverock proves female hypergamy
- any teenage hijabis? or any muslims? pls help
- Having Doubts About My Degree
- Should i vote Labour?
- marriage
- Make it More Childbirth-ey !!
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
