Turn on thread page Beta

Why modern feminism is illogical, unnecessary, and evil watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    When women got the vote it was slightly at the expense of men. The vote is something we need to defend, with men that meant mandatory military service, for women that meant nothing. I am not adversed to this because that was a reasonable thing for men to sacrafice for women to gain equality. As have most of the other changes that our society has gone through for women. However it is now getting to the point where our inequalities are equal. To progress only female causes means men will lose out, even if only slightly, and women will go up in status. If we all work together then there will be no disparity. I know that women in Sudan need equality too but what they need is a feminist movement of their own, not for women to cause disparitys in this country.
    Women are equal according to the Law BUT they are not treated equally in society. If where you are women are being treated equally then that great, but it isnt like that everywhere, and thats why feminists are still needed.

    Feminists are also trying to make it safer for women, stop rapes and domestic violence. I know men can be victims too (a smaller percentage though), but feminists are actually trying to make thing safer for them too. They want conviction rates to go up, no matter the gender of the victim.

    And why can we help women around the world?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ziggycj)
    Women are equal according to the Law BUT they are not treated equally in society. If where you are women are being treated equally then that great, but it isnt like that everywhere, and thats why feminists are still needed.

    Feminists are also trying to make it safer for women, stop rapes and domestic violence. I know men can be victims too (a smaller percentage though), but feminists are actually trying to make thing safer for them too. They want conviction rates to go up, no matter the gender of the victim.

    And why can we help women around the world?
    Correction, they are not treated equal in some parts of society, in others they have the upper hand. That's the point. It isn't the feminists jobs to stop rapes and domestic violence, it is a problem the whole of society has not just women. 40% of domestic violence is committed against men, but feminists like Harman have decided to only teach children that it is wrong to hit women.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Correction, they are not treated equal in some parts of society, in others they have the upper hand. That's the point. It isn't the feminists jobs to stop rapes and domestic violence, it is a problem the whole of society has not just women. 40% of domestic violence is committed against men, but feminists like Harman have decided to only teach children that it is wrong to hit women.
    Feminist are trying to stop violence against women. Look back 50 years whhen domestic violence and husband-wife rape was basically legal. I didnt say it was there "job", but they are trying to raise awareness and convictions for both male and female victims.

    Also, 40% of domestic violence is againt men? source? But, that is mainly men commiting the violence agaisnt men (and women). Why are you saying feminst should stop helping women just coz men arent helping each other. Why dont they raise awareness for themselves?

    In what part of society do women have the "upper hand"? Feminist arent trying to get women above men, just equal. If they happen to have the upper hand then people can try to even that out.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ziggycj)
    Feminist are trying to stop violence against women. Look back 50 years whhen domestic violence and husband-wife rape was basically legal. I didnt say it was there "job", but they are trying to raise awareness and convictions for both male and female victims.

    Also, 40% of domestic violence is againt men? source? But, that is mainly men commiting the violence agaisnt men (and women). Why are you saying feminst should stop helping women just coz men arent helping each other. Why dont they raise awareness for themselves?

    In what part of society do women have the "upper hand"? Feminist arent trying to get women above men, just equal. If they happen to have the upper hand then people can try to even that out.
    It was legal for a husband to rape his wife until 1991. In case you wondered this law changing had absolutely nothing to do with feminazis in any way. A woman was raped by her estranged husband after he broke into the house she was staying in. She took the case to the house of lords on her own and they made the right decision, this is how the country works.

    Women have the upper hand in much of society; children would be the main area. For instance it has not been entirely impossible for a woman to abort a mans child simply to get back at him, or for a woman to take a mans family away from underneath him whilst systematically making him pay for their upkeep as well.

    It isn't just a case of men taking up male only causes. If you want to make it into 2 camps give me one good reason why men should ever budge an inch for women if they won't budge an inch for men? Now that our inequalities are equal the situation calls for mutual cooperation because it is very give and take. Things would be resolved a lot quicker if everytime a female issue was solved a male issue was resolved at the same time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    It was legal for a husband to rape his wife until 1991. In case you wondered this law changing had absolutely nothing to do with feminazis in any way. A woman was raped by her estranged husband after he broke into the house she was staying in. She took the case to the house of lords on her own and they made the right decision, this is how the country works.

    Women have the upper hand in much of society; children would be the main area. For instance it has not been entirely impossible for a woman to abort a mans child simply to get back at him, or for a woman to take a mans family away from underneath him whilst systematically making him pay for their upkeep as well.

    It isn't just a case of men taking up male only causes. If you want to make it into 2 camps give me one good reason why men should ever budge an inch for women if they won't budge an inch for men? Now that our inequalities are equal the situation calls for mutual cooperation because it is very give and take. Things would be resolved a lot quicker if everytime a female issue was solved a male issue was resolved at the same time.
    Feminist fought to get the government to change the law for rape, now their trying to get more convictions. Whats wrong with that? They are helping male victims too.

    In terms of children, it is up to men to make men (who made up most of the rules) to change things. Their are male causes being fought for in relation to children. BTW. If she takes his kids, he can take her to court, same way she could take him to court for taking her kids.

    Women are trying to "budge" and find compromises, it isnt about putting down men.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    It was legal for a husband to rape his wife until 1991. In case you wondered this law changing had absolutely nothing to do with feminazis in any way. A woman was raped by her estranged husband after he broke into the house she was staying in. She took the case to the house of lords on her own and they made the right decision, this is how the country works.

    Women have the upper hand in much of society; children would be the main area. For instance it has not been entirely impossible for a woman to abort a mans child simply to get back at him, or for a woman to take a mans family away from underneath him whilst systematically making him pay for their upkeep as well.

    It isn't just a case of men taking up male only causes. If you want to make it into 2 camps give me one good reason why men should ever budge an inch for women if they won't budge an inch for men? Now that our inequalities are equal the situation calls for mutual cooperation because it is very give and take. Things would be resolved a lot quicker if everytime a female issue was solved a male issue was resolved at the same time.
    Yet again you're trying to make it into a battle between men and women; something you're accusing feminists of doing.


    'In case you wondered this law changing had absolutely nothing to do with feminazis in any way.'


    Do you really think that without the huge feminist revolution of the last century that law would have been passed? Feminist attitudes and feminists pushing women's issues forward were a major part of it, of course.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    It isn't the feminists jobs to stop rapes and domestic violence, it is a problem the whole of society has not just women.
    Who's stopping the whole of society sorting it out then? The fact is, history has shown time and time again, if women don't fight for their rights nobody else will. You say it's the whole of society's problem; well, that's great, except the whole of society isn't taking responsibility.

    (Original post by Elipsis)
    40% of domestic violence is committed against men
    Err, no.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ziggycj)
    Feminist fought to get the government to change the law for rape, now their trying to get more convictions. Whats wrong with that? They are helping male victims too.

    In terms of children, it is up to men to make men (who made up most of the rules) to change things. Their are male causes being fought for in relation to children. BTW. If she takes his kids, he can take her to court, same way she could take him to court for taking her kids.

    Women are trying to "budge" and find compromises, it isnt about putting down men.
    Like I said you know nothing of the topic. Feminists may well have been fighting the government, but the government never did anything. It was the house of lords, who are free from outside pressure, who made the right decision.

    There may well be causes being fought for by men, but they aren't getting anywhere and the government isn't listening. I guess you aware of the fact that if a woman decides to she can put the child up for adoption prior to its birth even if the father expresses a wish to have the child himself.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Who's stopping the whole of society sorting it out then? The fact is, history has shown time and time again, if women don't fight for their rights nobody else will. You say it's the whole of society's problem; well, that's great, except the whole of society isn't taking responsibility.



    Err, no.
    I would slightly agree with you if we were in the 60s, but we aren't. You claim that men never did anything for women, but the first laws with regards to working hours and conditions were for women and children; men could end up working 18 hours a day, whilst womens were limited to 12. However now we are in 2009, and women take up a disproportionate amount of the governments time and money compared to men. At the end of the day I will never believe that womens lives are harder than mens, the simple fact is women live on average 5-10 years longer. Stress is what kills us all and causes diseases, if women live longer they must have less stress, simple.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Yet again you're trying to make it into a battle between men and women; something you're accusing feminists of doing.


    'In case you wondered this law changing had absolutely nothing to do with feminazis in any way.'


    Do you really think that without the huge feminist revolution of the last century that law would have been passed? Feminist attitudes and feminists pushing women's issues forward were a major part of it, of course.
    Where did I try and make it a battle between men and women? I am advocating stopping the battle because we will get more done through mutual co-operation.

    Things generally sort themselves out in the end, feminism had nothing to do with the R v R (1991), it was just a matter of waiting for the right case to come along to change the law. It's strange how you should say that feminists are about equality because i'm fairly sure that back around 2000 when the government decided to finally be fair and make men and women retire at the same age they fought it all the way. So not only do women live 5-10 years longer, they have also had easier working hours in safer conditions, and to top it all off they retired 5 years younger. I think i'd be a woman for 15 years more life.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I would slightly agree with you if we were in the 60s, but we aren't. You claim that men never did anything for women, but the first laws with regards to working hours and conditions were for women and children; men could end up working 18 hours a day, whilst womens were limited to 12. However now we are in 2009, and women take up a disproportionate amount of the governments time and money compared to men. At the end of the day I will never believe that womens lives are harder than mens, the simple fact is women live on average 5-10 years longer. Stress is what kills us all and causes diseases, if women live longer they must have less stress, simple.
    Yet again, you're literally just making stuff up. Any evidence that women take up more of the government's time and money than men? Any actual evidence that women live 5-10 years longer because they're less stressed? Even the top geographers and scientists won't go as far as making such a bold claim. Maybe you should stop excitedly blurting out whatever assumption is going through your mind.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Where did I try and make it a battle between men and women? I am advocating stopping the battle because we will get more done through mutual co-operation.

    Things generally sort themselves out in the end, feminism had nothing to do with the R v R (1991), it was just a matter of waiting for the right case to come along to change the law. It's strange how you should say that feminists are about equality because i'm fairly sure that back around 2000 when the government decided to finally be fair and make men and women retire at the same age they fought it all the way. So not only do women live 5-10 years longer, they have also had easier working hours in safer conditions, and to top it all off they retired 5 years younger. I think i'd be a woman for 15 years more life.
    Do your research. There were numerous cases of marital rape brought to court before 1991, none of them getting very far at all. It isn't simple 'a matter of waiting for the right case to come along to change the law', this was an issue that had been brought up time and time again.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Yet again, you're literally just making stuff up. Any evidence that women take up more of the government's time and money than men? Any actual evidence that women live 5-10 years longer because they're less stressed? Even the top geographers and scientists won't go as far as making such a bold claim. Maybe you should stop excitedly blurting out whatever assumption is going through your mind.
    There are a variety of reasons as to why women live longer, however stress is a key reason. To me this indicates that women should retire at 60 and men should retire at 65 out of fairness, because men work a higher % of their lives than women.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Do your research. There were numerous cases of marital rape brought to court before 1991, none of them getting very far at all. It isn't simple 'a matter of waiting for the right case to come along to change the law', this was an issue that had been brought up time and time again.
    I think you will find that in the cases prior to 1991 the men were charged with a different crime, but nevertheless served a similar sentence.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    I think you will find that in the cases prior to 1991 the men were charged with a different crime, but nevertheless served a similar sentence.
    Irrelevent. Why wasn't the law changed then, with those cases?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    There are a variety of reasons as to why women live longer, however stress is a key reason. To me this indicates that women should retire at 60 and men should retire at 65 out of fairness, because men work a higher % of their lives than women.
    Yet again, do you have any evidence for this?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    Where did I try and make it a battle between men and women?
    'give me one good reason why men should ever budge an inch for women if they won't budge an inch for men?'

    'everytime a female issue was solved a male issue was resolved at the same time.'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    'give me one good reason why men should ever budge an inch for women if they won't budge an inch for men?'

    'everytime a female issue was solved a male issue was resolved at the same time.'
    In the first quote I am saying that in order for women to ever move any of their issues forwards they need some level of compliance with men. Why should the men be compliant when all they are interested in is taking rights away from them and shifting the balance in womens favour? It needs to be give and take. This isn't making it a battle, i'm saying it is a battle and that it shouldn't be. You will always have a battle when you are split into competing interest groups, therefore I am suggesting we do away with interest groups in gender and just do what is right regardless of if they are male or female. Of course if you had been paying attention to anything i'd written on the last 4 pages you would know this...

    The second quote is taken from me saying I want a situation in which female and male issues are resolved in parallel, it is nothing to do with making it a battle between men and women. That quote, as with quote 1, are both referring to the current situation created by feminism in which men and women have to compete with each other in order to get fair and equal treatment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by missygeorgia)
    Yet again, do you have any evidence for this?
    And you couldn't use google for yourself why?

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?clien...=Google+Search
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Elipsis)
    And you couldn't use google for yourself why?

    http://www.google.co.uk/search?clien...=Google+Search
    Why the hell should I do your research for you?

    Anyway, most of the links don't suggest that women suffer less than stress, just that they deal with it better. In the few links where it's suggested that men suffer more from work related stres, the furthest they'll go is suggesting that among other factors the stress could possibly make a difference.

    A far cry from 'Stress is what kills us all and causes diseases, if women live longer they must have less stress, simple.'
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
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.