why are feminist obsessed with Nice guys(TM)

Page 13 of 31 [ 490 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 31  Next

ArrantPariah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2012
Age: 121
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,972

13 Mar 2014, 10:46 am

AngelRho wrote:
What you DON'T see, however, is moderate, establishment Democrats working to shut up extreme leftist factions of their party.


:?:

There aren't any extreme leftists in the USA. Certainly not in the Democratic party.



Schneekugel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2012
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,612

13 Mar 2014, 11:17 am

Quote:
You're probably right. But that doesn't change the fact that they get the most attention and dominate the narrative. What disturbs me is that more sensible moderates don't seem to actively counter it, with some posts on WP being a striking exception rather than the rule.
There is attention, and there is attention. Sure that westborough protestant whatever nuts, gets lots of attention for their extreme oppinions. But there is "I never thought of it that way." attention and "WTF - I mean WTF? O_o *rofl*" attention.

Quote:
Feminism is only going to succeed where feminists are unified. Division is almost always catastrophic to a cause.
Sorry, but I dont agree on that. What you call division is for me the contrary of militarism. What freedom is there, if people are not allowed to mention their opinions, anyway if it may not opt well with someone elses opinion. I dont need a movement to free me from an conservative gender thinking that was forced on everyone of us, so that someone else can force on us their gender thinking. ^^ As well that there is no absolute need to fear it. So some people have extreme thinking. Luckily we live in democracy, which means the majority must agree on something, and not in an "Yellography", so that the one yelling the most get its way. ^^ Some rare extremist are not an devision to the cause. In eruope you have as well in almost every country some extreme rightwing conservative party. But they are no division or an catastrophe to conservative people, because conservative people are simply conservative people and extreme rightwing conservative people are rightwing conservative people. Outside of that forum and the ones, always creating that kind of threads, I never met someone, mixing those two totally different kind of oppinions with each other.

Its as if I´d post a video of some strange US "self founded religion" leader, having 25 wifes and 95 kids and opinions from the millenium before jesus was born, and start referring about "todays global patriarchism". ^^



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

13 Mar 2014, 1:09 pm

Schneekugel wrote:
Quote:
You're probably right. But that doesn't change the fact that they get the most attention and dominate the narrative. What disturbs me is that more sensible moderates don't seem to actively counter it, with some posts on WP being a striking exception rather than the rule.
There is attention, and there is attention. Sure that westborough protestant whatever nuts, gets lots of attention for their extreme oppinions. But there is "I never thought of it that way." attention and "WTF - I mean WTF? O_o *rofl*" attention.

Quote:
Feminism is only going to succeed where feminists are unified. Division is almost always catastrophic to a cause.
Sorry, but I dont agree on that. What you call division is for me the contrary of militarism. What freedom is there, if people are not allowed to mention their opinions, anyway if it may not opt well with someone elses opinion. I dont need a movement to free me from an conservative gender thinking that was forced on everyone of us, so that someone else can force on us their gender thinking. ^^ As well that there is no absolute need to fear it. So some people have extreme thinking. Luckily we live in democracy, which means the majority must agree on something, and not in an "Yellography", so that the one yelling the most get its way. ^^ Some rare extremist are not an devision to the cause. In eruope you have as well in almost every country some extreme rightwing conservative party. But they are no division or an catastrophe to conservative people, because conservative people are simply conservative people and extreme rightwing conservative people are rightwing conservative people. Outside of that forum and the ones, always creating that kind of threads, I never met someone, mixing those two totally different kind of oppinions with each other.

Its as if I´d post a video of some strange US "self founded religion" leader, having 25 wifes and 95 kids and opinions from the millenium before jesus was born, and start referring about "todays global patriarchism". ^^

Right.

However, there are movements within movements.

There is "Feminism," and then there's what I'm referring to as "Feminists™". You can't win without unity within a greater movement. You don't help yourself (as a whole) by attacking extremists. You see that fairly consistently in political movements, as I mentioned earlier in re Repubs vs. Dems. If feminists display factionalism, i.e. moderate "men+women=EQUAL" vs. a more militant Feminists™ "men<women," with a moderate majority shouting down a vocal minority, feminists as a whole lost a faction that they could potentially use to their advantage in the long run. If a vocal minority of Feminists™ are able to effect change, it only benefits non-militant feminists. The reverse can't be said.

@ArrantParriah: You never hear Dems getting all hot about "single-payer" as opposed to the individual mandate. They're not totally stupid. If a large number of people knew that a few Dems were working towards single-payer, they might be less likely to vote for them. And there have been Dems opposed to ACA BECAUSE it wasn't single-payer. This, however, doesn't make news very much. However, you haven't seen any Dems working AGAINST ACA legislation, either…unless you count how many times Obama has selectively rewritten it, and even then there really hasn't been much opposition from the left on this. It's not in Dems best interest to oppose it. Repubs, on the other hand, seem to provide too much entertainment by being divided the way they are. The establishment kinda co-opted the Tea Party to win elections, and not long after seem to have done everything they can do to shut them up, especially considering the dirty tactics used to get rid of electable candidates from their own party. The thing is, there are always divisions within groups. It's only the extremes you hear about, and no movement has made any lasting marks without agreeing on the essentials and moving forward. Dems for the moment are able to sacrifice on certain issues to get what's most important to them passed through. Repubs have abandoned their conservative base by trying to get votes (gays, immigrants, etc.) that they'll never get. Unless something significant changes, Repubs will be staying home for the next elections, too.



sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Mar 2014, 1:48 pm

AngelRho wrote:
So…if believing that we should make every effort to give women equal political and legal status on par with men and if believing that we should eliminate (within reason) barriers to success for women in the workplace makes me a male feminist, then sign me up.


You are a feminist.

I am a staunch feminist, and I am very perturbed by the fact that militant extremists have hijacked the name while ignoring the fundamental equality basis of the movement.

I am certain there are plenty of christians out there that feel the same way about the hate filled "christians" of the more extreme flavors.

If the scales ever tip too far the other way, then I will probably end up in the "opposite" movement, complaining about the male extremists who want to overthrow the female dominated world rather than achieve equality.


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,484
Location: Aux Arcs

13 Mar 2014, 1:59 pm

billiscool wrote:
salamandaqwerty wrote:
Misslizard wrote:
I think they are blaming the feminists because they can't get laid.


:lol:
This explains soooo much!! !


b.s,alot of guys who get laid,are married,have a gf, are
against feminist.there are women against feminist.
feminist and their hardcore leftist allies think
only bitter,cranky single guys hate them,which
is not true.You feminist and hardcore leftist are losing.
ok.

Do they go home and demand she fix them a sandwich and then beat her if she forgets to put mayo on it?
Why would anyone hate someone for wanting the same pay and rights?If you had a daughter wouldn't you want the same opportunities for her as men have?Or would you prefer that she get preggers at fourteen to a loser who treats her like crap?


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


AspergianMutantt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,782
Location: North Idaho. USA

13 Mar 2014, 2:03 pm

I do not see how it would be considered feminist to want equal rights for all.


_________________
Master Thread Killer


sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Mar 2014, 2:09 pm

billiscool wrote:
You feminist and hardcore leftist are losing.
ok.


So why are most MRA groups shouting about how much ground has already been lost and how much more they stand to lose?

By the way, not every feminist is a hardcore leftist, in fact some are quite politically conservative. And isn't being against discrimination a rallying cry for conservatives at times?


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


Last edited by sonofghandi on 13 Mar 2014, 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Misslizard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,484
Location: Aux Arcs

13 Mar 2014, 2:09 pm

I guess because not to long ago we couldn't vote,own property,be in charge of our reproductive rights,and were pretty much considered the man's property.Some men (and a few women I suppose)thought this was a good thing,so men and women who thought otherwise made great efforts to level the playing field.
There really shouldn't be men's rights or woman's rights,but just human rights.


_________________
I am the dust that dances in the light. - Rumi


sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Mar 2014, 2:14 pm

AspergianMutantt wrote:
I do not see how it would be considered feminist to want equal rights for all.


It shouldn't have to be.

While things have improved (and drastically) in the past century alone, if women weren't still systematically the victims of discrimination, then it would not bear the name "feminism."


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

13 Mar 2014, 2:14 pm

Misslizard wrote:
There really shouldn't be men's rights or woman's rights,but just human rights.


QFT


_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche


starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

13 Mar 2014, 2:55 pm

AngelRho wrote:
The problem is that the loudest voices are, as often is the case everywhere, the ones that aren't about equality in any reasonable sense. That's the issue I have with Feminism™ . It's not about equality at all. That's why this post caught my attention. Feminists™ would have put it this way:
"Oh, yes. I see that tons of woman always on my way to work, protesting before the parlament: "We dont want to be treated as equal humans! We dont want the same rights! We want MORE rights! We think we are of more worth and deserve to be treated with greater respect!" It's a viewpoint that holds that ALL men are scum and inferior. And where this is NOT the case, it IS the case that they demand men step aside and make every accommodation that they demand.

And this simply isn't the way the world works. At least not in the "man's world." If I got to demand every accommodation for my job to make it a success, I'd still be a public school teacher right now. Nobody in an entry level job gets his own personal assistant to run around fixing his mistakes to guarantee a promotion. Even if you have something on a management or executive level, you don't get a free pass from making mistakes and facing consequences. I'm self-employed, which basically means I'm a CEO. Just because I'm the CEO doesn't mean I've got clients breaking down the door to procure my services. I'm not really doing all that well at the moment, and if I'm going to grow my business, *I* have to take responsibility for things like finances and marketing. Talk about a glass ceiling! Hint: it only exists if YOU put it there. If there's no more upwards mobility for you in the company where you work, give yourself a promotion by seeking the job you want elsewhere, and don't stop looking for it until you get it.

Feminists™ aren't interested in ordinary upwards mobility. They see status as imposed by men for men's interests alone, women need not apply. It's "I'm a woman, and my kind have been oppressed for millennia. I'm ENTITLED to the top jobs, and YOU (men) are going to do all the work to put me there." Feminists™ would have a point if they stopped at equality. It's tit-for-tat dominance over men and demanding that men accommodate them along the way that I have the most trouble supporting.

And just to be clear, I'm referring to Feminists™ as a radical, extreme movement, what some may call "Feminazi." I'm not assuming that ALL feminists are like this, but it doesn't seem to me that feminists really have much of a voice in the media as Feminist™ radicals do. Saying all feminists are Feminists™ is like saying all nice guys are Nice Guys™. The problem is somehow we tend to be more attracted to the attention-getters, all the crazies whose views somehow get representation disproportionate to how many people actually buy into that ideology.


have any of the female feminists involved in this conversation said ANY of these problematic things that you mentioned here?

no.

and why is that?

because the kind of extreme feminists with the "loudest" voices you guys are talking about (the handful that have been mentioned that exist) are the only ones you guys here seem to pay attention to, the only sort of blogs you go looking for to quote in here, the only sort of youtube videos you link in these threads are about/made by the horrible all-too-common (apparently) FEMINAZI (god how i hate this f***ing word).

there are lots of feminists on this thread with what i would call pretty reasonable voices and opinions. and why is that?--because we actually represent THE LARGE MAJORITY of feminists--reasonable people who want to be treated like human beings. but you don't hear us. you only hear skrieking man-haters. whatev.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

13 Mar 2014, 3:27 pm

starvingartist wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
The problem is that the loudest voices are, as often is the case everywhere, the ones that aren't about equality in any reasonable sense. That's the issue I have with Feminism™ . It's not about equality at all. That's why this post caught my attention. Feminists™ would have put it this way:
"Oh, yes. I see that tons of woman always on my way to work, protesting before the parlament: "We dont want to be treated as equal humans! We dont want the same rights! We want MORE rights! We think we are of more worth and deserve to be treated with greater respect!" It's a viewpoint that holds that ALL men are scum and inferior. And where this is NOT the case, it IS the case that they demand men step aside and make every accommodation that they demand.

And this simply isn't the way the world works. At least not in the "man's world." If I got to demand every accommodation for my job to make it a success, I'd still be a public school teacher right now. Nobody in an entry level job gets his own personal assistant to run around fixing his mistakes to guarantee a promotion. Even if you have something on a management or executive level, you don't get a free pass from making mistakes and facing consequences. I'm self-employed, which basically means I'm a CEO. Just because I'm the CEO doesn't mean I've got clients breaking down the door to procure my services. I'm not really doing all that well at the moment, and if I'm going to grow my business, *I* have to take responsibility for things like finances and marketing. Talk about a glass ceiling! Hint: it only exists if YOU put it there. If there's no more upwards mobility for you in the company where you work, give yourself a promotion by seeking the job you want elsewhere, and don't stop looking for it until you get it.

Feminists™ aren't interested in ordinary upwards mobility. They see status as imposed by men for men's interests alone, women need not apply. It's "I'm a woman, and my kind have been oppressed for millennia. I'm ENTITLED to the top jobs, and YOU (men) are going to do all the work to put me there." Feminists™ would have a point if they stopped at equality. It's tit-for-tat dominance over men and demanding that men accommodate them along the way that I have the most trouble supporting.

And just to be clear, I'm referring to Feminists™ as a radical, extreme movement, what some may call "Feminazi." I'm not assuming that ALL feminists are like this, but it doesn't seem to me that feminists really have much of a voice in the media as Feminist™ radicals do. Saying all feminists are Feminists™ is like saying all nice guys are Nice Guys™. The problem is somehow we tend to be more attracted to the attention-getters, all the crazies whose views somehow get representation disproportionate to how many people actually buy into that ideology.


have any of the female feminists involved in this conversation said ANY of these problematic things that you mentioned here?

no.

and why is that?

because the kind of extreme feminists with the "loudest" voices you guys are talking about (the handful that have been mentioned that exist) are the only ones you guys here seem to pay attention to, the only sort of blogs you go looking for to quote in here, the only sort of youtube videos you link in these threads are about/made by the horrible all-too-common (apparently) FEMINAZI (god how i hate this f***ing word).

there are lots of feminists on this thread with what i would call pretty reasonable voices and opinions. and why is that?--because we actually represent THE LARGE MAJORITY of feminists--reasonable people who want to be treated like human beings. but you don't hear us. you only hear skrieking man-haters. whatev.

EXCELLENT. This is what we need to see from feminists.

One question, though: Can you show that you have engaged, as you put it, "shrieking man-haters" in countering their hate-speech towards men and their misrepresentation of themes central to your view of feminism, i.e. equality over superiority?



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

13 Mar 2014, 3:31 pm

I've never actually met a 'shrieking man hater,' nor do I hang out online where they congregate (assuming that there are enough of them to congregate anywhere), so, no.



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

13 Mar 2014, 3:41 pm

Found this interesting...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLemX9QtUa4[/youtube]



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

13 Mar 2014, 3:43 pm

LKL wrote:
I've never actually met a 'shrieking man hater,' nor do I hang out online where they congregate (assuming that there are enough of them to congregate anywhere), so, no.


ditto.



starvingartist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,032

13 Mar 2014, 3:46 pm

AngelRho wrote:
Found this interesting...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLemX9QtUa4[/youtube]


and this contributes to the discussion productively in what way?