Men are the new "women"

Post Reply New Topic

I think they will want to include Valerie Solanas. SCUM probably has modern adherents. I'll just concede that people can take to all extremes, rather than putting forth a no true feminist argument.

BettaPonic, do we all start acting white, or something? Perhaps we'll also match your criteria for masculinity and feminity? Wanting people to ignore their senses doesn't seem like a way to make progress. Good plan for making no progress!

No, I do not believe people can act like a race. Race should are made up of individuals with their own behavior. I want us to move past race to a world where people are not judged by their race and no one notices.

What specific policy do you propose to accomplish that?

Nor is a hammer the appropriate tool with which to clean a window.

Equality of outcome applied as policy is systemic prejudice and discrimination. One cannot adjust outcomes based on arbitrary distinctions without creating discrimination. An example of this is affirmative action.



Granting people the same opportunities typically includes the right to redress in cases of discrimination under law. Your argument amounts to "giving people equal opportunities isn't giving people opportunities", which can roughly be translated as "we haven't successfully given people equal opportunities, despite attempts to do so". If that's the case, it's the process that's failed, not the idea.

Which do you wish to debate? The argument I presented, or a hypothetical system which I neither advocated for nor invented?



First of all, I don't consider it to be a valid analogy. A better analogy for equality of outcome would be a requirement that all athletes who finish ahead of the single-legged runner be required to relinquish either one of their legs or their position on the podium.

Secondly, I don't believe justice enters the equation. Would it be just to grant one athlete the right to use performance enhancing drugs due to their lesser ability on the track? Would you grant children born with below-average intelligence a lower threshold for an A on their exams? Who would be served by this?



Let it also be noted that there are no true Scotsmen. Equity feminists are very much in the minority, and largely considered pariahs by the current feminist zeitgeist.



Read any decent book of law in any nation in the Anglosphere - or simply read the 14th Amendment. Equality before the law is written into the rules which govern our societies.



I suspect it's more likely that you don't recognise them for what they are.



And yet claim that anti-feminist egalitarian is a contradiction in terms. It rather suggests the adaptation required is in your thinking.

Equality between the sexes in the only form which counts, i.e. legal equality, already exists. If you can find any de facto cases of discrimination on the grounds of sex, I'll happily support your denigration of it. If, instead, you wish to postulate that societal systems are inherently sexist, I'll need a great deal more than an assertion that it is so. Incidentally, that's not an invitation to dredge up the same tired arguments that we've all seen a thousand times before.

On this I agree, in principle, with Morgan Freeman's suggestion in his 60 minutes interview: "I'm gonna stop calling you a white man, and I'm gonna ask you to stop calling me a black man". Of course, that's not to say that discussing race should be taboo, it just shouldn't be a relevant factor in how we perceive one another - with the obvious exceptions for observation of cultural niceties.



Likewise. Aside from the fact that it amounts to discrimination, it's also almost always a band-aid solution to a deeper problem - an example of which is the state of education in America. The onus should be on tackling the sprawling, inefficient, bureaucratic nightmare that is school administration and providing a strong basic standard education to students regardless of creed or colour.



That particular problem stems from the fact that, in the minds of such people, feminist ideas are inviolate, arguing against them is heresy and all heretics should be silenced (or labelled Nazis and punched). It would be remiss to suggest such behaviour is representative of all feminists, but it would also be remiss to claim that they don't represent feminism or that the problem of indoctrination in educational institutes can be swept under the rug and ignored.

A far more common issue is that of the ubiquitous conflation of "feminism" with "feminists" and "feminists" with "women". The words are used interchangeably in a sleight-of-hand game designed to label those who oppose feminist ideas as "misogynists". If you need to resort to such asinine tactics in order to preserve the doctrine of your ideology, the debate is already over and you've lost.

I think affirmative action is a good idea for marginalised groups, including ethnic minorities. But applying affirmative action to women is unnecessary because women are not a marginalised group. In general, people don't hate women.

As adifferentname said, hating feminism does not equate with women. Women are feminists are two different groups because not all women are feminists and not all feminists are women.

Yeah! How dare those mere men have unauthorised opionins! Only women are allowed to have their own opinions and if any man dares to voice a contrary opionion we must shame him by calling him a misogynist!

hmmm I didn't know males were getting less college education...granted I am kind of skeptical at the usefulness of college at least how it's currently set up. Seems like a debt trap for a lot of people, unless you really have an idea of what you want to do and know how to pursue it. but seems my age group was told we had to go to collage to have any chance in the real world so you had a lot of misdirected people that now have large sums of debt.

As for criminal justice there certainly are some issues with males getting harsher treatment, for instance I feel its possible a male who for instance agrees to use a condom and removes it would be viewed more harshly than a female who assures a male she takes birth control but has lied in an effort to get pregnant. But also in general seems like women are sometimes seen as less capable of crime than males by the justice system which isn't really true...and criminal women can certainly use it to their advantage.

MRAs are the new feminists! Same old self-victimising.

Why is it that when STEM workers are mostly men, MRAs say they want equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome but when it comes to sex-disparity in college enrollement MRAs want equality of outcome?

Less women chose to work in STEM? Fine. Maybe less men chose to enrole in college too. The same freedom of choice argument should apply to both.

You can talk about equality of opportunity rather than outcome and freedom of choice but you should apply it universally, including times when equality of opportunity favours women over men. Otherwise you're just cherrypicking.

Last edited by RetroGamer87 on 12 Mar 2017, 8:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well why are they saying the hair is unprofessional? Do they mean they don't tie it back or that they have some super extreme hairstyle....or that their hair doesn't look like that of a professional white person? Different ethnicities do have some different hair textures in things so yes to suggest someones natural hair makes them 'unprofessional' can certainly be problematic.

Dreads aren't supposed to be dirty though...I have them, still rather early stages but yeah you're still supposed to wash them just not as often and with shampoo or soap that leaves as little residue as possible ideally none. Also I certainly take care not to get food grease and such in them and try and wash my hand if I've eaten something greasy before touching them.

Also maybe not soap but there is water in nature, and freshening herbs/plants not like you couldn't bathe or wash at all.

I'm not sure that's actually the case. It's more that they argue against the legitimacy of affirmative action for women on the basis that the justification is flawed now the shoe is on the other foot, and that there is a social problem affecting the aspirations of young men. They're arguing against the inconsistency of it being deemed a problem when women are the minority of applicants but tickety-boo when they're applying in higher numbers.

Are young men being discouraged from applying directly or indirectly? That's the important question.



See previous point. When women weren't applying to college and university in equal numbers to men, it was classed as "problematic" and steps were taken to address it. Remaining consistent would require there be similar concern now the reverse is true.



Indeed. However, as I've suggested, that cuts both ways. Personally I don't care who is or is not applying for higher education, as long as there are no deliberate barriers preventing anyone from doing so, that there's no favouring of a specific group over another.

I agree, I think unprofessional hair should be the hair that negatively affects the workplace. I don't see how dreadlocks do that personally. That might just be because am used to it though. Retro, I agree MRAs and feminists seem to both have a huge victim complex. I personally prefer studying an issue to figure out why it happens and if it actually a problem.

I thought it came into existence for women to gain equal rights and to fight back against abuse from males, I don't think the initial goal was ever to eliminate all masculine behaviors from humanity. If that is the goal of some more extreme feminists than I don't agree with them and it certainly misrepresents the initial idea. Also how are empathy, social awareness and sensitivity specifically feminine traits? I thought those were considered being polite....

The way I see it most hair can be tied back, put in a hair net ect and be just fine for the work place...even if someone has a crazy mohawk, what does it matter if at work they keep it contained at work?