Understanding Feminism (Women: Your opinions)

Post Reply New Topic

No, darling, you were trying to prove that radical feminists are running wild and have the 'real control' out in the world. Remember, there's a permanent record of what you already said.

Says the guy who thinks that calling a blogger a 'fruitnut' challenges said blogger's body of work in some way.

There you have it, folks: MRA argumentation at its best.

Sarcasm detection isn't one of your strong points, isn't it. But then again, neither is irony detection either. BTW, women in glass houses shouldn't throw shovels..

Wow. Just wow.

Last edited by HereComesTheRain on 23 Jul 2012, 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Men's movements are not created to support women's rights



QuickStats: Age-Adjusted Homicide Rates,* by Sex and Type of Locality† — United States, 2007–2009

Weekly

June 8, 2012 / 61(22);422




* Per 100,000 standard population. Deaths from homicide are those coded *U01–*U02, X85–Y09, and Y87.1 in the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision.

† Counties were classified into urbanization levels based on a classification scheme that considers metropolitan/nonmetropolitan status, population, and other factors.

Among males and females, the homicide rate during 2007–2009 was highest in large central metropolitan counties. For males, the age-adjusted homicide rate in large central metropolitan counties was 76% higher than the rate in medium metropolitan counties (14.4 versus 8.2 per 100,000 population) and more than double (122%–129% higher) the rates in other types of localities. For females, the homicide rates ranged from a high of 2.9 in large central metropolitan counties to 1.9 in large fringe metropolitan counties. In each type of locality, the homicide rate was much higher for males than females. Overall, the homicide rate was 9.1 per 100,000 population for males and 2.5 for females.

Sources: National Vital Statistics System. County-level mortality file. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/deaths.htm and http://wonder.cdc.gov/mortsql.html.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1635092
If men want to stop being the victims of crime, the single most effective thing that they can do is to stop being criminals. There would still be women committing crime, but there would be vastly less crime overall.

One negative impact of feminism is that women who are no longer suppressing their aggressive and/or dominant sides are somewhat more likely to commit violent crimes, but the rate of female violence and crime is still vastly below that committed by men.

Wow.... Just wow.... Words cannot describe the outright insensitivity as well as ignorance of the above statement.

I posted peer-reviewed data; do you have data of similar quality that contradicts my point?

Your peer reviewed studies are correct, however, the premise you got from those peer reviewed studies is offensive and inaccurate. It's akin to saying "If a woman doesn't want to get beaten, she should avoid dating men who are poorer than her".

Hey, what I said is true. Women who date men from lesser socioeconomic levels do raped and beaten more often than women who stay within their own socioeconomic class.

But then if I said the following, I'd be accused of blaming the women for being victims. And you'd be right. It's because nobody asks to be a victim.

Therefore, you're a tool. Lemme guess, your ex boyfriend broke your heart and you act this way.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ&feature=g-vrec[/youtube]

Which men's movements? There are different ones. Some were established primarily to support women's rights. Others were started for different reasons.

The data you quoted are accurate. They are same as what I discuss in my Social Problems courses. As indicated, when they are controlled on age, the differences diminish. However, as I wrote before, the rate of violent crime among females has gradually been increasing.

Quick question, which men's movement are you a part of?

Me? I am not, formally, a part of any of them. However, I have a list of some of the more common branches of the movement at the bottom of this page.

<sigh>
Getting the ad-hominem off the table first, no: I'm still friends with all but two of my exes, and neither of those were very involved relationships; I'm currently dating a very nice man (NOT a "Nice Guy," but a good man). For the record, feminists tend to have pretty damn good sex lives and fulfilling relationships.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 102856.htm
Furthermore, I have a brother and a father whom I love and respect.
The difference between your analogy and mine is that women, at least, blame the actual source of the problem rather than deflecting onto some sort of cold-war-esque traditional enemy, like some old general still whining about the Commies. Feminists look at violence against women, GLBT people, people of color, the poor, etc, and say, 'Hey, we should end the system (the kyriarchy, by modern terms) wherein one party has so much more social capital than the other that they can basically do what they want with impunity, teach our kids not to hit each other, and work against poverty and class stratification.'
MRAs, on the other hand, look at men being the victims of violence, primarily at the hands of other men, and say, 'Those God-Damned feminists! they ruin everything!'

Nominalist; you keep talking about controlling for age. This is nonsense. All it means is ignoring those parts of the data that don't support your position. Besides which, even when you do control for age, the data still shows that men are the overwhelming majority of violent crime victims.

HereComesTheRain; wow dude, way to come in and prove my point about MRAs. I mean, seriously man, you're coming across as aggressively anti-woman here, rather than simply anti-feminist.

LKL; for real? Did you seriously just say that? Anyhow, the point still stands. Whatever the reason for it (and I'd argue that it has a lot to do with the way boys are conditioned from a young age to believe that their lives have less worth, and that their pain means less, than that of girls) the majority of violent crime victims are still men, which doesn't exactly support the idea that men are privileged.



Anyone else see how entirely unreasonable both sides of this argument have become? How neither can bring up a legitimate complaint without it turning into a "who's got it worse" pissing contest? This is why I do not associate myself with either. This is why I advocate abandoning both feminism and masculism.

Last edited by mds_02 on 26 Jul 2012, 3:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

I don't think you are reading the data accurately. For example:

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/229133.pdf

Do a PDF search for: Total Violent Victimization by Gender: BJS and JLKH, NCVS 1973-2005

Notice how the gender gap has continued to narrow.

Uh yeah, just did that. And, in recent years where male and female victimisation rates are closest, men are still about 1 1/2 times as likely as women to be victimised. So I'm kinda having trouble seeing your point.

Or maybe I should apply your logic to another scenario. The wage gap has narrowed over the last 30 years or so. Using the same logic you're using, that means it is no longer evidence that women are disadvantaged in the workplace.

The only information I can provide is empirical evidence. I did so.



Fortunately, that is increasingly the case.