Understanding Feminism (Women: Your opinions)

Page 13 of 14 [ 201 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

06 Sep 2012, 3:20 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
HereComesTheRain wrote:
It's hard to be anti-woman when you've been dating one for 4 years. Where's your wife or girlfriend, sweetie pie?




:lmao:


That's the dumbest post ITT. There are plenty of guys who either lack respect for women, or are anti-women overall and STILL manage to get girlfriends..........And even wives. I love it how you're regurgitating the most asinine of feminist ad hominems. Empathy does not equate with being sexually attractive.


I have yet to meet a gay misogynist.
I'm sure they exist, but to equate sexual + romantic attraction to/relationships with women with a lack of misogyny is pretty damned lulzy.

And, actually, empathy for women's experiences and issues affecting women is quite a turn-on, in men, for many a progressive woman,
myself included. Most feminist women refuse to date non-feminist men, meaning for that set, yes, empathy is by definition MORE attractive.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


06 Sep 2012, 4:43 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
HereComesTheRain wrote:
It's hard to be anti-woman when you've been dating one for 4 years. Where's your wife or girlfriend, sweetie pie?




:lmao:


That's the dumbest post ITT. There are plenty of guys who either lack respect for women, or are anti-women overall and STILL manage to get girlfriends..........And even wives. I love it how you're regurgitating the most asinine of feminist ad hominems. Empathy does not equate with being sexually attractive.


I have yet to meet a gay misogynist.
I'm sure they exist, but to equate sexual + romantic attraction to/relationships with women with a lack of misogyny is pretty damned lulzy.

And, actually, empathy for women's experiences and issues affecting women is quite a turn-on, in men, for many a progressive woman,
myself included. Most feminist women refuse to date non-feminist men, meaning for that set, yes, empathy is by definition MORE attractive.




Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists. Some women think that they can change these guys, and get involved with them long term. Other women realize that these guys ain't gonna change and so they shag 'em and forget 'em.

The point is that it IS possible to be sexually attracted to a person whose attitudes towards your sex are repugnant, or even someone who doesn't have respect for you as a person.



ValentineWiggin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 May 2011
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,907
Location: Beneath my cat's paw

06 Sep 2012, 6:26 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
ValentineWiggin wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
HereComesTheRain wrote:
It's hard to be anti-woman when you've been dating one for 4 years. Where's your wife or girlfriend, sweetie pie?




:lmao:


That's the dumbest post ITT. There are plenty of guys who either lack respect for women, or are anti-women overall and STILL manage to get girlfriends..........And even wives. I love it how you're regurgitating the most asinine of feminist ad hominems. Empathy does not equate with being sexually attractive.


I have yet to meet a gay misogynist.
I'm sure they exist, but to equate sexual + romantic attraction to/relationships with women with a lack of misogyny is pretty damned lulzy.

And, actually, empathy for women's experiences and issues affecting women is quite a turn-on, in men, for many a progressive woman,
myself included. Most feminist women refuse to date non-feminist men, meaning for that set, yes, empathy is by definition MORE attractive.




Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists. Some women think that they can change these guys, and get involved with them long term. Other women realize that these guys ain't gonna change and so they shag 'em and forget 'em.

The point is that it IS possible to be sexually attracted to a person whose attitudes towards your sex are repugnant, or even someone who doesn't have respect for you as a person.


Feminist by definition means egalitarian. I've yet to hear of a feminist man or woman who wanted a submissive partner. Usually, they have a personal-is-political philosophy.

I agree- sexual attraction for most people seems to be primary (looks-based), so it would make sense that not agreeing on sexual equality wouldn't matter.


_________________
"Such is the Frailty
of the human Heart, that very few Men, who have no Property, have any Judgment of their own.
They talk and vote as they are directed by Some Man of Property, who has attached their Minds
to his Interest."


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

06 Sep 2012, 6:59 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
ValentineWiggin wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
HereComesTheRain wrote:
It's hard to be anti-woman when you've been dating one for 4 years. Where's your wife or girlfriend, sweetie pie?


:lmao:

That's the dumbest post ITT. There are plenty of guys who either lack respect for women, or are anti-women overall and STILL manage to get girlfriends..........And even wives. I love it how you're regurgitating the most asinine of feminist ad hominems. Empathy does not equate with being sexually attractive.


I have yet to meet a gay misogynist.
I'm sure they exist, but to equate sexual + romantic attraction to/relationships with women with a lack of misogyny is pretty damned lulzy.

And, actually, empathy for women's experiences and issues affecting women is quite a turn-on, in men, for many a progressive woman,
myself included. Most feminist women refuse to date non-feminist men, meaning for that set, yes, empathy is by definition MORE attractive.


Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists. Some women think that they can change these guys, and get involved with them long term. Other women realize that these guys ain't gonna change and so they shag 'em and forget 'em.

The point is that it IS possible to be sexually attracted to a person whose attitudes towards your sex are repugnant, or even someone who doesn't have respect for you as a person.

And you know this because of your deep understanding of feminist women? :roll:
My bf is a marine. I'm dating him in part because he *isn't* intimidated by me, and unlike a lot of more macho, chest-beating trolls out there, does not need me to be weak in order for him to feel strong.

Wrt. misogyny and relationships with women:
The knight who makes sure that his mount is fed and bedded down, before he himself eats and rests at the end of every night, does not hate horses - but if said mount suddenly spoke up and said, 'next time you want to go for a run, could you ask me rather than kicking me in the ribs with those golden spurs?' his reaction is not going to be, 'Of course! I'm sorry for having offended you, and I will consult you on the speed of our travels from now on.' He might not hate horses, but neither does he respect them as individuals with opinions worth respecting.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 31,087
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

07 Sep 2012, 12:09 am

Well I certainly would not want to be expected to follow female gender roles since its really just not how I am...but at the same time if another female would like to I certainly don't think she should be barred from it and forced to not follow a gender role. However if a female is convinced being in the woman 'role' means its ok for males to abuse her then I might question whether their belief in needing to follow a gender role is healthy for them.


_________________
Lucy in the sky with Diamonds.


exemplar
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 19

07 Sep 2012, 7:49 pm

ValentineWiggin wrote:
Most feminist women refuse to date non-feminist men, meaning for that set, yes, empathy is by definition MORE attractive.


what about those feminists who believe that men cannot by definition be feminist (although can by sympathetic to feminist ideals)?

this discussion reminds me of that joke where a bloke says hes a feminist.... well hes gotta be these days to get his end away.... :lol:



exemplar
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 19

07 Sep 2012, 7:56 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists.


I've come across that. I've also come across men who identify themselves on the left of the spectrum and can be adept at utilising the language of feminism in a very convincing manner, but when it comes to their actual conduct vis a vis their engagements with women they can often treat them in a way that is only congruent with a mysogynist outlook. I have also come across peeps that are less adept in the language games of leftie discourse that whilst on the surface use language taht is associated with outmoded ways of being are far more 'feminist' in so far as their actions are such that demonstrates a respectful way of interacting with women.



07 Sep 2012, 8:27 pm

exemplar wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists.


I've come across that. I've also come across men who identify themselves on the left of the spectrum and can be adept at utilising the language of feminism in a very convincing manner, but when it comes to their actual conduct vis a vis their engagements with women they can often treat them in a way that is only congruent with a mysogynist outlook. I have also come across peeps that are less adept in the language games of leftie discourse that whilst on the surface use language taht is associated with outmoded ways of being are far more 'feminist' in so far as their actions are such that demonstrates a respectful way of interacting with women.



Actions speak louder than words. :wink:





The funny thing is, when it comes to sex appeal and menz behavior towards women, men who can use language in a manner that shows social sophistication while having a chauvinistic outlook seem to be far more appealing to women than guys who are politically incorrect and socially clumsy, but in general take people at face value. Much of what men say and do to attract women involves attempting to manipulate women's emotions.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

08 Sep 2012, 1:15 am

exemplar wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists.


I've come across that. I've also come across men who identify themselves on the left of the spectrum and can be adept at utilising the language of feminism in a very convincing manner, but when it comes to their actual conduct vis a vis their engagements with women they can often treat them in a way that is only congruent with a mysogynist outlook. I have also come across peeps that are less adept in the language games of leftie discourse that whilst on the surface use language taht is associated with outmoded ways of being are far more 'feminist' in so far as their actions are such that demonstrates a respectful way of interacting with women.

Chivalry isn't 'respectful' any more than an equestrian making sure that his horse is walked cool is respectful.

I imagine that men who speak feminism but act misogynist are about as common as women who speak patriarchal but belittle men behind their backs (ie, 'men can't control themselves...' 'men can't cook...' 'men can't run a dishwasher...' 'men aren't good parents..' 'men are stupid emotionally...' 'men can't be counted on...' etc.). One thing about feminists, that I would expect more men to appreciate, is that they treat men like complete, adult human beings who are responsible for their own behavior.



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

08 Sep 2012, 6:58 am

exemplar wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists.


I've come across that. I've also come across men who identify themselves on the left of the spectrum and can be adept at utilising the language of feminism in a very convincing manner, but when it comes to their actual conduct vis a vis their engagements with women they can often treat them in a way that is only congruent with a mysogynist outlook. I have also come across peeps that are less adept in the language games of leftie discourse that whilst on the surface use language taht is associated with outmoded ways of being are far more 'feminist' in so far as their actions are such that demonstrates a respectful way of interacting with women.


I agree.

I'm also one of those feminists that don't think men can be feminists, only sympathetic. Also, actions speak louder than words for me.

But a lot of guys who say misogynist things are also misogynist and some men who say feminist things are sympathetic to feminism. Sometimes if it looks like an otter it is an otter.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


Last edited by puddingmouse on 08 Sep 2012, 7:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

08 Sep 2012, 7:05 am

LKL wrote:
Chivalry isn't 'respectful' any more than an equestrian making sure that his horse is walked cool is respectful.

I imagine that men who speak feminism but act misogynist are about as common as women who speak patriarchal but belittle men behind their backs (ie, 'men can't control themselves...' 'men can't cook...' 'men can't run a dishwasher...' 'men aren't good parents..' 'men are stupid emotionally...' 'men can't be counted on...' etc.). One thing about feminists, that I would expect more men to appreciate, is that they treat men like complete, adult human beings who are responsible for their own behavior.


I don't think he was referring to chivalry, but I may be wrong.

In my subjective experience, men who pretend to be aligned with feminism aren't really that rare. Feminism is co-opted as a side interest by a fair few leftist groups, and thus forms part of the party-line. A lot of people are doing far-left politics as a way of having an identity and go along with ideas they don't really practice. The important thing to them is Marxism or anarchism and the feminism is just an extra they have to be seen to agree with. I'm the other way round - feminism first.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


08 Sep 2012, 8:58 am

LKL wrote:
exemplar wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
Most feminist women prefer men who are submissive; though many will accept men who are egalitarian. The thing is VW, there are a lot of women out there(some feminists, some not) who are sexually attracted to dominant men. And some of those guys can be total misogynists.


I've come across that. I've also come across men who identify themselves on the left of the spectrum and can be adept at utilising the language of feminism in a very convincing manner, but when it comes to their actual conduct vis a vis their engagements with women they can often treat them in a way that is only congruent with a mysogynist outlook. I have also come across peeps that are less adept in the language games of leftie discourse that whilst on the surface use language taht is associated with outmoded ways of being are far more 'feminist' in so far as their actions are such that demonstrates a respectful way of interacting with women.

Chivalry isn't 'respectful' any more than an equestrian making sure that his horse is walked cool is respectful.

I imagine that men who speak feminism but act misogynist are about as common as women who speak patriarchal but belittle men behind their backs (ie, 'men can't control themselves...' 'men can't cook...' 'men can't run a dishwasher...' 'men aren't good parents..' 'men are stupid emotionally...' 'men can't be counted on...' etc.). One thing about feminists, that I would expect more men to appreciate, is that they treat men like complete, adult human beings who are responsible for their own behavior.




Well LKL, that's the standard I hold women to. Women are not children, they are also adult human beings who are responsible for their words and deeds. That's a big reason why I have little patience for this talk about patriarchy and whining about how they're oppressed by men. It's ludicrous to believe that women, especially in the west, have no power.



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

08 Sep 2012, 9:21 am

AspieRogue wrote:

Well LKL, that's the standard I hold women to. Women are not children, they are also adult human beings who are responsible for their words and deeds. That's a big reason why I have little patience for this talk about patriarchy and whining about how they're oppressed by men. It's ludicrous to believe that women, especially in the west, have no power.


No feminist claims that women have no power.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


08 Sep 2012, 9:33 am

puddingmouse wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:

Well LKL, that's the standard I hold women to. Women are not children, they are also adult human beings who are responsible for their words and deeds. That's a big reason why I have little patience for this talk about patriarchy and whining about how they're oppressed by men. It's ludicrous to believe that women, especially in the west, have no power.


No feminist claims that women have no power.



OK, they don't explicitly say that women are powerless but the language they use often implies it. Many schools of feminist thought, especially 2nd wave feminism, seem to cultivate a victim mentality. I have observed many women(feminist or not) who act weak, especially around men, in order to make said men feel guilty. When you induce guilt in someone else you make them feel like they owe you something.



exemplar
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 19

08 Sep 2012, 3:41 pm

But i dont think most advocates of second wave feminism would advocate the perpetuation of a victimhood persona, mainly down to the basic fact that it is profoundly disempowering which essntially accepts as given a basic power structure but advocates that those who are in power do not abuse their power. But it does nothing to challenge disparities of power. In that sense i agree with Nietzches concept of resentiment and think that any radical politics should be about advancing the interests of a hitherto oppressed group by taking power rather than asking for the sympathetic treatment of those in power..