File: 1430958864536.jpg (42.63 KB, 960x960, 1907598_349449561909711_523562…)
Alright, this is something that really pisses me off.
I agree that radical feminists are bad, but MRAs are not any better.>thinks all women are whores and evil>thinks sexism toward women doesn't exist>makes fun of women who gets raped and abused because "men have it worst" >thinks men have it worse, kinda like how a white person would have said "omg black slavery is nothing white people have it so much worse">thinks it's fine to have sexist prejudices against women, insults them and makes fun of their problems because "women do it all the time">thinks they are better than radical feminists when they are worst
File: 1430958911758.png (18.07 KB, 598x123, Screenshot_1.png)
this is my first thread so sorry if it's shitty
Personally, I think MRAs are as bad as feminists. They both say the same shit, just to the opposite genders.
Feminists>"Men are pigs"
MRAs>"Women are pigs"
i think anon meant radical feminists.
tbh all the feminists i know are super nice and open-minded and they just want equality.
File: 1430964815600.jpg (65.65 KB, 640x598, image.jpg)
Just leaving this here.
Remember when feminists started a hashtag campaign called #notallmen to shame all those men who said "Hey wait, not all men are like that!"
If people really want equality, why not choosing Egalitarianism? Why choosing just one side?
I never understood why people are feminists and not egalitarians.
I wish people would understand that yes, men and women ARE different. It's not the end of the world. Let's just celebrate our differences and move on.
File: 1430970528112.png (12.13 KB, 533x189, todays feminism in action.png)
Alright, this is something that really pisses me off
I agree, MRA is a ridiculous movement that holds a very retrograde morality and ideal, but Feminists also:>thinks all men are pigs and evil>thinks sexism toward men doesn't exist>makes fun of men who gets raped and abused because "women have it worst" "is not rape if there's no penetration" "Be should grateful that someone wanted to fuck you that much">thinks women have it worse 99% of the time and manipulates statistics or make use of outdated ones to validate their claims. >thinks it's fine to have sexist prejudices against men, thinks misandry is not a problem in modern society and makes fun of their problems because "lol men are supposed to suck it up">think is okay to shame and harass on women who preach a different aspect of feminism or don't follow their exact same beliefs, calling them traitors>thinks they are better than MRAs but in fact they are THE EXACT SAME>they love to dismiss and ignore all their past and present mistakes as "That is not feminism", "They were not real feminists" >Bonus1: http://rt.com/news/205647-femen-vatican-topless-cross/>Bonus2: http://womenspost.ca/owner-of-shelter-for-abused-men-and-children-commits-suicide-after-financial-ruin-ridicule/>Bonus3:http://www.returnofkings.com/29317/how-feminists-shame-beautiful-women>Bonus4:http://twitchy.com/2014/11/14/slutshirt-shamed-feminist-bullies-just-made-a-comet-scientist-cry-over-his-sexist-shirt/
I think it's because Egalitarianism is too general because it includes religions, races, etc.
Feminism is exclusive to gender so maybe thats why idk
That's RADICAL feminism, not feminism.
i hate people who also do that.
both extrememists (my english sucks im sorry) are annoying.
the reason why i think feminism is different from mra and radical is because i know a lot of feminists that are nice and feminism actually helped people, unlike MRAs which was made just to bash women idk their official page makes fun of women.
MRAs are a lot fucking worse. >>5195
I doubt it. Most people in the chan culture have a rampant hatred towards all feminism, even the mild types. Nerds in general do, they're the exact type of people that "mens rights" tends to appeals to.
Because the problem in gender equality has, throughout history, been an issue of female inequality. The whole reason feminism developed in the first place was because women has a great deal of limitations placed on them by men. (Couldn't divorce, couldn't vote, ect.)
Saying it should just be called "egalitarian" suggests that the problem about gender inequality has never been an issue that primarily faces women. It's the same kind of "whaa men are so oppressed" attitude that MRA's pull.
File: 1430973895061.jpg (116.9 KB, 680x907, image.jpg)
Feminism shouldn't be bad word. Idk, I think feminism and radical feminism are very different. Just like the radical versions of everything are different from the original movement. >>5204
This is radicalism. Not feminism, at least not what it actually stands for (have you ever read feminist literature not from the 21st century?) Many people use feminism as a facade to cover up their own insecurities and project them onto others. It's embarassing, because globally, feminism is an important movement. There are so many countries where women are raped, devalued, disenfranchised and even murdrered just because they are women. There are many women around the world that do not have access to education or birth control. These are the women who actually need feminism. It is important to educate women because it has been shown that families with educated mothers are more successful and have less children (since overpopulation is a problem.)
I believe both (all? I don't even know anymore) genders have their own specific trials and tribulations they must face. However, as another anon pointed out earlier in the thread, women have historically been disadvantaged and devalued. I mean, even in America, women have not even had the right to vote for an entire century yet.
Idk. Radicals using agendas to project their own insecurities and ignorance is bad. People who treat other people like shit soley on the basis of their gender are bad. But I can't get behind renaming an entire movement just because some people don't like the word anymore. Seems kind of pussy to me tbh. I also can't get behind MRA, because I feel like (despite the hardships they may endure in life, and the skills they have used to overcome them) white, Western males are honestly the kinds of people who don't need to fight for their rights, because they have already been given them centuries ago.
Inb4 "ugly feminist" "girls deserve rape" "go back to tumblr" "women are all selfish devil whores who control men with their nasty witch pussies"
File: 1430974287219.png (21.46 KB, 518x430, whores.png)
File: 1430975032314.png (47.2 KB, 576x460, Untitled.png)
File: 1430975135843.png (95.31 KB, 1833x357, westernwomen.png)
File: 1430975195712.png (47.63 KB, 1784x216, Westrape.png)
File: 1430975239613.png (91.16 KB, 1789x501, Rapefactsfromautist.png)
File: 1430975340300.png (44.53 KB, 1776x298, Biblicalrape.png)
>That's RADICAL feminism, not feminism.
>This is radicalism. Not feminism,
Literally the No True Scotsman fallacy at work.
File: 1430976771614.gif (3.48 MB, 480x292, 1428725675543.gif)
Yes, not all feminists are man-hating dykes, but sadly, that side is the loudest one and thanks to that radicalism and hate the movement has such a bad reputation.
And no one does absolutely nothing to stop them ruining the meaning of the movement!
They all just rather wash their hands saying "No, wait, we have no affiliation to radicals"
"meh those are not real feminists, nothing to fix here"
Then why do they still use the Feminist label? They are clearly soiling it and giving all of you a bad name, isn't it?
You can ignore that huge pile of shit all you want, but that won't stop the smell from spreading and other people from noticing there's a huge pile of shit in the middle of your carpet.
Damn, how I hate these discussions. It always ends focusing on just one side of both extremes pointing at each other "But they are worse!" "No, look at them they are clearly worse!!".
Not surprising that most MRAs are virgin nekbeards complaining about the violation of innocence in women (and lol, never mentioning the fact that it takes two to engage in intercourse.)
There will always be men who believe they are better than women. And women who believe they are better then men.
However, the truth is that we are all pieces of shit. We can only make progress when we all realize what a massively terrible existence humanity is. People are blinded by their own egos. Everyone is shit.
File: 1430979781486.jpg (73.41 KB, 480x506, Screenshot_2015-05-06-23-13-38…)
I hate when (radical) feminists have to shit all over my childhood, nitpicking at every little thing.
>"The Powerpuff Girls wear dresses! Sexist!"
>"Dexter from Dexter's Lab is a SMART boy and his sister is a DUMB girl! Sexist!"
Also, it seems like the "radical" in radical feminism is the new "trigger warning" around here.
I never said I have the answers to all your problems, honey.
I'm not even a feminist, so is not really my duty to keep you clean, and to being completely honest, I've always thought in general terms that the movement focus a little too much on North America's problems and forget about other countries who really need some help too. You know, countries where women don't even have the right to speak up, where equality or even education is considered a foreign term.
But, hey "It's their own damn problem to take care of it", right?
Anyhoo. What should I know right? Nothing of worth.
Sooo right back at you; What would YOU suggest to stop radical ideologies from soiling your precious equality movement, Anon?
I mean, you all don't lose any time covering your asses when shit hits the fan, again, and again, and again, so if it's really that important to all of you to keep a clean reputation I mean, someone must have planned a way to stop that level of slander and rectifying the monumental mess they have caused, right?
Sorry that I can't figured it all out by myself, Anon, but using condescension is difficult when your language is not the one you're using at the moment.
Here's my way of looking at it. Back in the day, Atheism used to be represented by some smart people. You would see them on T.V., or at pubic debates. The people you would see representing Atheist were scientists and intellectuals. People like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, who knew their shit. Now, because of the internet, it's being represented by whatever retard has a webcam. People like The Amazing Atheist represent Atheism, and it's given Atheists a bad reputation. So, then, why still call yourself an Atheist? Well, because you don't believe in god. The same thing goes with feminism. It is responsible for women having much of the rights we have today, and now some oversensitive idiots refuse to self identify as feminists because of some fucking idiot on Tumblr. Do you believe in gender equality? Then you're a (dun dun dun)feminist. >>5236
Why does the opinions of these types of people matter so much? Why do these anti-feminists care so much about what people who they think are stupid say about men? Why should feminism be dedicated to calling our dumb kids on the internet instead of the issues associated with it?>>And no one does absolutely nothing to stop them ruining the meaning of the movement!
Lots of people are "doing something about it". The problem is, these people are usually the types who no one wants to be associated with. (Like MRA or redpillers). They aren't just against radical feminism, but feminism as a whole. They use the radicals as propaganda and ignore feminists with good arguments. These people are going to exist no matter what. Without radical feminism, they would still be misogynist. Yelling at the people they use as a strawman for all feminists isn't going to change their minds.
>>5240>>men and women are equal in the United States, when it comes to laws.
Not true>>The whole "pay-gap" is a myth
You're misunderstanding what the point on focusing on the wage gap is. Women earn less than men by a lot.
It's the result of society and it's expectations on women. Women are expected to do the bulk of the child-rearing, which cuts into careers and education. Women who do keep jobs and have children usually just end up with a double burden rather than shared work with their husband. The wage gap is a lot more complicated than just "but she gets paid the same". It's evidence that women are still disadvantaged by society.
Why go to another country and force your culture on them? Look at the shitstorm that caused when feminists criticized Islam. >>monumental mess they have caused
What mess? GamerGate? Tumblr? Go outside.
There's quite a few, men and women aren't considered the same under the law. Laws can be made which are specific to one gender and not the other, like requiring women to go through useless procedures in order to have abortions, or how women are required to keep their chests covered in public.
I know you want me to make a list of laws that apply to one sex and not the other, but I think that anyone who's been living in this country their whole lives would see them quite often. If you want a more silly example, men can't change a diaper in a daycare.
Almost responded, but you are just way too buttmad right now and didn't even realize that I talked about women outside of north America needing feminism in the first post you responded to.
Any argument about race, gender, history, politics, basically everything is completely worthless at this point. It just turns to shit, no matter what. I'm fucking out.
There is this loud blogger MRA lawyer dude who writes shitty stuff about women being emotional harpies and only out for money and dick (oh and how if a girl has short hair, she's automatically a lesbian) and talks about how successful he is duping women but someone leaked private texts of him basically begging this Russian girl to sleep with him. Straight up beginning for it so lol. Whose the pathetic one here? They hate us but want us? I guess love/hate is so similar at times.
But I agree about that innocent thing. IDK why pole are obsessed with virgins anyway. The first time is awkward as fuck. I'd much rather be with an experienced partner.
MRAs are as bad as radfems, tho. They both hate the opposite and can't see the irony of it and how much of their opinions make a horseshoe.
I guess for some of the MRAs I can kinda see why some of them are douchebags because they've had one shitty relationship and decide all women are like that, just like I can see why a radfem could have run into some situations where a dude has been an asshole to her and she decides all men are like this. I think paring it down to genders/labels is the problem here instead of thinking of someone as an individual and going 'well, that person is an asshat' and making them accountable as a human. It's easier to generalise.
You guys and gals are lumping Pickup Artists , Men Going Their Own Way and Professional Women Haters into our little movements. But hey, it's just like how people are calling "SJWS" feminists.
The difference? PWHs and PuAs don't actually give enough of a fuck to pretend they don't care about MRAs.
They are far too busy spreading their MGTOW shit to actually talk about Men's Issues.
>Talking about Custody issues.
>Mgtowers show up to hijack the thread talking about if you were a proper red pill you wouldn't have this problem,it's your fault if you got involved with those whores.
>Feminazis see thread now.
>OH MY GOD THOSE EVIL MRAS THEY WANT YOU TO BE A WHORE
SJWs on the other hand like to pretend they care about feminism while systematically destroying it while spreading their "Social Justice, Non Binary, Boo hoo, I was born with a penis but I'm not gonna make any effort to look like a woman, but you must call me a woman or I'll sue you" bullshit."
>No true scotsman
People who shout fallacies are incapable of seeing that there are people who abuse existing systems.
They'll use a fallacy to instantly discredit another person's argument without actually dissecting the argument, it's lazy and it's exactly what SJWs do.
Real people sit around and discuss things, not play Phoenix Wright shouting OBJECTION at each other every other line.
There's bullshit in every group and if you can't filter out the bullshit then you can't get anything done.
This is why Al Quada and ISIS are separate groups. Both do the same nonsense, but both believe in different things and different ways.
I mean we don't listen to superstitious nutjobs anymore, why do we listen to the people who identify as a Duck Billed Rainbow TransOctoLesbian when it comes to Women's Issues?
Feminism already did it's job in America. We're a gynocentric country where in the legal system, a woman's word is more powerful than a man's word. A woman will get nicer treatment for the same crime ( excepting if they're both ugly as shit, then both are screwed. Our system is fucked by the way)
This is a country where a female pedophile is treated like a hero, while a male pedophile is expected to die on the spot.
Both are scum, but we're treating the female ones like they did nothing wrong.
The difference is staggering.
Feminist groups were disgusted by the female pedos while SJW/Feminazi groups were cheering them on and got them TV Spots.
The only men with power in this country are rich men. The poor man, the working man has no power. But SJWs don't see that. They have to see the skin color of the man first before they consider that a "Cis man" is worth their time.
This is a country where we put men who can't pay child support or are late with child support into jail.
Who the fuck does that help?
The ones paying child support but were late on it, now no longer are paying it, so the kid doesn't get a father and they don't get money.
>What if I actually wanted my kid and I fell behind?
>OH THAT'S TOO BAD YOU GO TO JAIL ENJOY THE VICIOUS CYCLE <3
>LOSE YOUR JOB. GO TO JAIL. GET OUT OF JAIL. NEVER GET ANOTHER JOB AGAIN. FALL BEHIND ON PAYMENTS AGAIN. GO BACK TO JAIL
>That's not fair, we have to do something about that.
>This is not fair! Why punish men who are trying to be good fathers?
>What the fuck, I'm doing the best I can. I need help why are you screwing me over?
>I hOpE YOU GET RAPED IN JAIL YOU MRA SHITLORD
>This isn't my problem, I mutilated myself and fucked up my body with hormones. I don't care about your cis problems.
>Sucks to be you. This is why we need to kill the whores rather than breed with them. I'll never have this problem because I am a Superior Being. If I had learned my whore was impregnated, I would have taken matters into my own hands and terminated it, and her.
Don't even get me started on the men who get raped in jail because they've gotten disgustingly huge prison sentences for minor as fuck crimes.
Feminazis hijacked the Rape Culture so they can stop being empowered women and start crying wolf at the big bad rape boogieman.
My grandmother , god bless her soul would rise from her grave and by herself start the apocalypse if she saw what these insane women are doing to the name of feminism today.
Normal Feminists still care about their brothers or uncles in prison for minor charges, fearing that their cute little brother might be made into Tyrone's Bitch for his entire 4 month stay for a drug offense.
Egalitarianism would be lovely but people are so goddamn self centered and eager to believe lies and bullshit that in the end , it's just a pipe dream for those who get tired of dealing with fuckers ruining what they believe in.
I could say the same thing about condoms and men's toiletries.
Have you ever tried to buy Dove For Men? Shit's expensive.
File: 1431029936904.jpg (10.84 KB, 184x184, 1424143023164.jpg)
>>An actual fucking MRA shows up ITT
Hahahahaha holy shit>>5263>>We're a gynocentric country where in the legal system, a woman's word is more powerful than a man's word.
Again, not true. If that were true, women would be earning more than men. The fact that women earn less, as said in >>5248
, is evidence that women are still disadvantaged in society. What does women being caregivers rather than working or being politicians mean? Well, it means that women are going to have less money, less power, run fewer businesses, ect. There are few women in congress, in the senate, and we've never had a female president. (And sexism is so rampant, I doubt men would vote for one.) Poll data shows that lots of stay-at-home mothers fantasize about finding paid work and that in many ways women have become just as ambitious professionally as men. But for women, those career ambitions are more likely to get lost on the way to becoming actual career choices.
Aside from all of this, sex trafficking is the most common form of trafficking. Who are the victims? Women. The porn and the sex industry is run by men, and the product they're selling is women. There are more slaves today than there ever have been in human history, many of whom are part of the sex trade.
Of course, instead of admitting that this is a women's rights issue, critics would rather just call feminists man haters for opposing women being sold and exploited. "There's nothing wrong with finding women attractive whaa feminists want to take my porn and hookers away". >>A woman will get nicer treatment for the same crime
It's true that women are less likely to be incarnated and arrested for crimes, and that inmates are mostly male. However, this isn't because women commit just as many crimes and get away with it because they are women. It's because women, on average, are less likely than men to commit violent or sexual offenses. Estrogen and testosterone comes into play here. Estrogen tends to make a person less aggressive, while testosterone make one more aggressive. Women don't commit many sex crimes because rape goes against female reproduction interests, in terms of biology. (Though it does happen, throughout human history and throughout the world, it doesn't happen often.)
When a case is being decided, the severity of the crime is taken into account. Penetrative rape is often more painful and traumatic to the person receiving it, which is something that women do not do often unless they use a foreign object. The reason sentencing varies depending on murder cases is because the brutality of the murder is taken into account. For example, a woman recently went on death row for killing her neighbor. This doesn't happen with every murder case, but happened with her because sadism was involved in the killing.
>>This is a country where we put men who can't pay child support or are late with child support into jail.
The arguments made by MRAs are almost always, without a doubt, issues which were caused by men, and yet they blame women for them. Women have an advantage over men in child custody cases? No shit, why do you think that is? Could it have something to do with the fact that women are expected to be the primary caregivers of children? Could it have something to do with how women are required by society to do the bulk of the child rearing? Or maybe it has something to do with how the female parent had to carry the kid in her belly for 9 months, which is hell on your body and health.
To be put into jail for child support, you have to be very behind, and the jail time is usually a small amount intended to scare you into paying it. Child support is based on what the man makes, so when the amount is being decided in court, it's assumed that the man should be able to pay it.
Note I am not the person you were replying to and am definitely not an MRA.>>5295
>The fact that women earn less, as said in >>5248, is evidence that women are still disadvantaged in society.
That's not necessarily evidence of disadvantage, and even if it is, it's not necessarily evidence that such disadvantage is due to discrimination by others.
>>A woman will get nicer treatment for the same crime>It's true that women are less likely to be incarnated and arrested for crimes, and that inmates are mostly male. However, this isn't because women commit just as many crimes and get away with it because they are women. It's because women, on average, are less likely than men to commit violent or sexual offenses.
Not going to argue about the accuracy of his claims or your claims, because I don't know what the answer is, but you're not responding to what he claimed. Receiving nicer treatment is different from being charged less frequently. If it is true that women are treated more nicely than men for the same crime simply because they are less likely to commit those crimes on average, then the system is still unfair despite the difference in crime rate.
>>5319>>That's not necessarily evidence of disadvantage
Fucking really? Please explain to me how women having significantly less power and influence doesn't serve as a disadvantage. It's a big advantage to men, that's for sure. This is why the whole "a voice for men" shit is so fucking stupid. Laws are made by men, the business world is run by men, I would say that you have more than a fare representation. >>5319>>If it is true that women are treated more nicely than men for the same crime simply because they are less likely to commit those crimes on average
That's not the reason that women typically get a lighter sentence. As I said before, it's not just the crime itself that determines jail time, it's how the crime was carried out, which is typically what gives a women lighter jail time. What they need to understand is that it's not "a different sentence for the same crime". It's not the same crime, each case in unique, and so the sentencing will differ depending on other factors.
MRAs usually use statistics on incarceration or find two cases where a man and women commit the same offense, but the woman gets off lighter. (Like a women getting five years for child molestation and a different man getting 7). What they don't take into account is that men and women commit different types of crimes, and commit them differently. Say, the man penetrated a six year old, while the woman only felt one up. This would give the man a harsher sentence.
File: 1431047036235.jpg (21.58 KB, 539x539, 1431040693667.jpg)
>>5295>The arguments made by MRAs are almost always, without a doubt, issues which were caused by men, and yet they blame women for them. Women have an advantage over men in child custody cases? No shit, why do you think that is? Could it have something to do with the fact that women are expected to be the primary caregivers of children?
This. Fucking this. Men have pushed the agenda of women being primary caretakers and nurturers of children, that's why it's the women who stay at home an take care of the kids for at least the length of the maternity leave. It hasn't been too long when a career-driven working woman was considered a bad mother because it's the man's job to bring the income. And MRAs think this is a system that was thought up by women even though they haven't ever been in the position of power.
My country has a mandatory 6-month long army service for every man in the country and our MRAs keep bitching about how they're oppressed because women aren't required to complete such service. Well this is something that was decided by a parliament filled by men decades ago, but yeah of course it's the women who make the laws. Direct your complaints to your own gender you fucks. >>5337
For the record, lesbian prison rape is also a thing. It's not only men who get raped in jail.
> It hasn't been too long when a career-driven working woman was considered a bad mother
My mother got a lot of shit when she went back to work after having me (and this was the 80s, of course) and most of the shit was hurled at her by other women. A lot of people asked me was it shitty growing up in daycare and stuff but no, it wasn't. It made me social and I got to play with other kids so it wasn't bad. My mother was always there when I needed her so big whoop.
I agree there are still some challenges for women now, mostly around work/life balance for having children but for the vast majourity of it, I think that we're on a level playing field in the west. 3rd wave Feminism just take it to an extreme that I don't like. A man looking at you isn't 'rape' kay. And you can't ban the word 'bossy'. That shit is dumb. Also, if someone calls you bossy, turn around and be the best. Ain't nothing wrong with being bossy. I know I am and I'm always taking up leadership roles which gets me ahead.
>>5365>and most of the shit was hurled at her by other women.
This is important. While I believe that feminism as we know it today is not necessary IN THE WEST, I still think that we should continue to encourage gender equality, because many women who call themselves feminists do very un-feminist things that it's become a meaningless term. Especially radfems.
Also, a lot of the sexism does come from other women as a way to nitpick someone they consider a rival and 'bring them down a peg'. I've seen so many women do this, it's ridiculous. I'm not even saying you can't criticise another woman if she's being a dumb cunt. You should, especially if she's the brand of dumb cunt that panders to men so they never see anything past her tits while doing really shitty things (here I don't mean the likes of Jessica Nigri, they're just eye candy, I mean women that are hurting you or your friends/family directly). But the amount of dumb, pointless cattiness and nitpicking both online and off is ridiculous.
I've got called out multiple times in secondary school by random girls for having no eyebrows. I do have eyebrows, they're just light and sparse. Girls are the FIRST to comment on other women's appearances in public, and sadly that sometimes doesn't stop in adulthood either.
My mum had trouble conceiving and everyone blamed her for being barren when it was my da's problem in the first place. Men never even bothered to ask, it was always other women in the parish gobbing off at her. Then when she had me she was gossiped about for being too old for having a child.
Not that you don't have men who do this, in Switzerland women weren't allowed to vote until the 90s because they have that direct voting system and the men kept voting against it. But nowadays it's usually women who reinforce gender roles for themselves.
File: 1431177985033.png (32.12 KB, 660x492, vgyuhj.png)
>white, Western males are honestly the kinds of people who don't need to fight for their rights, because they have already been given them centuries ago.
File: 1431179710454.jpg (1.54 MB, 800x3000, 1405318132440.jpg)
>>5295>And sexism is so rampant, I doubt men would vote for one
Nice strawman. Got any source for that?
>the porn and the sex industry is run by men, and the product they're selling is women.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2507752/Over-half-women-regularly-watch-porn-daring-40-admit-making-own.html
More than half of all women regularly watch pornography. Sex trafficking and being forced into sex work is an awful practice, but a lot of women choose to go into the porn/sex industry themselves. Besides that, there are plenty of women who run porn companies, and that includes the production of gay porn. There is nothing inherently wrong with pornography, as long as everything is consensual Unless you're a conservative Christian/neo-puritan SJW
>and get away with it because they are women.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7995844/Judges-told-be-more-lenient-to-women-criminals.html
Then why were British judges ordered to give lower prison sentences to women?https://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/starr_gender_disparities.aspx
Why do American men receive prison sentences that are 63% longer than women for committing the exact same crime?
>testosterone makes you violent>this is what feminists actually believehttp://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/cognoculture/testosterone_and_human_aggression_or_180520http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-but-true-testosterone-alone-doesnt-cause-violence/http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091208132241.htm
>Women don't commit many sex crimes because rape goes against female reproduction interests, in terms of biology.
You do realise that according to that widely cited study about how 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 women become the victim of rape during their lifetime, also showed that the number of men and women raped in 2012 in the US was almost equal? It resulted in about 40% of rape perpetrators being female.(pic related)
MRAs are women-haters that think all women are whores.
MRAs are weak guys that like to fucking complain and thats it.
Were there any funds? No.
MRAs only donate to Voice For Men, which the creator of that website laugh at all the faggots that give him money for nothing.>The only men with power in this country are rich men. The poor man, the working man has no power.
And women too, except women must be "flawless", and if they have a SINGLE default, they're automatically a whore or evil.>Don't even get me started on the men who get raped in jail because they've gotten disgustingly huge prison sentences for minor as fuck crimes.
Why the fuck does people expect others to have sympathy for them?
America's prison is soft as shit compared to other fucking countries.In some countries, the prisoners eat food with insects in it, etc.
Don't want to get raped in prison? Then dont fucking get into jail. Boohoo that's it.
Jail isnt supposed to be fun.
No shit people are getting raped and beaten up there. lmao
If you're drunk, you cannot consent.
It doesnt matter if she said yes, you are taking advantage of an innocent women who is intoxicated (aka cannot consent).
Also, there is something called coercion.
i don't see what your point is. as other anons have said, these rules created decades, or even centuries ago weren't created by women to oppress men. circumcision is a facet of judaism, designed by men, as a measure of faith. it's also considered a matter of health, and it never went out of style. female genital mutiliation was never popular in the west. there's not so much protection as it is just not being popular, and because there's no relevant religious affilation, it seems barbaric and cruel (also, when it's done, is not hygienic, and can cause death as a result of operating in the middle of a field, on a rock, draped in animal skins. the process is usually done when girls are older, without analgesics or anesthetics, nowhere near a hospital.) female genital mutilation that happens in the west and any opposition is receives happens because it's an obvious a clash of cultures (and again, the process itself is very barbaric when compared to how boys in the west are circumcised, and has NO medical benefits). it's only somewhat relevant in the west and bashed because it's not been slowly introduced and accepted. most first world countries don't even routinely circumcise boys.
bottom line though: female mutilation is just not considered a hygiene issue. the majority of people in the US (men included) believe cut dicks are more hygienic. i really don't understand how this is a comparable issue. male circumcision is a religious force of habit. it's not an oppressive act. it's just not 'in style' to not cut off foreskin because judaism is a relevant religion in the US, and some people do develop hygiene issues, and some parents want to prevent future problems. i've known three guys that had their foreskin snipped off after getting an infection.
Circumcision has fuck all to do with male oppression. I'm against circumcision, but using it as an example of "male oppression" is fucking stupid as shit. It originated in ancient times within patriarchal societies as a hygiene practice. FGM is done with the intent of blunting a woman's sex drive and is often based on misogynistic misconceptions. >>5428>>There's nothing wrong with porn
88.2% of top rated porn scenes contain aggressive acts.
Studies show that after viewing pornography men are more likely to:
>>report decreased empathy for rape victims>>have increasingly aggressive behavioral tendencies>>report believing that a woman who dresses provocatively deserves to be raped>>report anger at women who flirt but then refuse to have sex>>report decreased sexual interest in their girlfriends or wives>>report increased interest in coercing partners into unwanted sex actshttp://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOPSYJ/TOPSYJ-5-1.pdf
>>More than half of all women regularly watch pornography.>>citing Daily Mail as a source
Lmao here is a real sourcehttp://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Gender_Differences_in_Pornography_Consumption_among_Young_Heterosexual_Danish_Adults.pdf
>>Compared to women, men were exposed to pornography at a younger age, consumed more pornography as measured by time and frequency, and used pornography more often during sexual activity on their own.>>Men and women were found to vary in their preferences in pornographic materials, with men both preferring a wider range of hardcore pornography and less softcore pornography than women.
>>but a lot of women choose to go into the porn/sex industry themselves.
You think anyone grows up thinking to themselves that they want to be prostitutes? They go into the sex industry due to bad circumstances, and they defiantly don't seem to enjoy it.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9698636
>>As adults in prostitution, 82% had been physically assaulted; 83% had been threatened with a weapon; 68% had been raped while working as prostitutes; and 84% reported current or past homelessness.
In Nevada brothels, it's against the rules for a prostitute to refuse sex with a customer. Where's the uproar? Prostitution has a fucking 68% rate of PTSD. If there were a normal profession out there with this rate, humanitarians would be outraged. And yet, men are convinced that the women in their hardcore porn enjoy their work.
>>5428>>>and get away with it because they are women.>>The telegraph
Stop fucking sourcing news articles you fucking retard. Aside from that, as said in the article, "Female criminals are more likely to have mental health or educational difficulties and to have parenting responsibilities, while a lower proportion will have committed violent crimes than men"
For the sake of a fair sentence, Judges are told to "keep these factors in mind". They aren't told to be more lenient on female criminals. Again, the circumstances of a case are very important to its outcome. A persons parental status, age, mental state, likelihood to commit future crimes, ect are all taken into account when deciding a case. If it's true that female criminals are more likely to have mental issues or to be the primary caregivers at home, then it would makes sense for a judge to keep these factors in mind.
>>Testostorone make you violent
Did I fucking say that? I don't think I did. I said it makes you more aggressive, which it does.
aggressive= ready or likely to attack or confront
Being more aggressive does not mean that you are inherently violent, it means that you are more confrontational, and more likely to "act".
Well, there is a lot that's wrong with that picture. For one, you're only selecting data from the 12 month area rather than lifetime to prove you point, which shows that 5,451,000 men have been forced to penetrate in their lifetime, while 14,617,000 women have been forcibly penetrated in their lifetime. You pulled an explanation out of your ass and the study you sourced to prove that men don't report rape is a study on adults reporting childhood molestation and has nothing to do with adult males reporting rape by female perpetrators.
You're only taking from the part "made to penetrate" and only comparing it with "completed forced penetration". Even under the "Other sexual violence" (where you are focusing on the data for men) the total number is at 53,174,000 for women and 25,130,000 for men.
Uh, no. All, and I mean ALL, academic studies I've read on prison culture, be it specific case studies or generalized polling on prison rape show the assault is a strategy to solidify power within a powerless subculture. I'll skip a walkthrough on how prison culture is what it is and why, but many prison rapes do not happen because of sexual frustration. Sexual frustration leads to consensual sex between inmates. Rape in prison doesn't happen because men have a need to dominate women. Quite the opposite. In prison culture, a rapist or batter of women will get a price on your head.
The only thing you're correct about is the fact that rapists rarely get prosecuted compared to false accusations. And the MRA agenda DOES discourage reports of rape and abuse. If I ever get bored enough I can try and find free academic articles linked to show this.
The MRA movement has zero validity for policy, study or concern in Western or Eastern culture. It simply does not have the research backing it's ideals or claims. It's cute how they use numbers so much because it's a case of undergraduates making sure to make uneducated assessments about data they don't understand.
>>5477>always fucking plows through MRA arguments with a 101 lesson how to use statistics accurately.
seriously though, can't wait to see the new returnofkings or dailymail source followed by a random out-of-context statistic or something like "80% of rape accusations are false!!"
i'd love to respect MRA's more but most of them tend to focus on hating women, trying to deprive them of their rights, or shit like >>5196
. you want to fight for fairer divorce law? i'm all for it, but it's hard to see it over a thousand posts of "this infographic from /r9k/ explains why all women want to be raped, it's just logic (which I have because I am the ubermensch, a man)"
to be honest, i consider myself an egalitarian but i hate feminists and MRAs because 95% of them are sexist, hypocrites and embarassing
even anti-feminists dont associate themselves with MRAs
File: 1440528216157.png (39.73 KB, 346x240, 1422469_621200864647188_334307…)
I'm an woman and I hate feminism.
Feminism isn't equality.
Feminists victimize women, whine about slut-shaming and fat-shaming, tries to fight for the "right" of women being able to be topless (who the fuck cares? its embarassing) and dont understand that western women dont need feminism. I don't seek affirmation. feminists make me ashamed of my own fucking gender.
men and women have the same privileges and feminists always shit on housewives and feminity and masculinity because "MUH GENDER ROLES"
also, i love women and men (I'm bi anyway)
it's just, if most of the people in your movement are sexist, why even bother?
i don't like women-haters neither
No thanks. Most of feminists are only interested in women being topless and go to buzzfeed and shit. You can keep your slut walks.
I know some feminists are good but most of them are bad.
File: 1440536306874.png (43.08 KB, 1429x325, ss (2015-08-25 at 04.25.03).pn…)
>Most rape cases from girls are either false claims or girls seeking revenge on a guy and ruin his life, some are just as innocent as Girl didn't like the sex and will get a guy in trouble.
>it's idiotic to treat all Frats and men in general under the same watch eye of feminists and frankly feminazis and lesbians that wish to destroy male culture.
>Rape has become such a sensitive thing now
>it's a battle of the sexes and the feminists are willing to destroy the men anyway they can
This guy is responding to a post about banners being hung in front of frat houses reading
>Rowdy and fun. Hope your baby girl is ready for a good time….
>Freshman daughter drop off
>Go ahead and drop off Mom too…
File: 1440538463716.png (184.58 KB, 958x535, 1406162855604.png)
We need a new MRA thread to track MRA lolcows without the debate.
File: 1440538555745.jpg (84.17 KB, 957x742, 1406162586334.jpg)
File: 1440538598170.jpg (63.21 KB, 957x476, 1406162437191.jpg)
File: 1440539322253.jpg (95.12 KB, 687x544, 1431180887440.jpg)
wheh wheh wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh
It's telling that they worship Eliott Rodger, a paranoid schizophrenic who took everything as a personal slight, cried at the drop of a feather, demanded the world cater to him because his parents were successful, and even failed to kill the girls he hated. In short, they are the perfect match for Tumblr feminists, unable to comprehend logic, facts, statistics, or evidence, only citing their hurt feelings.
Lol. The real kicker here is that those comics are drawn by EurasianTiger (lolcow within himself) who does nothing but whine on /r/ hapas about WMAF couples and thinks eurasian men are genetically inferior beyond redemption. He blames his eurasian race for all his perceived inferiority. I'm pretty sure he has some kind of cuck fetish.
But ya, I've seen those threads too. They freak the fuck out over those comics, it's amazing. They're not even real and every other post was about how reading someones cuck fetish made them hate women.
File: 1440539830792.png (51.73 KB, 1651x403, If_only_women_had_no_choice_in…)
They aren't actually eurasian. It's a psyop "troll" tactic done by Asian men on a particular subreddit.
>>31465>It's a psyop "troll" tactic done by Asian men on a particular subreddit.
It's a fucking meme from /r9k/ that got attention after Elliot Rodgers happened and newfags from reddit are now taking it seriously. >My white stepmom says that eurasian boys can't wear boxer briefs help
I would read through it and chuckle, because its obviously a joke.
Complete horseshit, is the summary of this thread in a nutshell.
Have any of you actually followed any MRA stuff? I don't even consider myself an MRA, but I try to actually learn about groups before I judge them. What you're describing is MGTOW.
MRAs don't do any of the shit described in the OP post. The closest I've ever seen them come to that was a post deliberately taken out of context where it was asserted an MRA was advocating violence against women, but the point of his post was that women often beat their spouses and society doesn't acknowledge it. Fittingly people who sought to mischaracterize it ignored that he was saying "If she hits you, go ahead and hit her back" and just read "hit her".
They're concerned with double standards in society, of which there are a laundry list. Concerned in particular with how courts favor women. How women get alimony, and child support, despite initiating most divorces and supposedly being equal. How men get double the sentence for the same crimes as women.
They never frame their criticisms as criticizing women, they criticize feminists, and how society treats women. It's all very science, history and fact-based.
MGTOW describe women as whores and evil, MRAs just say "feminists are abusing their power and the way courts treat men is fucking bullshit."
Also, saying they're "just as bad" as feminists? Please. When MRAs do things like writing the S.C.U.M. manifesto, creating the hashtag #killallmen, advocating that it should be illegal for men to pee standing up, describing any system where men are in power (you know, 'patriarchy') as inherently bad, and adding man to words in order to make them insults or describe them as negative as in "manspreading" and "mansplaining" as an attempt to gender non-gender issues to attack one gender and pretend the other is solely the victim of the other, then that asinine statement might have a leg to stand on.
Male circumcision offers no real health benefits. The same bullshit arguments about it being a health benefit have been made in the countries advocating female circumcision.
Male circumcision was introduced in the US for the same reason as female circumcision. It was stated it would make boys masturbate less. Men without foreskin have far less sensitive penises, it's done today strictly because the foreskins are sold to various pharmaceutical and beauty product companies.
File: 1440551941334.jpg (21.88 KB, 430x358, image.jpg)
this is why i fucking hate it when anti-feminists think i dont understand what feminism is.
I'm sorry but 90% of feminists are fucking bad and sexist.
like congrats on being a tiny minority of the ones that are good, the movement still has gone downhill.
The "double standards" they complain about are caused by men in the first place, yet they hate feminism because it tries to change these double standards. Women get better treatment in child custody cases because they are typically expected to be the primary caretakers of children, which in turn will hurt their economic advancement and can make it difficult to fend for themselves if their husband leaves. Hence why women earn less.
MGTOW=MRA. It's the same shit with the "men are oppressed in a female dominated world" delusions.
>Also, saying they're "just as bad" as feminists? Please.
I remember when some university set up an anonymous reporting system where students could call in to report crimes (like rape) without being identified. MRAs spread the number around and flooded it with false rape accusations against various females who attended and taught at the school so they could "know what it's like" or whatever?
Also, what makes you think that these people are "MDTOW" (a subset of MRA) or whatever? A great many of them look for wives overseas, that's not going your own way.
File: 1440558995394.jpg (28.03 KB, 456x321, image.jpg)
I see a lot of statements with citations needed. First off, the wage gap has been debunked again and again and again so trotting out that utter garbage only hurts your case.
Second, admitting there's a slew of instances where women are favored and then going "YEAH WELL… THAT'S MEN'S FAULT!" Is just fucking retarded, circular logic.
You're presented a slew of factual examples that directly prove you wrong, and your only recourse is to lie, and then blame men? Fuck you. You're why no one takes feminism seriously anymore. You're why three out of four women do not identify as a feminist.
>I remember when some university set up an anonymous reporting system where students could call in to report crimes (like rape) without being identified. MRAs spread the number around and flooded it with false rape accusations against various females who attended and taught at the school so they could "know what it's like" or whatever?
Also, what makes you think that these people are "MDTOW" (a subset of MRA) or whatever? A great many of them look for wives overseas, that's not going your own way.
MGTOW =/= MRA. Just asserting they're the same group is dishonest. As for the rest of what you're saying here, back up what you're saying. Link to an article proving this actually happened, and at which school, and that it was masterminded by "MRAs" and not you blaming them for what I'd bet -assuming this really happened- was some troll thread on some board's /b/. You get me an article advocating that on avoiceformen or during a honey badger podcast or something.
>>31567>you really have no argument.
You intellectually vaccuous piece of shit. You were just presented a slew of arguments, and your ignorant ass has been unable to counter any of them. Those aren't quotes from tumblr, those are quotes from various feminist authors, scandals involving various feminists, none of them on tumblr.
I mean for fuck's sake, Valeria Solanas wrote the SCUM Manifesto where she outlined how men should be murdered and kept as pets and then enacted this by shooting Andy Warhol because as a gay man he didn't need women. "That was one crazy woman, she doesn't count!" you say? That would be fair enough if not for the fact that NOW (the National Organization for Women) protested her arrest and raised funds for a legal defense to try to get her out. That was mainstream feminist thought in the fucking 60's, and shit has not gotten better.
You can't go to a mainstream MRA site and find speakers advocating for the extinction of women, but you find feminists advocating for the extinction of men in virtually every book, every article and every site. You have everything from Andrea Dworkins to Anita Sarkeesian, and the disturbing thing is the few self-identifying feminists who actually are logical and sincere like Christina Sommers are attacked and stated NOT to be real feminists by the mainstream feminists.
I mean, how in the fuck do you declare trying to "shame" men for sitting in a way so as not to crush their damn testicles? How do you justify purching "male tears" mugs? How do you justify attacking male heterosexuality by taking issue with women having boobs or dressing in skimpy outfits in video games, and then simultaneously holding slutwalks and asserting outfits don't matter? How do you account for ShirtGate? How do you explain wanting to make it illegal for men to pee standing up? What's your justification for men serving double the prison time for the same crimes women commit?
Paul Elam, founder of A Voice For Men, one of the most popular men's rights websites on the internet>The concept of rape has a lot of utility for women. One, it feeds their narcissistic need to feel irresistible. Two, it feeds their narcissistic need to feel irresistible.>Bill Cosby’s victims? Or just a bunch of drug whoring star fuckers?
John Hembling, former editor-in-chief of AVFM>With a small number of exceptions, western women have collectively demonstrated themselves to be unequipped with a grasp of personal accountability, ethics, compassion, or empathy.>I don't give a damn about rape victims.
bonus points for fun, Roosh Vorek, founder of Return of Kings, a site calling for a return to traditionalism and men to embrace masculinity>I thought about this problem and am sure I have the solution: make rape legal if done on private property. I propose that we make the violent taking of a woman not punishable by law when done off public grounds.>>31583
Funny you mention Sarkeesian, I thought everybody that wasn't a brainwashed feminist realized she's a puppet for Jonathan McIntosh, someone who actively calls for the destruction of masculinity and capitalism.
I'm not that anon and I'm not arguing modern feminism is good, but MRAs struggle with getting their message across. I see lots of feminists busy trying to demonize men rather than help women, I see lots of MRAs busy trying to demonize women rather than help men. I've read plenty of AVFM articles and articles elsewhere where the author suddenly strays from his subject to give his opinion on how much he despises women related to the topic. Thinking the 'enemy' is only full of irrational, overemotional bigots and your side is full of logical intellectuals is exactly what feminists do.>you find feminists advocating for the extinction of men in virtually every book, every article and every site.
You don't find this to be just a bit of a grandiose statement?>>31594
Watson merely commented on being a woman in a male-dominated field and got called a "stupid, lying, whining whore" by Elam and got death threats for speaking. I understand there are Brianna Wus in the world that scream misogyny at the drop of a feather, but you can approach things on a case-by-case basis instead of saying all threats matter or none do.
File: 1440562701405.jpg (748.7 KB, 2424x1272, 1440126994493.jpg)
>>31595>Paul Elam quote
That doesn't sound that bad to me, to be honest with you. How is he wrong? Are you familiar with Borderline Personality Disorder? I mean, there are hundreds of stories like this out there: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9894588/Compulsive-liar-jailed-after-11-false-rape-claims-in-decade.html
and other images and video were posted earlier demonstrating how feminists are fine lying about rape, and alter the rape statistics as with the fictitious "one in four" number. You have a group of people who are obsessed with rape and statistically more likely to have something like BPD, is it a stretch to suggest they might be narcissistic?
His quote also reminds me of Whoopi Goldberg's quote about Roman Polanski drugging, binding and sodomizing a 13 year old girl. "Well, there's rape, and then there's rape rape." I can't remember the rest of the exact quote, but she essentially asserted that because they were in Hollywood, the 13 year old girl knew what she was doing.
>With a small number of exceptions, western women have collectively demonstrated themselves to be unequipped with a grasp of personal accountability, ethics, compassion, or empathy.
A depressingly accurate statement. For reference, see: Women's Suffrage. You know, the group that fought for "equal" rights to vote, when at the time most men could only vote after being drafted, but then argued women should get the right to vote but be exempt from the draft that was a qualification for men, and then simultaneously started the white feather movement to guilt men into joining the military they themselves would not?
>I don't give a damn about rape victims.
Gonna need to see the context on this one.
>bonus points for fun, Roosh Vorek, founder of Return of Kings, a site calling for a return to traditionalism and men to embrace masculinity
A site which, in the wake of the Fury Road "boycott" posted an article explicitly saying they were not MRAs and hated MRAs because it's actually a PUA site, and linked to past articles where they'd spoken against MRAs? Nice try.
>I see lots of MRAs busy trying to demonize women rather than help men.
It's a question of context. Let's say there was a feminist articles that said "These men are scum only deserving of castration or the death penalty". If they're describing men in general, that's misandry. If they're describing men who aren't feminists, that's retarded. If they're describing men who are rapists, whether or not you agree with the statement you can see how it makes sense.
I'd wager with most of the MRA examples you speak of they're criticizing a specific subset of women or feminists, who don't even need to be female.
The most common thing I've seen an MRA criticized for was an article I think was called "bash a bitch day" and critics have asserted it advocated beating women, but it spells it out right in the article, the "bitches" in question are women who beat their spouses, and get away with it because of a societal double-standard. The point it was meant to make -and unfortunately succeeded in- was that people would ignore the men being beaten in that scenario and defend the women being hit back in self-defense.
>You don't find this to be just a bit of a grandiose statement?
>Watson merely commented on being a woman in a male-dominated field and got called a "stupid, lying, whining whore"
Accusing someone of rape for inviting you to coffee doesn't fit the description of a "stupid, lying, whining whore"?
File: 1440562736999.png (207.75 KB, 832x2159, 1440154880108.png)
File: 1440562783094.jpg (182.26 KB, 907x1280, 1440086894155-1.jpg)
File: 1440562844907.jpg (676.23 KB, 2354x1905, 1440085395060-1.jpg)
File: 1440562883430.png (241.93 KB, 689x800, 1439884916597.png)
File: 1440562945248.png (592.83 KB, 1372x597, 1439612784384.png)
File: 1440562982005.jpg (52.18 KB, 543x720, 1439429948803.jpg)
File: 1440563224854.jpg (155.28 KB, 497x797, 1438944277294.jpg)
File: 1440563263619.jpg (338.52 KB, 1458x1164, feministslol.jpg)
File: 1440563410053.png (285.28 KB, 588x646, 1438104203378.png)
File: 1440563580697.png (959.26 KB, 633x2811, 1436979161714.png)
File: 1440576968687.png (62.97 KB, 800x450, US_gender_pay_gap,_by_sex,_rac…)
>>31578>the wage gap has been debunked again and again and again
No, it has not. Women still earn less than men on average and that is a proven fact. Women are expected to be the primary caregivers of children and will often have their work affected by pregnancy. MRAs constantly claim that they have "debunked" the pay gap when it's been proven again and again and again that women earn less then men. They're so fucking stupid they don't even understand what the pay gap is intended to show, their arguments have no academic background. >Second, admitting there's a slew of instances where women are favored and then going "YEAH WELL… THAT'S MEN'S FAULT!" Is just fucking retarded, circular logic.
Holy Jesus fuck, no one can be this fucking stupid. You call your organization "Men's Rights" and "A Voice For Men". You also hate feminism because it seeks to give women equal rights and opportunities. What does this imply? Well, it implies that men are "oppressed" by women and that feminism is responsible. You can not fucking claim that this thing that happened as a result of a patriarchal society is the fault of women when they had no fucking say in it and you can not fucking call it "male oppression" when women could not even vote until 1920's.
>slew of instances
MRAs go around looking for the few instances in life where a man is at a disadvantage and blow it out of proportion to claim oppression points. Why do you think it is that women are given favor in child custody cases? Think really hard about it. Could it be because society expects the woman to be the nurturer and the man to be the provider? Could it be that society still expects women to rely on men? Hmmm. How does "empowering men" solve this problem when it's a problem that stems from the oppression of women?
>You're presented a slew of factual examples that directly prove you wrong
You provided me a bunch of screen caps from /pol/ that have no context and no sources. None of this proves anything I've said wrong.
>MGTOW =/= MRA.
Asserting that it's not the same group is dishonest, stop trying to separate yourself from your own stupidity. MGTOW is an offshoot of the men's rights movement and you know it.
>Link to an article proving this actually happenedhttp://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/12/20/3093761/mens-rights-occidental/
It was a reddit MRA group.
File: 1440577328200.jpg (76.09 KB, 600x927, Pregnancy_no_excuses.jpg)
File: 1440577406888.jpg (79.99 KB, 600x800, Prostituteposter.jpg)
File: 1440577643177.png (36.3 KB, 927x390, domesticviolenceok.png)
GirlWritesWhat condoning domestic violence.
File: 1440577748036.png (40.82 KB, 924x416, jeremiah.png)
I fucking hate girlwritewhat.
What the fuck is wrong with her to honestly believe that physical violence is indeed a perfectly acceptable form of resolving conflict? How is she so grossly misunderstanding of the cycle of abuse? Just - how!?
I don't necessarily agree with DV, but isn't it somewhat believable that women get turned on by violence, generally speaking?
Out of the women I've dated, virtually every one but one fantasized about violence during sexual fantasy. One "liked to be covered in bruises".
File: 1440578428207.png (40.4 KB, 544x584, Whiningredditfaggot.png)
Actually, the news.com.au is quite right: for one Eliot Rodgers, think about all the robots and "redpilled" men there are… Unlike him, they don't have the "mental illness" that made Rodgers act, but they have the same hatred of women which motivated and explained the killing. Most of them won't ever do anything than complaining on the internet, and harassing/doxxing/making threats to females personalities on social networks. Which leads us to another problem women face for the sake of being women.
I think the VICE thing is probably a joke tho.
About the Mary Sue, judging by the title, it probably makes sense. I don't believe in essentialism and "biotruths" in genetic codes, that a lot of americans tend to believe (in my opinion). Europe and France are far more influenced by philosophy, so we have different ways to react to gender "problems".
Most of the examples cited here shows a major problem about the approach of feminism today. Since the remainings of sexism and patriarchy are subtle, sneaky, underlying and that we live in an appearant equality, feminist reaction to those problems should be subtle aswell, in my opinion. Most american feminists think you should act the same way suffragettes did with being loud and agressive. It just not suited to our times anymore, i think.
>With a small number of exceptions, western women have collectively demonstrated themselves to be unequipped with a grasp of personal accountability, ethics, compassion, or empathy.
The major problem in his statement is that he says "western WOMEN" instead of "western PEOPLE".
Anyway I don't have anymore time, I'm posting from work.
Keep in wind that american feminism =! western feminism in general
>>31705>The major problem in his statement is that he says "western WOMEN" instead of "western PEOPLE".
Like you've done with EVERY single argument presented here? Let's see:
>for one Eliot Rodgers, think about all the robots and "redpilled" men there are… Unlike him, they don't have the "mental illness" that made Rodgers act, but they have the same hatred of women which motivated and explained the killing.
Elliot Rodgers didn't specifically hate women, he hated everyone. Most of his victims were men. In his writings he frequently describes his hatred of white, blonde people, both male and female. He hated any couple he saw happy. Yet YOU -and other feminists- make it a gendered issue, when it isn't. He was a misanthrope. He hated everyone. How can you explain your fixation only on the potential harm to women other than you being a complete sociopath?
>Most of them won't ever do anything than complaining on the internet, and harassing/doxxing/making threats to females personalities on social networks. Which leads us to another problem women face for the sake of being women.
And here you do it again. You assert this is a gendered problem. I'm going to leave alone the blatantly dishonest thing you're doing claiming quote "all
the robots and "redpilled" men" think the same way as Elliot Rodgers and harass people, because we both know that's complete and total horse shit.
The disgusting thing is that you assert the harassment, doxxing and threats are a female issue, when the reality is both genders face harassment and threats online, and just as often -if not more often- the threats come from WOMEN. Statistically mean receive more threats and get doxxed more frequently as well. Behind most cases where some teenage girl killed herself after getting catfished online, the person who catfished them was female. When Belle Knox stated in an interview the knowledge of her being a porn star was getting her harassed on campus, she stated the men didn't give a shit other than assuming she'd be easy and it was the women who showered her with threats and insults. There was a case recently where one female porn star filed a restraining order against another because over twitter the other porn star had threatened to have her raped and murdered. Women pull this shit more often than men, and men are more often the victims. I mean, holy fucking shit LOOK AT WHAT WEBSITE WE'RE POSTING ON, a majority female site created specifically for the mocking and harassment of lolcows.
>I think the VICE thing is probably a joke tho.
Do you see any articles "joking" about reducing the female population and keeping women as breeding stock?
>Most of the examples cited here shows a major problem about the approach of feminism today. Since the remainings of sexism and patriarchy are subtle, sneaky, underlying and that we live in an appearant equality, feminist reaction to those problems should be subtle aswell, in my opinion. Most american feminists think you should act the same way suffragettes did with being loud and agressive. It just not suited to our times anymore, i think.
Did you just assert there was an "underlying" problem with men ever being in power, i.e. "patriarchy"?
It varies from issue to issue, but generally "let men be men". Don't demonize male behavior. Don't assert violence or competition are bad things, don't try to feminize men, make the court system legitimately equal and dismantle all the circumstances where it only favors men, stop turning campuses into hostile environments where feminists tell men they can only speak last (and there are specific feminist professors I can pull up who have made this a policy) and they're marked down specifically for being male, and they're passed over for scholarship and admission because of their dicks. Stop demonizing them in the media, and glorify men and masculinity at least as much as you glorify women. For example, for every smart, attractive, sassy "voice of reason" mom on television, have a dad that can be described the same way, and not "fat, stupid, lazy slob".
>>31674>No, it has not.
Yes it has. Again and again and again. Watch this video.
Then read this article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303532704579483752909957472
Then read this one: http://time.com/3222543/5-feminist-myths-that-will-not-die/
Then this one: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html
Then this one: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/
Then this one: http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/08/gender_pay_gap_the_familiar_line_that_women_make_77_cents_to_every_man_s.html
And this one: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/time-to-ditch-this-obsession-with-the-gender-pay-gap/16759#.Vd2YNZec5_k
You don't have a fucking leg to stand on here, so stop lying and grow the everloving fuck up you intellectually dishonest, empty-headed feminist dipshit.
>Holy Jesus fuck, no one can be this fucking stupid. You call your organization "Men's Rights" and "A Voice For Men". You also hate feminism because it seeks to give women equal rights and opportunities.
Nope, nope, nope. Strawman fallacy all the way. MRAs consider themselves egalitarians, they want actual equal rights. They don't have anything against women having equal rights, they have issues with feminists lying about and demonizing men with false statistics (as you were actively trying to do above with the wage gap myth) and courts and society favoring women. And I'm sure you'll deny the laundry list of facts and images posted and just claim it's ridiculous to say society favors women while ignoring all those examples because you don't have a defense for any of them.
>You can not fucking claim that this thing that happened as a result of a patriarchal society is the fault of women when they had no fucking say in it and you can not fucking call it "male oppression" when women could not even vote until 1920's.
First off, women had political ads targeted at them before they had the right to vote suggesting they still had influence. Second, most of these problems didn't occur until the rise of feminism. That's when courts and media as well as academia largely started becoming very hostile towards men.
>MRAs go around looking for the few instances in life where a man is at a disadvantage and blow it out of proportion to claim oppression points.
No, they find factual circumstances to point out what utter dishonest hypocrites feminists such as yourself are.
>Could it be because society expects the woman to be the nurturer and the man to be the provider?
Are you really so painfully fucking stupid that you ask questions, then answer your own questions with an obviously horseshit answer and then strawman your way out from that theory?
>How does "empowering men" solve this problem when it's a problem that stems from the oppression of women?
False premise. The problem stems from courts favoring women. You can't honestly defend alimony in this day and age.
In other words, you don't have a counterargument so in a backhanded way you concede you're wrong by trying to dismiss them rather than refuting them. Typical, predictable, utterly sad and pathetic.
>Asserting that it's not the same group is dishonest, stop trying to separate yourself from your own stupidity. MGTOW is an offshoot of the men's rights movement and you know it.
First off, you've demonstrated clearly you know nothing about either group. Next, you admit at best it's an "offshoot". They consider their identity as separate and unique from MRAs, so you're being incredibly dishonest with this statement.
PffffAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. You really expect me to take a link from those lying pieces of shit seriously? Alright, ignoring that this site is documented as being complete horseshit and that the surrounding articles all have a clear, undeniable bias, let's examine the text.
>internet trolls have attempted to prove a point about the school’s anonymous reporting system
BAM. First fucking sentence and your entire narrative has collapsed. They were trolls you fucking scumbag, even ThinkProgress will admit that.
You have to acknowledge an anonymous rape report form where you can name and shame anyone whether or not they've actually done anything is bad policy, and what's more:
>So-called “men’s rights groups” typically allege that efforts to crack down on sexual assault end up victimizing men, who they claim often become the subject of false rape reports.
Are you trying to claim this is wrong? Do I really need to drudge out every highly publicized case where men's reputations were permanently destroyed by women who outright light about rape on campus? A certain Rolling Stone article ring any bells? How about fucking MATTRESS GIRL? Meg Lanker-Simons was posted earlier as well. There are so many cases like this where lies are used to justify destroying male spaces like frats while leaving sororities untouched.
File: 1440587656922.png (143.69 KB, 900x973, 1381894761097.png)
You're intentionally misinterpreting what she's saying to come to the conclusion she's "condoning domestic abuse". She's saying the problem is women are taught they can hit men, and men are taught they can't hit women. But many women either come from violent homes or have interest in BDSM.
I've argued with -and in many cases, subsequently broken up with- girls who demanded physical abuse. "Just slap me around a little, I need it." "Why won't you just choke me during sex?" Now I'd assert most of these women probably had BPD or another personality disorder, but the thing is, you're not refuting anything said there. In the case where a woman has chased a man around for an hour demanding he hit her, what do you call that?>>31686>What the fuck is wrong with her to honestly believe that physical violence is indeed a perfectly acceptable form of resolving conflict?
Why do so many women resort to physical violence with their partners and other women? Why if their partners refuse to hit them do they laugh at them, belittle them and tell them they aren't really men?
File: 1440591707963.jpg (23.35 KB, 525x150, itdoesntmatterwhoweare.jpg)
While we're on the topic of domestic violence, I want to share my experience with BPD, and aside from the obvious "get the fuck out of the relationship" which I eventually did, leading up to a specific event, I want both the feminists and the rational women in this thread to tell me what I should have done.
I'm sure if you know anything about BPD, you know how this story begins. Guy meets girl who seems charming, and perfect, and the most beautiful thing he's ever seen. That's what she was to me. I didn't know about BPD at the time. I didn't know she'd created a character to appeal to me. I just saw the most beautiful girl I'd ever met in my life.
She was short, had dark brown hair and brown-green eyes. She had pale skin and rosy cheeks, and a cute little button nose. Full lips and a perfect smile, an angelic voice, and a body like that of a fertility statue. Triple-D cup breasts, and a butt to match. Every morning watching her back as she sat up nude in bed felt like looking at a goddess.
And you know how it goes, three months of relative bliss, lots of egoboosting and constant sex, and then suddenly a switch is turned and however long the relationship lasts after that, her only goal is to destroy her partner. In my case, this was two years.
She isolated me from all my friends and family, took issue with everyone else I talked to until I had no one to talk to but her. Got me to move out to the middle of no where so they couldn't "influence" me anymore. In particular she despised my mother and brother, who were both quite convinced she was crazy.
I could go into explicit detail and a timeline on these events, but to summarize events after that: She monopolized my time and took everything, EVERYTHING from working to sleeping to throwing out the fucking trash as a personal slight, as me not wanting to be around her. She'd throw a fit and say "I won't be held prisoner!" and of course I'd let her leave, and some time later she'd come back sobbing, disappointed I didn't force her to stay. "Why didn't you tie me to the bed? Don't you love me?"
She'd fake injuries like falls down the stairs. She'd claim to see all manner of demon and ghost and told ridiculous, childish stories about having supernatural powers and being hunted by demons for her purity (pffft.) And not just demons either, invisible hoodie-wearing rapists too. Oh yes, she'd claimed to have been raped by 12 people. Probably 13 after the relationship ended since most of these were probably just guys that dumped her. But she'd have constant freakouts in public. We'd go out somewhere to eat, I'd go to the bathroom, and I'd come back to find her collapsed and sobbing "HE WAS HERE! HE WAS WATCHING ME! HE FOLLOWED ME!" but of course, absolute refusal to go to the police or let me try and track the guy down, just dragging me out of bed every damn night to lumber around the building making sure he was gone. She hated it when I slept. God only knows how she functioned on no sleep.
Now see, another trait with BPDs is they're constantly demanding some new proof that you love them. Sex, then sex only the way they want it, then time, then commitment, then money. "Why won't you move in with me if you love me?" "Don't you want to marry me?" "Then why don't you buy me a ring?" "I need a new car, don't you care about me?" "Why won't you give me a baby?" on and on, it can never end. They can't help it. In my case she drained what little money I had month after month. I sold so many of my things just to maintain the lifestyle she wanted. All the clothes, stuffed animals, food and jewelry. There was the time she got jealous of my oldest cat because I called her princess. She was jealous of the affection I showed my pets. Speaking of which, my cats were terrified of her. For good reason, I'd later discover. You see, turned out she was poisoning them and smacking them around whenever I left the house. At one point she sobbed about the family dog still up at her parents house and how she missed her. I offered to drive up there and just get the dog for her, either talking with her parents or just grabbing it. "She's too old, she couldn't handle that. I want a new dog." And so I got her one. A dog which was supposed to be for us, but she picked out, named, and later on abused. That became the source of many of our later arguments. "Why the fuck are you beating the puppy? Holy shit."
God knows how many men she cheated with, I can only confirm the last one, but before that one of the final things she got me to give her was an engagement ring. Spent every last cent I had on it, and fittingly, it became the first object she threw at me. It immediately became a weapon to throw in my face every time she got upset. At that point it was constant emotional abuse. I was worthless, useless, weak, pathetic, she attacked me every way she possibly could. "I faked all those orgasms!" "the smell and taste of your cum reminds me of all the times I was RAPED!" "No no, harder, fuck me like my brother did." Not even exaggerating on that last line. By the end of the relationship I'd cried more than I had throughout the rest of my life.
But from the ring she went to plates, and glasses, anything she could get her hands on. Then she stopped throwing things and just started hitting me. At first I'd try to reason with her, like I did with her various fake suicide attempts and self-harming. There was the time she sat there slapping her face as hard as she fucking could and I grabbed her wrist to get her to stop "OW! I THINK YOU BROKE MY WRIST!" which of course, didn't even bruise. The times she'd run to the bathroom with a knife and a bottle of bleach and just wait for me to come in and stop her.
As with those instances, reasoning with her didn't meet with much success. By this point I knew what BPD was and was actively seeking help online, but mentioning it to her just resulted in sobbing fits and accusations that I was only trying to insult her and was calling her crazy. So, when reasoning didn't work, I started just walking away. I'd go out for a walk and hope she'd calmed down by the time I got back. She started throwing me out of my own apartment, dragging me around by my collar, throwing my keys at me. And sure enough after a few minutes she'd go into abandonment mode and come running back apologizing.
Now, I must have a destination in mind with this rambling, long-winded story, right? Well keeping all that in mind, this is about one night in particular. Our last big fight. This was going to be the third time she left me. She'd threatened it for over a month, set the date and everything. So now she was just charging around the house putting everything she could fit in her car. I reached out to her, begged her to stay, was swatted away at every attempt to hug her. I just sat down kinda crying after a while and let her go about her business. My mother -who honestly is nuts in her own right- kept calling. The phone rang and went to voicemail fourteen times before I finally answered. "Yeah. Yeah, no. Not doing so great. No, I don't need any help. Yes, she's leaving again."
She flew into one of her most extreme rages after that. "You can't even do one thing I ask you to, can you? Not even one thing. You're pathetic. I told you not to talk to anyone. I told you not to tell your mom." She knew within an hour my mother's crazy -but supportive- ass would be up there making sure she wasn't walking out with any of my stuff.
So she launched into the longest, most aggressive tirade of insults I'd ever had directed at me. She kept shoving me around and smacking me, and I just sat there, maybe raising one hand and pleading with her to calm down and stop being so aggressive. I pulled out my cell phone "Look, I want you to be aware I'm doing this." "What are you doing? Deleting our picture as the background? Deleting my number?" "No, I'm recording this conversation so in the future you can see how you sound." "Well why don't YOU say something mean then? Go on, this is your last chance. Why don't you let me have it? Why don't you say the most hateful thing you can think of? I want you to sit here in this apartment waiting forever, alone for the rest of your life knowing I'll never come back but waiting and hoping I do."
I'd never insulted her throughout our entire relationship. The closest I'd come was calling her actions "monstrous" after the first time she left me (I woke up to her father and brother showing up with a uhaul) and another instance where one of my cats ran away from her and I said "He's afraid of you because you're crazy." I'd made a point not to let myself insult her during the relationship, because I know there's no going back after you cross that line.
But here I was with an invitation to say whatever I'd been afraid to bring up on the declaration that this was the last time we'd ever see eachother, so I posed a question. With all these supposed rapists chasing her, it seemed the rest of her friends and family didn't try to get her to go to the cops, so I asked "How come I'm the only one that seems to believe you about the rapes?"
She fucking lost it. She dropped the box she was carrying to the car on the floor, ran to me and started swinging. I just held up my hands. "HOW DARE YOU! PEOPLE BELIEVE ME! PEOPLE BELIEVE ME!" "Okay. Alright. They believe you. Calm down." I tried to turn away and put some space between us. She grabbed my collar and started twisting. "Please stop, you're tearing my shirt." "Oh yeah? Maybe I should tear it some more." and she ripped and pulled as hard as she could until my shirt was in tatters on the ground. Then she stood there laughing at me. All I said was "stop" "please stop" "That was my favorite shirt" she just kept shoving me and telling me I was pathetic and stupid and weak and what was I going to do about it.
So, I did something I flung her back as hard as I could. She collapsed to the floor and pretended to be unconscious. I was shouting now "I'M NOT YOUR FUCKING PUNCHING BAG! YOU CAN'T TREAT ME LIKE SHIT! I'M NOT YOUR FUCKING FATHER! I DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO DESERVE THIS SHIT! I KNOW YOU'RE NOT UNCONSCIOUS, SO GET THE FUCK UP AND GET OUT OF THE APARTMENT. GO. RUN AWAY AGAIN. JUST GET THE FUCK OUT!" and I lumbered over her, and I'll admit it, I wanted to punch her. I wanted to just get down on the ground and wail on her until my knuckles bled.
But I didn't, and even though I knew she was exaggerating I felt horrible just for shoving her away from me. I sat down in the corner, covered my face and just fucking cried like a bitch. I was more upset that I'd let myself lose control than at everything she'd said and done that night.
And she got up and ran over to hug me and say it was okay and brought me a new shirt from the closet and I just looked at her like she was wearing a straight jacket and more quietly repeated that she should just go ahead and go.
Now I ask you, aside obviously from not getting into the relationship how should I have handled that differently? How can you claim she wasn't quite literally "asking for it"? Why is it okay for women to do things like that to their partners, but men are the monsters when they fight back in any way?
A lot of robots share those kind of views on women tho, even if it's often "softer". Also just think about how they think "women can't be robots". No matter what they can do or be, women will be always wrong for them, because they are women. Not all robots, tho, but a lot are like this, maybe a bit less now, the board population changed a bit. But 1 or 2 years ago… >>31711
Did i ever said that? Western people sure lack because of postmodern individualism and capitalism, but i don't know how the rest are, lol. >>31719>courts and society favoring women.
Courts sure do for divorces, and MRAs have all my support for that, but "society favoring women" is just laughable. Courts and custody are basically the only thing where women are favored… Women rapists, pedophiles and women domestic abusers are less likely to sued, judged etc… But it's because "women can't be violent, abusive towards men/children! They are born nurturers! They can only be the victim! they are just not wired like this!" Can't you see where those beliefs come from? Some kind of deceitful gynarchy? Obviously not.
>Are you really so painfully fucking stupid that you ask questions, then answer your own questions with an obviously horseshit answer and then strawman your way out from that theory?
When people starting being defensive like this, it's when a sensitive point is touched.
Thank you for sharing this, I appreciate you letting out. Before I go any further, are you the same person as >>31712
Anon it's nok okay for women to act like this. She clearly has a shit ton of disastrous issues, and you aren't responsible for it. You got caught in the circle of abuse, like other domestic violence victims.
If you feel like you can handle this, please sue her. You have proofs (ie: recorded conversation, maybe teared shirt, your mother as a witness, etc), so don't let a walking disaster roam free. At least she could be treated by professional psychiatrists.
She's not going to stop otherwise.
No one would ever think what she did is okay. Problem is people would be more likely to believe her (totally false and invented) version of what happened. Because:
1) She's manipulative as fuck. People like that, are confident as hell. They believe in what they say at the moment, and will defend what they say to the last breath. Tomorrow they can say the contrary, but still believe it as strongly. You, as a sane being who doesnt think the world revolves around you, will begin doubting your own version of the facts. You will start thinking you over reacted, have a biased opinion, even your memory will start failing. You can literally have black outs. Other people's rationality, like you, will be struck and vainquished by such (pathological) confidence. They might don't believe you unless they are really close (ex: your mother).
2) And of course, you have that good' ol' underlying belief that women can't be abusers. That they are born nurturers. That they can only be the victim. That they can't overpower men. Opinions, i hope, are starting to change on that topic.
File: 1440688888933.png (68.93 KB, 1084x1600, feministlogo.png)
I'm pretty sure that that's actually the black power fist too. wrong symbol dumbasses. If they were looking to imitate the feminist fist it looks pretty different
File: 1440690286843.png (115.07 KB, 2000x2843, 2000px-Fist.svg.png)
But the one they used is the black power fist
>>31712>generally "let men be men". Don't demonize male behavior. Don't assert violence or competition are bad things
This is your solution to reducing violent crime against men? Did you ever consider that "letting them be men" is basically a codeword for letting a man get away with stupid and violent shit because "he has a dick he can't help it durrrr".
>don't try to feminize men
If you want men to do better in education, they're going to have to learn that sitting still and reading isn't just for them sissies.
As far as pushing for rights, it's always seemed more like women asking for more privilege. I mean, even women's suffrage was a privilege 100%. Before that only men who were forced to enlist for the draft could vote.
That is to say they the only people who should have a say in how their country was being run were literally paying for it with their lives and women these days still don't have to sign up for drafts.
File: 1440711756519.jpg (683.31 KB, 1814x1280, Info.jpg)
I made this
Took way too long, but goddamn if ignorance is bliss.
File: 1440724429337.png (140.56 KB, 471x400, usagi rori.png)
Oh god thank you, I can't wait to troll some MRAs with this
>>32558>while already holding more power virtually all aspects of life
Yeah, look at how the majority of our government is women, or all those female heads of corporations that pay off our politicians. I'm not saying they SHOULD be because equality, it's just a fact men still rule the world. You overestimate how much power women have. Divorce, child custody, rape cases? Sure, we have that (and it can be pretty bad in the last case, male rape is very unfairly ignored or mocked)
>If you're a woman and you think that at any point in your life it would have been easier as a man you're deluded.
You're putting on a victim complex as bad as a tumblrina. This is the exact thing people criticize feminists for. You want to not have to sign up for the draft to be eligible to vote? Start asking for it, I haven't seen any MRAs talking about it yet.
Men for still propose and vote for legislation appealing to women, just as they can propose and vote for legislation that harms or infringes on men. Like I said, I was only noting how it was, not what it should be.>>32566
Let's say everything you're saying is true. Women have it easier than men in every single respect, all women have life easier than their equivalent man, men have the exclusive rights to sadness, etc. What are you doing about it? How are you making things better for men? So many MRAs I know don't do anything, they just argue on imageboards, just like feminists argue on tumblr and accomplish nothing. Sitting around and just complaining about how hard you have it while doing nothing about it is absolutely a victim complex. You get up and start campaigning for things that everybody can agree on. More fair divorce settlements, remove signing up for the draft, start awareness and programs for male victims of rape and domestic abuse. You're not going to make any progress like this.
>>5207>Most people in the chan culture
A lot of them do but they still don't make up the majority.
Outside of /r9k/ you'll find more people for 1st and 2nd wave feminism than against.
I really doubt "most women" you've met have said this. It is offensive, but you seem to be overreacting. Usually people who say this shit have just had a break up, I give them some emotional elbow room in that case.>>33059
Holy shit, can you even think without dreaming up cartoonish caricatures of men and women in order to validate your preconceived views that half the world's population is homogeneous in their preferences? >>33079
This tbh. Also, a lot of the "feminist rage" pictures posted around the internet are obviously fake. The way they write often betrays the MRA thinking behind them. I've seen emails from "divorce lawyers" that couldn't spell 'subpoena', Tumblr blogs that obviously come under poe's law with a billion prefixes (otherkin isn't an SJW thing, get over it) and a flood of other miscellaneous posts and statuses that use terms like "friendzone" and "beta" in a way that women outside insular manospere communities wouldn't. Hell, some are just random posts from douchebag women - like being a bitch automatically makes you a feminist even if you've expressed no political opinion on it.
Radical feminists can be bad, but they're generally regarded as a bigoted hangover from the 70s by the majority of the social justice community. Even then, they're generally less radical and violent than the shit I've seen mainstream MRAs say. One of the moderators of /r/MRA was a follower of /r/BeatingWomen, and prominent members of the movement like Paul Elam even say they would vote innocent if they were on a jury for rape and he thought the defendant was guilty. I'm not even going to get into how utterly batshit Return of Kings and The Spearhead are.
Really, "social justice" has become a snarl word? What the fuck? It's like the word "white knight" or "do gooder". It's literally trying to demonize people acting considerate of others' feelings.
That comes back to bite them in the ass because sons have a higher chance to inherit their intelligence from their mothers.
If you ever why a lot of extremely accomplished men have sons who are retard lay-abouts who couldn't run a company to save their stash of weed: shouldn't have married a bimbo, suckers.
File: 1457280530130.png (65.04 KB, 1015x346, mra.png)
lol /r/mensrights is a he-man women haters club. Pic related actually got upvotes, and the one reply who called him an idiot has 1 point.
mde too feminist politicians really messed up with law system in favor of those manhating cunts.
Too bad lots of loosers latched onto this movement and ruined it.
File: 1457298666672.jpg (205.39 KB, 1000x704, lincoln.jpg)
Its kinda both funny and sad how all this essentially boils down to a simple fact we should have learned a long, long time ago. Most people can't handle even the slightest bit of power without going completely principles-out-the-window insane.
ALL OF MY YES!
Please, regardless of sex, have my babies.
Thanks for being so agreeable, guy though, so having those babies will be a bit difficult.>>77865
By what axiomatic ethical standard is it wrong?
Who first formulated that ethical standard?
Yes. Both ideologies see men and women as fundamentally antagonistic forces (see: feminist historiography and MRA offshots like MGTOW) and both see the extension and entrenching of various "inalienable rights" as a panacea to whatever crisis they're claiming exists.
Fundamentally though, both groups see equality, both materially and metaphysically, as something desirable in of itself. MRAs just see men as unequal and feminists see women as unequal.
I don't think equality is, in of itself, desirable.>>77869
This too. Issues of it being wrong or not are immaterial, the question is why you bemoan any hint of "Eurocentrism" in the media, curriculum and elsewhere while being perfectly happy to engage in rampant "Eurocentrism" when it comes to perceived crimes/inhumane behavior.
It you don't think slavery is wrong then just say it straight you fucking pussy. >>77869
What the hell are you on about?
The transatlantic slave trade is not the morally sui generis thing that modern historiography has made it out to be. It's just one of many, countless in fact, slave trades that have existed since the dawn of settled human civilization in Sumeria. Even in terms of scale it's not distinguishable, since the various Islamic slave trades (West African, Caucausian-Ottoman etc) moved (and killed) more people.
The notion that the Transatlantic Slave Trade is some morally unique thing, that we need to talk about until the sun goes supernova is bullshit.
(The above is an original creation by me and not something i just copy pasted from like 8 posts above)
I think he made it perfectly clear what he was on about, that a grossly disproportionate amount of attention is paid to the Transatlantic Slave Trade and that, more importantly, it is presented as something historically and morally unique.
Which it most certainly is not.
>It you don't think slavery is wrong then just say it straight you fucking pussy.
Answer my questions. I'm opposed to slavery because it makes the host population lazy and more averse to basic labor tasks.
You must be retarded to think people aren't aware that slavery existed in many parts of history. What I'm asking is, how is this even relevant today? Are whites really being made to apologize over and over again? If blacks make a fuss about past slavery to get their way day-to-day, don't people accuse them of pulling the race card? What exactly
are you unhappy about? Give real life examples.
For the disinterested bystander it might be useful to take a glance at the ever useful SJW Survival Guide.http://www.voxday.net/mart/SJW_Attack_Survival_Guide.pdf
This sjw >>77889
successfully found a violation of the Narrative and initiated the Point and Shriek.
Sadly though he (or she/xhe/zze/heu/zxz/it) got stopped cold in its tracks when no one else was around to help with the isolation phase.
Successfully stopped at 3. phase. Good job me and other anon!
I've noticed the emotive outrage is actually more powerful when they encounter a does not compute error.
Because too many people approach them with the tired old spiel of "I know what my ancestors did was wrong but…"
No. My ancestors did nothing
wrong, and I'm not
sorry. Eat shit.
>>77894>you've spent the thread
My first post: >>77865
The irony is lost on you isn't it
How about you answer this of mine since you admitted this is about the BLM retards: what the fuck does slavery have anything to do with BLM? As far as I know isn't it about police injustice?>>77895
Great argument. Nice try. Not black.
So your first post was a strawman mis-representation of my argument?
I'm not sure how this exonerates you from what I claimed, but ok.
>what the fuck does slavery have anything to do with BLM?
You brought up "BLM", not me. Since BLM is just one activist group, I'll address it more broadly, in very simple terms so you can understand.
The idea, in western societies, that whites buying slaves from black slaveowners in West Africa and shipping them to North America was some sort of historically seminal event, morally unto itself and unique, provides black tribalists with a powerful and non-falsifiable rhetoric that helps to advance their cause and is overwhelmingly the foundation stone of their status on the victim hierarchy.
Now, answer my questions.
Under what ethical axiom is slavery wrong?
Who first established this axiom?
>>77903>that wasn't a strawman
>The Transatlantic Slave Trade was not morally or historically unique.
>everyone else did it too>so it's not really wrong
This is a strawman and a mis-representation of my argument.
My reply:>is that your logic?
Nice cherrypicking. I love it when people like you spout fallacies but can't keep away from them themselves.
So, let me try getting this straight once more:
>everyone else did it too>so it's not really a big deal
I've never even had a tumblr account in my life, unlike 99% of you.
>Under what ethical axiom is slavery wrong?
>Who first established this axiom?
You're implying slavery isn't unethical. This is not even worth my time.
>>77908>Is this your point?
No, re-read my post. My "point" is contained in a single sentence.
Attaching a rhetorical question to the end of your misrepresentation doesn't make it any less of a misrepresentation.
>You're implying slavery isn't unethical.
Jesus fucking Christ you're dumb. Something isn't just unethical by default, you need to make an actual ethical philosophical argument to justify why it's wrong.
I was wrong about you, you're just stupid.
File: 1457304658026.png (679.61 KB, 1280x1109, 1455751254983.png)
Oh yeah so true, not getting the 'sorry' right away really fucks with them. They spin out of control within minutes. >>77908
You should really give that pdf a look.
File: 1457305493157.jpg (162.3 KB, 1492x495, fbea7925ff8c2d522896a69090a303…)
Just had another look but no luck.
This one is kinda thought provoking, though>>77915>>77916
Heh yeah was wondering that as well.
Nah im one of those and i assume Millhouse is the other
dunno who /k/bro is
Look, you clearly don't even have a clue what the fuck strawman means. In order to straw man you must falsely represent the other's argument AND attack that false argument. I did not do the latter at all and the former unintentionally because that is really what I've been getting from you, just in more words.
From your prior posts:
>No, the point is that it happened so much, on such a scale, TO EVERYONE, that its fucking pointless and even insulting to waste time making special permission for one totally random group out of so many. They figured out they could milk the badfeelz.It's not worth revisiting.people are making too big of a deal over itIt's not a big deal.
>Now, answer my questions.>Under what ethical axiom is slavery wrong?>Who first established this axiom?It's not really wrong.
Really? I'm strawmanning?
>You brought up "BLM", not me.
Oh yeah, sure. If you hadn't been implicitly referring to BLM among other things all this time you'd surely have pointed that out back here: >>77894
>The idea, in western societies, that whites buying slaves from black slaveowners in West Africa and shipping them to North America was some sort of historically seminal event, morally unto itself and unique, provides black tribalists with a powerful and non-falsifiable rhetoric that helps to advance their cause and is overwhelmingly the foundation stone of their status on the victim hierarchy.
And again; I've already said once that you must be retarded to believe that people didn't think slavery occured in nearly all parts of history.
Just take a moment and look at all this shit you've said that you claim to never had and please for once, stop going all dindu on me like the blacks you dislike so much.>>77911>against slavery>must be tumblr
What was that term again, that if you're far too on the right then everyonce else must look like extreme leftists, and vice versa.
File: 1457306163916.jpeg (198.7 KB, 1300x957, image.jpeg)
>you should not make a hostile or off topic racial comment in a /b/ thread if the thread is not about race.
Take it to the appropriate containment thread in /b.
File: 1457306406640.gif (1.6 MB, 350x197, Nathan-Fillion-reaction-gif.gi…)
…that actually seems like a totally fair and good point.
Was fun watching other anon!
>>77924>In order to straw man you must falsely represent the other's argument AND attack that false argument.
I'm happy to call it misrepresentation.
>It's not a big deal.
In the grand scheme of human history, or even western history? Fuck no, it isn't.
>It's not really wrong.
I asked you to demonstrate to me why it was wrong. I've already explained to why I think slavery is morally wrong and explained my basis for thinking so.
In order for something to be unethical, you need to demonstrate it to be unethical.
>If you hadn't been implicitly referring to BLM among other things
Black tribalism is broader than BLM, and tapping into the reservoir of the commonly repeated narrative about West African slave trades being particular
in their moral abhorrence as a rhetorical tool long predates such a movement.
The reason I referenced campus activism is because you said that nobody in contemporary America is using the narrative I've been talking about as a rhetorical tool. Campus activism and its successes in flushing various things down the memory hole obviously proves this wrong.
>I've already said once that you must be retarded to believe that people didn't think slavery occured in nearly all parts of history.
Actually, I'm skeptical that most people do think that. I think that most people are vaguely aware slavery was a thing, but still buy into the notion of the Transatlantic Trade as being particular in how "brutal" it was. As an illustration, ask the average person what they know about the Ottoman or Abbasid/Rashidun slave trades, they won't know a thing 9 times out of 10.
Feminism does not see men as antagonists what the fuck. Again: I know that the word "feminism" is particularly abused nowadays with tumblr and shitty memes. But the biggest problem of feminism is really that, the enormous amount of people having the wrong idea about it. So we have the crazy sjws who embarass themselves over the internet with the "fuck cis white males" shit while declaring themselves "feminists" on one side, and the people really believing that feminism=misandry on the other side.
MRAs don't have a reason to exist in the first place, because no one discriminates a man because he's a man. A man is discriminated when black, hispanic or asian in a "caucasian" country; when disabled, when homeless, when homosexual, when poor. MRAs should focus on this, to prove they really care for men's rights, and yet all they do is whining "Waaaah waaaaah feminists are evil". There's no way you can compare those people to feminists. The only equals of fedoras/MRAs are social justice warriors, and that's it.
But there's a feminism thread out there already, so we can bring this discussion there perhaps
>>78203>Feminism does not see men as antagonists what the fuck.
Have you ever read any feminist historiography? It's an application of Marxist historical materialism to the world of "gender" with classes substituted for male/female. The entirety of human history is viewed as an antagonistic relationship between men and women, with men as the oppressor.
>Again: I know that the word "feminism" is particularly abused nowadays with tumblr and shitty memes.
I'm referring to all feminism. Although I dislike the "fuck cis white males" types of third-waver, the "porn and prostitution are empowering!" ones are markedly worse. These are people who actively hurt
women through the systems they support and the raunch culture they help uphold and promote, and they have the audacity to turn around and rant about how "right wingers didn't care about women until Cologne!"
>A man is discriminated when black, hispanic or asian in a "caucasian" country
This gives your game away, you're an intersectional feminist who believes in intersections of privilege. As a result you believe white men are at the top of the privilege pyramid. We're so much more privileged than the rest of the world. That's why even tentatively suggesting we have the right to remain majorities in our homelands will get us branded neo-nazis.
Odd how that doesn't happen to the supposedly less privileged Japanese in Japan.
>There's no way you can compare those people to feminists.
They're both products of deranged enlightenment thinking. Believe it or not history didn't begin with the foundation of "inalienable rights". The idea that equality and liberty and morally good above all other things is not some default belief system, it's ideology, just like what China promotes (synthesis of Confucianism with other things), IS promotes (Islamism) and so on.
>MRAs should focus on this
MRAs are clowns. Don't worry. They buy into the narrative of non-white victimhood and morally unique "white oppression" too.
File: 1457375485000.jpeg (462.77 KB, 1000x923, 1451729943469.jpeg)
>>78237>Have you ever read any feminist historiography? It's an application of Marxist historical materialism to the world of "gender" with classes substituted for male/female. The entirety of human history is viewed as an antagonistic relationship between men and women, with men as the oppressor.
No. The Marxist solution came after and wasn't really applied then, let alone now. Feminism has evolved, keeping the ideal of proportional equality. >I'm referring to all feminism. Although I dislike the "fuck cis white males" types of third-waver, the "porn and prostitution are empowering!" ones are markedly worse. These are people who actively hurt women through the systems they support and the raunch culture they help uphold and promote, and they have the audacity to turn around and rant about how "right wingers didn't care about women until Cologne!"
Who said "porn and prostitution are empowering"? Although there are feminists who are against prostitution and feminists who are okay with it, I've never heard of a feminist saying it's "empowering" outside of tumblr. >This gives your game away, you're an intersectional feminist who believes in intersections of privilege. As a result you believe white men are at the top of the privilege pyramid. We're so much more privileged than the rest of the world. That's why even tentatively suggesting we have the right to remain majorities in our homelands will get us branded neo-nazis.
Odd how that doesn't happen to the supposedly less privileged Japanese in Japan.
Actually I had to google "intersectional feminist" to understand what you were saying. Are you denying the existence of things like racism or homophobia? Discrimination works on many levels, and this is objectively undeniable. >They're both products of deranged enlightenment thinking. Believe it or not history didn't begin with the foundation of "inalienable rights". The idea that equality and liberty and morally good above all other things is not some default belief system, it's ideology, just like what China promotes (synthesis of Confucianism with other things), IS promotes (Islamism) and so on.
So what is right for you? I can't really understand.
File: 1457380139842.jpg (181.11 KB, 1024x1024, 1449194162636.jpg)
>>78279>Feminism has evolved, keeping the ideal of proportional equality.
Maybe you have but feminism as a movement is doing the opposite. But i guess feminism is a lot like Anonymous. The lack of leadership and official membership status eventually ensures the ranks are filled with the absolute shit tier of people. The ones with plenty of their own issues they could work on and maybe even a bit of that very hate they claim to fight in their hearts.
When no one can dictate what is law and what is not, it eventually becomes like this where one feminist says something and the next contradicts it. But both in the name of feminism of course.
But inconsistency is something people catch on to and i think a lot of people are starting to view feminism in a negative light. And they are voicing their concerns. So i guess that present you (a proud feminist i assume) with a problem. People are attacking your religion so what are you gonna do about it?
I see two options:
1) Look inwards - try to fix the church
2) Look outwards - attack the heretics
>>78279>The Marxist solution came after
Marxism predates feminism. Historical materialism (Hegel) long predates both.
>Who said "porn and prostitution are empowering"?
Many third-wavers believe that boundaries of sexual propriety of any kind, beyond say kids, are tools of the patriarchy.
>Are you denying the existence of things like racism or homophobia?
No, I'm denying the idea that a group that is supposedly the most privileged on earth is concurrently impotent to prevent its own demographic downfall simply by passing a few immigration laws to make inflows slow down and settlement stricter.
"Racism" doesn't convey anything meaningful anyway, so in the sense it is used as a tool of ideological disarmament and nothing more, I deny it.
>So what is right for you?
Western Tradition. Each group on earth has its own tradition, for the Chinese it is Confucianism, for the Arabs it is Islamism, for Sub-Saharan Africans tribal confederations etc.
For Westerners it is Plato and Aristotle. The idea of things like Aristocratic Republics or non-absolute monarchies, the rule of law etc. This means going back to our perennial traditions.
You blew it when you actually stated what was right for you. You can't really come from a morally nihilistic place and say that "it's always been so, so it should stay so".>>78347>>78320
It does make me sad how people who are against feminism (I'm assuming you both are, can't read much right now) are more educated than those who somewhat agree with me. I wish for gender equality because I'm a female and, as far as I can see, there's no good reason why I should not be taken as seriously/not be as free to be a person as men are solely for that fact.
Not that being against feminism is a bad thing, I do loathe most of its practices, but gender equality /is/ something that seems right, in my opinion.
>>78348>anything that isn't liberalism is nihilistic
This is literally what you just said.
Sit on that for a moment.
>It does make me sad how people who are against feminism
I'm against feminism. I'm not against women.
At present some 75% of men who commit violent sexual assault are released and go on to offend again. Hundreds of women are raped every year by men who are released on bail. Thousands have been raped and killed by recidivist murderers. Nobody talks about this. No parole boards, judges or officials are ever held responsible.
Not a single feminist has ever mentioned it. In fact most feminists support the same liberal policies like tariff sentences, early release schemes and so on that lead to this.
If it were up to me, aggravated rape would result in the death penalty. Every time. Sexual assault would result in public humiliation and/or work in a labor camp. Pedophilia would result in either chemical castration and a labor camp or death.
I'm a thousand times more committed to the welfare of women (and men) than any feminist. The very policies feminists support, without any exaggeration, kill women like flies. Lead to women become drugged, pimped-out messes, or pornstars with all sorts of incurable psychological pathologies.
No leftist has any right to talk about how right-wingers don't care about the welfare of others when western criminal justice systems have the level of contempt for the general public they do today.
No feminist has mentioned it? None at all?
Wow, anon, you've stumbled across something quite incredible!!! You've found something that no
single feminist has ever mentioned ever. That's mind blowing, call the press ASAP!
>>78320>But i guess feminism is a lot like Anonymous. The lack of leadership and official membership status eventually ensures the ranks are filled with the absolute shit tier of people.
Well, yes, this is true. But feminism is about ideals, it just says "Women and men are created equal with the same abilities, gender stereotypes are bullshit and sexism is always wrong, for both men and women", it's a school of thought, how could it have a leader?>People are attacking your religion so what are you gonna do about it? I see two options:
1) Look inwards - try to fix the church
2) Look outwards - attack the heretics
Many people think wrong about feminism because of both the case above discussed and the fact that there's no information about it. Or, well, there is, but the wrong information. I follow two feminist blogs and at first in the comments many people were so puzzled because they really thought feminism was women>men, they had no idea. Why? "I heard it was about women being above men". They heard it. So yes, there are some internal problems like the scarcity of cohesion (but I don't want to be responsible for a dumbass somewhere saying all men are pigs while flaunting the flag of feminism), but there are some external prejudices too.
(Also, about the pic, I think it's out of context to place Dunn's quote there… I don't think she was trying to say that men are useless, just that it's not a big deal for a woman to not have a man by her side, remember that in those years feminists were more aggressive because women used to have less rights, for example in my country it was legal for a man to kill her wife if she cheated on him, and this law was abolished only in 1981)>Marxism predates feminism. Historical materialism (Hegel) long predates both.
No, I assure you. It's really not. >Many third-wavers believe that boundaries of sexual propriety of any kind, beyond say kids, are tools of the patriarchy.
Look at the beginning of this post, I discussed about this problem with the other anon.
For the rest, you have quite a… special way of thinking? Don't get me wrong, but are you from /pol/?>>78348>Not that being against feminism is a bad thing
Well, if you're a woman, yes it is. It's dumb at least. I could understand not
being feminist because one doesn't want to have a label (I don't like labels myself, in fact I don't describe myself as a feminist, I rather say "I've got a feminist way of thinking", in a no-sexist way) or doesn't want to educate themselves or doesn't care or stuff, but a woman being against
it it's ridiculous. It's like an homosexual against LGBT movements. Like, if you hate feminists so much why do you vote. Why do you go out on evening instead of taking care of the house. Why do you have a computer instead of cooking. Since you don't want rights and miss the good ol' days so much, just play Amish and pretend nothing happened. >>78349
>At present some 75% of men who commit violent sexual assault are released and go on to offend again. Hundreds of women are raped every year by men who are released on bail. Thousands have been raped and killed by recidivist murderers. Nobody talks about this. No parole boards, judges or officials are ever held responsible. Not a single feminist has ever mentioned it. In fact most feminists support the same liberal policies like tariff sentences, early release schemes and so on that lead to this. If it were up to me, aggravated rape would result in the death penalty. Every time. Sexual assault would result in public humiliation and/or work in a labor camp. Pedophilia would result in either chemical castration and a labor camp or death. >No feminist mentioned it
No no no no. This is all wrong. >I'm a thousand times more committed to the welfare of women (and men) than any feminist.
Sorry, but now I'm just rolling my eyes into oblivion. You can't be serious.
>>78354>No no no no. This is all wrong.
You're just either playing at being ignorant here, or you're actually ignorant.
It's mystifying. The vast, vast majority of self-described feminists support left wing parties and left wing causes. The vast majority are opposed to swifter and quicker deportations for example, the vast majority support relaxed asylum acceptance rates and the vast majority are opposed to the death penalty.
I've noticed in the last few years or so, some liberals will actively try to deny their support for liberal policies as a last ditch effort to defend liberalism.
>Sorry, but now I'm just rolling my eyes into oblivion. You can't be serious.
I support making men who violently rape women either work in labor camps for the rest of their lives or executing them.
What do you support? Fee-fee tier "rehabilitation"?
It's actually you the ignorant here. You clearly don't know anything about feminism, you just use big words to look more educated when it's really not. This doesn't make any sense. You keep switching the topic just in order to make others confused.
And at "I'm a thousand times more committed to the welfare of women (and men) than any feminist" blah blah you finally proved yourself as a snowflake. To quote your own words… >>78352
Let's assume I'm ignorant.
Can you name a single feminist who supports the death penalty for aggravated rape?
I'll be waiting.
>>78348>It does make me sad how people who are against feminism (I'm assuming you both are, can't read much right now) are more educated than those who somewhat agree with me.>>78349>I'm against feminism. I'm not against women.
This. >>78354>Women and men are created equal with the same abilities, gender stereotypes are bullshit and sexism is always wrong, for both men and women
Well that's just not right.
>but I don't want to be responsible for a dumbass somewhere
But see that's the problem right there. Your movement has no leadership and nobody who takes responsibility. Every idiot under the sun can use your names and icons to send whatever the hell message they want. And they do. And none of you seem to be interested in really ever owning up to any of the bad stuff but instead go straight for shooting the messenger.
Also how can people hear wrong about feminism when everyone everywhere can say what they want? You speak like your the queen of feminism and all the others just have it wrong but i bet a huge goddamn fight would ensure if you ever actually had to meet up and agreed on wtf feminism is.
The First Council of.. well San Francisco i guess. Or Sweden.
>>78349>This is literally what you just said.
No, it's how interpreted what I said. I admit I was pretty unclear, though. You sounded like you came from a morally nihilistic POV to me because you're aware there's more than one way to understand morality and I assumed you were intelligent enough to see that this meant that objectively speaking, nihilism is "true". Doesn't mean you should abandon all belief and go full " everything is permitted ", just that what you think is right is nothing but that - a matter of (informed) opinion.
I just wanted to clear this up because it was bad rethoric. I don't really feel the need to argue with those who disagree with me, I'm not really going to participate in this thread.
File: 1457392730810.jpg (54.7 KB, 700x575, U2dM341.jpg)
>>78421>I just wanted to clear this up because it was bad rethoric. I don't really feel the need to argue with those who disagree with me, I'm not really going to participate in this thread.
You already participated, didn't you..
I know I'm autistic and can't communicate properly but come on. I just meant I wouldn't take part in the discussion.
And if you're the quoted anon: finished reading the post and you're OK, I like you.
>>78354>Like, if you hate feminists so much why do you…
I'm against feminism as a movement, against its current practices, that doesn't mean I:>hate feminists>want ye good old days>am against gender equality
On the contrary, the precise reason why I dislike it so much is the fact that I have the same goals as (some of) them, feminism is a huge thing, it could actually make a difference. Instead, they're fifty shades of misguided in how they go about it, and end up making things worse and the struggle for equality a walking joke. They give it a bad reputation, which will stick to any and every sane attempt to change things. They seem to be gung ho about showing people that the slippery slope is real and not just a fallacy.
Not to mention their apparently inherent deconstructivism. Tearing down toxic notions and prejudices with nothing to put in their stead? Heh, yeah, good luck trying to make that work.
Yeah yeah I said I wouldn't participate, apparently I can't help it.
maybe im getting too tired to follow this but aren't you at least>>78542>>78421>>78348>>78279>>78237
If you are it seems kinda like a weasel tactic to try and claim your above participating in the discussion now.
>>78356>You're just either playing at being ignorant here, or you're actually ignorant.
Aaaaaand now you fall. Always the same story with "anti-feminists": even if some may act calm and collected at first, it's only a matter of time until they snap and start insulting. Just like monkeys, when they throw their poop. What's the matter? Why can't you follow a straightforward argumentation with a final point instead of vomiting pointless notions and percentages - that look copypasted - and expecting people to believe you without even bothering to post some source? (A reliable one, maybe)
And when you say that "Feminists don't care about women because they don't ask for death row for rapists" can you realize that this is exactly what most radical ones do and they're bashed by literally everyone starting with anti-feminists (who yell "Can you see it guys? They're crazy!") and feminists who don't want their movement to be considered barbaric? So when a "feminist" wants even just castration people say it's cray (and I won't object with this, since castration does not solve anything and could even make it worse); when another feminist wants to debate about the right punishment without killings or mutilations he/she's wrong too? Sounds like a lose-lose situation to me. Some people will always bash without contributing. This is the problem.>>78389>But see that's the problem right there. Your movement has no leadership and nobody who takes responsibility. Every idiot under the sun can use your names and icons to send whatever the hell message they want. And they do. And none of you seem to be interested in really ever owning up to any of the bad stuff but instead go straight for shooting the messenger.
But people should know the right definition of feminism before, otherwise it's useless. If a self proclaimed vegan came to you saying "Hey lol I eat fish because it's not meat amirite?" what would you think? That he's not doing it right because when you're vegan you don't eat animals and products of animal origin or
that omg veganism is pointless and vegans are full of shit because they say one thing and then do another? (Brought the vegan example because I was scrolling /snow/ and the fitginger's mug was the first thing I saw lol)>Also how can people hear wrong about feminism when everyone everywhere can say what they want? You speak like your the queen of feminism and all the others just have it wrong but i bet a huge goddamn fight would ensure if you ever actually had to meet up and agreed on wtf feminism is.
Nah. There are people all over the internet and the world who will say bs, and you're browsing lolcow so you know it. One can always lie about something: about being a feminist, about being asian, about their name, about their interests etc. All you can do when you see such people is exposing them, saying "No you're not because…". And I'm not the queen of anything, don't worry. You ask, I answer. The major problem with feminism is the ignorance about the movement itself and its purposes, but I can assure you there's cohesion internally. In my country, at least. I don't know how's the situation where you are. I'm used to a generally non-aggressive feminism that avoids trolls and tries to find real solutions instead of "Kill them all!".
I'm pretty sure you wouldn't find it so bad if you looked further into it (and if you're not against women obv)
File: 1457470518072.png (41.17 KB, 610x479, women-men-manipulation-amyjala…)
>>78752>But people should know the right definition of feminism
I just don't understand how they ever could. Who can define it?
>If a self proclaimed vegan came to you saying "Hey lol I eat fish because it's not meat amirite?" what would you think?
I would ask it about its reasons for being vegan then form an opinion based on that.
Don't you realize that with that example you expose yourself quiet a bit?>self proclaimed vegan
How can anyone ever be anything but a self-proclaimed feminist/vegan? Is there a counsel to decide who can join? You get voted in? No, all you can ever do is proclaim it. >not doing it right
Your regulating behavior for a group without having any authority to do so. Who are you to say that person is not a vegan?>vegans are full of shit because they say one thing and then do another?
Vegans ARE full of shit because they say one thing and do another. Just like feminists and MRA's. And as long as you and people like you keep insisting on dawning that noble shiny armor of Feminism or Veganism or w/e the fuck, people will keep saying it.
>The major problem with feminism is the ignorance about the movement itself and its purposes
I think that's probably right. And i also think that it might be because the movement no longer has a purpose. If your coexisting with peaceful feminists that's nice and its probably why your willing to go on the defensive. Your defending your friends. But let me throw something insane out there.. What if women were actually just naturally awesome and the actions and achievements of them are neither in spite of, because of, or even related to Feminism?
Why can't the work you/they do stand on its own? Instead of being a feminist why aren't you just you? It seems like a pointless virtue signaling system to me, kinda like having to be a card carrying member of the ruling party to even be considered for a job.
>and if you're not against women obv
Im not against women. But im not particularly for them either. I believe we all have the capacity to be assholes so i hate equally.
>>78781>I just don't understand how they ever could. Who can define it?
Even a dictionary, for example. >I would ask it about its reasons for being vegan then form an opinion based on that.
Don't you realize that with that example you expose yourself quiet a bit?
How?>How can anyone ever be anything but a self-proclaimed feminist/vegan? Is there a counsel to decide who can join? You get voted in? No, all you can ever do is proclaim it.
You are self-proclaimed when you say
you are part of something, but actually don't act
like you really are part of it. A poser, to sum it up. >Your regulating behavior for a group without having any authority to do so. Who are you to say that person is not a vegan?
Because a vegan shouldn't eat meat and products of animal derivation, so if you say you are vegan and then eat meat you're not, simple.>Vegans ARE full of shit because they say one thing and do another. Just like feminists and MRA's. And as long as you and people like you keep insisting on dawning that noble shiny armor of Feminism or Veganism or w/e the fuck, people will keep saying it.
You're trolling, I give up. >I think that's probably right. And i also think that it might be because the movement no longer has a purpose. If your coexisting with peaceful feminists that's nice and its probably why your willing to go on the defensive. Your defending your friends. But let me throw something insane out there.. What if women were actually just naturally awesome and the actions and achievements of them are neither in spite of, because of, or even related to Feminism?
Nobody say that… Oh, I'm done. >Why can't the work you/they do stand on its own? Instead of being a feminist why aren't you just you? It seems like a pointless virtue signaling system to me, kinda like having to be a card carrying member of the ruling party to even be considered for a job.
Who tells you I/they don't. It's not like everytime I do something "naturally awesome" I think "Woah it's the power of feminism that brought me there! I'm doing this for feminism!" but I guess there's nothing to do with you, it looks like you get it wrong on purpose. Nothing to do here.
Saging because we went OT.
go back to /r9k/
I have all guy friends and I think they all know. This is how it usually goes down.
Guy>something derogatory about feminism
Me>what's wrong with feminism?
Guy>usually laughs, starts to "explain" that they hate men, laugh at their misfortune etc
Me>mate that's extreme feminism, what's the definition of feminism? Look it up.
Guy>looks up/already knows it's equal rights for women
Me>so do you believe in that message? Should women get equal pay/generally not be disadvantaged due to their gender?
Guy>but muh egalitarianism
Me>but the message is still equality for women, do you believe in that? And if not, why are we hanging out/acting as equals? It seems like you think of me at least on the same level as you.
Guy>well yeah, of course they should have the same rights
Me>so what does that mean then? What does that make you?
Guy >technically a feminist?
Me>yeah me too, you dick
And that's how I do it. If your guy pals don't believe in equality for women/see you as lesser, then get rid.
The worst of the anti feminists I've seen though are the "not like the other girls" girls. They seem to go the extra step to show they hate feminism.
You may want to specify which "leaders" you're referring to, as another anon pointed out earlier in the thread, feminism is like anonymous in that there are no real leaders.
As for the meat of the thread itself, I feel too many anons have fallen into the same trap r9k/pol falls into by equating the worst examples of a group with the entirety of the group itself. r9k could very well be entirely made up of MRAs, just as Tumblr could very well be mostly made up of femenists. This does not mean that either site or the worst examples from either site represent their respective movements.
Why did you bump this thread?
And no, that's not the point of MRA, it's a big "whaaaaaaaa im so oppressed I should be treated special" party.
My female programmer cousin gets less pay. She joined a company, and was offered a lower than initial sum she had to accept after negotiating for ages because no other job choice. Her male classmate joins and he gets, for the same project, the sum he first suggests, way higher than my cousin.
This is in Poland, mind you, but I didn't specify the west.
I agree with this. I can't fundamentally understand why any white woman would believe in intersectionality.
And I don't see how believing in typical liberal things like a revolving door prison system helps makes the streets safer for women. I've got some very clear ideas as to reduce rape, including death penalty for violent sexual assault that is particularly bad (like that girl who had her eyebrows cut off).
I would also say women who constantly go on about how great rape fantasies are are fucking annoying too.
Cut off dicks off rapist.
What are some of your ideas?
Pretty much this >>84212
Once a person becomes a violent rapist, I have a hard time believing that they're ever capable of returning to sexual normality. Cutting off their dick removes their weapon permanently.
Chemical castration is of course always an option.
God, that would be one hell of a deterrent huh? >"hurghhhh these bitches think they're too good for me, well tonight I'll give em' a taste of daddies big dick, and I bet the slut'll love it too">"oh wait shit if I'm caught my penis will be forcibly removed like that guy I saw on the news last week, maybe not"
Ofc people will always rape, but something like this would for sure drive numbers down. It would have to be heavily regulated and controlled though, like legit men who are caught in the act, DNA evidence, CCTV + audio etc., absolutely concrete.
So someone points out your movement contain extremist elements and instead of being worried about those extremist you turn on your "friend"?
He correctly identified something is very wrong and sick with the feminist brand and you even confirm it. That's the first step towards fixing it, you know. Luckily for muh equality you discourage his interest in making the world a better place for all of us by acting as a good little brainwashed regulator of opinion.
Your literally being self congratulatory about the fact you divert attention away from the extremist because they are part of 'your' group.
Omfg I wish the robot containment thread wasn't autosaged.
Careful about getting too deep into those conspiracy theories. Didn't you see that thread where the robot cut his nuts out? That shit can really effect you, mentally.
I'm female actually, sorry that I don't subscribe to your ideology of female supremacy. Unlike you, I don't hate men.
I saged, because I don't feel the need to bump a thread while adding not much to it.
File: 1470785929531.png (32.99 KB, 1020x194, mras.png)
This is what gets upvoted on /r/mensrights. Literally just whining about personal dating failures and nothing to do with men's rights.
Why is this guy acting like the abortions matter?>woman doesn't get abortion>woman births child>shit hits the fan and bf decides to leave (a la "three past gfs and a failed proposal)>woman has the legal right to pursue child support if needed>"MUH MALE OPPRESHUN I SHULD BE ABLE TO KEEP ALL MY MONEY I HAD NO REAL CHOICE FOR THE BIRTH AUUGHHHH!!!"
Sounds like the women were smart and escaped this delusional manlet before it got ugly. Now he's gonna get a mail order bride to control because she knows if she contests shit her ride in America could end.
>dad is homeless!1!!!!
Nothing to do with women. Thank your government for not supporting vets dude.
You know why. He's using the classic robot posting technique of starting off his post soundind moderate, but "hiding" his obvious stance in the middle.
The guys that say shit like that don't actually care about "women in the west" being in the dastardly clutches of the ~feminist agenda~. When you press them on their opinions, a lot of them are frustrated that they aren't given a place at the table on default anymore.
Look at the post about NEETs. A lot of them complain about feminism making their lives harder, because since women can take care of themselves, these NEETs don't have the motivation to try to succeed. Since they aren't guaranteed a place in the company and a pretty wife, they don't want to even try.
So whoever I see dudes post about how feminism isn't necessary in the west, I always wait for their second comment. That's when shit goes off the rails with evopsych, or PUA bullshit about the ~true natures~ of men and women.
The only Western country where abortion is illegal is Ireland. In most Western countries it's even completely reimbursed by social security. Additionally contraception is legal everywhere so there shouldn't even be any reason for abortions to happen.
Men are about three to four times more likely to be murdered than women.
And if men are more common in managing positions and women are more common as housewives this has nothing to do with oppression, discrimination, or any "glass ceiling", it's only got to do with men and women on average being driven by different things and having different priorities.
The word I used was to be denied the right to an abortion, this is not just an Irish problem. Contraception also costs money, it isn't free and many idiot men refuse to wear condoms resulting in the pregnancy as reported earlier on this thread. They expect women to take hormonal contraceptives that have major negative side effects for women.
Women and even underage girls face sexual harassment every day whilst on the train, walking home from school etc a man would never have to think about not showing too much flesh whilst walking home or making sure he had an escape route when on a bus or train some stranger gets too close and starts rubbing their legs
against them. Women are the main victim of domestic violence, that months, years, decades of being abused they also are at the highest risk of being murdered when they try to leave.
You think the average woman WANTS to do a day at work then come home and take care of a lazy husband who can't make dinner or tidy up after himself nor bathe the baby?
>denied the right to an abortion
When and how does this happen in the West?
>Contraception also costs money
So does food.
>many idiot men refuse to wear condoms resulting in the pregnancy as reported earlier on this thread. They expect women to take hormonal contraceptives that have major negative side effects for women.
Well you're going to have to choose between taking the pill or not fucking men who don't want to wear condoms. I don't really understand how you expect feminism to solve this. If your idea of contraception is not using any and then get abortions, then you really shouldn't do that, for health reasons for starters.
>harassment and violence
Yes, these are problems people face, regardless of gender. It's a law and order issue, not a "feminism" issue.
>You think the average woman WANTS to do a day at work then come home and take care of a lazy husband
If she's doing it, then yes she probably wants to. Divorce is legal, getting a job is legal, there's nothing forcing her to stay and nothing that feminism could do to solve her problem.
I'd rather not, since this is a thread to talk about goofy MRA bullshit.
Nice agenda tho, brah.
Same to you bby
>>107101>That child needs to be taken care of.
Because the mother has decided to keep it>>107104>He CHOOSE to have unprotected sex with a woman, unless he has had no sex education he should have been aware that pregnancy would be the likely conclusion.
This is a practical issue. People prefer having sex without a condom and they do it if circumstances allow. If the guy trusts the girl and she tells him that he can do it without a condom because she should be safe, the guy will very likely do it. But then, turns out she wasn't that safe and ends up pregnant and decides to keep it because muh motherly instincts. How is this the guy's fault? Clearly he could've avoided it by using a condom, but it's unreasonable to expect everyone to constantly use condoms.
Furthermore, place yourself in the girl's position - you keep telling a guy that he can do you raw, yet he keeps refusing and puts on a condom every time. Wouldn't you assume that he just doesn't trust you enough? Wouldn't you be hurt?
>>107116>because the mother has decided to keep it
Well she didn't create the baby alone. And once it is here, the courts don't care.
Look, sex ed tells you that unprotected sex can make a baby. Since men have the short end of the stick, biologically speaking, if they truly don't want to pay child support, they should take steps to control their fertility. Condoms exist. Or have sex with a partner you trust, who also doesn't want children. Or get a vasectomy. I have been responsible for my own fertility since my first period. But, since men aren't the ones carrying the baby, they need to either take steps to ensure they don't get someone pregnant, or be comfortable with paying child support if they aren't a custodial guardian.
So you don't want to insist on wearing a condom, because you might upset the girl…even though you know it could lead to pregnancy…
I'd rather have an awkward conversation instead of a child in 9 months.
I already do.
But if you reeeeeeally don't want to pay child support that badly, you should double up on your birth control, and wear the condom.
The issue is that women are presented with all the same choices, but in addition, they also get to choose whether or not they take day after pills and later on, if they get an abortion, and then after that, if they want to keep the child. The man cannot tell the woman that he wants the child so she should just have it instead of aborting it, let alone pay child support afterwards, but the reverse is perfectly reasonable and viable.
I realize that changing the law is not an option because there are situations that justify it entirely, but people are way too eager to just shrug it off with "lol he should've used condoms", as displayed by everyone ITT. At the very least, women should be heavily discouraged from keeping a child without a father, but instead, we have the complete opposite.>>107118
This is like the whole assumed consent debate, when feminists say that you should ALWAYS ask for consent, before every single sexual act, otherwise it's rape, even between couples and married people. It's not practically viable, 99.999% of the population is not going to do it because it's idiotic and if you actually did it, it'd make you look like a wussy sperg. It would solve your issues with child support though, because no woman would let you put your dick inside them.
Blame biology, then. Since you aren't the one carrying the baby, you can't choose its fate. You can only control your own actions, and the courts don't care about your intent. The courts will make an arrangement so the child is taken care of.
If your only options are looking like a "sperg" or having a baby you didn't even want, I know what I'd choose.
Just keep a condom in your wallet or poket.
Lol then what the fuck are you whining for????
At least see a naked woman IRL before you shit your pants about child support.
Ikr. You can only control your own actions, so why do these guys get so frothy when they are told to be responsible?
Don't want evil women to ~enslave you via child support? Take extra steps to make sure you don't get anyone pregnant. Use condoms, sleep with partners who also don't want children, ask your partner about the BC they are using, and/or get a mastectomy.
Exactly, we're just telling them to take responsibility WITH us, literally no woman ever said "it's ONLY the guys fault if we get pregnant"
Holy fuck i can't understand how they got so stupid
I don't think you understand just how harmful the contraceptive pill can be to women, and it isn't 100% guaranteed of preventing pregnancy. It also does not protect against infection or disease.
What is the big deal with men taking responsibility for their own sexual health?
>>107157>If you are allergic against something and knowingly eat it you can't be angry when you have an allergic reaction
No, if you want to make analogies, it's more like this: you try a new food at a restaurant and then suddenly have an allergic reaction, turns out you're allergic to an ingredient in the food, but it's your first contact with it. The chance was pretty damn small, but here it is. Thankfully the girl you're on a date with has an epi-pen, she gets it out, but then stops and starts to ponder:>well, you know, if you didn't want to get into anaphylaxis, maybe you shouldn't have ordered anything, or just get something you've eaten before>Didn't they teach you in school about allergies? Don't you know that every time you eat something you've never tried before, you could have an allergic reaction to it?>I could give you the epi-pen, but I'm not sure it'd be the moral thing to do>now that I think about it, since you chose the food yourself, and you decided to eat it despite knowing about the 0.001% chance that it contained some allergen you're sensitive to, I think it'd be correct to take responsibility for your own actions>on second thought, if you give me a thousand bucks every month for the next ten years, I'll give you the epi-pen>>107160
All she's saying is that men should wear condoms, nothing about female contraception.
>>107122>The man cannot tell the woman that he wants the child so she should just have it instead of aborting it
Well, it's growing inside her body. Pregnancy is not exactly pleasant, especially if you don't want the kid.
I stand by the body autonomy principle wholeheartedly - you have a right over your own body, it would be absurd to remove a kidney or lung off you so someone else can live, and forcing a woman to grow a fetus works the same way (or maybe mandatory blood donations would be a better analogy).
I do think however that a man should have the right to forfeit parenthood ("abort", so to speak) and not pay child support if the woman chooses to keep the kid while he doesn't.
>women should be heavily discouraged from keeping a child without a father, but instead, we have the complete opposite.
That's only on the tumblr crazy SJW side, single moms are still widely frowned upon.
Same goes for the consent part. I don't know a single sane person who thinks that verbal consent is required AT ALL TIMES, that's what body language and reciprocity is for. If you've ever had sex you know that.
I'm not really trying to make an argument that the reverse should be possible; it makes sense that the woman has the decision over the abortion, I was just illustrating the fundamental differences between just how much of a say each sex has in the matter.
Forfeiting parenthood, it solves one issue, but creates another. If the mother is otherwise poor as fuck, as it is often, if they don't even receive child support, the child will have a fucking terrible time growing up. It is, of course, the fault of the mother, but the law prioritizes the well-being of the child over serving justice between the parents.
Maybe a partial solution would be attributing any child support as debt that the mother has to pay back once the child grows up, but then again, 18 years is such a long timespan that most low-lifes wouldn't even care, and the debt would be so huge that most would never be able to cough up enough money to cover it.
>>107164>I don't know a single sane person who thinks that verbal consent is required AT ALL TIMES, that's what body language and reciprocity is for. If you've ever had sex you know that.
Some really are that delusional. They think when you have sex your bf is constantly supposed to ask you 'do you like that?' and 'that feel good?'
Which is retarded because it eventually starts to feel like you're fucking your own mother and it's kinda impossible to answer at times.
>>107166>If the mother is otherwise poor as fuck, as it is often, if they don't even receive child support…
Well, if she chose not to abort it's her own fucking problem to deal with.
Coming from a country where abortion is forbidden, it's baffling how bizarre and unfair the US is when it comes to child support. We have mandatory child support here because once a woman is pregnant everyone's fucked and nobody has a say. That's not the case in the USA.>>107167
Maybe he's just insecure…? I've never come across a guy who did that. Hope it doesn't spread.
This. I don't know why they try to say we're equal. The name itself implies female only, but then you'll get ones that say: OH BUT ITS 4 MEN TOO LOL!! Yeah, nah. Feminists would be crying if the Olympics weren't segregated.
>Please explain to me how women having significantly less power and influence doesn't serve as a disadvantage.
Its fine though. Men are stupid and bend over backwards for women, women are capable of manipulating men in power. Same reason why we don't really need to be strong. Have you ever thought about maybe women don't want to be in power as well? Are you angry that they're making the "wrong" decisions? I mean, how many feminists itt actually studying STEM? http://munews.missouri.edu/news-releases/2016/0421-girls-more-anxious-about-mathematics-stem-subjects-compared-to-boys/
MRAs are annoying because they leech off other men's accomplishments and take it as their own. I don't really mind the opinions, because ya'll already know they're not getting laid anytime soon. Its just a fox and the grapes situation.
MRAs are basically the male counterpart to radical feminists. A reaction to not being the center of attention. I believe women aren't the only ones who want the limelight.
They always complain women are invading their safe spaces, when women have always been a part of them. Meanwhile they have the right to invade everything women are "supposed" to do.
There are people always trying to exploit others, Capitalism baby. But if you really think a girl ruined your hobby that you probably p2w then blame that on all of you freely trying to impress or pamper her. Always a problem when everything isn't default MAN and when people want at least some credit, understanding or personality it should just be suppressed for some superficial issue.
The only issue is yourself boy.>>107410
It's always:>Men are the creators of civilization women have done nothing>Men built everything women would live in mud houses without us>Men provided the food women would starve>meanwhile he's never worked in construction, been hunting, or has a PH.D as an civil engineer or anything relevent
Love it when they say any man can beat up a female MMA fighter. I wonder what Chinese martial artists would have to say about such nonense.
File: 1472017827930.gif (1.99 MB, 484x256, fuck you fedorafag.gif)
>>5197>If people really want equality, why not choosing Egalitarianism? >>5203>I never understood why people are feminists and not egalitarians.
Do you also ask>why didn't black americans protest against hitler's policy on jews?>why doesn't the french fight for japanese white collars' rights?>why don't homosexuals in russia fight for freedom of religion in china?>why don't women in syria fight for the proper treatment of mentally ill in s. korea?
But I guess unlike every other ~oppressed~ demographic that are allowed to only be concerned with issues concerning them, women who want equality need to be passionate about literally every social cause under the sun.
File: 1472047322638.jpg (53.97 KB, 546x896, 1468470770441.jpg)
If I think that both men and women are whores and evil (myself included), and I like making fun of women who get raped and abused but also men who get raped and abused, what does that make me?(USER HAS BEEN PUT OUT TO PASTURE)
i think that facebook twitter page is a fake or made by a troll to discredit it, absolutely no prominent mensrights writers talk like that
also>going on encyclopediadramatica for an informed opinion
none of them seem to post or talk about theamazingatheist btw
look at the leddit mensrights page and their sidebar, the shit they talk about is a bit more serious than the "hurr bitter virgin" thinghttp://www.realsexism.com/https://notehub.org/hpp2i
^ real problems
gender politics has become a shit flinging victimhood olympics
these people find politics because they're bored
File: 1476832654686.png (518.21 KB, 700x800, 1391073374489.png)
I dislike how people say "radical feminism" to talk about feminists they don't like.
Radical feminism is literally 2nd wave feminism. The feminists you often find retarded and entitled are most likely liberal feminists/3rd wave feminists.
If you read about 2nd wave feminist you'll literally read about what people call "true feminism". Liberal feminist is literally the shit you see, SJWs, entitled "feminists" pulling theories out their asses and whatnot. 3rd wave bullshit that most likely makes no sense and only caters to "progressive" people, the kind of people who want to put trannies in girls locker rooms.
At least if you are gonna shit on feminists know what you are talking about.
During the second wave, man-hating was already rampant. Feminists were looked down upon by other feminists for daring to marry a man, or to give birth to a boy.
The SCUM manifesto was a big inspiration for prominent feminists of the second wave.
But as if feminism was ever good. In the first wave, it was already only for rich white women. The feminists of the first wave looked down upon poor and coloured women.
It has always been a shitty movement, and social change in favour of women would still have happened if it didn't exist. Just focus on general human rights, stop alienating men and blaming their masculinity for all the problems in the world. How about just focus on human rights in general, instead of focusing on women? Then you won't get people who feel the need to start men's rights movements, to counteract the shittiness of feminism.
I wouldn't care if someone is a men's right activist as long as they didn't hate women (same thing with feminists as well).
Most of the "men's rights" activists seem set on complaining about feminists or thinking that men "have always had it way worse than womenz!". That being said I don't write anyone off right away if they chose to say they are also interested in this. I can identify many ways in which men are disadvantaged at or something not fair, but that doesn't mean you have to discredit women or pretend that historically men have had more discrimination against them.
I think men CAN advocate for men's right but they have to not be trying to compete in "victim hood" or saying things like "sexism against women isn't a big deal! only if it's about men!". Saying things like that just shows how biased and blind to history someone really is. You can't deny that for most of history women have had sub par rights and treatment compared to men. In most places, there is still a lot of shitty things that happen to women just because they are women.
I've heard "men's right activists" or even just regular men say things like "well women got the right to vote! and can go to school! so sexism isn't real!!!" kind of thing which is just so confusing to me. That's like saying because slavery is over in a country that there is no racism at all. I wish it were like that.
In fact, in my home country (south american here) sexism (and racism) are very very bad here. Just a few years ago work ads would say things like "Looking for MALE engineer" and would not hire equally competent women to do a "man's job". Now that I live in the US, the sexism is not as "bad" but I still see it a lot in the views of many people that seem otherwise reasonable. I work in the STEM field and there is a lot of sexism there as well sadly.
I would say, in my opinion, most of the "bad" sexist things that affect negatively BOTH men and women are caused by toxic masculinity aspects. I feel like whenever I say that "buzz word" people (particularly men lol) freak out at me, call me an SJW etc but I really believe it. There is nothing wrong with someone being masculine but toxic masculinity is different. It's what drives men to treat women like sub human, it doesn't let men have feelings, it promotes violence, etc. Just bad all around. It's very very prevalent in Hispanic cultures like mine, where the culture is super "machismo"(strong or aggressive masculine pride/chauvinist).
I personally Identify as BOTH someone interested in woman centric feminism (women's issues) but also as a person who is also interested in men's rights. I do my best to try to promote healthy views on men and women.
I understand there may be differences between men and women and that is ok, but no one should be made to feel bad or forced to be something they are not. In the end of all it, men and women have similarities. We all have feelings, thoughts, dreams, and have a right to be respected. I respect everyone equally and part of that respect for is rejecting many of the "toxic" society enforced thoughts and things both men and women "have to do".
ESL chan sorry for any misunderstandings
This is stolen from Reddit by the way, but I think these views make sense.
>. I'd say the father who runs into a burning house to save his kid/spouse is an example of positive masculinity. It's not unique to men, but characteristic of them. And I think that for toxic masculinity to be stopped, we also need to stop pushing for people to perform within positive masculinity.
>positive traits of masculinity usually involve self sacrifice. To provide for, defend and protect, and show love through self sacrifice. Integrity, loyalty, steadfastness, courage, self reliance.
VS negative traits
>Negative/toxic traits stem from the alleged positive traits in my opinion though, and the "positive" traits often lead to problems for men. Toxic traits would be overindulging in anger, taking advantage of the weak to further self, inability to express feelings (which leads to a build up of anger and resentment from self sacrifice), fear of not being enough, fear of intimacy, aggression, viewing femininity as lesser than masculinity (The concept of "Man up" to take your blows and carry on, where women are coddled), viewing everything as competition.
Honestly, I've been really conflicted. I've heard awnsers like
>Therefore, toxic femininity would be a trait that society views as positive that is taken so far that it is harmful. In our current society, feminine traits are not viewed as positive, which is why we don't have toxic femininity
>Based on this definition, and a couple of the others I've looked at, it seems to me that the basic meaning is a gender role taken to the extreme, which ends up being harmful and/or the harmful effects of restrictive gender roles.
Based on my own observations, I think that toxic femininity is something that may already exist. For example, pro-Ana subculture and hardcore slut shaming in North America.
I'm not really sure what I think. I'm really kind of confused by the literal meaning of both "toxic" femininity and masculinity. So far, I've "interpreted" as gender "traits" pushed to an extreme but I still question this answer as well. I was just trying to find a phrase to show kind of how I feel since I am ESL but it might not be the perfect one? it's a concept I haven't fully grasped and I'm not sure on my stance on that particular thing. >>112984
>It is the socially-constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive
So far from what I've read/understood, Masculinity isn't inherently toxic. it becomes "toxic" when it's in some extreme form. At this point it causes problems for both men and women ( I have read this so I am thinking whether or not this is correct, I have not yet fully grasped this topic)
What's dishonest lol? This is just my point of view and in no way am I trying to coddle anyone this is just my opinion. >>112995
I live by tradional gender roles for the most part.
>>108286>Love it when they say any man can beat up a female MMA fighter. I wonder what Chinese martial artists would have to say about such nonsense.
Late response, but this drives me crazy. I love to watch fight scenes from martial arts movies on yt, and so many videos that have a woman fighting men the thread is flooded with 'pssshhh yeah right, the strongest girl on the planet couldn't take down the average guy, we're way too physically superior' when one, it's a fucking movie, one person typically can't take on twenty people who come at them one and a time, and two, the person is usually explained to be trained in the ways of fighting to their advantage, not just simple matter of strength. It's supposed to be the technique.
This anon just hit the nail on the head about how most of the guys that talk down to women because men typically work physically demanding jobs are the ones to leech off their parents and work at grocery stores if working at all. Real men don't give a shit about the politics and complain about how the world is unfair, they do what they have to do to be the provider and don't be crying little pussies on the Internet going 'waaaaah it's not fair! Girls live life on easy mode!' I highly doubt the guys whining online are like pipe fitters or mechanics or build houses for a living. Most of them are fat fucks who can't even be bothered to go the gym to hone those oh-so physically superior in every way bodies.
Mras are the counterpart to feminists full stop. They're both the product of an entitled society where people will ramble on endlessly about their rights, but don't have a single word to talk about their obligations or responsibilities. Fuck them both.
Chinese martial arts is useless in physical fights anyway. It's more like pantomime.
Let's not forget that children are mostly abused by their mothers, toxic femininity right there.
Or how about the fact that a lot of people don't even think a woman can rape a man or little boy? That's an actual example of rape culture.
Let's not forget that women get basically just as often violent in domestic disputes, as men.
>>113049>Let's not forget that children are mostly abused by their mothers, toxic femininity right there
Not the anon you've been replying to but can you elaborate on this? If you're implying that women are found to be across the board leading in all cases of child abuse, you are blatantly incorrect. Sadly, it is the case that both genders or men are usually responsible for child abuse. Very rarely are women found to be the majority abusers.
Take this Australian study, for instance>https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children>in a study examining 126 profiles of perpetrators of fatal assault in United States, found that males were three times more likely to fatally assault their children>Violence between intimate partners with children is overwhelmingly a gendered issue with the vast majority of incidents involving a female victim and male perpetrator >Evidence overwhelmingly indicates that the majority of child sexual abuse is perpetrated by males (ABS, 2005; McCloskey & Raphael, 2005; Peter, 2009). In a US study examining the characteristics of perpetrators in substantiated cases of child abuse and neglect (US DHHS, 2005), 26% of all cases involving male perpetrators were associated with sexual abuse compared to just 2% of cases involving female perpetrators>Research suggests that both mothers and fathers may physically abuse children. Findings from the ABS Personal Safety Survey (2005) indicated that of participants who had experienced physical abuse before the age of 15, 55.6% experienced abuse from their father/stepfather and 25.9% experienced abuse from their mother/stepmother
Now with women, it seems they're mostly accountable for the majority of child neglect cases, but the article states a reason for that:>Evidence also suggests that mothers are more likely than fathers to be held responsible for child neglect. In a large representative study that examined the characteristics of perpetrators in substantiated cases of child abuse and neglect in the United States, neglect was the main type of abuse in 66% of cases involving a female caregiver, compared to 36% of cases involving a male caregiver (US DHHS, 2005). This finding is consistent with the fact that mothers tend to be the primary caregiver and are usually held accountable for ensuring the safety of children even in two-parent families. In light of societal views on gender roles, it has been argued that this may constitute unreasonable “mother blaming” (Allan, 2004; Jackson & Mannix, 2004).
Sad but true.
Not that person who you replied to, but I think any discussion of who does a domestic crime more gender wise is kind of pointless, as either side can be countered by "Well there's obvious issues with reporting of it". Which are valid, because there's an insane amount of pressure on both sides to not report the issues (or perceived pressure at least), but either way, it makes bringing up a study that goes "It objectively happens more here" kind of pointless.
The second point you raise is a great example (first is pretty clear cut, I can't debate that). I think it would be hard to argue that there's not a double standard for when someone should report violence in an intimate relationships. Girls are told they should do it straight away if a guy hits them. It's much more acceptable (socially) for a girl to slap a guy than a guy to slap a girl, so I think it's valid to argue that most men don't feel like they should report cases of violence towards them.
But yeah, I don't think that abuse of children is a gendered issue at all, I've never seen anything that says one gender is worse to their children than others.
I could not agree with this comment more. Like, so f*cking what race or sex of person committed this crime? Finding out that men are 3 times more likely to rape doesn't actually stop them from doing it…maybe working out WHY and not WHO does it would be more effective?
I don't get involved in these conversations often anymore because it just seems to be a case of 'who's more to blame' rather than 'how can we help the victims', or whatever.
Anyone with an extremist view - MRA, feminazis, terrorists, strict religious people - is a cunt. I've never met a nice misandrist, a nice misogynist, a nice judgmental prick, as they are not mutually inclusive terms. MRAs are just as bad as feminazis, all of them need to get off the internet and get a life.
/sage for not contributing
File: 1485641546936.jpg (41.98 KB, 480x477, this is not blini.jpg)
Literally what the fuck am I reading?
>Finding out that men are 3 times more likely to rape doesn't actually stop them from doing it…maybe working out WHY and not WHO does it would be more effective?
Only 3 times?
You should kill yourself for being so retarded:
1.Nobody FUCKING EVER said finding out who rapes more alone
accomplishes anything. But knowing that men make up the vast majority of rapists enables society to do things like setting up women's shelters that are out of limits for MEN.
2. Nobody's actively 'finding out' about it. They don't need to. It's a truth that is known since antiquity. The empirical evidence is overwhelming.
lmfao found the angry feminazi
You've just proven my point. All you've done is pick out the - completely random and most likely incorrect - numerical statistic in my comment, then tell me to kill myself because…what? I see this from a different point of view to you? You're exactly the sort of person my comment was referring to, congrats. Way to smash the patriarchy, kek
Secondly, there are plenty of fucking shelters out there for women being abused by men. What about the men abused by women? In the same vein, a lot of men still don't report being abused and raped, which obviously skews the statistics… meaning you're right, the experience is "empirical" - gathered by experience rather than LOGIC, which is what the rational world deals in. The fact the law still states men cannot be raped by women shows how unbalanced the data actually must be, because there is legit no point going to the police as IT'S NOT EVEN A SERIOUS CRIME.
By the way, I'm actually a victim of gang rape - maybe you should start supporting female victims of horrific sexual attacks by not being a cunt to everyone who doesn't support your safe space, retard.
lmao sorry, I'll correct it if using one word invalidates my point of view.
Is that better? Don't want to hurt your feels
/sage for pointless defending myself against people who desperately want me to not be relevant to this discussion
File: 1485707025294.jpg (90.11 KB, 710x473, 15-trump-steaks-well-done.w710…)
Not to be that guy, but I don't really understand how that word = poster must be an angry virgin man who loathes women.
If we don't take rape seriously as a repugnant, illegal action from both sides of the coin, we aren't going to get anything accomplished. "Robot" makes a good point in the last post.
I'm all for supporting the right's of men and discussions including it. At this point, I just have to ignore any rhetoric that's clearly just bitterly lashing out at "the other side" because it just makes me think about picking sides, rather than looking at the good points of both sides, and rejecting others.
I shouldn't say MRAs, because that invokes a picture of a certain person, and I don't want to say feminist, because that does as well, but I think that if those labels were off the table, we could shake off the implications for long enough to understand the other side.
It's hard tho, I get it.
Thank you. I also think you make good points - the terms "MRA" and "feminist" do invoke images of certain people, which is why the word "feminazi" appeared in the first place. There are many feminists out there doing great things for equality, but there are also plenty sat on the Internet getting angry at people for pointing out that equality is supposed to be helping with men's issues too. There's good and bad on both sides.
The point I originally made (and above) was completely proven when one popped up and told me to kill myself because I tried to make a balanced point, then further proven by another trying to discredit me by inferring that I must be an angry MRA virgin. Great fight for equality there guiz
>>inb4 same poster
thanks, I love being a radfem.
sorry for triggering
you, robot friend
What part of my post –after "Only 3 times?" was ever referencing your retarded statistic in any way, shape, or form?
I'm guessing you're just dwelling on those three words because you can't argue with the rest of the post, dipshit.
yes, it's me who's the triggered
one, because I'm the one getting my panties in a twist about a word. kek>>180139
maybe because it's not, you melon? I'm a woman for a start, in a sexually active relationship. mental how stupid you'd look trying desperately to maintain that only incels disagree with radical feminism (and use a word specifically designed to denote it) if you could see who you were talking to. >>180140
says the one who completely ignored the rest of my post, just to argue with the fact I said "all you've done" in an ambiguous way? Okay, whatever you say m8 >>180142
I'm a college-educated woman in my mid-twenties. I don't think feminists are all men-hating dykes, I think SOME feminists twist every single little thing to fit their own aggressive agenda - like some of the posters here - and they are who I am referring to with "feminazi". If radical feminists categorise everyone who disagrees with them as angry virgin men or uneducated and immature, who is really the one with the problem here?
I'm out, people involved with gender politics are f*cking impossible to have rational conversations with. Enjoy your echo chamber, Tumblrinas.
File: 1485745771539.png (199.13 KB, 620x412, middle page trump story.png)
Yeah, it is used by women, too. I don't know why you would say it's used exclusively by men. I know that a lot of annoying ass people use it inappropriately, but sometimes being super aggressive and short sighted just spoils the broth
Not worth it anon. IDK what's happened but like, there's a sudden influx of easily triggered
babyradfems on this site and it's super annoying.
There seems to be no balance of opinion either on some of it and I just hide the thread and move the fuck on.
people keep tipping cows who then post lolcow on Tumblr. they should just stay there if all they want is to be fucking agreed with and give each other asspats.
/sage for not contributingthread hidden
File: 1485822024558.png (288.15 KB, 3000x3000, b8 holy shit.png)
>>180113>says retarded shit>gets BTFO>lmfao found the angry feminazi
xD>>180143>cherrypick strawman the fuck out of three fucking words in someone's post>hey why are you ignoring the rest of my post waah waaaah
You need to calm down, I can feel the anger just emanating from the screen. You shouldn't be online if you get triggered
this easily by others having different opinions.
>>180113>the experience is "empirical" - gathered by experience rather than LOGIC, which is what the rational world deals in
That's not what the rational world deals in. Not in any way whatsoever. Science deals in empirical data and observations, if you went by ~LOGIC~ we still wouldn't know atoms exist or have any comprehension of physics because most of it makes no sense and has little logic to it.
Shoo, dirty robot, shoo. We don't want your cheap, shallow reasoning around here.
Perhaps they mean like how courts rely on empirical, anecdotal evidence to prove someones innocence/guilt?
There are naturalistic truths based on hard evidence such as the theory of evolution and then there's the airy fairy human-centered bullshit that's constructed by humans dealing with irrelevant petty shit usually spouted in the social sciences which basis lies in subjectivity and qualitative methods of research and data finding.
It would be asinine to conflate the two.
You mean there aren't women being battered and beaten by men who think they own them?
You mean women aren't murdered when they reject some crazy men or try to leave them?
Sorry you feel indignant, but there are actually women who struggle everyday for their basic human right of not being owned by some man.
I like how modern women forget, that wifes were literally their husbands property until a few decades ago. You couldnt work, move, or do anything without your husbands agreement and were forced to have sex even if you didnt want to. Rape between spouses wasnt a thing until around 20 years ago. It just didnt exist as a law, since "why can you not penetrate the woman you own?".
If women worked, the husband owned
their money. They werent even able to buy property without a husband on their side. The couldnt do jackshit alone.