[RD] Feminism

[civver_764]

Hello everybody. In this thread I will be arguing that that we need a better, more equitable gender movement than feminism. The basic reasons for this are:

1. Feminism is anti-male
For example -- Feminism teaches that a "patriarchy" runs the world. It teaches that men benefit from this, and women are disadvantaged by this. This creates an atmosphere of disdain towards males. Males are taught that they need to correct themselves and their sons ("teach boys not to rape"), that they have a "toxic masculinity", and that even appreciating the beauty of a woman is akin to abuse.

If we look at the world through a more objective lens, we see that there is no "patriarchy", or at least that it does not benefit men at the expense of women. Gender roles have pros and cons for both genders, and while I support moving beyond these roles, claiming that men had it "easier" is just dishonest.

2. Feminism is anti-sex
For example -- If women are portrayed in a way that is sexually appealing to men, that is the "male gaze" and it harms women, according to feminism. I think this is totally perverted, one of the greatest aspects of women is their beauty. Men are designed to appreciate this, and in fact it gives women a certain power over men who find them attractive. That's part of the biological force that keeps our species going.

3. Feminism encourages victim mentality
For example -- Despite having laws in place since the 1960's which ban pay discrimination based on gender, feminists still like to complain about the "gender pay gap". On International Women's Day, women skipped work and protested in the street, to show people a "day without women". This is just childish, and certainly not a good way to advance in your career. What exactly are they trying to accomplish anyways? Do they want a law that mandates all employees receive the same pay? Nothing comes out of protests like that besides the feminist victim complex becoming more solidified.

We need a better gender movement, one that recognizes the sacrifices and merits of both genders. One that does not shame one gender, and makes the other a victim. One that recognizes that men and women are merely two parts of the whole, and stresses unity rather than division.

 

[Honor]

LOL good one. Made me laugh. Thank you

We need a better gender movement, one that recognizes the sacrifices and merits of both genders. One that does not shame one gender, and makes the other a victim. One that recognizes that men and women are merely two parts of the whole, and stresses unity rather than division.

I agree with the statement above, but not in your World. Need to fix your society to be more loving first. Feminism is simply a manifestation of your more individualized, less loving/trusting social construct, where nobody is happy and everyone is looking for things to blame their unhappiness on.

But also, and more importantly, your men do rape your women. All 3 of my white girlfriends in the US had had some kind of sexual assault going on in their past. One of them was victimized as a minor. It is a very underrepored crime. Which takes me back to... you need to stop being the way you are and be some other way (emotionally) that doesn't produce these results. Unfortunately, your social trajectory seems to be taking you to becoming either emotionless robots (sometimes in the name of equality) or raging lunatics (because the human inside you is incompatible with the robotizing system). Y'all need to stop and start meditating. Look at the trees and the flowers. Bask in the warmth of the sun. Embrace one another. Fall in love. Not try to continue leading your old lives the way you have lead them, but become something completely "new."

 

[Lexicus]

Slapping an [RD] tag on this cheapens the [RD] label enormously. Also if you want to be taken seriously don't call feminism "whiny," that itself is a sexist insult ironically.

Hello everybody. In this thread I will be arguing that feminism is evil, and that we need a better, more equitable gender movement. The basic reasons for this are:

"Feminism" is not monolithic.

It teaches that men benefit from this, and women are disadvantaged by this.

Actually most feminists would agree that men are also harmed by patriarchy, just nowhere near as much as women.

2. Feminism is anti-sex
For example -- If women are portrayed in a way that is sexually appealing to men, that is the "male gaze" and it harms women, according to feminism. I think this is totally perverted, one of the greatest aspects of women is their beauty. Men are designed to appreciate this, and in fact it gives women a certain power over men who find them attractive. That's part of the biological force that keeps our species going.

It's weird because all the best sex I've had has been with women who were feminists...incidentally, it is sexist and objectifying to say that one of the greatest aspects of women is...their physical attractiveness to men. Women don't actually exist to satisfy your desires, shocking as it may be to hear.

Do they want a law that mandates all employees receive the same pay?

I would certainly want a law that requires employers not to pay people less because they are women.

 

[JollyRoger]

I know this woman who goes by Red. A real diamond in the rough. Loves to get very sexual with me while her MRA son pounds away on the keyboard and whatever else down in the basement. She is a bit whiny though, but obviously not to the point of being evil enough to want dignity, respect, and equality.

 

[civver_764]

Slapping an [RD] tag on this cheapens the [RD] label enormously. Also if you want to be taken seriously don't call feminism "whiny," that itself is a sexist insult ironically.

The RD tag is more than necessary given the amount of trolling in my previous thread. And care to explain how "whiny" is a sexist insult? You're looking for reasons to be offended.

Actually most feminists would agree that men are also harmed by patriarchy, just nowhere near as much as women.

So my point still stands then.

It's weird because all the best sex I've had has been with women who were feminists...incidentally, it is sexist and objectifying to say that one of the greatest aspects of women is...their physical attractiveness to men. Women don't actually exist to satisfy your desires, shocking as it may be to hear.

This is nothing more than a strawman.

I would certainly want a law that requires employers not to pay people less because they are women.

Like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Pay_Act_of_1963

 

[JollyRoger]

Why slap the RD tag on a thread that violates RD standards with its title and opening post?

 

[Gigaz]

Just out of curiosity, civver - Are you male?

Your arguments are neither worse nor better if you are, but if you're female that would certainly make your point of view less self-serving.

Modern feminism is largely driven by women. Often it occurs that male behaviour which these women perceive as rude, sexist or otherwise demeaning is unfortunately an efficient strategy. Which is something that is difficult to understand from the female point of view. So there will ultimately always be tension.

 

[civver_764]

Edit: @Gigaz -- I am a male. However, my views here are partially inspired by female thinkers like Janice Fiamengo.

Why slap the RD tag on a thread that violates RD standards with its title and opening post?

How does it do that? Because you disagree with what I'm saying?

 

[JollyRoger]

Calling a group evil and whiny seems in violation of RD standards.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

The problem with an RD tag here is that the OP is attacking straw-women and equating feminism in general with the most extreme voices in the movement. Of course those extremists exists, but they are a tiny minority and only so "prominent" because they tend to be very loud, but using them as representatives of the movement/ideology is as useless as letting Robert Mugabe speak for all black people or bringing up Pol Pot in a discussion about wealth inequality.

 

[Gigaz]

Are we talking about that Janice Fiamengo who went to a white nationalists radio talkshow and claimed that men are living under a feminist version of Sharia law?

 

[civver_764]

Calling a group evil and whiny seems in violation of RD standards.

An ideology, not a group.

The problem with an RD tag here is that the OP is attacking straw-women and equating feminism in general with the most extreme voices in the movement. Of course those extremists exists, but they are a tiny minority and only so "prominent" because they tend to be very loud, but using them as representatives of the movement/ideology is as useless as letting Robert Mugabe speak for all black people or bringing up Pol Pot in a discussion about wealth inequality.

I don't think so. The idea of patriarchy is pretty central to feminism, no? The "day without women" was pretty widely celebrated. The idea of "male gaze" is hardly controversial either.

Are we talking about that Janice Fiamengo who went to a white nationalists radio talkshow and claimed that men are living under a feminist version of Sharia law?

I'm not aware of anything like that. She has an excellent show on YouTube called the "Fiamengo File" which I really enjoy.

 

[JollyRoger]

I think the ideology spouted in the OP is evil and whiny.

Moderator Action: This post as well as your post in #4 are unacceptable for an RD thread. One point warning. - Vincour
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Gigaz]

I'm not aware of anything like that. She has an excellent show on YouTube called the "Fiamengo File" which I really enjoy.

Perhaps you should have listened occasionally to people with different opinions on feminism before starting this thread. Ms. Fiamengos claim popped up prominently thanks to Google. I don't know if that's also your opinion, but she is certainly highly controversial and should not stand uncommented even in circumstances where she does not sound insane.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Hello everybody. In this thread I will be arguing that feminism is evil, and that we need a better, more equitable gender movement. The basic reasons for this are:

1. Feminism is anti-male
For example -- Feminism teaches that a "patriarchy" runs the world. It teaches that men benefit from this, and women are disadvantaged by this. This creates an atmosphere of disdain towards males. Males are taught that they need to correct themselves and their sons ("teach boys not to rape"), that they have a "toxic masculinity", and that even appreciating the beauty of a woman is akin to abuse.

If we look at the world through a more objective lens, we see that there is no "patriarchy", or at least that it does not benefit men at the expense of women. Gender roles have pros and cons for both genders, and while I support moving beyond these roles, claiming that men had it "easier" is just dishonest.

2. Feminism is anti-sex
For example -- If women are portrayed in a way that is sexually appealing to men, that is the "male gaze" and it harms women, according to feminism. I think this is totally perverted, one of the greatest aspects of women is their beauty. Men are designed to appreciate this, and in fact it gives women a certain power over men who find them attractive. That's part of the biological force that keeps our species going.

3. Feminism is whiny
For example -- Despite having laws in place since the 1960's which ban pay discrimination based on gender, feminists still like to complain about the "gender pay gap". On International Women's Day, women skipped work and protested in the street, to show people a "day without women". This is just childish, and certainly not a good way to advance in your career. What exactly are they trying to accomplish anyways? Do they want a law that mandates all employees receive the same pay? Nothing comes out of protests like that besides the feminist victim complex becoming more solidified.

We need a better gender movement, one that recognizes the sacrifices and merits of both genders. One that does not shame one gender, and makes the other a victim. One that recognizes that men and women are merely two parts of the whole, and stresses unity rather than division.

Oh, this is going to end well...

Keep clearly in mind that every time you disparage feminists as some kind of group who all think the same way and act the same way and that we are all anti-male, hate men, etc., you are insulting numerous members of this forum.

How many times do I need to say this: If I hated men, if I were anti-male, would I have spent the last 12 years on this forum, where the vast majority of members are male?

Feminists are "anti-sex"? Newsflash: Feminists claim the right to decide for ourselves, and not be dependent on men's decisions. Feminists claim the right to retain our original identities after marriage, if we want. One of my convention friends kept her original name after marriage, as she saw no need to become "Mrs. (husband's name)." Back in 1979, the wife of one of our Prime Ministers kept her original name after marriage, and she was vilified in the news... didn't she love and respect her husband enough to take his name? I don't know if that played any part in anyone's decision not to vote for him in the election he lost, but I recall my own mother judging her for not giving up her own name and taking his. To this day, she's known as Maureen McTeer, whose husband is the Rt. Hon. Joe Clark.

Women claim the right to say "no" and have their "no" really mean NO. Feminists want to be able to ask a guy out if they want, and not be thought too forward, or slutty. It's becoming less... shocking? surprising?... if a woman is the one who proposes marriage.

I've already given my own perspective on patriarchy. I don't care if you or anyone else here considers my perspective invalid because it's not backed up by charts, graphs, and Wikipedia articles. As I said, I grew up in the pre-personal computer, pre-internet, pre-social media era in which people simply did not broadcast their personal family situations for everyone to read about, gossip about, and so on.

I have always been honest on this forum about whatever personal details I've shared, whether in the public forums, in the staff forum when I was on staff, in the social groups (when we still had them), and via PM. I've never seen any need not to be honest, because where's the benefit in lying? The reason I don't put all this stuff on Facebook is because unlike the forum culture of CFC that demands at least a minimum amount of respect among members (in terms of rules against trolling, flaming, doxxing), FB is open to the world, and there is zero respect that can be counted on.

 

[Honor]

Oh, this is going to end well...

Keep clearly in mind that every time you disparage feminists as some kind of group who all think the same way and act the same way and that we are all anti-male, hate men, etc., you are insulting numerous members of this forum.

How many times do I need to say this: If I hated men, if I were anti-male, would I have spent the last 12 years on this forum, where the vast majority of members are male?

Feminists are "anti-sex"? Newsflash: Feminists claim the right to decide for ourselves, and not be dependent on men's decisions. Feminists claim the right to retain our original identities after marriage, if we want. One of my convention friends kept her original name after marriage, as she saw no need to become "Mrs. (husband's name)." Back in 1979, the wife of one of our Prime Ministers kept her original name after marriage, and she was vilified in the news... didn't she love and respect her husband enough to take his name? I don't know if that played any part in anyone's decision not to vote for him in the election he lost, but I recall my own mother judging her for not giving up her own name and taking his. To this day, she's known as Maureen McTeer, whose husband is the Rt. Hon. Joe Clark.

Women claim the right to say "no" and have their "no" really mean NO. Feminists want to be able to ask a guy out if they want, and not be thought too forward, or slutty. It's becoming less... shocking? surprising?... if a woman is the one who proposes marriage.

I've already given my own perspective on patriarchy. I don't care if you or anyone else here considers my perspective invalid because it's not backed up by charts, graphs, and Wikipedia articles. As I said, I grew up in the pre-personal computer, pre-internet, pre-social media era in which people simply did not broadcast their personal family situations for everyone to read about, gossip about, and so on.

I have always been honest on this forum about whatever personal details I've shared, whether in the public forums, in the staff forum when I was on staff, in the social groups (when we still had them), and via PM. I've never seen any need not to be honest, because where's the benefit in lying? The reason I don't put all this stuff on Facebook is because unlike the forum culture of CFC that demands at least a minimum amount of respect among members (in terms of rules against trolling, flaming, doxxing), FB is open to the world, and there is zero respect that can be counted on.

Hey Valka D'Ur,

I hope the world around you converges to a place where feminism is not required, and equality is assumed without needing to fight for it. Where it is okay to be a man and be sensitive, gentle, and loving without thinking they (themselves) must be homosexual. Where women are attracted to such men, who are now just men, instead of men who constantly feel the need to show strength. Where women are also more sensitive, gentle, and loving. Where people know how to love. How to embrace one another. Where people realize that written law is less powerful than people who understand and trust one another.

Cheers,

 

[civver_764]

Oh, this is going to end well...

Keep clearly in mind that every time you disparage feminists as some kind of group who all think the same way and act the same way and that we are all anti-male, hate men, etc., you are insulting numerous members of this forum.

How many times do I need to say this: If I hated men, if I were anti-male, would I have spent the last 12 years on this forum, where the vast majority of members are male?

Valka, you are choosing to make this about you. I did not say "Valka hates men".

Feminists are "anti-sex"? Newsflash: Feminists claim the right to decide for ourselves, and not be dependent on men's decisions. Feminists claim the right to retain our original identities after marriage, if we want. One of my convention friends kept her original name after marriage, as she saw no need to become "Mrs. (husband's name)." Back in 1979, the wife of one of our Prime Ministers kept her original name after marriage, and she was vilified in the news... didn't she love and respect her husband enough to take his name? I don't know if that played any part in anyone's decision not to vote for him in the election he lost, but I recall my own mother judging her for not giving up her own name and taking his. To this day, she's known as Maureen McTeer, whose husband is the Rt. Hon. Joe Clark.

I agree, women should not change their last names if they get married. But this is just a distraction, you did not address my actual argument.

Women claim the right to say "no" and have their "no" really mean NO. Feminists want to be able to ask a guy out if they want, and not be thought too forward, or slutty. It's becoming less... shocking? surprising?... if a woman is the one who proposes marriage.

Again, I'm totally on board with all of this, but you are ignoring what I actually said in my post.

 

[Broken_Erika]

There's Feminism, then there is "Super-Feminism"

 

[Cutlass]

1,2, and 3, are all explicitly false statements. So where can you go with that?

 

[civver_764]

1,2, and 3, are all explicitly false statements. So where can you go with that?

Why don't you make counterarguments so we can have a discussion?