Hey civver, you're missing a much greater variant of feminism. One that's objectively better in a huge variety of ways.
Come join us! We're fantastic!
Come join us! We're fantastic!
[RD] Feminism
- Thread starter civver_764
- Start date
- Status
civver_764
Deity
@El_Machinae I'm happy to learn more 
I'm just saying we take a more wholesome look at the situation. You see oppression, I see division of labor. Men were delegated to do the decision making, breadwinning, and life risking. Women were delegated to raise children, and take care of things at home. Both are essential for the advancement of our species, and neither are particularly privileged, they are rather two parts of the whole family unit. A man could not escape his gender roles any more than a woman could.
I think you misinterpret what I mean by "hard work". I'm talking about physically demanding, dangerous work. Of course, raising children and talking care of the home is very important work, and I'm not trying to discredit women for doing it. I'm just trying to point out that both genders were disadvantaged in some ways.
And I don't dispute that women lacked these rights.
I'm just saying we take a more wholesome look at the situation. You see oppression, I see division of labor. Men were delegated to do the decision making, breadwinning, and life risking. Women were delegated to raise children, and take care of things at home. Both are essential for the advancement of our species, and neither are particularly privileged, they are rather two parts of the whole family unit. A man could not escape his gender roles any more than a woman could.
Please stick to what I actually said.
Cool rant, but it doesn't have anything to do with my actual position. I don't think people should be restricted by their gender roles
Kay, a lot of what people see is due to really about the Boomers generation. We can all think of some serious imbalances that were pre-Boomers, and we can generally acknowledge that those imbalances needed to be corrected. As well, we've had some serious victories since the Boomers in the way of getting things better. So, since I know you'll just agree with them (and their necessity), we'll just move on.
But there's one major holdover that's still causing all kinds of issues. Property ownership. Now, using a handwaving generality, men have more classically done the things that earned money. And the women didn't. Oh, we all value the work women did. It was great, and hard, and necessary, and mighty. But this imbalances with the implicit assumption that the men owned the money. They earned it, people think (rightly so). But because they earned it, they deserved to own it. That's where the breakdown occurred.
We have a hard time doing the math with opportunity cost, but we have this weird imbalance with how assets were being divided when the Boomers were getting going. Men were determined to own more of the stuff created during the Boomer's economic growth. Women's work was acknowledged and appreciated. But when it came to actually giving dollars (which is a legal property that we then use to create compounding growth), there was a serious divide between those who got paid for their contribution and those who didn't. People who owned the money got to decide what to do with it, so that imbalance propagated.
A lot of the pushback will be along two fronts - fighting old and tired battles that we've inherited from this conflict, and the memes around them. And along a second front where it's perceived as a series of zero-sum games. As women assert themselves from being sexualized, men feel that their freedoms to sexualize are being taken away. It's true, even. And then guys who inherited a system of where they had a simple edge because of the glass ceiling realize that their edge is being taken away every time the glass ceiling is being chipped away at.
But, meanwhile, we also have to deal with the inheritance imbalances from two generations ago. So, the errors made there are still propagating. Money compounds. And so does opportunity.
Yeah, some feminists will be shrill. Ignore them if you want. Or drill faster into their underlying concern, so that you can have a real swapping of insights. But the reason why you don't see this (implicitly) as merely an equalizing of opportunity is because we're concomitantly trying to create those equalities while continuing the struggle to get the equalities that should have happened previously. It's not fair that you were thrown in mid-struggle, but that's the way it works. There are old battles still being played out. And new ones that we're gonna figure out too.
But there's one major holdover that's still causing all kinds of issues. Property ownership. Now, using a handwaving generality, men have more classically done the things that earned money. And the women didn't. Oh, we all value the work women did. It was great, and hard, and necessary, and mighty. But this imbalances with the implicit assumption that the men owned the money. They earned it, people think (rightly so). But because they earned it, they deserved to own it. That's where the breakdown occurred.
We have a hard time doing the math with opportunity cost, but we have this weird imbalance with how assets were being divided when the Boomers were getting going. Men were determined to own more of the stuff created during the Boomer's economic growth. Women's work was acknowledged and appreciated. But when it came to actually giving dollars (which is a legal property that we then use to create compounding growth), there was a serious divide between those who got paid for their contribution and those who didn't. People who owned the money got to decide what to do with it, so that imbalance propagated.
A lot of the pushback will be along two fronts - fighting old and tired battles that we've inherited from this conflict, and the memes around them. And along a second front where it's perceived as a series of zero-sum games. As women assert themselves from being sexualized, men feel that their freedoms to sexualize are being taken away. It's true, even. And then guys who inherited a system of where they had a simple edge because of the glass ceiling realize that their edge is being taken away every time the glass ceiling is being chipped away at.
But, meanwhile, we also have to deal with the inheritance imbalances from two generations ago. So, the errors made there are still propagating. Money compounds. And so does opportunity.
Yeah, some feminists will be shrill. Ignore them if you want. Or drill faster into their underlying concern, so that you can have a real swapping of insights. But the reason why you don't see this (implicitly) as merely an equalizing of opportunity is because we're concomitantly trying to create those equalities while continuing the struggle to get the equalities that should have happened previously. It's not fair that you were thrown in mid-struggle, but that's the way it works. There are old battles still being played out. And new ones that we're gonna figure out too.
civver_764
Deity
You might be interested to know that while men earn more money, women spend more of it. Does a man really own that money if his wife is deciding what to spend it on? In fact that's a major advantage for females, getting to spend money that you didn't earn, or just getting money spent on you in general.
I'm curious what you mean by "sexualize" here?
What exactly are you talking about here? Affirmative action?
Senethro
Overlord
What are you here for civver? You're stating things you perceive as facts, but are actually just opinions, and then failing to state a conclusion. Is this so what we read as your conclusion can always be denied?
civver_764
Deity
Because I am a man and I want to share my perspective, and I won't be bullied otherwise.
Let me give you a little background on myself. I'm a millennial, 23 years old. Throughout my life I have watched my female peers get preferential treatment by teachers, bosses, and colleges. They get special scholarships. They get preferred when being hired. They get more emotional support from pretty much everybody. They don't have to take any risks when it comes to dating. They receive a lot of free stuff from men. They can hit a man and the man will just be laughed at, unable to defend himself.
If you see a homeless man vs. a homeless woman, who are you more likely to help out?
I watched my mom totally dominate every aspect of my parent's marriage. My dad did all of the hard work while my mom sat in front of the TV. Not only did my dad work more hours than my mom, he did most of the housework. My mom was so lazy she made my dad agree to hire a maid so she wouldn't have to clean. She was verbally abusive to me and my brothers as a child.
I just got out of a marriage with an abusive feminist. For the last 2 years, I lived in fear knowing that she could my own child away from me at any point. I worked hard everyday and completely paid for all of her expenses. I hid my emotions so I could help her deal with hers. Meanwhile, she stayed home and played on her phone and watched Netflix. Anytime I would ask her to do more work around the house, she would accuse me of being controlling. Anytime we had an argument, I couldn't raise my voice or else she would accuse me of being abusive. Anytime I wanted to have sex, she would call me a rapist. When she finally got a job I couldn't have any say over it, because then I'm an evil man that controls the finances. The feminist narrative of how men are the perpetrators and women are the victims was used against me. She would often tell me how she could just take our daughter away from me. I knew that in family court, she would have the advantage. And now she has done just that, for the past 2 months I have not been able to see my own child, all based on false allegations of abuse.
And I'm not the only man in this situation. There are so many stories like this. I have a friend who has a girlfriend that will regularly slap him, yell at him, and verbally degrade him. And he's terrified. He can't fight back, because he will end up in jail. Yet feminism almost never talks about things from the male perspective. There's no marches, or public outrage when things are unfair for men. The proof is really in the name 'feminism'. A movement for gender equality should not be named after only one gender. Life can suck for men and women, yet we are so hyper-focused on the problems of women.
I'm sick of people dismissing my opinions here because I'm a man. I'm sick of being labelled as misogynistic and hateful just for criticizing feminism. I'm sick of what I say here constantly being mis-characterized. I'm sick of people ignoring my actual arguments in favor of one-line "gotchas". I'm sick of people assuming I have some hidden intentions here, and that I really want to oppress women.
And if you read this, and your instinct is to dismiss me as a crybaby, ask yourself how you would respond if I was a girl.
Senethro
Overlord
That's, like, actually sad and all but women who are jerks don't mean feminism is wrong.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
Know what exactly? That men and women had gender roles in times before resource-shortages became less severe?
If so, then we can get an idea of how things looked before our Civilization took off by looking at the animal kingdom. Wherever we see Sexual Dimorphism, we see animals taking the roles they're made for. That's why Sexual Dimorphism exists in the first place. Especially in primates we can very much see how human groups most likely functioned way in the past, because we came from the same ancestors.
For the time after our Civilization became a thing, we have enough historical sources to get a rather cohesive picture.
Senethro
Overlord
Which primates? They're all very different.
Why the ones you've chosen?
Why the ones you've chosen?
Thank you for sharing your story, civver_764.
Ryika
Lazy Wannabe Artista
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 9,393
Because certain things are true for the vast majority of primates? There are only a hand-full of primates where males do any significant amounts of parental care for example, none of which are closely related to us humans.
I still don't even know what exactly you're asking though, you seem to just ask random questions. If you need a starting point, look up information about sexual dimorphism and its role in human evolution.
I think it could be more accurate to say that they did not really want to escape anything, because the roles felt right to them, and they were happy together. This is what I observe in my own society, which happens to be a wee bit *ahem* "behind" in terms of "social evolution" (not an actual thing, but might also be an actual thing, if you consider evolution simply as change... anyway) towards your society's current makeup, assuming it is going in that direction at all. It does seem to be kind of doing that.
Akka
Moody old mage.
I think his points was less about how the women he knew were jerks but more about how he felt that society's viewpoint about women made him the guilty party regardless.
TBH, I find this story too manicheist to be an exact description (even if somewhat touching), but I'm still pretty curious to see how differently it'll be treated compared as to if Valka was describing her own experiences in the same way
civver_764
Deity
That's not what I said man. I'm happy to talk about this with you but you've gotta respond to my actual argument.
Where are you from, if you don't mind me asking?
I am from somewhere in the Middle East
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
How muscle muscle-mass is required to complain about feminists on the internet?
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 13,412
civver, I don't think you were married to a feminist. I think you were married to an abuser. And among the things she abused were the precepts of feminism. It's probably all too raw for you right now, but I don't think you should blame feminism for what you've gone through. I think your wife is the one to blame.
Senethro
Overlord
So what was yoru point? Again it was too cryptic and mixed in with your opinions.
Senethro
Overlord
Pffffffffffffffff primates have hugely different mating systems, social structures, degrees of sexual dimorphism, diets, life histories, whatever. That is quite the leap you are making.
The variety in primates is huge and I'm sure you could find human like characteristics in each of them, but thats meaningless unless you can say why they're relevant.
You'd probably do better to drop zoology and try some archaeology?
Leonel
Breakfast Connoisseur
It's been my observation that when people say feminism is evil, they take it completely out of context and/or make judgement calls by only what they see on the surface without understanding why, not to mention a massive disparity between the regular definition and the definition the said accuser.
- Status
