Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

castille · Oct 16, 2003, 10:19 am

Is feminism becoming more about man-bashing, rather than equal rights?

Legally, women have equal rights. If we consider the actual situation, women actually have more rights than men.

So....whats the problem?

On a small note, a recent billboard with 4 bikini chicks was grafittied (or vandalized) and the words "sexist pig" was written on it. Were the 4 women on the ad sexist? If so, were they sexist against men, or women, or animals?

On a little note, is it just me, or do I notice most of the extremist feminists have rarely gone out with a guy, while women who go out a lot tend to be less feminist? Its generalising, but I do believe some level of jealousy is apparent.

GuidoNius · Oct 16, 2003, 10:30 am

What's the problem, indeed!

What extra rights do we have, pray tell.

I haven't met a feminist for a long time so I can't help you with your feministfobia but, if you like, I could post the exact same topic with macho's and woman-haters instead of feminists and man-haters. That would help us all as much as your topic is helping us.

Agnes, don't bother to ask whether I'm getting any - I already replied somewhere that I give abundantly ;-)

fedfem · Oct 16, 2003, 01:22 pm

YOU ASKED:
On a little note, is it just me, or do I notice most of the extremist feminists have rarely gone out with a guy, while women who go out a lot tend to be less feminist? Its generalising, but I do believe some level of jealousy is apparent.

ME:

It is you.

I am a Feminist. You could even call me a Radical Feminist if you like. I am not a man hater by any means. I am married(to a male)and have 3 male children. As far as women having more rights than men.....hogwash.

I still don't understand why people fall for the demonization tactics.

Waychel · Oct 16, 2003, 01:34 pm

In my opinion the term feminist no longer represents the ideals that it once did and has been perverted over the years, encompassing some kind of man-hating superiority complex. Many feminists today regard women in the US as oppressed, but I think before those women start screaming about oppression here, that they should visit any 3rd world country first to see what oppression really is. Even modern and industrialized countries which have been heavily influenced by the US (such as Japan), have no where near as equal rights regarding men and women as the US does. I think a movement like "humanist" would be better, considering there are many other disenfranchised groups in America besides women such as homosexuals and transsexuals that are far from having equal rights and priveledges yet.

dannyp · Oct 16, 2003, 04:19 pm

Well I don't know about true feminists, but I know a handfull of female peers of mine that seem to have it out for guys. It seems like the word has been askewd so much to this generation.

For example, my cousin was putting her makeup on, she was goin out with her boy-friend [ don't ask what their relationship is technically called. this term is also skewed ] and that she was going to help him with the car. First she says she is going to help him take some screws out. She then said she probably wouldn't be able to do it half the speed as he could. I said no probably not, less than half i bet. In my mind I am considering that this guy has been doing it [mechanical work on cars] for 6 years or so. Also I recognize that this interjection was probably part of my male persona, because it seemed a little competitive, I suppose. She darts off on some rampage against why a woman couldn't do it as fast and all this nonsense. I tried to explain that it wasn't that a woman couldn't do it as fast at all. That it was just because he has more experience, i'm sure if a woman had the drive she could work on cars for 6 years and then be able to take out screws or whatnot just as fast as a guy. But what woman has that drive? I'm sure there are a select few, but still..damn i didn't ask for that.. She didn't listen and pointed out random things about society that women aren't considered 'equal' on. Like women in the workplace, and then about social class value of gender.. ugh.. then she lost herself in the personal differences between men and women [ in how she has experienced them ].. whats that going to accomplish? just shows me that shes had some retarded guys.

I apologize and shes just pissy and gives me a 'whatever'. I found out additionally that she wasn't even in her cycle. Not that thats always the case, but it seemed like I was not deserving of that kind of retaliation. I know that the 'not in cycle' comment was a low blow to the females but guys have self esteem too.

It's abstract and against common sense. To me, I'm sure a girl can do things a guy can, if they have that sort of drive, or willpower, or physical capability. But if they do not, then shut the hell up about being equal, men and women are not supposed to be equal on that front. If they were, why aren't men complaining about wanting to do womens jobs? If you are talking about legal rights, women should definately have equal rights. Except for cases that involve something that is not unisex. In unisex cases I think that there should be some seperation, well not seperation, clarification on gender issued rights.

To all you *true* feminists, please help me and those around me to know the rights you are lacking that men have? I have no real idea of what a feminist is about too, so would someone clarify? because all I see is this mutated stupid word that young girls spout off when they feel unjust but don't want to do anything except complain about it. I'm not saying this is encompassing feminists, but i'm sure feminists would not like to be represented by the "man hater" fem-creepies.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 16, 2003, 04:43 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille)
Is feminism becoming more about man-bashing, rather than equal rights?

Legally, women have equal rights. If we consider the actual situation, women actually have more rights than men.

So....whats the problem?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Legally, Blacks have the same rights as Whites. In reality, however, racism still remains.
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille)
On a small note, a recent billboard with 4 bikini chicks was grafittied (or vandalized) and the words "sexist pig" was written on it. Were the 4 women on the ad sexist? If so, were they sexist against men, or women, or animals?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
The marketers - ie: male, and their intended audience - ie: male, were sexist for objectifying women. That was the point for the graffiti. Judgement about the graffiti aside, if you couldn't figure that out, what are you doing ranting about sexism?
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille)
On a little note, is it just me, or do I notice most of the extremist feminists have rarely gone out with a guy, while women who go out a lot tend to be less feminist? Its generalising, but I do believe some level of jealousy is apparent.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Jesus Christ when was the last time you talked to a woman to get such painfully wrong outlooks on their gender? "That's right, bitch, you just need some MANmeat to calm your flames." Gag me with a spoon.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 16, 2003, 04:48 pm

DannyP, you're right - you're working with a biased sample. The actions of that girl do not reflect the validity of the issue of sexism.

dannyp · Oct 16, 2003, 05:15 pm

well my point is that there is so much distortion. I don't even know what the 'feministic goal' is. I sure as hell know that these girls have a major case of ignorance about 'knowing what they THINK' they believe in. There is much hipocracy because they have no real set goals or ideals, they just revert to calling everything unjust. Talking shit about any guy that comes along. Whenever I ask them directly about their feministic beliefs they resort to some mediocre definition and use examples of guys who have wronged them.

Thats primarily in one group of girls that are in close proximity to me right now. I need to hear from a real feminist to set some of these girls streight! :O they feel like they need to dispose all of their weight on me because i'm a guy, i don't even talk to some of them. Most of these ones just have had issues with really bad guys and dwell on it.

RebelWithanAK · Oct 16, 2003, 05:30 pm

Sounds like it; tho most people overall have poorly developed senses of politics and society overall, so it may just take a bit of education for these girls to coalesce their views into something more meaningful. 'Course, that doesn't appear to stop there from being Castilles in this world... =p

fedfem · Oct 16, 2003, 06:03 pm

I agree with Rebel, sounds like these girls are taking feminism ala talk shows.

The only goal of Feminism is to bring equality to women around the world.

Separate but Equal. We respect and understand the differences between males and females and do not try to be men or hate men. When we speak out against patriarchal society--which threatens men--they label us Man haters. Now, speaking out against Patriarchal society does not mean we want a Matriarchal society to replace it, as some have accused.

Waychel, surely as an anthropologist, you must know that feminism is not new. Feminists are Humanists, but not all humanists are feminists.

dannyp · Oct 16, 2003, 06:50 pm

ah, seperate but equal, that reminds me of racism.

thanks for clarifying a little femdem :)

I have read an essay by a long-time feminist who did try to take on some traits that men are generally better suited for. It was about what women could learn from men. Initially she said there was only one thing to learn from men; the ability to summon a waiter/waitress with the slightest of gestures. She then dove into other aspects to promote a womens self-esteem and help her not be a submissive drone. One other example of something that seemed prevalent was men in leadership positions. let me go into why I think that men are more prone to lead:

It all goes back to gender needs ( pray i do not say roles ). unless you have a big ego or a strong drive for power, the majority of women generally [& genetically]hold different values which are apparent: sensitive, self-concious, and cautious -- and too much so to take this leadership role. I'm not saying a woman can't.. which is what most profeminists read from what i've said. Its not that at all, instead its that an average woman just wouldn't do this on her own terms. The ones that do are the ones who need this sort of thing [ My, from what they may preceive as negative-male-inspiration ] to boost and drive them, which, coincidentally is the dominant self-concious trait that woman on average have. Where as a male would take the leadership almost automatically. As seen in almost any small group discussions as it develops. I think everyone who has had schooling knows that the boys will speak up in a group discussion and specifically one or maybe a few will try to take a hold of it. Unless it gets personal, or deals with their personal life, and is offensive, then girls get in on it with a vengence. This is so common its not even funny. Look at a girl fight sometime, girl with a girl. It can get intense, and the most intense things a girl can say to eachother in a fight are ones that strike their personal life. Where as a guy, wouldn't take much heed to an offense to his feelings. But when it has to do with either the guys ego, strength, balls/manhood, or just threatining their power, thats when shit goes down with men usually. Of course there are exceptions but those are usually the low blows.

fedfem · Oct 16, 2003, 07:14 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
It all goes back to gender needs ( pray i do not say roles ). unless you have a big ego or a strong drive for power, the majority of women generally [& genetically]hold different values which are apparent: sensitive, self-concious, and cautious -- and too much so to take this leadership role.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

You are defining leadership in terms of the way a male would lead. The female qualities you mention are exactly the qualities needed to lead successfully and many males do have those qualities. Big Egos and a drive for power are negative qualities for leadership.

How is separate but equal akin to racism?

as far as watching girl fights....no thanks. Are you in high school? Where do you find these people?

dannyp · Oct 16, 2003, 08:38 pm

I'm in college, the girls in the group that i am talking about are just a group of friends i suppose mostly in college, some in HS.

well the fights i'm referring to are ones in i've seen in high school, but not always, i've seen some adult women go at it in the same fashion.

seperate but equal used to be what they said about 'blacks' and 'whites', and then that never worked out because how can you ""seperate equally""? its a contradiction of terms. It was a bill i think, or an act ?? Anyway it didn't work out, maybe i'll go looking for that 'cuz i remember it from a history class.

::You are defining leadership in terms of the way a male would lead. The female qualities you mention are exactly the qualities needed to lead successfully and many males do have those qualities. Big Egos and a drive for power are negative qualities for leadership.::

When you see a woman leader who does not have these qualities, but a strong sense of the traits that women generally possess -- let me know. Or point out some in history. This way i can "define leadership in the terms a woman would lead"

Who would follow a woman who was sensitive to the other parties feelings to debate a subject? would you? and if you would.. would one of the reasons for following her just include that she is considerate? sensitive? compassionate? cautious?

I don't think those are good qualities for someone who has to make decisions 'on impulse / on demand / on-the-fly' which any good leader should be able to do logically and quickly.

What does that do though women leading with those said traits? because normally those things are to impress/cater to the males imperfections, inadequacies, or fix what males don't have sexually. but in this case, what void does it fill? whats the purpose? It feels like its just to show that women 'can' and thats great, but what purpose?

Men like power/their ego/uh for example cars because it shows material posession, some things women lack that should definately be kept up to a man. Take this example into consideration; what if a women loved power? their ego? and had a horrific&obsessive fascination with the inner workings of a car? she would be very boy-ish, and who would that attract? probably submissive men or lesbian women, or women who like that she has power. This paragraph just shows that the reasons for these inflected values that each gender has is to attract the other gender of what they are lacking. If you're ready to change that, go ahead, but i hope you don't bring too many women along with you because I need one to do shit that I cannot, and help me in ways men [HOPEFULLY] cannot.

Like anything that deals with people talking about women, you will probably be offended by what I am saying because it is 'speaking directly to you' but don't take it as an attack on your feelings. I'm just stating that this is how it works so far, and if you want to change it, then change it, nothing is stopping you except your own lack of willpower. Submissive behavior is also dominant, if you don't like it, then don't conform-- make men submissive, see if that relieves you. If it does not, then hey, at least u have more to talk about! :) which brings me to another point, men are known for not being as sociable, you see them acting impulsively, don't talk as much, get more bullshit done in the time alotted. Women on the other hand are more encouraging, more sociable, do not act impulsively, and they spend a little less time acting. Not to say that they do not get the same amount done. The quality of work is put in to different areas depending on the woman or mans values.

also you missed what i said, women do not generally approach this situation with a leadership persona, and if they do they have had something affect them thats given them drive to show people that women can do it. Like i said, I know women can do it, its just that there isn't the initial drive to do it, or willing to do it on their own terms.

i've kinda lost directive in my post and am just saying everything i can think of about women and men.. stop me plz! Ahhh!

RebelWithanAK · Oct 17, 2003, 12:27 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp)
seperate but equal used to be what they said about 'blacks' and 'whites', and then that never worked out because how can you ""seperate equally""? its a contradiction of terms. It was a bill i think, or an act ?? Anyway it didn't work out, maybe i'll go looking for that 'cuz i remember it from a history class.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
That was in reference mainly to schools, and secondarily to everything else. It didn't work out because while it was separate, it most certainly was not equal. We still have remnants of it in just about every county that's successfully fought off bussing propositions.
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp)
When you see a woman leader who does not have these qualities, but a strong sense of the traits that women generally possess -- let me know. Or point out some in history. This way i can "define leadership in the terms a woman would lead"<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Eleanor Roosevelt.
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp)
Who would follow a woman who was sensitive to the other parties feelings to debate a subject? would you? and if you would.. would one of the reasons for following her just include that she is considerate? sensitive? compassionate? cautious?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
How about because she won't put half the federal budget into the war department and then laugh off all diplomatic institutions?
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp)
I don't think those are good qualities for someone who has to make decisions 'on impulse / on demand / on-the-fly' which any good leader should be able to do logically and quickly.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Considerate? Sensitive? Compassionate? Cautious? WHAT LEADER SHOULDN'T HAVE THESE QUALITIES?!
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp)
What does that do though women leading with those said traits? because normally those things are to impress/cater to the males imperfections, inadequacies, or fix what males don't have sexually. but in this case, what void does it fill? whats the purpose? It feels like its just to show that women 'can' and thats great, but what purpose?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Err... you ARE thinking this through a patriarchal viewpoint.

That said, what do you define as a "leadership persona"?

Waychel · Oct 17, 2003, 02:57 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (fedfem,)
Waychel, surely as an anthropologist, you must know that feminism is not new. Feminists are Humanists, but not all humanists are feminists.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I never said I was an anthropologist. o_O I'm only minoring in it right now... I never claimed to be an anthropologist so please don't take that impression.

Also, I have yet to see feminists taking such active positions for the equal rights of other groups such as the above-mentioned as they do for themselves. =P

castille · Oct 17, 2003, 04:34 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Agnes Ostic,)

What extra rights do we have, pray tell.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

So you are suggesting women should get *extra* rights?

So feminism is about getting more rights for women than men.

I know some kids like to play little games like "its my turn to be superman", but I didn't know adults did. Maybe men persecuted women, but it doesn't mean women should now persecute men. Adolf Hitler killed a lot of Jews - do we have to go and kill 6 million Germans to make up?

RebelWithanAK · Oct 17, 2003, 04:38 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Agnes Ostic,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille)
Legally, women have equal rights. If we consider the actual situation, women actually have more rights than men.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
What extra rights do we have, pray tell.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
So you are suggesting women should get *extra* rights?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
You fucking moron.

dannyp · Oct 17, 2003, 10:47 am

nice job twisting

GuidoNius · Oct 17, 2003, 10:52 am

Dear castille,

It was a question.

Sorry about forgetting the question mark, but I thought it would have been clear given you said originally that "women have extra rights".

So, castille, what extra rights do women have??

I added a question mark to make this a wee bit easier for ya.

Agnes

castille · Oct 17, 2003, 11:40 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Agnes Ostic,)

So, castille, what extra rights do women have??
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

They don't. Thats the point.

EQUALITY is where neither side has extra rights. If women had extra rights, then it wouldn't be equal, would it?

Women don't need extra rights. They only need equal rights - unless you believe women are better than men (which most feminists do).

If you want to see feminism in action, just go to the family courts, watch the women steal half the man's fortune (and more, if they get child support), while the man is refused the child, and is forced to pay support. Anna Nicole Smith is a recent case. I'm *sure* the Playboy centrefold really needs that $500 million, considering the six months of marriage.

RebelwithanAK: Your fine speech makes the feminist cause proud!

Oct 16, 2003, 10:19 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	Is feminism becoming more about man-bashing, rather than equal rights? Legally, women have equal rights. If we consider the actual situation, women actually have more rights than men. So....whats the problem? On a small note, a recent billboard with 4 bikini chicks was grafittied (or vandalized) and the words "sexist pig" was written on it. Were the 4 women on the ad sexist? If so, were they sexist against men, or women, or animals? On a little note, is it just me, or do I notice most of the extremist feminists have rarely gone out with a guy, while women who go out a lot tend to be less feminist? Its generalising, but I do believe some level of jealousy is apparent. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Oct 16, 2003, 01:34 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Waychel Supercalifragilistic Posts: 431	In my opinion the term feminist no longer represents the ideals that it once did and has been perverted over the years, encompassing some kind of man-hating superiority complex. Many feminists today regard women in the US as oppressed, but I think before those women start screaming about oppression here, that they should visit any 3rd world country first to see what oppression really is. Even modern and industrialized countries which have been heavily influenced by the US (such as Japan), have no where near as equal rights regarding men and women as the US does. I think a movement like "humanist" would be better, considering there are many other disenfranchised groups in America besides women such as homosexuals and transsexuals that are far from having equal rights and priveledges yet. Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Oct 16, 2003, 04:19 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
dannyp projects himself Posts: 130	Well I don't know about true feminists, but I know a handfull of female peers of mine that seem to have it out for guys. It seems like the word has been askewd so much to this generation. For example, my cousin was putting her makeup on, she was goin out with her boy-friend [ don't ask what their relationship is technically called. this term is also skewed ] and that she was going to help him with the car. First she says she is going to help him take some screws out. She then said she probably wouldn't be able to do it half the speed as he could. I said no probably not, less than half i bet. In my mind I am considering that this guy has been doing it [mechanical work on cars] for 6 years or so. Also I recognize that this interjection was probably part of my male persona, because it seemed a little competitive, I suppose. She darts off on some rampage against why a woman couldn't do it as fast and all this nonsense. I tried to explain that it wasn't that a woman couldn't do it as fast at all. That it was just because he has more experience, i'm sure if a woman had the drive she could work on cars for 6 years and then be able to take out screws or whatnot just as fast as a guy. But what woman has that drive? I'm sure there are a select few, but still..damn i didn't ask for that.. She didn't listen and pointed out random things about society that women aren't considered 'equal' on. Like women in the workplace, and then about social class value of gender.. ugh.. then she lost herself in the personal differences between men and women [ in how she has experienced them ].. whats that going to accomplish? just shows me that shes had some retarded guys. I apologize and shes just pissy and gives me a 'whatever'. I found out additionally that she wasn't even in her cycle. Not that thats always the case, but it seemed like I was not deserving of that kind of retaliation. I know that the 'not in cycle' comment was a low blow to the females but guys have self esteem too. It's abstract and against common sense. To me, I'm sure a girl can do things a guy can, if they have that sort of drive, or willpower, or physical capability. But if they do not, then shut the hell up about being equal, men and women are not supposed to be equal on that front. If they were, why aren't men complaining about wanting to do womens jobs? If you are talking about legal rights, women should definately have equal rights. Except for cases that involve something that is not unisex. In unisex cases I think that there should be some seperation, well not seperation, clarification on gender issued rights. To all you true feminists, please help me and those around me to know the rights you are lacking that men have? I have no real idea of what a feminist is about too, so would someone clarify? because all I see is this mutated stupid word that young girls spout off when they feel unjust but don't want to do anything except complain about it. I'm not saying this is encompassing feminists, but i'm sure feminists would not like to be represented by the "man hater" fem-creepies. projectdp.com :: thinktankforums.com

Oct 16, 2003, 04:43 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille) Is feminism becoming more about man-bashing, rather than equal rights? Legally, women have equal rights. If we consider the actual situation, women actually have more rights than men. So....whats the problem?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Legally, Blacks have the same rights as Whites. In reality, however, racism still remains. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille) On a small note, a recent billboard with 4 bikini chicks was grafittied (or vandalized) and the words "sexist pig" was written on it. Were the 4 women on the ad sexist? If so, were they sexist against men, or women, or animals?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> The marketers - ie: male, and their intended audience - ie: male, were sexist for objectifying women. That was the point for the graffiti. Judgement about the graffiti aside, if you couldn't figure that out, what are you doing ranting about sexism? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille) On a little note, is it just me, or do I notice most of the extremist feminists have rarely gone out with a guy, while women who go out a lot tend to be less feminist? Its generalising, but I do believe some level of jealousy is apparent.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Jesus Christ when was the last time you talked to a woman to get such painfully wrong outlooks on their gender? "That's right, bitch, you just need some MANmeat to calm your flames." Gag me with a spoon. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 16, 2003, 04:48 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	DannyP, you're right - you're working with a biased sample. The actions of that girl do not reflect the validity of the issue of sexism. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 16, 2003, 10:30 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
GuidoNius Molten Ash Posts: 51	What's the problem, indeed! What extra rights do we have, pray tell. I haven't met a feminist for a long time so I can't help you with your feministfobia but, if you like, I could post the exact same topic with macho's and woman-haters instead of feminists and man-haters. That would help us all as much as your topic is helping us. Agnes, don't bother to ask whether I'm getting any - I already replied somewhere that I give abundantly ;-)

Oct 16, 2003, 01:22 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
fedfem Igneous Magma Location: Northeastern, USA Posts: 606	YOU ASKED: On a little note, is it just me, or do I notice most of the extremist feminists have rarely gone out with a guy, while women who go out a lot tend to be less feminist? Its generalising, but I do believe some level of jealousy is apparent. ME: It is you. I am a Feminist. You could even call me a Radical Feminist if you like. I am not a man hater by any means. I am married(to a male)and have 3 male children. As far as women having more rights than men.....hogwash. I still don't understand why people fall for the demonization tactics.

Oct 16, 2003, 05:15 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
dannyp projects himself Posts: 130	well my point is that there is so much distortion. I don't even know what the 'feministic goal' is. I sure as hell know that these girls have a major case of ignorance about 'knowing what they THINK' they believe in. There is much hipocracy because they have no real set goals or ideals, they just revert to calling everything unjust. Talking shit about any guy that comes along. Whenever I ask them directly about their feministic beliefs they resort to some mediocre definition and use examples of guys who have wronged them. Thats primarily in one group of girls that are in close proximity to me right now. I need to hear from a real feminist to set some of these girls streight! :O they feel like they need to dispose all of their weight on me because i'm a guy, i don't even talk to some of them. Most of these ones just have had issues with really bad guys and dwell on it. projectdp.com :: thinktankforums.com

Oct 16, 2003, 05:30 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	Sounds like it; tho most people overall have poorly developed senses of politics and society overall, so it may just take a bit of education for these girls to coalesce their views into something more meaningful. 'Course, that doesn't appear to stop there from being Castilles in this world... =p . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 16, 2003, 06:03 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
fedfem Igneous Magma Location: Northeastern, USA Posts: 606	I agree with Rebel, sounds like these girls are taking feminism ala talk shows. The only goal of Feminism is to bring equality to women around the world. Separate but Equal. We respect and understand the differences between males and females and do not try to be men or hate men. When we speak out against patriarchal society--which threatens men--they label us Man haters. Now, speaking out against Patriarchal society does not mean we want a Matriarchal society to replace it, as some have accused. Waychel, surely as an anthropologist, you must know that feminism is not new. Feminists are Humanists, but not all humanists are feminists.

Oct 16, 2003, 06:50 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
dannyp projects himself Posts: 130	ah, seperate but equal, that reminds me of racism. thanks for clarifying a little femdem :) I have read an essay by a long-time feminist who did try to take on some traits that men are generally better suited for. It was about what women could learn from men. Initially she said there was only one thing to learn from men; the ability to summon a waiter/waitress with the slightest of gestures. She then dove into other aspects to promote a womens self-esteem and help her not be a submissive drone. One other example of something that seemed prevalent was men in leadership positions. let me go into why I think that men are more prone to lead: It all goes back to gender needs ( pray i do not say roles ). unless you have a big ego or a strong drive for power, the majority of women generally [& genetically]hold different values which are apparent: sensitive, self-concious, and cautious -- and too much so to take this leadership role. I'm not saying a woman can't.. which is what most profeminists read from what i've said. Its not that at all, instead its that an average woman just wouldn't do this on her own terms. The ones that do are the ones who need this sort of thing [ My, from what they may preceive as negative-male-inspiration ] to boost and drive them, which, coincidentally is the dominant self-concious trait that woman on average have. Where as a male would take the leadership almost automatically. As seen in almost any small group discussions as it develops. I think everyone who has had schooling knows that the boys will speak up in a group discussion and specifically one or maybe a few will try to take a hold of it. Unless it gets personal, or deals with their personal life, and is offensive, then girls get in on it with a vengence. This is so common its not even funny. Look at a girl fight sometime, girl with a girl. It can get intense, and the most intense things a girl can say to eachother in a fight are ones that strike their personal life. Where as a guy, wouldn't take much heed to an offense to his feelings. But when it has to do with either the guys ego, strength, balls/manhood, or just threatining their power, thats when shit goes down with men usually. Of course there are exceptions but those are usually the low blows. projectdp.com :: thinktankforums.com

Oct 16, 2003, 07:14 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
fedfem Igneous Magma Location: Northeastern, USA Posts: 606	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by It all goes back to gender needs ( pray i do not say roles ). unless you have a big ego or a strong drive for power, the majority of women generally [& genetically]hold different values which are apparent: sensitive, self-concious, and cautious -- and too much so to take this leadership role.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You are defining leadership in terms of the way a male would lead. The female qualities you mention are exactly the qualities needed to lead successfully and many males do have those qualities. Big Egos and a drive for power are negative qualities for leadership. How is separate but equal akin to racism? as far as watching girl fights....no thanks. Are you in high school? Where do you find these people?

Oct 16, 2003, 08:38 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
dannyp projects himself Posts: 130	I'm in college, the girls in the group that i am talking about are just a group of friends i suppose mostly in college, some in HS. well the fights i'm referring to are ones in i've seen in high school, but not always, i've seen some adult women go at it in the same fashion. seperate but equal used to be what they said about 'blacks' and 'whites', and then that never worked out because how can you ""seperate equally""? its a contradiction of terms. It was a bill i think, or an act ?? Anyway it didn't work out, maybe i'll go looking for that 'cuz i remember it from a history class. ::You are defining leadership in terms of the way a male would lead. The female qualities you mention are exactly the qualities needed to lead successfully and many males do have those qualities. Big Egos and a drive for power are negative qualities for leadership.:: When you see a woman leader who does not have these qualities, but a strong sense of the traits that women generally possess -- let me know. Or point out some in history. This way i can "define leadership in the terms a woman would lead" Who would follow a woman who was sensitive to the other parties feelings to debate a subject? would you? and if you would.. would one of the reasons for following her just include that she is considerate? sensitive? compassionate? cautious? I don't think those are good qualities for someone who has to make decisions 'on impulse / on demand / on-the-fly' which any good leader should be able to do logically and quickly. What does that do though women leading with those said traits? because normally those things are to impress/cater to the males imperfections, inadequacies, or fix what males don't have sexually. but in this case, what void does it fill? whats the purpose? It feels like its just to show that women 'can' and thats great, but what purpose? Men like power/their ego/uh for example cars because it shows material posession, some things women lack that should definately be kept up to a man. Take this example into consideration; what if a women loved power? their ego? and had a horrific&obsessive fascination with the inner workings of a car? she would be very boy-ish, and who would that attract? probably submissive men or lesbian women, or women who like that she has power. This paragraph just shows that the reasons for these inflected values that each gender has is to attract the other gender of what they are lacking. If you're ready to change that, go ahead, but i hope you don't bring too many women along with you because I need one to do shit that I cannot, and help me in ways men [HOPEFULLY] cannot. Like anything that deals with people talking about women, you will probably be offended by what I am saying because it is 'speaking directly to you' but don't take it as an attack on your feelings. I'm just stating that this is how it works so far, and if you want to change it, then change it, nothing is stopping you except your own lack of willpower. Submissive behavior is also dominant, if you don't like it, then don't conform-- make men submissive, see if that relieves you. If it does not, then hey, at least u have more to talk about! :) which brings me to another point, men are known for not being as sociable, you see them acting impulsively, don't talk as much, get more bullshit done in the time alotted. Women on the other hand are more encouraging, more sociable, do not act impulsively, and they spend a little less time acting. Not to say that they do not get the same amount done. The quality of work is put in to different areas depending on the woman or mans values. also you missed what i said, women do not generally approach this situation with a leadership persona, and if they do they have had something affect them thats given them drive to show people that women can do it. Like i said, I know women can do it, its just that there isn't the initial drive to do it, or willing to do it on their own terms. i've kinda lost directive in my post and am just saying everything i can think of about women and men.. stop me plz! Ahhh! projectdp.com :: thinktankforums.com

Oct 17, 2003, 12:27 am	#14 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp) seperate but equal used to be what they said about 'blacks' and 'whites', and then that never worked out because how can you ""seperate equally""? its a contradiction of terms. It was a bill i think, or an act ?? Anyway it didn't work out, maybe i'll go looking for that 'cuz i remember it from a history class.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> That was in reference mainly to schools, and secondarily to everything else. It didn't work out because while it was separate, it most certainly was not equal. We still have remnants of it in just about every county that's successfully fought off bussing propositions. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp) When you see a woman leader who does not have these qualities, but a strong sense of the traits that women generally possess -- let me know. Or point out some in history. This way i can "define leadership in the terms a woman would lead"<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Eleanor Roosevelt. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp) Who would follow a woman who was sensitive to the other parties feelings to debate a subject? would you? and if you would.. would one of the reasons for following her just include that she is considerate? sensitive? compassionate? cautious?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> How about because she won't put half the federal budget into the war department and then laugh off all diplomatic institutions? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp) I don't think those are good qualities for someone who has to make decisions 'on impulse / on demand / on-the-fly' which any good leader should be able to do logically and quickly.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Considerate? Sensitive? Compassionate? Cautious? WHAT LEADER SHOULDN'T HAVE THESE QUALITIES?! </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dannyp) What does that do though women leading with those said traits? because normally those things are to impress/cater to the males imperfections, inadequacies, or fix what males don't have sexually. but in this case, what void does it fill? whats the purpose? It feels like its just to show that women 'can' and thats great, but what purpose?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Err... you ARE thinking this through a patriarchal viewpoint. That said, what do you define as a "leadership persona"? . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 17, 2003, 02:57 am	#15 (permalink) (top)
Waychel Supercalifragilistic Posts: 431	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (fedfem,) Waychel, surely as an anthropologist, you must know that feminism is not new. Feminists are Humanists, but not all humanists are feminists.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I never said I was an anthropologist. o_O I'm only minoring in it right now... I never claimed to be an anthropologist so please don't take that impression. Also, I have yet to see feminists taking such active positions for the equal rights of other groups such as the above-mentioned as they do for themselves. =P Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Oct 17, 2003, 04:34 am	#16 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Agnes Ostic,) What extra rights do we have, pray tell. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> So you are suggesting women should get extra rights? So feminism is about getting more rights for women than men. I know some kids like to play little games like "its my turn to be superman", but I didn't know adults did. Maybe men persecuted women, but it doesn't mean women should now persecute men. Adolf Hitler killed a lot of Jews - do we have to go and kill 6 million Germans to make up? Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Oct 17, 2003, 04:38 am	#17 (permalink) (top)
RebelWithanAK Igneous Magma Location: New York City Posts: 739	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Agnes Ostic,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille) Legally, women have equal rights. If we consider the actual situation, women actually have more rights than men.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> What extra rights do we have, pray tell. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> So you are suggesting women should get extra rights?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You fucking moron. . . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Oct 17, 2003, 10:47 am	#18 (permalink) (top)
dannyp projects himself Posts: 130	nice job twisting projectdp.com :: thinktankforums.com

Oct 17, 2003, 10:52 am	#19 (permalink) (top)
GuidoNius Molten Ash Posts: 51	Dear castille, It was a question. Sorry about forgetting the question mark, but I thought it would have been clear given you said originally that "women have extra rights". So, castille, what extra rights do women have?? I added a question mark to make this a wee bit easier for ya. Agnes

Oct 17, 2003, 11:40 am	#20 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Agnes Ostic,) So, castille, what extra rights do women have?? <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> They don't. Thats the point. EQUALITY is where neither side has extra rights. If women had extra rights, then it wouldn't be equal, would it? Women don't need extra rights. They only need equal rights - unless you believe women are better than men (which most feminists do). If you want to see feminism in action, just go to the family courts, watch the women steal half the man's fortune (and more, if they get child support), while the man is refused the child, and is forced to pay support. Anna Nicole Smith is a recent case. I'm sure the Playboy centrefold really needs that $500 million, considering the six months of marriage. RebelwithanAK: Your fine speech makes the feminist cause proud! Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.