Ugh feminism....

On December 22 2011 03:46 Zorkmid wrote:
I wouldn't paint feminism with this broad of a brush. Feminism is about equality, some "extreme" feminists hijack it into shit like this, but don't lump it all together.

I am, and we should all be feminists.

On December 22 2011 03:46 Zorkmid wrote:
I wouldn't paint feminism with this broad of a brush. Feminism is about equality, some "extreme" feminists hijack it into shit like this, but don't lump it all together.

I am, and we should all be feminists.

On December 22 2011 03:48 ranshaked wrote:

Personally, I feel that we've reached equality, and if we continue, then it'll end up with men on the other end of the stick. I can't find a job as a bartender at most places because i'm not a pretty girl for instance. That's not equal!

On December 22 2011 03:45 HackBenjamin wrote:
I tend to dislike most things ending with "ists".

Imagine if there was a zerg unit called "Feminisk". Doesn't do any real damage, it just makes noise to annoy you.

On December 22 2011 03:49 HackBenjamin wrote:


Disagree. If anything, we should all be equalists.

On December 22 2011 03:42 ranshaked wrote:
Of course they are! Most girls want dolls, while boys want toy guns. Quit trying to break a standard.

On December 22 2011 03:54 corumjhaelen wrote:

That's something I strongly disagree with.

On December 22 2011 03:51 Djzapz wrote:
Some feminists are crazy. Just take it with a grain of salt and laugh - there are legitimate feminists who try to deal with real problems and there are extremists who hate men - sometimes because they've had bad experiences in the past, sometimes because they're crazy...

On December 22 2011 03:53 ranshaked wrote:
I guess I don't see feminism as an issue here. It's the same for racism. I don't see it. I think it's because of how I treat everyone equal. I know it happens, but it seems like a non-issue to me o.0

On December 22 2011 03:49 HackBenjamin wrote:


Disagree. If anything, we should all be equalists.

On December 22 2011 03:49 intrigue wrote:
yeah, this is like judging gaming based on this article http://gizmodo.com/5833787/my-brief-okcupid-affair-with-a-world-champion-magic-the-gathering-player.

On December 22 2011 03:48 ranshaked wrote:

Personally, I feel that we've reached equality, and if we continue, then it'll end up with men on the other end of the stick. I can't find a job as a bartender at most places because i'm not a pretty girl for instance. That's not equal!

On December 22 2011 03:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
yeah this is a really really bad way to learn about feminism. like in most things, there are a lot of people with a really low understanding:enthusiasm ratio in the feminism movement



yeah me too. contrived gender roles are a serious problem that limit options and sometimes force people to act in a way that doesn't make them the happiest. it starts with shit like toys assigned for only one gender

On December 22 2011 03:57 Tamburlaine wrote:
I'm sensing some cognitive biases up ins.

Nice try with the edit.

On December 22 2011 04:04 mordk wrote:
So.. I think males and females have (or should have) equal rights in everything, and the possibility to do whatever they want.

Am I a feminist? Sounds a bit weird to me.

The word "feminism" sounds like positive discrimination in regards to men, which isn't something that sounds desirable imo. There shouldn't be any discrimination based on gender, be it positive or negative.

On December 22 2011 04:26 DigiGnar wrote:
I remember there was some "feminist" movement happening in the States (sometime this year), where women would walk around in lingerie pretty much, but get pissed off when a guy whistled at them. I want to find the article, but pretty much, if you're going to dress sexy, expect to be thought of as sexy. If you were a shirt showing your cleavage, expect guys to look.

On December 22 2011 04:01 tehemperorer wrote:

We're very far from equal dude. Your feeling is definitely not close to actuality, just look up any statistic dealing with this. You can choose, say, pay rate for men and women given the same job title, length of time it takes for women to get promotion vs. men... number of women in upper echelons of government compared to lower levels of government...

On December 22 2011 04:11 quirl wrote:
You have to distinguish between the idea and the people who (want to) represent the idea. While feminism is a very important topic and we have, after 100 years of coming up with that idea, still not reached 100% equality, that woman in your examples is just stupid. In that regard men and women are pretty much equal.

...does feminism even exist anymore in 1st world countries?...

On December 22 2011 03:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
yeah this is a really really bad way to learn about feminism. like in most things, there are a lot of people with a really low understanding:enthusiasm ratio in the feminism movement



yeah me too. contrived gender roles are a serious problem that limit options and sometimes force people to act in a way that doesn't make them the happiest. it starts with shit like toys assigned for only one gender

On December 22 2011 03:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
yeah this is a really really bad way to learn about feminism. like in most things, there are a lot of people with a really low understanding:enthusiasm ratio in the feminism movement



yeah me too. contrived gender roles are a serious problem that limit options and sometimes force people to act in a way that doesn't make them the happiest. it starts with shit like toys assigned for only one gender

On December 22 2011 04:42 ComaDose wrote:

This hurt me so much. So many of the replies hurt me so much.

Some of the people who have posted so far in this thread need help beyond reading a comment.
Anyone who believes women are treated equally with men anywhere in the world are mistaken.
Anyone who can say feminist or feminism with a negative connotation is ignorant.
Feminists are not against strippers, they are for them.

The woman who made the youtube videos is obviously stupid but a stupid youtube video does not warrant a thread bashing a movement for equality. If you want to start a topic on feminism I think you should know more than what a stupid person told you on a youtube video. Please close this thread its spreading ignorance and its painful to observe.

On December 22 2011 04:47 Wegandi wrote:


Sorry, it was Iceland not Sweden.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/mar/25/iceland-most-feminist-country

Really?

I all ready posted a piece by Time that a great deal of women are getting paid 10%+ than their male counterparts. Since you argue for equality surely you are in favor of reducing their wages by 10% so they are equal with their male counterparts right?

On December 22 2011 04:42 ComaDose wrote:

This hurt me so much. So many of the replies hurt me so much.

Some of the people who have posted so far in this thread need help beyond reading a comment.
Anyone who believes women are treated equally with men anywhere in the world are mistaken.
Anyone who can say feminist or feminism with a negative connotation is ignorant.
Feminists are not against strippers, they are for them.

The woman who made the youtube videos is obviously stupid but a stupid youtube video does not warrant a thread bashing a movement for equality. If you want to start a topic on feminism I think you should know more than what a stupid person told you on a youtube video. Please close this thread its spreading ignorance and its painful to observe.

On December 22 2011 04:49 ComaDose wrote:

Yes closing down the sex industry is ironically sexist.
And about the wages. I believe the better performing employee should be paid more. And women should be given as much chance as men to demonstrate how they perform the job.

On December 22 2011 05:01 Torte de Lini wrote:
Yeah, she is reaching. This is similar to radical feminists frowning on Princess-Disney movies because it sets young girls up with the mentality that they need a prince to save her so she can live a proper life accompanied by a handsome young male.

In a sense, they have a point, but it is not as damning as they make it. That video is pretty bad too and sounds like contemporary bullshit of trying too hard and reading too much into the lyrics (especially about Mariah Carey, all her songs are fucking like that, rofl).

The things you should know about feminism are these three key points:

• Women are not paid equal wages as men for the same job
  
  
• Women are still trapped within gender-roles and expectations
  
  
• Mother-child unit are still presumed in many countries

On December 22 2011 05:07 Wegandi wrote:
Women are getting paid more than men in many areas today. Again, I ask, where are all the Feminists arguing to get paid less?

On December 22 2011 05:08 Kukaracha wrote:
Equality is an ideal, it will never be reached. -isms are bound to continue virtually forever, as they're not meant to solve a specific problem, but to shape the world in a way that you seem fit.

Many feminists are aware that society does not necessarily submit women to men, but gives both specific and stereotypic roles. They simply disagree with the role they're given.



I demand sources and precise facts. If you're taking the prostitution market as your example, the numbers are meaningless. What is interesting is the market as a whole, not just a few jobs here and there.

Furthermore, ethnology has proved that the role given to women in our society is cultural, and not natural, as different civilizations behave differently (for example, the matriarcal Naxi people in China).

On December 22 2011 05:08 Kukaracha wrote:
Equality is an ideal, it will never be reached. -isms are bound to continue virtually forever, as they're not meant to solve a specific problem, but to shape the world in a way that you seem fit.

Many feminists are aware that society does not necessarily submit women to men, but gives both specific and stereotypic roles. They simply disagree with the role they're given.



I demand sources and precise facts. If you're taking the prostitution market as your example, the numbers are meaningless. What is interesting is the market as a whole, not just a few jobs here and there.

On December 22 2011 04:59 Wegandi wrote:


Then that is not equality that is meritocracy. Feminism today has nothing to do with the movement created by figures like Susan B. Anthony. So why the outcry ex-post of wage disparities when females were on general making less? If it was based on discrimination then the goal would be to end the discrimination, and not necessarily some vague 'equality', right? It was never about ending the discrimination, but reversing it towards a favorable genesis to women and a punishment of men. I've met quite a few Feminists with such putred hatred of men....I'm sure we've all met them. You can't keep throwing around No True Scotsman fallacies, that all these Feminists are not Feminists because they don't hold to what you view as a Feminist is.

I think a lot of men would be shocked by the views of the modern-day Feminists, and I think a great deal of men are very supportive of the old-Feminist ideals and movement of equality of Law, and of Suffrage.

On December 22 2011 04:32 Wegandi wrote:


http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

Really?

You must be stuck in the 1950s. Further, the unemployment rate for men is much higher than it is for women. Is there going to be a ... Dudeism movement? Payment should not be either equal, or based on a persons gender, but on a persons productivity & merit. Why should a woman who outputs half the work (hypothetical) get paid the same as her male co-worker just because she is a woman? Equality of Law is the only equality that is logical, moral, and adheres to principles of liberty.

On December 22 2011 05:16 Wegandi wrote:
Further, MEN have higher unemployment than women.

On December 22 2011 04:43 Wegandi wrote:


On a great deal of areas I agree that an individual should pursue their interests and that those around them should support them insofar as it doesn't do great bodily or mental harm to them (gentle persuasion out of say...doing meth would be ideal), however, to say that gender roles are contrived is to dismiss nature. Men and women are not built either physically or mentally, the same. There is a physiological and biological reason that Men and Women generally have different tastes in a wide ranging amount of activities and interests. Further, many things require different attributes to perform well. You aren't going to see many male ballet dancers for instance because men lack both the finesse and dexterity of their female counterparts (sure, there are exceptions...), and you won't find many females out there jack hammering away at cement or other strenuous physical work. You cannot fight against Nature and win. Sorry that biological and physiological realities constrict people down certain paths (you can however surely go against the grain if you want, but not sure you'll find much success or happiness).

On December 22 2011 05:14 Torte de Lini wrote:


Where are men getting paid less than women. You must be confused unless the gender has a specific utility to the job.

http://www.unpac.ca/economy/wagegap3.html
Here are some stats and examples of jobs where women are paid 70.4% (could be more now) to the men's dollar.



No, feminism has a lot to do with what people think of, they just take it on peg too far. I mean trapped by the ideas they are often obliged to take care of the kids, be the homemaker and are pressured by the expectancy of the gender divide in work. You think everyone has equal opportunity to work and become an independent breadwinner, but you are sorely mistaken even in Westernized countries.

What's it like being completely delusional? Do you say the same thing about homosexuals wanting equal rights?

On December 22 2011 05:20 bonifaceviii wrote:

This is somewhat structural, actually.

Women on average are more willing to work part-time and casual labour, and that is unfortunately what is not getting cut as much in this economy. Also womens' labour force participation rate is lower.

Here's the slightly deflating caveat: this reverse gender gap, as it's known, applies only to unmarried, childless women under 30 who live in cities.

He attributes the earnings reversal overwhelmingly to one factor: education. For every two guys who graduate from college or get a higher degree, three women do.

On December 22 2011 05:14 Torte de Lini wrote:


Where are men getting paid less than women. You must be confused unless the gender has a specific utility to the job.

http://www.unpac.ca/economy/wagegap3.html
Here are some stats and examples of jobs where women are paid 70.4% (could be more now) to the men's dollar.



No, feminism has a lot to do with what people think of, they just take it on peg too far. I mean trapped by the ideas they are often obliged to take care of the kids, be the homemaker and are pressured by the expectancy of the gender divide in work. You think everyone has equal opportunity to work and become an independent breadwinner, but you are sorely mistaken even in Westernized countries.

What's it like being completely delusional? Do you say the same thing about homosexuals wanting equal rights?

On December 22 2011 05:29 Wegandi wrote:


I don't group people. Homosexuals have no special rights, nor do any other group. There is only individual rights, and that is very much an ideal predicated on the equal liberties of one to another. If you are talking about Marriage, I do not support State involvement whatsoever. It should be a personal, religious, and contractual matter. A Church should not be compelled against their will to accept a homosexual marriage, nor should the State prevent two parties to coming to a contractual agreement for all the things we associate with the legal entity Marriage (Next of Kin, PoA, Shared Bank Accounts, etc.).

But that isn't what Feminism is about. It isn't about Suffrage, or Equality of Law (liberty). It's about stupid cultural shit about an egalitarian society where there should be an equal number of males and females and of pay in every industry and every sector regardless of the INDIVIDUALS interests, wants, needs, and desires. It's a totalitarian movement.

This is why you see places like Iceland banning the individual woman's choice to pursue a job stripping, or of porn / prostitution. Further, when the evidence points to them getting paid more on average than their male counterparts in a great deal many areas (which is increasing every year), you hear not a PEEP about that women should be getting paid less and should be equal with their male counterparts.

You are under some false impression from waydays of Susan B. Anthony and Suffrage movement that Feminism is about equality of liberty/Law. It used to be. Hasn't been the case since the 1950s/60s.

Perhaps you should take your egalitarian nightmare and go become a borg. Everyone is equal in the Borg. There is no individual. There is the collective and they are all the same. Let me know how long you find yourself living in that environment before you go insane (not to mention the stupendous amount of violence and force you would need to compel and make people behave, believe, and act in such a manner to create such a society). Human beings are not equal. We are all born with INDIVIDUAL characteristics completely unique to ourselves. Why are you so biased against uniqueness? Why are you so fascinated by a totalitarian egalitarian doctrine? By nature we are not egalitarian, therefore to fight against nature requires violence, force, and compulsion. Human beings are not a borg.

On December 22 2011 05:01 Torte de Lini wrote:
Yeah, she is reaching. This is similar to radical feminists frowning on Princess-Disney movies because it sets young girls up with the mentality that they need a prince to save her so she can live a proper life accompanied by a handsome young male.

In a sense, they have a point, but it is not as damning as they make it. That video is pretty bad too and sounds like contemporary bullshit of trying too hard and reading too much into the lyrics (especially about Mariah Carey, all her songs are fucking like that, rofl).

The things you should know about feminism are these three key points:

• Women are not paid equal wages as men for the same job
  
  
• Women are still trapped within gender-roles and expectations
  
  
• Mother-child unit are still presumed in many countries

On December 22 2011 04:32 Wegandi wrote:


http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

Really?

You must be stuck in the 1950s. Further, the unemployment rate for men is much higher than it is for women. Is there going to be a ... Dudeism movement? Payment should not be either equal, or based on a persons gender, but on a persons productivity & merit. Why should a woman who outputs half the work (hypothetical) get paid the same as her male co-worker just because she is a woman? Equality of Law is the only equality that is logical, moral, and adheres to principles of liberty.

Honestly if it was about equality then why do Feminists in Sweden want to ban women who choose to strip & prostitute? That's not equality -- that's totalitarianism. It seems the Feminist movement has turned into a dictatorial sort of fascistic set of ideals. If you think Feminism today has anything to do with Susan B. Anthony and Suffrage, you are sorely mistaken.

On December 22 2011 06:07 Torte de Lini wrote:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1983185,00.html

Same mangazine.

rofl, what a joke.

On December 22 2011 03:48 ranshaked wrote:

Personally, I feel that we've reached equality, and if we continue, then it'll end up with men on the other end of the stick. I can't find a job as a bartender at most places because i'm not a pretty girl for instance. That's not equal!

On December 22 2011 06:35 Count9 wrote:
She embodies everything bad and wrong about extreme feminists, real feminists shun people like that and it's people like her that makes the job of real feminists extremely difficult.

I mean, you can say things like "I generally distrust all -isms, I prefer to make up my own mind" and it might seem like you're oh-so-independent, but well, the facts and arguments for feminism are available if you want to look them up. See for yourself whether you're a feminist or an anti-feminist, but don't weasel out of it by painting an equality movement as somehow uncouth and extreme, just because you're afraid of taking a stand.

On December 22 2011 03:45 HackBenjamin wrote:
I tend to dislike most things ending with "ists".

Imagine if there was a zerg unit called "Feminisk". Doesn't do any real damage, it just makes noise to annoy you.

On December 22 2011 05:22 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
First, you don't know the difference between gender and sex. Look it up before you continue posting in a thread about feminism.

Now to your response, you seem to be supposing absolute equality. Equality in every possible way is not the goal. Equal opportunity and equal reward based on performance are closer to the goal. While gender roles are not completely arbitrary, they are still significantly arbitrary. When the differences in the sexes of children have been studied, we've learned that there's more variation within the sexes (difference between one male and another male, or one female and another female) than there is between the sexes (difference between one male and one female). So if you take two people, blind to their sex, and do some personality tests and observe extremely different results, it isn't very much more likely that they're different sexes than they're the same sex. The sexes are mostly overlapping. The difference between male and female is much smaller than the difference between a boy on one extreme and a boy on the other extreme.

Gender roles fuck that up. They're very black and white (non-overlapping) and they're very psychologically powerful. So when we study the difference in the sexes with people who have been affected by gender roles, we get way different results. People don't behave how they naturally would. They repress some things and exaggerate or fake other things. Their interests are forced by what the world says is okay or not okay for their sex to do, despite what they're good at or not good at.

So the point is that everyone is okay with the extent that nature limits our abilities because we know those limits are actually really small. Gender roles are overwhelmingly contrived and all that shit should probably go.

On December 22 2011 03:48 ranshaked wrote:

Personally, I feel that we've reached equality, and if we continue, then it'll end up with men on the other end of the stick. I can't find a job as a bartender at most places because i'm not a pretty girl for instance. That's not equal!

[B]On December 22 2011 03:45 HackBenjamin wrote:[/B
Imagine if there was a zerg unit called "Feminisk". Doesn't do any real damage, it just makes noise to annoy you.

On December 22 2011 07:31 OmniEulogy wrote:
I am strongly for equality which we have not reached in North America yet. However when you start to rename manholes because the term is sexist I believe the feminists are shooting themselves in the foot. It's unfortunate that the crazy ones get the largest platforms =/

On December 22 2011 05:22 Liquid`Tyler wrote:

When the differences in the sexes of children have been studied, we've learned that there's more variation within the sexes (difference between one male and another male, or one female and another female) than there is between the sexes (difference between one male and one female).

On December 22 2011 08:22 D_K_night wrote:
Aside from focusing on the young lass who did that youtube thing, what is the agenda or the motive behind the person. Is the person simply trying to provoke the viewers, in order to "promote" feminism?

These will be unpopular viewpoints. Just my opinions guys. Please.

The reason that feminism isn't as successful as it could be, is because it means different things to different people. It has long reached the point where it can be just about anything anyone wants it to be. To one person it means more equality for women. To others it means just another outlet for self-expression, with a sprinkle of controversial statements within.

Think about technology around us and how things - for the most part - just work. That's because finally dissimilar companies have finally agreed to standards. Plug and Play is a reality(mostly, it's good enough, bear with me here). But there are no concise standards on what Feminism is. Ask X number of people...anyone. It should be as wide a spectrum as you can possibly find, eg. your grandparents, the teenage boy on the street, construction worker, fashion designer, etc etc. Ask them "what does Feminism mean to you"

And you'll get different answers from everyone. And that's a problem.

Without a central figurehead of some kind, without some unifying set of principles, goals or even say, "commandments of feminism", we lack focus. We can gauge roughly what the conditions are today, but we don't have a unified end goal in mind, one which is consistent across the board, across all ages, groups, cultures, etc. We don't even know how to measure our progress, if any. And you know something? I'd be criticized for "thinking like a man" and these ways "aren't how women think, who are the true rulers of feminism".

I can already hear some of you shouting "well noob it's wages disparity DUH" well no it isn't. We can't arguing wage disparity, where there is inequality with respect to gender roles in the workplace. Take a look at jobs/industries such as:

- Mining
- Sewage Treatment
- Forestry
- or any job that requires you to be exposed to rain/snow/the elements as a requirement of your job

Fair to say that they're male dominated, by a large margin? What about other jobs where they're trying to encourage women to pick up, via ads, government mandates "must hire X women for every X number of men"? Where are the feminists when it comes to these scenarios? Totally silent. Let me guess, the jobs above don't appeal to many women - why?

Conversely, why so many female admin assistants vs males? If you wanna talk wage gap in the workplace in an equivalent job, how many examples can you think of, of where there's still inequality with respect to what a male would willingly do, versus a female? Enough talk from me on wage disparity.

Next thing is social etiquette. Man takes charge thing, with respect to manners, planning locations/activities for the date, being a gentleman when it comes to the bill - what is the end goal for feminists? Does "equality" mean splitting the bill? Does it mean equal input and ideas from both sides for activities, instead of the boring movie/dinner date? Will we see the woman pull the chair out for the man?

I suspect that when it comes to romance, they(the feminists) want these old fashioned behaviors to remain intact, not to change, but yet change all these other things. They will continue to want a strong, take-charge man over a fella who solicits the women for their opinion before committing to action.

On December 22 2011 08:22 D_K_night wrote:
Aside from focusing on the young lass who did that youtube thing, what is the agenda or the motive behind the person. Is the person simply trying to provoke the viewers, in order to "promote" feminism?

These will be unpopular viewpoints. Just my opinions guys. Please.

The reason that feminism isn't as successful as it could be, is because it means different things to different people. It has long reached the point where it can be just about anything anyone wants it to be. To one person it means more equality for women. To others it means just another outlet for self-expression, with a sprinkle of controversial statements within.

Think about technology around us and how things - for the most part - just work. That's because finally dissimilar companies have finally agreed to standards. Plug and Play is a reality(mostly, it's good enough, bear with me here). But there are no concise standards on what Feminism is. Ask X number of people...anyone. It should be as wide a spectrum as you can possibly find, eg. your grandparents, the teenage boy on the street, construction worker, fashion designer, etc etc. Ask them "what does Feminism mean to you"

And you'll get different answers from everyone. And that's a problem.

Without a central figurehead of some kind, without some unifying set of principles, goals or even say, "commandments of feminism", we lack focus. We can gauge roughly what the conditions are today, but we don't have a unified end goal in mind, one which is consistent across the board, across all ages, groups, cultures, etc. We don't even know how to measure our progress, if any. And you know something? I'd be criticized for "thinking like a man" and these ways "aren't how women think, who are the true rulers of feminism".

I can already hear some of you shouting "well noob it's wages disparity DUH" well no it isn't. We can't arguing wage disparity, where there is inequality with respect to gender roles in the workplace. Take a look at jobs/industries such as:

- Mining
- Sewage Treatment
- Forestry
- or any job that requires you to be exposed to rain/snow/the elements as a requirement of your job

Fair to say that they're male dominated, by a large margin? What about other jobs where they're trying to encourage women to pick up, via ads, government mandates "must hire X women for every X number of men"? Where are the feminists when it comes to these scenarios? Totally silent. Let me guess, the jobs above don't appeal to many women - why?

Conversely, why so many female admin assistants vs males? If you wanna talk wage gap in the workplace in an equivalent job, how many examples can you think of, of where there's still inequality with respect to what a male would willingly do, versus a female? Enough talk from me on wage disparity.

Next thing is social etiquette. Man takes charge thing, with respect to manners, planning locations/activities for the date, being a gentleman when it comes to the bill - what is the end goal for feminists? Does "equality" mean splitting the bill? Does it mean equal input and ideas from both sides for activities, instead of the boring movie/dinner date? Will we see the woman pull the chair out for the man?

I suspect that when it comes to romance, they(the feminists) want these old fashioned behaviors to remain intact, not to change, but yet change all these other things. They will continue to want a strong, take-charge man over a fella who solicits the women for their opinion before committing to action.

On December 22 2011 05:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:

yep and they are recession figures and the recession has had a greater negative effect on men's jobs than women's. explanations can go on and on and on about what these figures mean. it's absolutely ridiculous for someone to suggest a figure like that means that sexism is ending and feminism has accomplished its purpose

On December 22 2011 10:42 Desirous wrote:
The very existence of the word "feminism" is anti-equal rights, because you're fighting for ONE specific groups rights, because you think their rights are more important. Either fight for everyone's rights, or admit to being prejudice, because it is prejudice.

On December 22 2011 10:42 Desirous wrote:




The very existence of the word "feminism" is anti-equal rights, because you're fighting for ONE specific groups rights, because you think their rights are more important. Either fight for everyone's rights, or admit to being prejudice, because it is prejudice.



FYI, as an American, you're spelling labor incorrectly. Labour is how Canada and the U.K. spell it.

On December 22 2011 10:42 Desirous wrote:




The very existence of the word "feminism" is anti-equal rights, because you're fighting for ONE specific groups rights, because you think their rights are more important. Either fight for everyone's rights, or admit to being prejudice, because it is prejudice.



FYI, as an American, you're spelling labor incorrectly. Labour is how Canada and the U.K. spell it.

On December 22 2011 03:42 ranshaked wrote:
The 3rd song she uses as an example is "It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas" stating that the toys kids want are gender based. Of course they are! Most girls want dolls, while boys want toy guns. Quit trying to break a standard.

On December 22 2011 08:36 MasterBlasterCaster wrote:


I am somewhat curious as to what this means? Do they mean physical differences, mental differences, and how do they quantify it?

On December 22 2011 16:05 GeorgeForeman wrote:
I'll just add that as I understand it, the best studies (account for the most variables, etc.) generally find a much smaller (though still non-zero) wage gap between men and women than the "~20% less than men" figure that's most often cited. A couple reasons (inadequate accounting for experience, work hours, union vs. nonunion, etc.) were given above. This doesn't mean that a wage gap doesn't exist anymore, but I think it's fair to say that the problem is far less severe than it once was and all trends point to it moving in the direction of equality.

On December 22 2011 11:41 Mobius_1 wrote:
Surprisingly deep discussion. Have to say some of those extreme feminists blow some many things out of proportion. Just on the point of sexy Christmas songs, it's not like artists were forced into performing them, I'm sure Mariah Carey didn't need to do that song if she somehow deemed it degrading, just like Rihanna/Katy Perry don't need to dress as provocatively as they do. However, they know sex sells and they are simply making good money with their good looks. I'd say it's actually a good feminist thing because females are free to do what they want without being oppressed (or any more so than men). If you are honestly mad at this, then shouldn't men be mad too at Beckham's underwear ads and topless actors in movies and music videos with bulging sixpacks?

There are of course still inequalities, and many of those we as a society can still work on. However, these feminists see injustices everywhere even when none exist substantially in the same way literary critics can pluck themes and illusions out of thin air. Ugh indeed.

On December 22 2011 03:45 HackBenjamin wrote:
I tend to dislike most things ending with "ists".

Imagine if there was a zerg unit called "Feminisk". Doesn't do any real damage, it just makes noise to annoy you.

On December 22 2011 20:29 HardMacro wrote:
LOL, all the videos have their ratings disabled.

And comments must be approved by the uploader.

Seriously I hope she gets a very painful kind of untreatable cancer, soon.

On December 22 2011 10:42 Desirous wrote:




The very existence of the word "feminism" is anti-equal rights, because you're fighting for ONE specific groups rights, because you think their rights are more important. Either fight for everyone's rights, or admit to being prejudice, because it is prejudice....

On December 22 2011 03:42 ranshaked wrote:
Just recently, as in today, I was roaming youtube, and I came across a feminism based youtube channel. At first I was intrigued. I thought to myself, does feminism even exist anymore in 1st world countries?

btw, the last song "baby it's cold outside" she states is a man date raping a girl. it's absurd.

On December 22 2011 22:42 Hynda wrote:


Are you seriously saying that you think that feminsim is a bad thing? Just because some attention whore is on the internet claiming to be feminist doesn't mean she actually is one.

Also baby it's cold outside is a date rape song, listen to the lyrics, it's fucking creepy.

On December 22 2011 21:29 ComaDose wrote:


smarten up son. Its a technical definition of anti female discrimination. And there is a technical one for male discrimination too so you can stop feeling so oppressed as a man now.

On December 22 2011 16:35 Jibba wrote:
The bigger problem that still exists, and makes up the majority of the 76%, is that women are often socialized into lower paying fields. There isn't an inherent (natural) reason that precludes women from being good at math and science, but they still make up a small minority of engineers, which is one of the highest paying professions. They do, however, make up the majority of Education, which is one of the lowest paying fields. So the problem is not usually seen on the individual level, where sex might determine the pay of two equally qualified candidates, but rather it's seen on the societal level where women are far more likely to pursue lower paying fields than men. That makes it much more complicated and difficult to solve, but pretending that an issue doesn't exist is certainly detrimental.

On December 23 2011 02:54 trias_e wrote:


There's no evidence for any of this. The assumption that there are no inherent, average differences between the sexes in terms of motivation, type of preferred occupation, and even capability is an incredibly strong claim that is parroted often with no evidence to support it.

Personally, I don't think it has much to do with socialization that women are the vast majority of elementary school teachers. Easily explained through women on average caring more for young children than men, which is a cultural universal (it's inherent, and it's obvious why it's the case.) Of course socialization could reverse this trend through various means, but I don't think it would be a matter of equalizing past socialization, but rather of socialization actively working against the natural average preferences of men and women.

I also would guess that men are better on average at hard math and science due to average differences in the brains of men and women, but this is a much more tenuous position. There is no evidence against it, however, at least that I have seen, so I wouldn't hastily dismiss it as if the answers are clear and obvious, because they aren't.

On December 23 2011 02:54 trias_e wrote:


There's no evidence for any of this. The assumption that there are no inherent, average differences between the sexes in terms of motivation, type of preferred occupation, and even capability is an incredibly strong claim that is parroted often with no evidence to support it.

Personally, I don't think it has much to do with socialization that women are the vast majority of elementary school teachers. Easily explained through women on average caring more for young children than men, which is a cultural universal (it's inherent, and it's obvious why it's the case.) Of course socialization could reverse this trend through various means, but I don't think it would be a matter of equalizing past socialization, but rather of socialization actively working against the natural average preferences of men and women.

I also would guess that men are better on average at hard math and science due to average differences in the brains of men and women, but this is a much more tenuous position. There is no evidence against it, however, at least that I have seen, so I wouldn't hastily dismiss it as if the answers are clear and obvious, because they aren't.

On December 23 2011 03:35 Haemonculus wrote:

Eh, and wtf do you base that on?

Socialization doesn't play a role? Please. From day 1, you're either wrapped in a pink or blue blanket on your way home from the hospital. The fact that we all just take this for granted shows just how deeply gender socialization runs. And on an interesting note, before the 1920s, pink was a "masculine" color, and blue was a "feminine" color. Baby boys would be wrapped in pink, and baby girls in blue. It's all socially constructed.

How many parents buy their young daughters a chemistry set, or an erector set, or mentally stimulating building toys like knex or legos? We get dolls and toy kitchens. How many young girls, (though these trends are slowly changing) are encouraged to join the chess/math club?

Have you ever watched the crap on TV aimed at young girls? Watch any show on the Disney channel depicting dolled up middle schoolers squabbling over the attention of cute boys and try not to puke. We feed our daughters all this crazy stuff about what's expected of them, or what's "proper and feminine", and then when they say they're not interested in hard sciences, we assume it's because female brains are just different.

And socialization works both ways. How often are men told that professions such as nursing or caring for kids is "for women", and something to be avoided? What reaction does a man get if he admits to being a nurse or an elementary school teacher? It's not that he's somehow biologically inferior at either profession, but he's been told over and over since the day he was born, from his peers, from media, and from society in general that it's not "what men are supposed to do." When you swallow those expectations your entire life, it's easy to just assume it's "the norm."

On December 23 2011 04:17 trias_e wrote:


It's a fallacy to assume that just because socialization exists, nature has no impact. I don't argue that socialization occurs. Just because it occurs doesn't mean it has full explanatory power.

As I said, it is a cultural universal that women care more for young children than men do. When we see certain behavioral differences in every culture on Earth, it is safe to say that socialization is not the primary reason behind them.

There is no reason to think that, in a cultural vacuum (if it could somehow exist), the sexes would be equally inclined towards every profession. Sexual dimorphism is not simply a matter of height and muscle mass, it also a matter of preference and motivation. Men prefer riskier activities and more violent ones. This is a cultural universal. Women care more for children. This is a cultural universal.

On December 23 2011 04:17 trias_e wrote:
There is no reason to think that, in a cultural vacuum (if it could somehow exist), the sexes would be equally inclined towards every profession. Sexual dimorphism is not simply a matter of height and muscle mass, it also a matter of preference and motivation. Men prefer riskier activities and more violent ones. This is a cultural universal. Women care more for children. This is a cultural universal.

On December 22 2011 10:42 Desirous wrote:




The very existence of the word "feminism" is anti-equal rights, because you're fighting for ONE specific groups rights, because you think their rights are more important. Either fight for everyone's rights, or admit to being prejudice, because it is prejudice.



FYI, as an American, you're spelling labor incorrectly. Labour is how Canada and the U.K. spell it.

On December 22 2011 03:46 Zorkmid wrote:
I wouldn't paint feminism with this broad of a brush. Feminism is about equality, some "extreme" feminists hijack it into shit like this, but don't lump it all together.

I am, and we should all be feminists.

On December 23 2011 15:24 Swede wrote:


This is so dumb. Fighting for equal opportunity for one gender is fighting for equal opportunity for both.

On December 28 2011 12:32 Klockan3 wrote:

Not true at all, if we have two categories of people; "A" and "B", and I manage to win the fights for A's rights in every situation where A were disadvantaged but ignore the rest then the result is that B will have all the disadvantages hence A>B. For example I could fight for males in all areas where males are disadvantaged (males have more dangerous jobs and thus face more accidents, judges are harsher against males, males do worse at school, males are more often voilence victims, males die earlier, males got the short end of the stick in the dating game and so on) while ignoring or trivializing all the areas where males are advantaged. However if I do that then I would be called a misogynist or antifeminist even though all I do is fighting for equality...

On December 28 2011 17:38 khaydarin9 wrote:


If someone called you misogynistic for trying to "right" the fact that males statistically have a shorter life span (which may be true statistically, but I don't think it's something you can fight for, necessarily - and I disagree with some of your other examples), they'd be wrong - I believe the term mysognist is anti-women rather than pro-men, and there is a difference.

On December 28 2011 20:16 Klockan3 wrote:

Of course you can fight for having the same lifespan in exactly the same way you can fight for things like equal wages or womens maths. If women have lower wages because they are mistreated why can't we say that men have lower lifespans because they are being mistreated? Men also have higher mortality rates in every age category so the difference even must be systematic all throughout the system! So, we just have to add extra resources and campaigns supporting specifically mens health till the lifespans are equal, it is quite simple.

On December 28 2011 18:52 Selendis wrote:
It's because their primal instincts are overriding their self control. What I am trying to say is that if those rapists were gay, they would be raping men instead.

On December 28 2011 22:05 khaydarin9 wrote:


The thing is, equal wages is a product of culture, the concept of money being an arbitrary social construction with no natural value - therefore one can plausibly say, there is no inherent, permanent connection between human beings and the concept of currency, so why exactly is it that on multiple reports, women earn less than men in the same jobs? While it's also impossible to separate the issue of lifespan from its cultural (or, say, environmental) context, it has a lot more to do with biology, so one might say: males and females are biologically different, therefore this leads to differences in average life span in the long term (drawing on examples, perhaps, from the natural world - species in which one sex is documented to live longer than the other). You could then try to campaign for extra resources specifically supporting men's health, but you'd probably have to acknowledge somewhere that this would more or less equate being male to having some kind of congenital disability (although, depending on who you ask, this might not be a far stretch ... just kidding). See the difference?

Can you prove that the age difference is mostly biological and not cultural? And can you prove that the wage gap is mostly cultural and not biological?

On December 29 2011 02:40 Klockan3 wrote:

Can you prove that the age difference is mostly biological and not cultural? And can you prove that the wage gap is mostly cultural and not biological? Same with why women are not prominent in the sciences?
Lots of edit:
I mean, I could easily argue that the lifespan difference is almost solely due to our culture pressing men to be more macho, take more risks and live more stressful while ignoring their pains and you wouldn't be able to disprove me, simply because research in the area is non-conclusive at the moment.

And about the wage gap, it is not only cultural, men and women have several innate differences and these could easily result in a wage gap that big. Men are better at taking advantageous risks which leads to a higher total income. In addition people have more respect for people with deeper voices no matter the sex. So we are programmed to take women and children less seriously which of course leads to a wage gap, you pay more to people you think as serious.

Now, my point isn't that we shouldn't work on womens issues or that we should work on mens issues. My point is only that both sides are more or less ignoring the issues of the other side using arguments they themselves dismiss when used against themselves. I am against ignorance, thinking that the life expectancy is mostly a product of biology is very ignorant, same with thinking that wages impossibly could depend on what genes you were born with.

The most plausible explanation is that there are small genetical differences behind most of the inequalities which then gets magnified by society. Newborn girls might slightly favour dolls while newborn boys might slightly favour mechanical things, so society markets dolls for girls and mechanical things for boys and we get the strong dichotomy we have today.

On December 28 2011 12:32 Klockan3 wrote:

Not true at all, if we have two categories of people; "A" and "B", and I manage to win the fights for A's rights in every situation where A were disadvantaged but ignore the rest then the result is that B will have all the disadvantages hence A>B. For example I could fight for males in all areas where males are disadvantaged (males have more dangerous jobs and thus face more accidents, judges are harsher against males, males do worse at school, males are more often voilence victims, males die earlier, males got the short end of the stick in the dating game and so on) while ignoring or trivializing all the areas where males are advantaged. However if I do that then I would be called a misogynist or antifeminist even though all I do is fighting for equality...