EPT#Ineedmasculism - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
FlaShFTW
United States10172 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
I guess I agree and Disagree with you. Also that picture disturbs me. I never thought Rachel Adams would do something like that. lol but seriously some things need to be thought about before they are photographed... | ||
|
Beorning
United States243 Posts
On February 10 2013 07:53 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nxeffJv.jpg) Take this image. What do you think of it? Those ladies look a little too old to be touching that boy in his private parts. (This picture is trending hard, at the moment) Now, imagine that the picture was a little different. Instead of two women and a little boy, picture two men and a little girl. What do you think of that situation? If you think the kid is lucky, and the girl is unlucky, you are sexist. If you think both the girl and boy are unlucky, you're a humanist. If you think they are both lucky, well... What the hell? For one, this picture is ancient, and two, who is saying the kid is lucky? | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On February 10 2013 08:32 Beorning wrote: What the hell? For one, this picture is ancient, and two, who is saying the kid is lucky? I'd say that the women are saying he's lucky, and the fact that the women have not been criminally charged with child molestation makes the police, maybe even the federal government, saying such a thing. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PAcKzJM.png) Of course, male circumcision isn't mutilation, either. Only when it's done to female is it bad. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
Yes, there are double standards when it comes to male/female molestation and circumcision, but you're not the first person to bring this up and that they exist is not some black mark on feminism in general. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:09 Myles wrote: Wow, even as someone who agrees that feminists go a bit overboard sometimes, the reasoning by the OP makes me sad. Yes, there are double standards when it comes to male/female molestation and circumcision, but you're not the first person to bring this up and that they exist is not some black mark on feminism in general. My reasoning is that if "feminists" are really for "equality" then why make a word that implies femininity be considered for "equality", yet doesn't imply anything about masculinity? Why not just say, "I'm a humanist" or "I'm an equalist" or something. But hey, if me being for equality makes you a sad panda, then I don't know... | ||
|
Beorning
United States243 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:15 GnarlyArbitrage wrote:me being for equality What's the title of this post again? Also re:that pic, We have a picture of a girl maybe touching a kid's crotch(doesn't really look like she is to me), and you're saying the government should be mobilizing to bring her to justice? | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
Also, "maybe touching a kid's crotch"? Are you blind? What do you think would happen if it was a picture of two men and a little girl? Do you think that the men would still be walking around without punishment like the women are? Do you honestly believe that? | ||
|
Beorning
United States243 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:32 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: The title of this blog is the hashtag #Ineedmasculism, not because I need it, and you won't find me saying it in here, but because it has gotten national media attention for being hijacked by feminists. Also, "maybe touching a kid's crotch"? Are you blind? What do you think would happen if it was a picture of two men and a little girl? Do you think that the men would still be walking around without punishment like the women are? Do you honestly believe that? Yes? It's a picture on the internet, do you think the fbi is running face detection software on every picture of some guy touching a woman's chest? Anyways I don't feel like getting trolled any more. What happened to banlings living up to their name? | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On February 10 2013 08:45 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: Of course, male circumcision isn't mutilation, either. Only when it's done to female is it bad. You should try to understand what words mean before you use them. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:43 Beorning wrote: Yes? It's a picture on the internet, do you think the fbi is running face detection software on every picture of some guy touching a woman's chest? Anyways I don't feel like getting trolled any more. What happened to banlings living up to their name? You do realize that the FBI will arrest people for even having a single picture of child pornography on their computer, right? Also, if the situation was different, it's two men and a little girl, not a man and a woman. If it was a picture of a man fondling a girls breasts, then I guess the woman was alright with it, unless it shows her trying to actively get away from the guy or something. Think of back when the first feminists popped up. If they had the social media we had today, and they made a hashtag #Ineedfeminism, don't you think they would've been publicly attacked, even physically? (Some) men were very opposed to the idea of a woman being able to vote and other things. What you see in the hashtag #Ineedmasculinity is feminists attacking the other gender for wanting "equal" rights. Again, however, masculinity can not be for equality in a pure sense because the same reason why feminism isn't equality: It implies only one gender, leaving out the other. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:50 sam!zdat wrote: because you're not actually advocating healthy masculinity, you're just a reactionary anti-feminist stooge You're just a reactionary anti-masculinist stooge. That's easy. Why don't you provide any intellectual argument? Did you know that female genital mutilation is illegal in the US, while male circumcision is not? http://www.nocirc.org/publish/9pam.pdf | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:50 sam!zdat wrote: because you're not actually advocating healthy masculinity, you're just a reactionary anti-feminist stooge I also am not advocating masculinity, I am advocating equality. At least we can agree on that. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:53 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: You're just a reactionary anti-masculinist stooge. That's easy. Why don't you provide any intellectual argument? Did you know that female genital mutilation is illegal in the US, while male circumcision is not? http://www.nocirc.org/publish/9pam.pdf they're not equivalent at all, except for the name. You should know what words mean. For what it's worth, I do think that male circumcision is unethical, but comparing it to female circumcision is totally disingenuous and you are a fool to suggest there is any meaningful equivalence. If you had any idea how many fights I've gotten into with feminists, you would not call me this. You are a substanceless reactionary, don't try to play the "I'm rubber, you're glue" game with me, son. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On February 10 2013 09:53 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: You're just a reactionary anti-masculinist stooge. That's easy. Why don't you provide any intellectual argument? Did you know that female genital mutilation is illegal in the US, while male circumcision is not? http://www.nocirc.org/publish/9pam.pdf what? Are you trying to compare circumcision to getting your tubes tied and confusing what the latter is? Or where Circumcision comes from and that it wasn't done to women... or... do you think Circumcision is getting a vasectomy? You are comparing two things that don't relate with each other. You are aware that "female circumcision" isn't a professional medical procedure right? ... I'm not sure what you don't understand about the topic you yourself brought up but its a pretty large misunderstanding. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
khaydarin9
Australia423 Posts
In addition to what was said above - the procedures that are termed male circumcision and female circumcision are actually functionally very different - there is also a huge movement in the US against male circumcision (being one of the few remaining countries where male circumcision is still prevalent). I'm pretty sure there's a big TL thread about circumcision, as well - ight want to have a look at that before you take another stab at claiming to know what people think. Feminism as a political idea is about subverting established power structures like gender, but also things like race and social hierarchies. I don't know what "masculism" can possibly mean in relation to this, but the word, as it exists, and the concepts it's supposed to portray hurt my brain a little. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
There's a type where it's impossible for the woman to have a child, but there are types where it removes sexual sensation. Removing foreskin also takes away from sexual sensation. Both, for the sake of cleanliness. Cutting off a baby's foreskin without his permission should be considered assault or something equivalent, if circumcising girls is illegal. | ||
|
Ianuus
Australia349 Posts
On February 10 2013 10:46 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: Did you guys know there are different types of FGM? As stated in the link... There's a type where it's impossible for the woman to have a child, but there are types where it removes sexual sensation. Removing foreskin also takes away from sexual sensation. Both, for the sake of cleanliness. Cutting off a baby's foreskin without his permission should be considered assault or something equivalent, if circumcising girls is illegal. Except girls don't have foreskins. I don't see why you're trying to equalise two procedures which apply to different body parts on different people. On February 10 2013 09:53 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: You're just a reactionary anti-masculinist stooge. That's easy. Why don't you provide any intellectual argument? Did you know that female genital mutilation is illegal in the US, while male circumcision is not? http://www.nocirc.org/publish/9pam.pdf If you think drawing unanalogous parallels, making illogical inferences, and bringing up irrelevant points constitute an "intellectual argument", then I have bad news for you son. | ||
| ||
