| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:43 Falling wrote: How the heck did this topic morph from ills received by a woman from men on the internet to ills received by men from women (feminists)? ♪ somebody's new to net femi-nism argu-ments ♪ | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:43 Falling wrote: How the heck did this topic morph from ills received by a woman from men on the internet to ills received by men from women (feminists)? First of all, women ≠ feminists. To answer your question, this topic shift naturally came about because it is yet another example (following many others in recent history) of feminists coming into a male-dominant environment where everyone is treated badly, and getting upset and demanding changes just for women. | ||
Falling
Canada11388 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:45 TheExile19 wrote: ♪ somebody's new to net femi-nism argu-ments ♪ Not really, there's a term used for this sort of derail, but I cannot recall it right now. It's just a little irritating to see it on TL as well I used to dismiss a lot of those sorts of critiques. Edit @sunprince. First, Perhaps I should have specified that I meant feminists as a subset of women that are being complained about, but I'll grant you one can be male and a feminist as well. Second, I'm not sure that it has been established that the author of that article IS a self-identified feminist. Maybe she is, maybe she is not. Nor has it been established that everyone is treated equally poorly. That the sorts of criticisms, the frequency of the comments/ criticisms and the ferocity of the criticism and comments are equivalent. | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:43 xDaunt wrote: Oh how quickly people forget Ms. Sandra Fluke showing up on Capitol Hill to weave a tale of woe about how unfair it was for Georgetown to refuse to pay for her birth control! To be fair, I think it's worth subsidizing birth control for everybody, male and female. Unwanted children are disproportionately likely to end up at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder and cause problems either as criminals or overall drains on the government. I also take issue with Republicans opposing birth control for religious reasons, rather than simply the unfair subsidization of someone's choices. | ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
they just sort of pale in comparison to the issues of any other group in the first world nobody's forbidding your focus on issues that matter to you and that plenty of other people would regard as true, far from it, but maybe, just maybe, you could chill the fuck out and stop claiming that only your particular problems matter. if you think that's what the dumber feminists do, well, try leading by example. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:47 Falling wrote: Not really, there's a term used for this sort of derail, but I cannot recall it right now. It's just a little irritating to see it on TL as well I used to dismiss a lot of those sorts of critiques. Happens all the time in feminist blogs. They'll post something and then MRA people show up to attack them usually making me wonder "why the hell is an MRA guy doing reading feminist blogs?" Some people just enjoy attacking women. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:50 Thieving Magpie wrote: Happens all the time in feminist blogs. They'll post something and then MRA people show up to attack them usually making me wonder "why the hell is an MRA guy doing reading feminist blogs?" Some people just enjoy attacking women. Or just simply disagree? Works both ways anyway, and tbh as long as people aren't insulting it's positive to expose yourself to debate with those who are diametrically opposed to you. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:35 sunprince wrote: Sure. Knowledge and link bomb incoming: Feminists fight against shared custody. You can read the National Organization of Women's own statement here. Also note their false accusations against men, such as "fathers are abusive, don't give them custody. Feminists fight against protection from false rape accusations. Feminists fight against attempts to have male and female convicts treated equally. They argue that no woman should be sent to jail, including female serial killers. Feminists fight against equal treatment for male victims of domestic violence by suppressing evidence showing that women commit half of domestic violence, and sent bomb threats and death threats to researchers who tried to reveal this. This continues to modern day. The feminist definition of domestic violence has skewed arrest and prosecution philosophies, resulting primarily in having only male batterers criminally pursued. Feminists fight against punishing female rapists in India and Israel. Feminists fought against stimulus spending for male-dominated fields (which had lost jobs during the recession) and successfully lobbied the government to redirect money to female-dominated fields (which had gained jobs during the recession). I could keep going, but that should be sufficient. I find it interesting. Quite a few of these don't actually come from "feminists". Unless you assume that all legislation that benefits women is the product of "feminists". In which case we obviously can't have a reasonable discussion. And some of those are quite reasonable. Indeed, you do whatever you can to slant a story your way. For example: Feminists fight against protection from false rape accusations. That's not what the article says. A more neutral tone would be exactly what the article is titled: "Rape charge anonymity pledge dropped". There was a law that was going to be passed, which would make those accused of rape anonymous until conviction. That was dropped. Whether you believe that anonymity is necessary to provide "protection from false rape accusations" is up to you. Personally, I agree with what the "Women Against Rape" spokesperson said: "People are no more likely to be falsely accused of rape than of other crimes." As such, anonymity is not essential to protecting people from false rape allegations. Not unless you can produce some pretty convincing evidence that false rape allegations are significantly more prevalent than false allegations of other crimes. Then there's: Feminists fight against attempts to have male and female convicts treated equally. They argue that no woman should be sent to jail, including female serial killers. No "feminists" were involved in that report. The "Women's Justice Taskforce" is a group of government officials and experts, who came up with the recommendation. It's not like some random women's group came along and said, "let's do this!". Furthermore, their argument seems to be focused primarily on improving rehabilitation, rather than punishment. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:52 Djzapz wrote: What legitimacy can MRA's possibly have anyway, outside of unfair custody stuff? Are we getting screwed in any other ways? The 'rights' part is a stupid way to name it, our rights are pretty well protected! Culturally there are arguments to be made, but there's not a lot of legal unfairness going on | ||
|
kmillz
United States1548 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:46 sunprince wrote: First of all, women ≠ feminists. To answer your question, this topic shift naturally came about because it is yet another example (following many others in recent history) of feminists coming into a male-dominant environment where everyone is treated badly, and getting upset and demanding changes just for women. Misandry is just as prevalent as misogyny, you just don't hear about it as often. I am all for equal rights, but I despise any agenda that asks for more rights than the opposite sex (in either instance, whether it be men demanding more rights than women or women demanding more rights than men). In the case of the op, women think its unfair that they get harassed constantly by childish viewers demanding "tits or gtfo" and the such, while many men think its unfair that women get 10x as many viewers just for being a woman. It goes both ways no matter how you slice it. Garbage like this just fuels the fire: On May 03 2013 14:50 Thieving Magpie wrote: Happens all the time in feminist blogs. They'll post something and then MRA people show up to attack them usually making me wonder "why the hell is an MRA guy doing reading feminist blogs?" Some people just enjoy attacking women. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:55 Wombat_NI wrote: The 'rights' part is a stupid way to name it, our rights are pretty well protected! Culturally there are arguments to be made, but there's not a lot of legal unfairness going on Yeah I agree | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:58 kmillz wrote: Misandry is just as prevalent as misogyny, you just don't hear about it as often. I am all for equal rights, but I despise any agenda that asks for more rights than the opposite sex (in either instance, whether it be men demanding more rights than women or women demanding more rights than men). In the case of the op, women think its unfair that they get harassed constantly by childish viewers demanding "tits or gtfo" and the such, while many men think its unfair that women get 10x as many viewers just for being a woman. It goes both ways no matter how you slice it. Garbage like this just fuels the fire: Being that that is exactly what is happening here, in this thread, right now, and is still happening, right now. I am not inaccurate. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
| ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14080 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:54 NicolBolas wrote: I find it interesting. Quite a few of these don't actually come from "feminists". Unless you assume that all legislation that benefits women is the product of "feminists". In which case we obviously can't have a reasonable discussion. And some of those are quite reasonable. Indeed, you do whatever you can to slant a story your way. For example: That's not what the article says. A more neutral tone would be exactly what the article is titled: "Rape charge anonymity pledge dropped". There was a law that was going to be passed, which would make those accused of rape anonymous until conviction. That was dropped. Whether you believe that anonymity is necessary to provide "protection from false rape accusations" is up to you. Personally, I agree with what the "Women Against Rape" spokesperson said: "People are no more likely to be falsely accused of rape than of other crimes." As such, anonymity is not essential to protecting people from false rape allegations. Not unless you can produce some pretty convincing evidence that false rape allegations are significantly more prevalent than false allegations of other crimes. I thought it was common sense that it's much easier to accuse a man of raping a woman than to accuse someone of stealing something or hitting someone in the face. However, here's the data supporting that this might be in fact what is happening: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape The overall rate of people being falsely accused of crimes is around 2%. Pretty much no single number that can be found in the above article is close to that. Add to that that a "rape allegation" literally can ruin a persons live long before and even if they don't get convicted it's a rather clear case. Whoever that "Women Against Rape" spokesperson is, her point if view is not supported by data above but by the belief that an allegation is strong enough to condemn people. Gender equality? Yes please. Feminism or any beliefsystem that aims to favor one of the genders? No, thanks. | ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:58 kmillz wrote: Misandry is just as prevalent as misogyny, you just don't hear about it as often. I am all for equal rights, but I despise any agenda that asks for more rights than the opposite sex (in either instance, whether it be men demanding more rights than women or women demanding more rights than men). In the case of the op, women think its unfair that they get harassed constantly by childish viewers demanding "tits or gtfo" and the such, while many men think its unfair that women get 10x as many viewers just for being a woman. It goes both ways no matter how you slice it. at the risk of a derail...do people really think the way women streamers interact with viewers is something that should invoke unfairness, or jealousy? I've seen ailuj/aphrodite/tara babcock stream, and aside from aphrodite, the culture surrounding that sort of exhibition is generally pretty repulsive for everyone involved, including the streamer, because there's this implication that these hundreds of people, usually all men, aren't really there to see great gameplay. who's being wronged in this equation? I was generally dismissive of an actual example of unfairness tangential to feminism and rights that involves fucking SC2 streams, but I'm curious now in spite of myself. I would predictably lean towards the women that, regardless of intent, are being ogled and trolled, but who must know on some level that at the point this particular community is at - aside from the general state of gaming itself - nothing much positive is going to result. I respect their right/desire to stream regardless, though, and I'm finding it very hard to somehow tie that dilemma into other people being harmed in any realistic way. | ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14080 Posts
On May 03 2013 15:01 Thieving Magpie wrote: Being that that is exactly what is happening here, in this thread, right now, and is still happening, right now. I am not inaccurate. How someone can claim that feminists do their things right but male rights advocates are pigs attacking the opposition is beyond me. It's fine that you want to frame it like that but it's not like either side has the holy grail or is utterly innocent. Someone advocating that more women or more men should be hired for a certain job or that standards for one of the genders should be lowered is what I find to be horrible. Those kind of mindsets foster gender-unequality. Replace "men" and "women" with "black" and "white" or "Jews" and "non-Jews" and it becomes apparent how utterly disgusting those concepts are. | ||
|
TheExile19
513 Posts
On May 03 2013 15:13 r.Evo wrote: Someone advocating that more women or more men should be hired for a certain job or that standards for one of the genders should be lowered is what I find to be horrible. you mean exactly what doesn't happen and nobody takes seriously in reality? | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On May 03 2013 14:54 NicolBolas wrote: I find it interesting. Quite a few of these don't actually come from "feminists". Unless you assume that all legislation that benefits women is the product of "feminists". In which case we obviously can't have a reasonable discussion. Read the actual articles, and use Google to look up the advocacy groups in question. On May 03 2013 14:54 NicolBolas wrote: That's not what the article says. A more neutral tone would be exactly what the article is titled: "Rape charge anonymity pledge dropped". There was a law that was going to be passed, which would make those accused of rape anonymous until conviction. That was dropped. Rape charge anonymity is a key way to protect people from false accusations. The fact that feminists oppose it is telling. On May 03 2013 14:54 NicolBolas wrote: Whether you believe that anonymity is necessary to provide "protection from false rape accusations" is up to you. Personally, I agree with what the "Women Against Rape" spokesperson said: "People are no more likely to be falsely accused of rape than of other crimes." As such, anonymity is not essential to protecting people from false rape allegations. Not unless you can produce some pretty convincing evidence that false rape allegations are significantly more prevalent than false allegations of other crimes. What she said is false On May 03 2013 14:54 NicolBolas wrote: Then there's: No "feminists" were involved in that report. The "Women's Justice Taskforce" is a group of government officials and experts, who came up with the recommendation. It's not like some random women's group came along and said, "let's do this!". You must be joking. The Women's Justice Taskforce is a group of feminist government officials. The chairwoman Fiona Cannon is a feminist who works as a director of diversity who only talks about sex diversity. Sounds like a feminist to me. The other members include: Antonia Bance, a feminist. Wendy Cramer, a feminist who also signed this letter Lady Fiona Hogson, a feminist And so forth. Also, does this letter not count as well? I'm sure you can also look around on the Internet to find that every UK feminist group supported the initiative. On May 03 2013 14:54 NicolBolas wrote: Furthermore, their argument seems to be focused primarily on improving rehabilitation, rather than punishment. Yes, take out all the women (but not the men) from prison, and rehabilitate them instead. How egalitarian of them. I'll assume from lack of response that you have no answers to the rest of the evidence I've given. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26225 Posts
Do it if you wish, I don't consider it a big deal, but equally when the community reacts poorly it is always shown as sexist in motivation in articles etc. I find it just as likely that followers of a niche activity don't like 'outsiders', like the reaction of people who get annoyed when their favourite underground band hit the mainstream | ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
Shameless vs MaNa
Nicoract vs Percival
Krystianer vs TBD
Cure vs SHIN
PiGosaur Monday
The PondCast
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Serral vs TBD
BSL 21
BSL 21
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
|
|
|
EPT
