/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4108569]

Feminist male with a female friend who's feminist, here. I had this conversation through texts yesterday, asking for input from /lit/

Me: (on her English paper) If you screw up say it was autocorrect.
>Her: (probably equally in jest) no, autocorrect is kyriarchal oppression.
No more tumblr for you. Tiem fer buks
>tiems for buks? and tumblr is the best tool for self enlightenment ever given to me.
Read a book, yes. Tumblr, while often a good place to find underreported news, is not a good place to grow philosophically or intellectually.
>you are so biased.
Reading Invisible Man or Kapital will inform you a great deal more about privilege than tumblr ever will.
>reading a proffesionally published account vs informal account. classism, mate. You're particiapting in it.
An informal account is fine, although most of any merit are published. Your "bookism is oppression" attitude is very indicative of the anti-intellectual age. There's a reason 451 is considered a cautionary tale, and you're it.
>omgG You're seriously going to argue that the people privieleged enough to publish their own books have more varied perspective than the infinite microcosms of groups on a free-to-use blogging site?
I'm going to argue that books encourage critical thinking more, yes. Blogs are, by and large, no more thought provoking than magazine articles. There have been numerous great books written by authors living in abject poverty.
>Yes there are. But I like to vary my reading. I don't stick to one media. Also, many books are available online.
Have you ever ventured into the depths of tumblr? Would you like to read my blog?
Yes, there are. I read quite a few on Project Gutenberg but then I just started ordering online via the library.

No, I am not interested in reading your blog. While I consider your experiences valid I do not think you have done significant research or that you see things outside of your own context. Case in point: how many tumblr articles do you see critiquing specific rape-friendly hip hop songs compared to the attention Blurred Lines gets?
>Because black culture.
Exactly. Although the hip hop industry is very white owned and black rappers are really no more "black culture" then those black women Miley was spanking are. Hip hop USED to be about racism and class, but now it's about consumerism and fetishizing black people as savages; that is no mistake.

Tumblr can be a valuable resource, I suppose, but books should the foundation. Read some works on women who are being oppressed by Islamic patriarchy (even in the Western world) for a change.
>I have friends who are being oppressed by it, sweety. firsthand accounts
"I have gay friends so I won't bother studying the history or context of various class and national incarnations of the oppression of non-heterosexuals."
>no that's not what i'm saying . what i'm saying is i have an understanding based on firsthand experience.

Will continue in next post. Want advice, particularly from feminists.

[Anonymous No.4108573]

>>4108569
Your post has no literary content, fuck off to >>>/soc/

[Anonymous No.4108576]

>>4108569

Me: You cannot understand how black people are oppressed firsthand because you are not black. This includes black women, poor women, ect. You can understand secondhand yes (quasi firsthand in cases of artistic expression), but you need to review material that requires very deep contemplation and critical thinking if you want to go beyond, "Yeah, shit's fucked, needs fixing."
>yes. okay we're on the same page.
That's great. What was the last book you've read that altered your philosophical outlook and furthered your understanding of complex issues?
>Malcolm X's autobiography
And what did you garner from it?
>white people ar the devil.
Malcolm X hated women as well, that attitude is neither useful nor particularly deep. If it were, then The Scum Manifesto would be a feminist work of considerable merit.

There's a lot more of value there. For one thing there's the idea that positive social change takes anger and force.

Once again is all you're doing is saying, "That's fucking awful!" and not engaging in considerable critical thinking or evaluation of society.
>herg
Eh, nevermind.
>nvm yourself.

End.

I know we're probably both biased, but is there any way I get through to her more on the value of literature?

[Anonymous No.4108582]

This is unreadable.

[Anonymous No.4108584]

You are a rag to walk on, not a human.

[Anonymous No.4108586]

This is a nice fiction. But isn't the premise (talking to a woman) a little to far-fetched? Best of luck with your book, bro.

[Anonymous No.4108595]

>>4108586
She's my ex. And I don't claim that she doesn't have a few good points, but she's very narrow-minded is the issue. then again, so am I, in this I admit that I haven't really searched the depths of tumblr being that just a couple of blogs and the site's reputation was enough to keep me away.

[Anonymous No.4108601]

tl;dr

[Anonymous No.4108610]

>>4108569
>>4108576

[Behemoth !!Twl3DmqEY/B No.4108621]

Why do you care what she reads or doesn't read?
Why are we supposed to care about what she reads, or care that you care?
Here's my take, though:
Fiction contextualizes the personal within the social whereas the anecdotal only looks at context to relate to itself.
But:
It's still completely unnecessary for an activist. Non-fiction, sure, but fiction is completely optional, your opinion is like the retarded English teachers who think Uncle Tom's Cabin was more influential than the hundreds of abolitionist speakers and thousands of protesters: no, the book had its impact because it was dropped into the society where these people were already at work. And it was a melodramatic piece of shit anyhow, written to scandalize dumb people.

[Anonymous No.4108629]

>>4108595
I don't know what to say. I've been studying feminism lately, I'm preparing myself to read The Second Sex... And then there's this nice resource: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/the-faqs/faq-roundup/

From what I've read, feminism has some solid foundations but it bothers me how they often miss the big picture. Maybe I think like that because I didn't study about feminism enough? Much of the more reasonable ideas (at least for me) of feminism also draw from french constructivism and that's another thing I didn't study enough.
I've tried to asked questions to feminists so they could clarify concepts, I even send some e-mails, but they think I'm being rude or some sort of MRA.
For example, I agree patriarchy is real. But then there are many other systems at work. Together. Weaving complex interactions. And I think those interactions, ultimately, determine the position a person occupies in society. I think this explains things better because it looks at someone like Angela Merkel as product of society not as an exception of patriarchy.
In mathematics, whenever you can broaden a rule to include what were previously exceptions, you have a better theory in your hand. I tend to look at feminism the same way.

[Anonymous No.4108637]

4chan, where dreams of supporting yourself as a Blogger come to die.

[Anonymous No.4108647]

>>4108621
I appreciate your criticism. Thanks for the input. She's actually not "dumb", she's just gone into some weird phase lately.

>>4108629
Yeah, I agree with that. Which is why there are actually several feminist schools of thought today. The big ol' new trend is to simply state that feminism means no more or less than sexism is bad, but if you ask me that's an idiotic oversimplification. Yes, sexism is bad and hurts both men and women, is a basic tenant, but there's a lot more to feminist theory than that, and just saying, "Sexism is terrible" isn't really the best way to address the issue of it beyond overt legal equality.

[Anonymous No.4108657]

Shouldn't this be on /lgbt/?
What the fuck is "herg"?

[Anonymous No.4108658]

>>4108657
"Ugh" as resignation.

[Anonymous No.4108698]

Sounds like any argument i had with any woman i've known.

Women are more emotional, no woman i encountered leaned to pure logic without appealing to emotion like 99% of the time.

They put emotion on par with logic if not higher, which can be cute until it's not.

[Anonymous No.4108719]

>>4108698
Women are clearly a product of Romanticism.

[Anonymous No.4108728]

>>4108647
>Which is why there are actually several feminist schools of thought today.
Hasn't it been always like this? It's easy to look back and take the side of John Stuart Mill on female suffrage but it probably took him some courage to compromise. He must have had stronger convictions than I do...
The fact that there are many schools of feminism kind of means we gotta choose. We're in the middle of battle, that's why it's so difficult that take a step back and just observe. Maybe in 50 or 100 years, it'll be clear what our positions mean but right now we can't have that luxury. I feel constantly invited (or even pushed) to take a side... but I'm too afraid to choose the wrong one. I wish I could see more, read more... and then I'm riddled with paralysis, doing nothing, just watching people make history.
I hope this doesn't sound too dumb, but I have the same difficulty in choosing a side in Skyrim civil war. I guess we have to take a leap of faith and pay the price of our wrongs if needed. There's simply no other way.

[Anonymous No.4108742]

>>4108698
>Woman
>having emotions

[Anonymous No.4108753]

>>4108569
>Although the hip hop industry is very white owned

You mean jew owned surely?

[Anonymous No.4108756]

>>4108753
Jews are considered white in the US.

[Anonymous No.4108761]

>>4108595
You're both stupid cunts. I'm glad you're feminists, but other than that, you're morons.

[Anonymous No.4108763]

>>4108728
Well I don't know if there's an objectively "right" side. There is a particular direction of progress that's been happening in Western civilization for hundreds of years.

Mostly we're moving toward the complete abolition of gender roles and gender as choice, one you don't even need at that. In a few hundred years either gender will be mostly irrelevant or you'll see male sex and female sex each equally divided among gender, if gender is even still a traditional dichotomy, at least in Western civilization. Similar to how there will be far fewer cultural divisions and more one homogenous ethnicity regardless of race.

[Anonymous No.4108772]

You do know that books also, by and large, are as you put it no more thought provoking than magazine articles. Most of books written and published are not on the level with anything associated with any kind of literary canon. Today it's even more pronounced with the ease of publishing online.

Also wtf mate? The last book you read that altered your philosophical outlook and all that? An interesting question, yes, but in this context it just makes you sound like a douche. As if something said in a book automatically holds more value and merit than something on a blog or tumblr.

I mean really, you come across as a try hard fedoraman.

[Anonymous No.4108778]

>>4108569
wow who gives a fuck

if she doesn't want to value lit, let her. I fail to see how this effects you in any way whatsoever

[Anonymous No.4108780]

>something that had to be reviewed and edited by proffessionals
>several hundred pages and probably took over a year to write
>same level of quality as some shitty tumblr post someone wrote in one night

[Anonymous No.4108784]

>>4108763
>Mostly we're moving toward the complete abolition of gender roles and gender as choice, one you don't even need at that. In a few hundred years either gender will be mostly irrelevant or you'll see male sex and female sex each equally divided among gender, if gender is even still a traditional dichotomy, at least in Western civilization.

Gender is hard-wired biologically, whether or not SJW like it. It will never disappear.

[Anonymous No.4108787]

>>4108569
>Feminist male

There are better ways to get laid dude. Don't be one of those people.

[Anonymous No.4108791]

Why the hell are you arguing with a woman? You should just say her brain is 11% smaller than yours and sit back and watch the rage. And no, there's no getting through to her, you're wasting your time and breath. Stupider people than her vote in this country.

[Anonymous No.4108794]

you're both fucking retards, you less so though.

>male feminist

oy vey

[Anonymous No.4108804]

>>4108763
>this is what leftards ACTUALLY believe

[Anonymous No.4108807]

>>4108763

this post reeks of mental illness

[Anonymous No.4108818]

>>4108787
There are better ways of being a faggot but here you are.

OP you sound like a fag and your points aren't very well developed. Why not talk about Miley's attempt at authenticity through a manufactured black non-identity? Why not tell her that her (your friend's) assumption in her ability to choose authentic "firsthand" accounts, which while valuable will be necessarily limited, is a position of privilege itself?
Valerie Solanas did no wrong, kill yourself and so on

[Anonymous No.4108819]

>>4108794
>>4108787
I don't usually participate in any threads with the words feminism, religion, fedora, etc just because they're pointless. But seeing these posts on the front page i've got to say, you guys really are either true bigots (i doubt it) or have no idea what feminism is. I'm pretty sure it's the latter.
You see, what you think feminism is is actually a representation of females not giving a flying fuck what males think. What you see in hardcore feminist is exactly what they see in you. A good feminist is dignified and all that good shit, but most are tumblr and SRS gals. I see it as MLK jr and his camp being the dignified feminists, and Malcom X and his camp being the extremist.
I didn't put much effort into writing this so pick it to pieces if you want, but more than likely you'll just greentext a /pol/ meme or something so...

[Anonymous No.4108827]

>>4108819

That post made no sense whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.4108835]

>>4108827
Hold on, I shall revise it. I regret representing my stance with such shitty post quality. I shouldn't have posted at all.

[Anonymous No.4108838]

>>4108835
Whatever you're about to post is going to be a shitty version of No True Scotsman anyway so you might as well abstain altogether.

[Anonymous No.4108842]

>>4108569

>kyriarchal oppression

Stopped reading right there.

[Anonymous No.4108855]

>>4108804
Gender is just culture based on sex. No different from culture based on race.

[Anonymous No.4108860]

>>4108855

Prove it.

[Anonymous No.4108871]

>>4108860
I doubt you want him to prove it. Because there are tons of feminist writings about the theme; you could use Google to find and read them. This is a complex matter and that's why people have written so many books about it. You're just trying to sound logical when, in fact, you're being narrow-minded.

[Anonymous No.4108879]

>>4108871

I'm convinced you are a troll now. Why do the opinions of feminists trump biological facts?

[Anonymous No.4108880]

>>4108871
You do realize that any serious source (i.e. a respected medical journal) will completely trash that view, right?

The illogical and anti-reality ramblings of lunatics in sociology departments don't count.

[Anonymous No.4108899]

>>4108860
You want me to prove that the implications of gender haven't varied one iota between between periods and nations and economic levels?

[Anonymous No.4108906]

>>4108879
>>4108880
I'm not saying those views are right. When >>4108860 said that "gender is just culture based on sex." he was just repeating something that he read. He does not have to prove it because you could just refer to the books he read in order to understand the logic behind that. He could try to explain that to you but the matter is too complex and it's bound to derail the thread if he tries. There are too many books about the subject and if you're really interested in understanding it, you should give it a try. It's not anon's responsibility to "prove" anything because he's repeating a very well-founded idea, albeit one that you're not familiar with. If you were, you wouldn't have asked for proof.

[Anonymous No.4108907]

>>4108899

No. I want you to prove that gender is entirely socially constructed.

[Anonymous No.4108908]

>>4108569
Identity politics are awful but I think your view on appropriation of Black culture isn't materialist. You deny Blacks any agency at all with your analysis, relegating them to mere Pawns Controlled By The White Man, which is kinda insulting but more to the point not an accurate perception. When we say a group of people is marginalized what we mean is that they are pushed to the margins, ignored. Sure, white supremacy leaks into everything, but there are spaces where Blacks are able to assert their cultural independence and agency--the fact that whites eventually co-opt it does not retroactively make the initial kernel of Blackness unBlack.

[Anonymous No.4108912]

>>4108907
You're going to have to start with some traits that you think are inherently biologically for me to do that, because I'm not going to go through every gendered trait from every society from every age and show where it blatantly didn't apply.

[Anonymous No.4108915]

>>4108906

>a very well-founded idea

But it's not well-founded at all. There was a Norwegian documentary that pretty much proved that gender being a social construct is pushed on political grounds rather than scientific.

[Anonymous No.4108920]

>>4108908
That's like seeing McDonald's and Coca-Cola graffitied all over a town and saying, "Now tell me how this isn't just blacks expressing themselves."

[Anonymous No.4108925]

>>4108920
Ironically, the CEO of McD is black.

[Anonymous No.4108926]

>>4108569
You're guarding your knowledge really, lording it over her. I can understand why she views your "read books" thing as elitist. Instead, recommend her books in the Marxist-Feminist tradition that give body to your vague criticisms of tumblr liberal feminism and counter the shallowness of what she's been taught thus far. Show, don't tell, to put it briefly.

[Anonymous No.4108931]

>>4108925
That is interesting, but you're missing my point about product placement.

[Anonymous No.4108936]

>>4108931
The fuck does product placement have to do with anything?

[Anonymous No.4108938]

>>4108569
You sound like a pretentious dick, OP, but the chick is an absolute moron

[Anonymous No.4108939]

>>4108920
Are you intentionally trying to not understand me? Like I said, eventual co-option doesn't invalidate the initial cultural expression and nor does it completely destroy the original kernel within even in the consumerist artifact. Even when seeing McDonalds graffiti, you should take note of the fact that it IS in graffiti . . . ever hear the phrase "the medium of the message?"

This is like someone saying that the fact that you can buy Che Guevara t-shirts at Hot Topic invalidates the Cuban Revolution or Marxism.

[Anonymous No.4108943]

>>4108939
*medium is the message

[Anonymous No.4108959]

>>4108915
>There was a Norwegian documentary that pretty much proved that gender being a social construct is pushed on political grounds rather than scientific.
So there's idea A. You don't know much about idea A, you just know that it exists. Did you try reading about idea A? Probably not. It apparently doesn't matter to you that other minds have dedicated their entire lives to idea A so they could better understand it. It seems to be a complex idea.
But there's a documentary that tells you that idea A is wrong. Who knows how much of idea A the documentary explores? You wouldn't know because your knowledge of idea A is limited. But you don't care. You've watched a documentary that tells you that idea A is wrong. And it's pretty convincing! So now, without ever getting in contact with idea A, you just repeat it's wrong. Because you saw it in a documentary.

And, hey, I'm not even telling you that the documentary is bad. I wouldn't know, I didn't see it. But I think that you should give idea A a real try so you could be more critical towards both idea A and the documentary.

[Anonymous No.4108975]

>>4108939

No it is not, it's simply saying it invalidates those shirts as Marxist.

[Anonymous No.4108980]

>>4108959
So there's ancient aliens. You don't know much about ancient aliens, you just know that it exists. Did you try reading about ancient aliens? Probably not. It apparently doesn't matter to you that other minds have dedicated their entire lives to ancient aliens so they could better understand it. It seems to be a complex idea.
But there's a documentary that tells you that ancient aliens is wrong. Who knows how much of ancient aliens the documentary explores? You wouldn't know because your knowledge of ancient aliens is limited. But you don't care. You've watched a documentary that tells you that ancient aliens is wrong. And it's pretty convincing! So now, without ever getting in contact with ancient aliens, you just repeat it's wrong. Because you saw it in a documentary.

And, hey, I'm not even telling you that the documentary is bad. I wouldn't know, I didn't see it. But I think that you should give ancient aliens a real try so you could be more critical towards both ancient aliens and the documentary.

>this is how retarded you sound
>this is the actual level of your inability to think critically

Oh and...
there are tons of medical writings about the theme; you could use Google to find and read them

You ignorant, condescending fuckwit.

[Anonymous No.4108995]

Reporting in from a stronghold of "Islamic patriarchy." Is your post meant to be satirical, or do conversations this silly and cringe-inspiring actually take place somewhere?

[Anonymous No.4109003]

>>4108975
That's fucking stupid and totally binary. Your thinking is remarkably non-materialist and unmarxist.

[Anonymous No.4109007]

>>4108980
No, did you just equate ufology to feminism? Feminism doesn't not rely in any kind of faith. It collects evidences to support its claims. You seem to think that sociology is not valid so it's really hard to reason with you. Feminism (at least the serious authors) uses the same principles of philosophy to build its arguments. If you discredit sociology, you might as well go all the way down and become a complete skeptic. I'd refer you to Descartes then... but I don't want to sound even more condescending.
>Oh and...
>there are tons of medical writings about the theme; you could use Google to find and read them
Don't try to reverse this on me. I'm not the one asking for proof.

[Anonymous No.4109013]

>>4108980
So, I agree with you but aren't you implying ancient aliens are, or rather, were real? Dont be Giorgio mate

[MrThrills !aAnvD.FqpM No.4109033]

>>4108569

She is a pleb, who believes that just because a perspective comes from a marginalized or oppressed community, it is worth being exposed to. You're also a pleb, who believes that mediums with a middle man are inherently more valid than other perspectives simply because the middle man is there.

>publishers, editors, and the idea of a canon are a form of peer review

This is true, but one cannot trust all middle-men of rhetoric to have egalitarianism and philanthropy in mind, or be swayed by the doxa; neither can one possibly believe that all voices are worth consideration.

>muh repressed voices

Being part of an oppressed demographic only stifles one's ability to contextualize reality in meaningful empiricism. It's sad, but it's a fact: if a minority seeks to oppose oppression, it simply puts itself in the shackles of the oppressor's antithesis.

The two of you belong to the same problem: an inability to be exposed to the entire spectrum of demographics and use critical thinking to pin-point arts and arguments with value.

I'm surprised you broke up. The hate-fucking must have been fantastic.

[Anonymous No.4109070]

>>4109007
>Feminism doesn't not rely in any kind of faith. It collects evidences to support its claims.
Have you ever actually looked at the bullshit feminists think is going to be paradigm changing for men who don't agree with them, like that male privilege checklist? 95% of the shit on that list is not even falsifiable.

[Anonymous No.4109094]

>Because black culture.

Second generation French black dude here. I never understood why people continue to persist in this black culture stuff. Hip-hop was born out of poverty, not specific blackness. Granted, Black americans came up with it and incorporated elements of their african culture but the real meat of hip hop is ghetto meat, not black meat.
Blues and rock'n'roll were also to a certain extent, invented by black americans. Now it's everywhere and whites don't have second thoughts about it.

Now middle class likes Rap and it went mainstream. Polish, hungarian, russian composers didn't stay off classical music just because it was "franco-italo-germanic", they just liked it and tried to contribute, and succeeded.

I think people need to understand that any culture who comes up with something that appeals to other people have to be ready to lose the "ownership" of that element. Chinese characters were "savaged" by the japanese, Switzerland invented Raclette and Fondue who made it into the mainstream of French cuisine. The french language was turned into créole and Hip hop is now made by germans, australians, britfags, spaniards rich people, middle class and so forth..


Feminism is a great attempt at doing something ultimately futile. Women and Men are radically different. Psychologically and physically. All attempt at brute equality is ultimately pointless.

[Anonymous No.4109107]

>>4109070
It also bothers me. But I take caution when giving my opinion about it because I simply didn't study feminism enough. Those lists are probably oversimplifying the work of serious authors. They are pop and that's what massification does to ideas... No idea is immune to massification.
Some women, even if they didn't read so much about feminism, identify deeply with those lists. Please, take that into account. They've had some experiences that justify their "belief". And you simply don't know what experiences those are. Not everyone is outspoken like Simone de Beauvoir...

Personally, I can't help but playing devil's advocate. When I'm on 4chan, I prompty take a "feminist" stance. But when I'm discussing with feminists, they all think I'm another MRA since I tend to bring topics such as friendzone, higher male suicide rate, the importance of recent scientific findings, rapes in male prisons... When I ask people to give the other side a chance, it's because I sincerely do it myself. And it can be confusing most of time. It feels lonely. Whatever, end of rant.

[Anonymous No.4109113]

>>4109094
I don't think you got her point. Her point is that hip-hop is seen as "black" by white feminists who don't feel that black women are their problem cuz "blacks gonna black". She was being cynical and sarcastic.

[Anonymous No.4109114]

>>4109070
The male privilege checklist is a basic resource for people who already generally agree with the tenets of feminism, not a sustained argument. Have you read anything longer than a checklist?

[Anonymous No.4109123]

>>4109107
>friendzone

Yeah...that's a pretty stupid thing to bring up as a serious issue.

Those other issues are pretty important and can definitely be addressed from a feminist perspective. Men are expected to be responsible for others more might have something to do with the higher suicide rate. Rape in prison is often about establishing masculine dominance and the victims are shamed and compared to women (bitches).

[Anonymous No.4109128]

>>4109094
Blacks and whites are radically different. Psychologically and physically. All attempt at brute equality is utterly pointless.

[Anonymous No.4109138]

>>4109123
>Rape in prison is often about establishing masculine dominance and the victims are shamed and compared to women (bitches).
In other words, when men are raped women are still the victims in the abstract.

[Anonymous No.4109140]

>>4109094
But white expectations of black culture and old black culture (just 50 years ago in America there was segregation, yesterday, historically speaking) all shape black expectations of black culture, which is black culture basically. We still have the idea that being white is being affluent and working hard in school and getting a good job and family in the suburbs, and being black is being hip and not caring about the white establishment and not caring about school. So what happens is blacks basically don't want to be "white", even blacks raised in the suburbs, because it's hard not to be a bit self-conscious that you're the only black person there.

[Anonymous No.4109142]

>>4109114
I've routinely seen it cited by feminists when a man asks how he's privileged over women.

[Anonymous No.4109151]

>>4109138
Hell naw. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying completely. Women are NOT the victims of prison rape. I am not coming from the point of view that men are not victims of sexism, I am merely coming from the point of view that most misogyny and misandry alike is a form of patriarchy. So prison rape not being dealt with is a form of misandry, not misogyny, but it is patriarchal misandry because it's about a male position of power over a female position. In other words, there is not oppressed female sex involved, but there are members of the male sex forced into female gender roles in order to fulfill the role of the oppressed. Do you see what I'm saying?

[Anonymous No.4109154]

>>4109107
>friendzone
I generally agree with your post (though feminists do address these topics... it's hard to judge how much of a focus is "proper" in any event) but I don't think you should do this. You wouldn't respect your male friends if they told you that you were friendzoning them after they acted unusually nice to you before coming on to you, I hope.

>>4109138
The men are victimized "as women," which probably says some things about how the perpetrators feel about women in general
it's really not a hard concept

[Anonymous No.4109155]

>>4109128
Oh ha-ha, I see. You're making fun of the statement that women and men are radically different. Very clever, but the difference between women and men far surpasses the difference between blacks and whites. A different sex is far more separated than a different race.

No, I'm not some idiot that doesn't know about gender roles either. Physiologically, biologically, neurally, hormonally: they're different. Although I don't agree with the statement all attempt at equality is utterly pointless.

[Anonymous No.4109158]

>>4109142
so you haven't read anything longer than a checklist. noted.

[Anonymous No.4109162]

>>4109138
Nice strawman there buddy. So you think feminism is simply about establishing victimhood? You're a complete moron

[Anonymous No.4109167]

>>4108742
This guy knows.

[Anonymous No.4109168]

>>4109154
I'm concerned about friendzone. It's mainly a male complaint... isn't it some kind of symptom of something? Sign of the times? I don't know.

[Anonymous No.4109174]

>>4109162
>So you think feminism is simply about establishing victimhood?
http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admit-that-hating-men-is-a-thing-will-you-stop-turning-it-into-a-self+fulfilling-prophecy

A lot of it actually is.

[Anonymous No.4109177]

>>4109155
Let's take a look at the cranial difference between blacks and whites....

[Anonymous No.4109176]

>>4109155
But it's rather obviously not a strict binary, yet people treat it as such. Even in considering a typical male brain, not every male is typical. Maybe people are more aware of this than I've seen, but atypical men or women are seen as failed men or women rather than simply themselves.

[Anonymous No.4109181]

>>4109168
It's called men who think being really really nice means they should have a relationship (or just sex) with the woman they are being explicitly nice to and if they don't get it then it's some important gender issue.

[Anonymous No.4109183]

>>4109174
What about this article proves that "a lot of feminism" is about victimhood? This is just as bad as linking to a Fox News video to show that it's self-evident that all Republicans are sexist or racist or what have you.

[Anonymous No.4109196]

>>4109176
I completely agree, and thanks for not indulging in ad hominem like everyone else does.

The most important gender roles, that women are dainty flowers and men are tough providers, can be boiled down to the fact that men typically have more muscle mass. But with dangerous labor, in developed countries at least, becoming more and more mechanized, we have less need for this. Then there's the plethora of minute differences that I honestly don't even know enough science about to summarize them all.

>>4109177
Not even going to bother responding if you don't realize how different women and men are. Difference does not imply inferiority BTW.

[Anonymous No.4109207]

>>4109168
I think the existence of the concept of "friendzone" might be that men and women are interacting outside of a professional context on a much larger scale, but I don't know if I could even prove that premise. Or maybe just that a lot of people have a weird concept of social interaction in general; being "nice" to someone with the expectation of some sort of reward isn't really that nice at all and it's not like washing my boss's car gives me good grounds for calling him a selfish bitch when he doesn't give me a raise

[Anonymous No.4109219]

>>4109196
And that's cool. Because there's racial differences too. But black people aren't inferior--true, they have significantly lower IQ on average, but if the Olympics are any indicator than you guys are badass runners. There's difference but not inherently better or worse, I'd say.

[Anonymous No.4109220]

>>4109183
I said "a lot", not "all". In the same way that you could cite something racist that a Fox News pundit said that received overhwhelmingly supportive comments as evidence that a significant portion of the republican base is latently racist, that Jezebel article is evidence that a significant portion of those who identify as feminists are just women who found a socially respectable ideology in which to express their victim complex.

[Anonymous No.4109231]

>>4109207
The friendzone is just men who don't know how to ask girls out, so they just be nice and act like friends and think sex is just going to happen spontaneously if they're around a girl at the right time.

It's not sexism, but it's also not guys feeling entitled, unless it's suddenly entitled to want to have sex with people.

[Anonymous No.4109249]

>>4109219
But black IQ differences are most likely cultural. That's what I believe.

[Anonymous No.4109258]

>>4109219
This is ridiculous. Even if there were no preordained gender roles or stereotypes, men would take on heavy lifting because it would be more practical because they have more muscle mass after puberty.

[Anonymous No.4109255]

>>4109231
When I bring the subject of friendzone in feminist discussion, it's usually in the context of bringing attention to what feminism has already conquered. If you look at friendzones, it becomes clear that women can now choose their partners freely... which kind of weakens the purpose of something like SlutWalk.

[Anonymous No.4109263]

>>4109249
That's why many Africans still think raping prepubescent girls gets rid of AIDS and black people, despite the exceptions of individuals, are inevitably at the lowest economic and educationsal level of any society they inhabit.

[Anonymous No.4109267]

>>4109258
White people have more cranial mass, hence why they should be the thinkers and the officials.

[Anonymous No.4109270]

>>4109263
>bout a thousand years of imperialism, slavery, and oppression of blacks
>begin to liberate them just 50 to 200 years ago, still in progress
>"what is reconstruction, why haven't they caught up yet, lol?"

[Anonymous No.4109273]

>>4109270
Compared to at least four thousand years of oppression of women. Durrrrrrrr

[Anonymous No.4109274]

>>4109267
Cranial mass doesn't correspond to intelligence, doofus.

[Anonymous No.4109280]

>>4109219
>they have significantly lower IQ on average
It's worth revisiting what IQ was designed to measure. Think about the many so-called geniuses, in societies like Mensa, doing absolutely nothing revelant to the sciences or to the arts. Why does IQ matter?

[Anonymous No.4109282]

>>4109273
How can you put the oppression of women anywhere near the oppression of blacks? In the Middle East, but nowhere else was it as bad, doofus.

[Anonymous No.4109287]

>>4109274
>This conclusion is confirmed by the preponderance of the evidence which shows a within family correlation between brain size and IQ (Gignac et al, 2003; Rushton and Jensen, 2010).

http://abc102.wordpress.com/2011/02/17/brain-size-and-correlates-with-iq/

[Anonymous No.4109292]

>>4109280
There are a lot of strong and fast people doing nothing relevant with it. I fail to see your point.

[Anonymous No.4109295]

>>4109282
The current paradigm of the Middle East was the paradigm of the West for most of that time, yes.

[Anonymous No.4109293]

>>4109280
>Why does IQ matter?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Social_outcomes

[Anonymous No.4109294]

>>4109287
OK, you dirty ass backwards racist, I'm not arguing with you anymore.

[Anonymous No.4109301]

>>4109282
>the Middle East oppressed women comparably to how Whites oppressed Blacks
Just... stop.

[Anonymous No.4109307]

>>4109294
Except your arguments are just as ass-backward as mine, but you're applying them to sexes instead or races and think that makes you somehow not as much of ass-backward bigot.

[Anonymous No.4109322]

>>4109307
But you've presented a perfect argument for how whites are smarter than blacks and they should therefore take on intellectual jobs, but you've rejected it anyway because that racist.

Similarly, I have seen all the evidence for the difference between men and women, but rejected the idea that women should be sheltered and stay-at-home mothers and just let men do the work because that's sexist. But gender roles are derived from sexual differences, they didn't come out of nowhere. If you want to deny that, then I really can't argue with you.

[Anonymous No.4109324]

>>4109287

Black dude again.

correlation isn't uniqueness. There are hundreds, possibly thousands different statistical factors correlated with intelligence. Singling one of them doesn't prove your point.

Anyway, the most complete studies of comparisons between Black and white IQs actually show an average of 2 to 3 points of difference on average, which is frankly largely irrelevant on a sociological point of view. IQ is relevant when comparing 100 vs 130 I, not 102 vs 105.

That doesn't explain the differences on poverty, success etc..

Black vs White IQ is irrelevant and off topic at this point. Let's just move on.

[Anonymous No.4109325]

>>4109322
*that's

[Anonymous No.4109327]

>>4109307
>there has never been a matriarchal civilzation in the history of Earth (in before retards confuse matrilineal with matriarchal).
>that only happened because all men everywhere created the same sexist power structures that kept women from ruling, biology had nothing to do with it.
lel

Also, Sexual dimorphism is a thing in the animal kingdom, which human are a member of.

[Anonymous No.4109337]

>>4109327
Just clarifying this is not the person you were arguing with.

Since you've made a good argument, let me ask you: if there were no preordained gender roles/stereotypes, would women and men take similar jobs and roles in society?

[Anonymous No.4109339]

>>4109292
IQ does not determine what a person can do. It does not predict what someone will achieve. Just like being strong and fast does not automatically makes someone an athlete.
That is, the average IQ of a population tells me almost nothing about it.

>>4109293
What that tells me is that society is built in such a way that having a high IQ is an advantage. If IQ did really measure intelligence, it would be able to predict when someone can make valuable contributions to human knowledge. That'd be a useful measure and would justify the merit that comes with having a high IQ.

[Anonymous No.4109343]

>>4109322
Since there is no universal black skull, my argument is in fact not valid at all.

[Anonymous No.4109355]

>>4109327
Roma people were historically matriarchal and they've survived quite a bit of oppression themselves
http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/383031-my-week-gypsy

[Anonymous No.4109357]

>>4109343
I redirect you to: >>4109337

[Anonymous No.4109359]

>>4109337
I remember there being a study about how Norway, which was deemed the greatest country for gender equality in the world, had genders less equally distributed among occupations than India.

I can't find it right now though.

[Anonymous No.4109365]

>>4109359
I saw it too, you ruined it. But there it is anyway, Norway, the most progressive country in the world when it comes to feminism, is full of women that prefer certain jobs and men that prefer other jobs.

[Anonymous No.4109391]

>>4109365
Bump because I don't want to leave this unresolved before I go to sleep.

You can call me an idiot and say you don't want to argue with me anymore, if you want.

[Anonymous No.4109399]

>>4109359
>>4109365
You have a somewhat narrow idea of equality. When I think about equality, I'm thinking that society isn't an obstacle to whatever you want to do.
If you want to be a scientist or a hairdresser and stumbles into your own limitations, that's a pain you've got to deal with. Maybe you can overcome them, maybe you can't.
But when you want to be a scientist and find it difficult because no one will give a science job to a woman, now this is a problem and equality comes to the rescue.
The problem is that there aren't clear lines between what are your own limitations and what are the obstacles society puts in front of you. Every individual is also part of a society. Anyway, a part of the problem is clearly the society and it's precisely this part equality is concerned with.

[Anonymous No.4109413]

>>4109399
Can you give any evidence at all that Norwegian society works to actively reinforce gender roles when it comes to choosing occupations?

Or are you just blaming society because not knowing somehow defaults to social constructs holding women back?

[Anonymous No.4109417]

>>4109399
But the thing is, I completely agree with this. But your (are you the person I was arguing with?) argument was that sexual differences shouldn't make gender roles without the extra leap of sexism to bridge them, but practicality also comes into play.

[Anonymous No.4109441]

>>4109413
Hmmm... I'm not saying Norway enforces gender role. I was trying to say that a female (or male) preference for some sort of occupation is not incompatible with equality. Nor does it qualify as gender roles.
If in Norway a woman has to fight just her own demons (and not HR bigots) in order to be a sucessful engineer, then it doesn't matter if most women prefer X: equality reigns there.

[Anonymous No.4109442]

>>4109339
>If IQ did really measure intelligence, it would be able to predict when someone can make valuable contributions to human knowledge.
It does. Nobody with an I.Q. of 80 is going to be able to be a physicist, ever.

Just because someone is intelligent enough to advance human knowledge doesn't mean they're going to though.

[Anonymous No.4109461]

I like how a lot of threads on /lit/ get into psychometrics - my favorite topic. Then I can anonymously bash ignorant people over the internet. Fun! :)

And feminist nonsense, best fought with lulz.

[Anonymous No.4109466]

>male feminist
>feminism
>this thread

[Anonymous No.4109467]

>>4109442
>Just because someone is intelligent enough to advance human knowledge doesn't mean they're going to though.
That sounds almost like a paradox to me. If one is "intelligent enough to advance human knowledge" but doesn't, then one is not intelligent enough to advance human knowledge.

[Anonymous No.4109471]

>>4109441
The more free countries have larger sex differences, not smaller. When you make people freer, to are freer to pursue those interests that they are naturally inclined towards.

http://roseproject.no/?page_id=39

[Anonymous No.4109475]

>>4109471

[Anonymous No.4109476]

>>4109475

[Anonymous No.4109480]

>>4109467
That makes no sense. If I'm strong enough shove a dildo up my butt, but I do not, then I am not strong enough to shove a dildo up my butt?

[Anonymous No.4109481]

>>4109476

[Anonymous No.4109483]

>>4109481

[Anonymous No.4109490]

>>4109483

[Anonymous No.4109493]

>>4109480
Why wouldn't you put a dildo up your butt anon

It makes reading so much more intellectual

[Anonymous No.4109494]

>>4109490

[Anonymous No.4109498]

>>4109494
and so on. I'm tired now. :3

[Anonymous No.4109508]

>>4109498

Thanks for the source and pics, anon! These will be useful!

[Anonymous No.4109510]

>>4108569
pol here

Your post makes me feel sick.

[Anonymous No.4109513]

>>4109480
How do you know you're strong enough to shove a dildo up your butt without trying? Maybe because you have a reliable way to assess your strength without doing it?
So here's why you can't substitute intelligence for "strength to shove a dildo up yor ass" in my phrase: there's not a reliable way to measure intelligence.
I tend to regard someone as intelligent by looking at what she has accomplished. If you have a lot of potential but doesn't realize it, you need help —not the automatic merit of being a genius.

[Anonymous No.4109514]

>>4108912
Preference for beautiful and young partners. Go. This one is easy, course the science has been done. Assuming you reply, it will be some kind of non-science reply about feminist theory etc. blahblahblah. After which I can point to some science that does indeed show that men in all cultures studied have a stronger preference for beauty and youth than do women.

Read, set, go!

[Anonymous No.4109515]

>>4108915
For those wondering about the documentary. It is actually a series of 7, each 40 mins dealing with different aspects of blank slate beliefs (sex roles, violence, education, races, sexual preferences, summary).

https://genusnytt.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/se-hjernevask-avsloja-genusmyterna/

Password = hjernevask (brain wash)

[Anonymous No.4109523]

>>4109471
Your conclusion is not necessarily accurate. It could be that with a greater infrastructure of media and capital, cultural norms (rather than what people are "naturally inclined toward") become more heavily entrenched.

[Anonymous No.4109536]

>>4109510

Also from /pol/. That is why I am glad I have a source to back up claims about how women actually are different than men and don't give a fuck about important things.

Feminism isn't about equal rights with men, it is about suppressing men. Women's rights are a legitimate issue. Feminism is just a legal form of sexism.

pic related.

[Anonymous No.4109537]

>>4109280
>It's worth revisiting what IQ was designed to measure.

It is not particularly interesting. What matters is what they DO measure, and they measure mostly g-factor, aka. general intelligence. That is why they are called intelligence tests.

How do we know this? Science. Do you see how all of these numbers are positive? It's because all the tests, 29 in total, correlate positively. Why do they do that? Because they measure the same thing, though to different degrees.

[Anonymous No.4109540]

>>4109514
>the science has been done
>but only my interpretation is correct
nice try bub

[Anonymous No.4109543]

>>4109515
"I hear everybody that you know is more relevant than everybody that I know"

Before you try a reversal, I'm clicking that link and watching the documentary. And hating myself right now.

[Anonymous No.4109551]

>>4109510
>>4109536
>>4109537
Was there some call-to-arms on /pol/? Because it sure looks like it did.

[Anonymous No.4109554]

>>4109324
>correlation isn't uniqueness. There are hundreds, possibly thousands different statistical factors correlated with intelligence. Singling one of them doesn't prove your point.

It is evidence. Ignoring evidence is irrational.

>Anyway, the most complete studies of comparisons between Black and white IQs actually show an average of 2 to 3 points of difference on average, which is frankly largely irrelevant on a sociological point of view. IQ is relevant when comparing 100 vs 130 I, not 102 vs 105.

The most complete studies find the mean diff. between US whites and blacks is 1-1.2 sd, i.e. 15-18 IQ. This makes a lot of difference for social outcomes.

https://occidentalascent.wordpress.com/2013/07/29/why-is-the-gap-so-large/

[Anonymous No.4109566]

>>4109514

With love, /pol/

>m-muh science bro!

Anyone who knows anything about the nature of science knows there will always be false positives. So this is either one of two situations:

>[Citation Needed]
or
>My sources are: _______.

p.s. Hopefully you are not using blogs as sources for your "science" (or worse: using feminist websites or .com websites instead of legitimate scientific census groups).

[Anonymous No.4109567]

>>4109551
U mad? U mad that facts turn people against the mosh pit of trash that calls itself "the Left" these days?

[Anonymous No.4109570]

>>4109536
I'm curious as to how much feminist literature someone from /pol/ has actually read.

please let it be actual feminist literature and not extremists on the internet
I mean, all conservative Christians are racists who believe in "mental AIDs," right?
http://conservativetimes.org/?p=12122

[Anonymous No.4109573]

>>4109551

Don't think so. Just people who frequent /pol/ and happened to be on here.

[Anonymous No.4109577]

>>4109551
I never go to /pol/, as I'm not interesting in US politics or how Obama this or that.

[Anonymous No.4109580]

how come the text is all bold n shit