/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.5293974]

>2014
>not understanding feminism

When people are openly racist, anti-Semitic, or otherwise bigoted, this board usually tells them to go back to /pol/. But huge amounts of people here still seem afraid of the feminist bogeywoman, convinced they're being censored or held down by feminist radicals, or that feminism is built on misguided principles or reverse sexism.

What gives, /lit/? Is it just that this board is overwhelmingly men? That seems hard to believe, we're overwhelmingly white too but not as a whole particularly racist.

>But the idea of "patriarchy" sounds ridiculous to me! I'm not part of a conspiracy!
How about the idea of "culturally widespread sexism"? That's all patriarchy means, no different from any other form of bigotry.

>But feminism is about demonizing men!
This is Reddit-level thinking and you can take it to the MRA forums or whatever there. Feminism is about opposing biased power structures, whether men or women impose those structures.

>But some feminists on Tumblr are dumb!
Some people everywhere are dumb, congratulations for realizing that.

>Feminism was a good idea in the early 1900s, but now it's gone too far.
I agree, there are far too many female CEOs, presidents, and Best Director Oscar winners. Let's take back the night from the people who took back the night from us.

>I'm extremely convinced now, what should I read?
Glad you asked. Here is some entry-level feminist literature:

Virginia Woolf - Three Guineas START HERE IF YOU HAVEN'T READ ANYTHING ABOUT FEMINISM YET
Simone de Beauvoir - The Second Sex
Betty Friedan - The Feminine Mystique
bell hooks - Ain't I A Woman?

[[s4s] No.5293998]

good post i read it

[Anonymous No.5294002]

>>5293974
Feminism is shit-tier, and so it OP

[Anonymous No.5294010]

Ideally I'm a feminist but since my gf dumped me I can't help but extend my hatred towards all of you

It's like how I always become racist for a minute after getting mugged

[Anonymous No.5294012]

>>5293974

Fuck off, cunt.

[Anonymous No.5294017]

>>5293974
>How about the idea of "culturally widespread sexism"?

a fantasy

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5294028]

>>5293974
Thanks. Good thread
>What gives, /lit/?
It's a diverse crowd in here.

>>5294010
Sorry to hear. But you must know feminism isn't to blame?

[Anonymous No.5294029]

>>5293974
>>But feminism is about demonizing men!
>This is Reddit-level thinking

> But huge amounts of people here still seem afraid of the feminist bogeywoman, convinced they're being censored or held down by feminist radicals, or that feminism is built on misguided principles or reverse sexism.
>What gives, /lit/? Is it just that this board is overwhelmingly men?
;)

[Anonymous No.5294032]

>>5293974
The internet really hates feminism, I think because they believe high schoolers and college freshmen on the internet are representative of the movement as a whole

[Anonymous No.5294033]

As far as I can tell, the anti-feminist sentiment on /lit/ comes from Christians and /r9k/ migrants, and /pol/ of course.

[Anonymous No.5294037]

>>5293974
>we're overwhelmingly white too but not as a whole particularly racist.

hahahaha

[Anonymous No.5294042]

>culture makes women feel bad!
Culture makes everyone feel bad. The whole point of "society" or culture is to place the needs of the group above the needs of the individual. Even Western "freedom" and "individualism" is indoctrination

>be as greedy as possible, no no, don't worry about morality or the worth of humans, goy, just contribute as much money and inventions to the world as possible

Wanna know the reason women have been reduced to subservient baby-making factories for the majority of history? The same reason the ideal man has been stoic, self-sacrificing, and practically invulnerable for the majority of history: it's beneficial for continuing the human race. If a man decided, "Fuck this, I don't want to do all this physical labor and devote my life to chasing pussy," they'd get shamed by everyone, but no one cares about that.

The reason for the rise and acceptance of feminism is because ethics has been thrown into question because of overpopulation. If the human life has less value than we previously thought it had, who gives a shit about practicality and reproduction? Men can be "pussies" and women can be "butch", it's all good for the people in power who've decided it's in the general interest of everyone to reproduce less.

[Anonymous No.5294046]

>>5294012
this

[Anonymous No.5294049]

>>5294042
>they'd get shamed by everyone
lol. they'd get props by their bros

[Anonymous No.5294051]

>>5293974
All radicals must be eliminated for the good of all.

[Anonymous No.5294054]

>>5293974
Tumblr feminism is breaking into real life. Arguing that it isn't feminism is like arguing that I'm not a true scotsman.


Oops, sorry, I meant not a true proud oppressed POC scotsmyn.

[Anonymous No.5294072]

>>5294054
damn this impervious logic

[Anonymous No.5294078]

>>5293974
Go back to Tumblr

[Anonymous No.5294087]

>>5294072
Damn this textbook impotent sarcasm that you learned in your retarded circle jerk community before coming here to fight da evul waycisses

[Anonymous No.5294088]

>>5293974
What you (hopefully) define as feminism is the struggle for equal rights for men and women, which in itself is a noble cause.

What the term "Feminism" has come to mean to a lot of people today, is pic related. Where the struggle is no longer against laws forbidding women to vote, get certain jobs or do certain things, but to actively search for anything that can be called "sexism" and demonize it.

When people express opposition to Feminism, it is not the idea of women being of equal worth or deserving of equal rights as men, but opposition against ideas such as "women can have penises and disagreeing is offensive", the need for "trigger warnings" on books, the idea that traditional pronouns are in themselves sexist, against the idea that there is a male conspiracy actively working to keep women down, etc.

Feminists complain that not enough women are CEOs but how many of these feminists have actually tried to become a CEO in any company? The amount of women applying for certain studies that tend to lead to powerful positions within businesses (STEM, usually) is significantly lower than men. Is this because there is some invisible male hand preventing them from applying? If that was the case, why would the feminists themselves, apparently aware of this and seeking to fight it, apply for "gender studies" instead of business management?

When feminists argue that there should be a set % of women in positions of power, in business or in politics, are they not saying that discrimination is right? Should the more qualified person lose the job because he's a he and not a she? Wouldn't a truly equal system ignore the applicant's gender? Maybe I've not paid enough attention, but I've never seen feminists argue that name and gender should be hidden from a job application, just that women should get jobs on the basis of being women.

[Anonymous No.5294094]

The patriarchy is an unfalsifiable idea that is held together by plot logic

There, saved you all the money you'd spend on feminism literature

[Anonymous No.5294095]

>>5293974
Feminists are like police. They know there are some serious bad apples in the basket, but will do everything they can to defend them when any news gets out.

[Anonymous No.5294096]

>>5294049
By their friends, maybe, but not by their family, elders, and community

[Anonymous No.5294125]

>>5293974
>>5294088
Cont.
A lot of feminists argue that there are a lot of discriminating beauty standards in the world today, pushed on young women through mass media. But is this not just genderizing an issue that affects everybody? Most men do not have the body of Chris Hemsworth, Ryan Gosling or Cristiano Ronaldo, yet these men are openly portrayed as what women want, and what all men should strive to achieve if they want success. Captain America is a prime example: a skinny manlet who was not good at anything, but once he was transformed into a tall, muscular man, he immediately becomes a hero. Is this not shaming of the male body, or does it not matter as it's not directed towards women?

The difference seems to be in the reception of these pushed beauty standards; where the feminists go on tumblr to blog about body acceptance, often whilst encouraging an unhealthy lifestyle leading to obesity, men tend to go on /r9k/ or /fit/, keeping their body complexes largely to themselves instead of putting them into a higher ideological sphere.

You use the phrase "culturally widespread sexism", which again is a diffuse term. Are there genuine problems with sexism in the modern world? Yes, certainly. There is physical harassment, there are rapes, etc,. but some feminists ignore these important matters and instead spend time arguing that any sort of flirting, complimenting or general act of traditional chivalry is an act of harassment.

A lot of feminists also seem to direct their hate against the "patriarchy" against western men, when ignoring the fact that only in the western world do they really have the right to say these things to begin with. Feminism and women's rights are modern, western inventions, and just the fact that these women are adult, single, promiscuous, free to openly express their hatred towards the patriarchy without risking to be stoned to death, shows that the western patriarchy they so hate is, if anything, the lesser of many evils.

[Anonymous No.5294133]

>>5294088
Anonymous applications sound like a far better idea than quotas of female employees, but if you bring that in what do you then do about the interview stage?

[Anonymous No.5294135]

>>5294088
>the idea that traditional pronouns are in themselves sexist
please strawman harder. it's amusing.

[Anonymous No.5294138]

Why do feminists have such a vendetta against white men? Every time I've ever been sexually harassed it was by blacks, Arabs or Poles.

[Anonymous No.5294144]

>>5294138
poles are white

[Anonymous No.5294150]

>>5293974
>>Feminism was a good idea in the early 1900s, but now it's gone too far.
>I agree, there are far too many female CEOs, presidents, and Best Director Oscar winners. Let's take back the night from the people who took back the night from us.

>tfw none of them have been as bad ass a Bessie Smith since the 30s
Why are we giving women titles of power they won't live up to?
>inb4 pepsi cola and vogue probably have private jets for their female leaders
That's not as bad ass as a private train and you know it.

[Anonymous No.5294170]

I have no argument, I simply dislike women.

[Anonymous No.5294175]

>>5294144
They're still poor immigrants though, not exactly part of the "patriarchy". Wealthy white men have probably done more for women's rights than any other group, including women ourselves. That's another thing I dislike about feminism, that it generally just seems like a way for women to henpeck men into giving them favours. Fuck all this "sisterhood" nonsense, I do more for the feminist cause just by minding my business and getting ahead in life on my own acumen and hard work. Feminists are more concerned with telling men they're equal than actually proving it.

[Anonymous No.5294197]

>>5294138
Because they view non-white men as minorities who are victims of discrimination, thus they identify with them. "It is not the Arab's fault that he rapes, it is the culture he was raised in! I can change him!"

Why do some women become obsessed with serial killers? Ted Bundy recieved hundreds of love letters a day according to some sources, by women who "understood" this troubled man, who were convinced that he himself was the victim of a cruel system, and that they could cure him.

Some people say that this way of thinking was transformed into ideology by the Marxist Frankfurter school of thinking, but I don't know enough about that to comment.

[Anonymous No.5294198]

Not american and in my country there aren't really a lot of feminists so I don't know exactly how the situation is over there, but isn't the point of feminism glitching and fucking up thought-lines evolved and inherited inside the social construct?

I mean, it's not really asking for favours, it's more about the fact that shifts of power inside societies have consequences on everyday life that are perceived as oppression by the not dominant anymore, isn't it?

I like feminism because it's antisocial, really, or at least opposed to the notion that societies are created by historical inertia alone. And that allows everybody to try and think non-dialectically.

[Anonymous No.5294201]

>>5293974
>Feminism is about opposing biased power structures
Everyone is fucking biased

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294214]

yep

I still like Edith Wharton

[Anonymous No.5294217]

>>5293974

100% agreed OP. My wife is a feminist (anthropologist), I have always supported her. We have a healthy sex life (including doggy style and some spanking on her ass) and a happy marriage. We are now thinking about having kids.

I have never thought of feminists as men haters or this kind of shit until I've began browsing 4chan. Of all the boards, /lit/ is the superior but yet you still can see now and then some of this stupid, internet-age common sense about feminism.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5294219]

>>5294201
>Everyone is fucking fair

[Anonymous No.5294223]

>>5294217
My wife is kind therefore her ideology is perfect.

[Anonymous No.5294243]

>>5294223

except I never told I think feminism is perfect. All I said is that this internet common sense about feminism, reverse cherry-picking some radical women as paradigm of the evils of feminism is bullshit.

[Anonymous No.5294245]

>>5294010
Next time you get mugged, remember that it isn't actually a race thing, just a socio-economic thing. The people mugging you are mugging you because they're poor, not because of their skin color. It just happens that because of unjust cycles of poverty, many minorities make up disproportionate amounts of poor people.

It's pretty damn justified to recognize that poor people are more likely to commit crimes against you. It's just important to remember what the real reason for this problem is.

[Anonymous No.5294258]

>>5294088
>>5294125

underrated post(s). posters would do well to read these

[Anonymous No.5294262]

>>5294245
this post came straight out of reddit

[Anonymous No.5294273]

Any idealistic social movement opposed to discrimination and judgment is a hypocrisy. All men and women hold prejudice, and for one to fight for freedom from prejudice is a fight for oneself only. It is a selfish venture that aims to serve oneself rather than justice. This is contrary to material social movements such as civil rights and suffrage, in which actual progress is made. But the movements that call for the ending of ethereal prejudice (written and spoken prejudice) are utterly hypocritical because they are blind to their own prejudices within. Feminism at this point is mostly idealistic, because constitutionally a woman now holds the same rights as a man. The only arguments feminism has against society are against ethereal prejudices; by "ethereal" I mean subconscious and caused by basic human nature that is present in real life common interaction, which is UNFIXABLE. You cannot name me a person, man or woman, who has not discriminated. I am sick of people who complain of impolite mistreatment, when they themselves KNOW they do it to others.

For example, I had a conversation with a fat girl who was complaining about a guy who turned her down, obviously because she was obese. I asked her if she ever found a man unattractive due to his height, and she said she did. Unfortunately, she didn't even realize that the guy's reasoning and hers were exactly the same. It's fucking bonkers

[Anonymous No.5294274]

>>5294245
Yes and this one:

>>5294175

[Anonymous No.5294277]

>>5293974
>How about the idea of "culturally widespread sexism"? That's all patriarchy means...

Hey, Feminister.

You're not going to remove cultural phenomena with ideology. The idea of patriarchy is silly because patriarchal power structures are no longer entrenched in Western culture and could not possibly be absent in the cultures in which they are present. Why join a movement to play second fiddle to the course of historical development, especially when you could play a better second fiddle under the heading of 'democracy'? The latter term includes the fight for equality on all fronts as far as it has thus far developed in history. Feminism itself was most relevant when it was a part of the struggle for democratic representation.

>Feminism is about opposing biased power structures, whether men or women impose those structures.

Then there is no point to the word 'feminism,' as it clearly no longer has anything to do with its etymological origins. Various forms of anarchism are about opposing power structures, why don't you just call yourself an anarchist? For that matter, the earlier mentioned heading of 'democracy' represents the general struggle against biased political power structures. Why could democracy not more effectively extend to economic power structures? Why 'feminism'?

>I agree, there are far too many female CEOs, presidents, and Best Director Oscar winners.

I'm supposed to care about irrelevant award shows? I'm supposed to care that the boss is more likely to have balls than a cunt? I'm supposed to care that the boss' man in office is a *man* in office?

You talk game about biased power structures and then demand equal gender distribution within biased power structures? You're on something, mate--a dick, I assume.

[Anonymous No.5294279]

>>5294135
How is that a strawman? You are ignorant or a liar if you claim many feminists do not think the English language itself is sexist.

[Anonymous No.5294280]

>>5294088

your posts reminds me of a debate between a feminist pornstar and a porn producer. She was all "fuck the system" until the guy asked her if she also questioned the fact that female pornstars were much better paid than male ones. She responded saying "well, that's ok, that's capitalism".

[Anonymous No.5294281]

>yet they continue to dye their hair, get exposed dresses, compete over rich men, gladly be used by directors and advertisers, etc..

Face the truth; you will never escape from your instinct to be in a safe position, and will always seek to place yourself better, like now, with feminist movement.

And oh, reminder. Women for a long time could be merchants, philosophers, mathematicians, natural philosophers... but it wasn't necessary attributes to keep themselves in a relatively good position.

[Anonymous No.5294282]

>>5294051
oh the irony

[Anonymous No.5294287]

>>5294133
The interview stage is obviously a difficult part, but anonymous applications in itself could be an interesting project.

Will the amount of female applicants being called in for interviews rise? If so, this might show that there is a genuine bias towards women (and/or other minorities).

[Anonymous No.5294289]

>>5294245
So you're saying that certain races aren't more likely to resort to mugging when in poverty? To be more inclined or comfortable with the idea of mugging so to speak.

I'm not saying that's the case, just curious if you believe that everyone reacts to impoverished circumstances the same way.

[Anonymous No.5294293]

You lost me when you recommended Simone de Beauvoir.

[Anonymous No.5294297]

>>5293974
>people who read hundreds of novels, gain insight into how the world works
>people with insight into how the world works, are less susceptible to your propaganda
News at 11

[Anonymous No.5294302]

>>5294287
If you are genuinely interested this outside of this shit-tier bait thread, then you should find this documentary. I saw it on Netflix and it included a scene where the director sent out resumes with traditionally white and black names and the white names received many more calls for interviews.

[Anonymous No.5294310]

>>5294289
Well black people in the US commit crimes out of all proportion to both their numbers relative to the population and their poverty rates relative to others.

[Anonymous No.5294313]

>>5294297
>people who have read hundreds of novels confirming their own idea of how the world works have bought into a different kind of propaganda

[Anonymous No.5294318]

>>5294302
>Employer prefers "Jane" over "La-Dishsoapa"
>This is CLEARLY racist as fuck
Top secret strategy memo from the new black panther headquarters: stop naming your children retarded-ass names if you don't want them to live lives of exile

[Anonymous No.5294323]

>>5294302
Do you have the name of the documentary? Name indicates gender and ethnicity, what would happen if this was obscured?

Also what were examples of traditional black names? Because I would call in John Smith over Airwrecka Shanequa Jackson even if that makes me biased.

[Anonymous No.5294324]

>>5294302
What is a "traditionally black name"? Shaniqua? Latisha? Trayvon? It should be obvious why these poor ghetto trash get discriminated against. Blame their parents for giving them retarded self-segregating names. Actual traditional black names are exactly the same as "white" American names. Like RALPH Ellison.

[Anonymous No.5294330]

>>5294318
>La-Dishsoapa

La "Dash" Dishsoapa, cuz the "-" ain't silent.

[Anonymous No.5294334]

>>5294002
>>5294012
>>5294046
>>5294078
EDGEMEISTERSSSSS

[Anonymous No.5294336]

>You cannot name me a person, man or woman, who has not discriminated

Conjuring up images of this old gem.

[Anonymous No.5294339]

>>5294323
http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873

[Anonymous No.5294340]

>>5294323
I would take John Smith over a stereotypically trashy 'white' name as well. There are plenty of 'black' names that do not sound like thugs or idiots that would probably get plenty of call backs.

[Anonymous No.5294341]

>>5294336

Discriminating against all those dishonest man was real fucking bigoted, bro.

[Anonymous No.5294346]

>>5294339
Thanks. This is the report they cited. I'll try to find the actual documentary. I don't recall the subject though.

[Anonymous No.5294349]

>>5294339
>Lakisha and Jamal

They are either idiots or trying to get a certain result if they did not repeat it with Cletus and Charlene.

[Anonymous No.5294356]

>>5294339
>http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873
>ARE EMILY AND GREG MORE EMPLOYABLE
THAN LAKISHA AND JAMAL?

Fucking kek.

[Anonymous No.5294359]

>>5294346
It was featured in Freakonomics. It's also a popular book. There is no underlying theme to the documentary/book other than exploring the fascinating and often unexpected side of the world which can be revealed through statistical analysis.

[Anonymous No.5294360]

>>5294088
>>5294125
almost too much here to respond to--basically every argument against modern feminism is being trotted out in two posts

>The amount of women applying for certain studies that tend to lead to powerful positions within businesses (STEM, usually) is significantly lower than men.
Your explanation for this, I assume, is biology, since you're not ready to blame a sexist culture that encourages men to study science and women to do more womanly things. So why do women do just as well or sometimes better than men on standardized tests of math and science skills? Culture is a powerful force, and even though it does not directly and explicitly stop women from entering fields, it reduces the amount that do.

>When feminists argue that there should be a set % of women in positions of power
Nobody's arguing for quotas, they're arguing that disproportionate reality reflects disproportionate cultural attitudes. Just having a male name on an application biases reviewers in favor of it: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/09/23/study-shows-gender-bias-in-science-is-real-heres-why-it-matters/

>A lot of feminists argue that there are a lot of discriminating beauty standards in the world today, pushed on young women through mass media. But is this not just genderizing an issue that affects everybody?
Sort of, but making breast cancer about women is genderizing an issue that affects men an women too. Look at the amount of culturally worshipped men WITHOUT impressive physiques, and then look at the amount of women. You've got to have blinders on not to see that beauty standards affect women disproportionately.

>only in the western world do they really have the right to say these things to begin with
"In another country you'd be shot" is closer to a threat than an argument.

>>5294277
>Hey, Feminister.
OP here, I have never read Stirner and I never will.

>Various forms of anarchism are about opposing power structures, why don't you just call yourself an anarchist?
Because that part was (I thought obviously) about specifically sexist power structures? Because feminism is specifically about combating sexism? Why would an anarchist not also call him or herself a feminist if he or she opposes sexist power structure as well?

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294363]

So I'm trying to read the thread and it's a lot harder to when people keep talking about weird ideals and political involvements with what is essentially gender equality.

How do we stop this

[Anonymous No.5294365]

why would i need to voluntarily associate myself with a term that has so much dumb shit attached instead of just doing what i feel is right

[Anonymous No.5294367]

>>5294356
>>5294349
Obviously it's important to take all of these studies with a grain of salt and investigate their methodology so you can find things like this. Still, they used these names but made the exact same resume otherwise.

[Anonymous No.5294371]

>>5294360
>So why do women do just as well or sometimes better than men on standardized tests of math and science skills?

But they don't... They do better in K-12 schooling but worse on standardized tests. Also you know that like 80-90% of K-12 teachers are female, right? You don't think this a problem? You don't think there is a resulting bias against boys? If you aren't trying to change K-12 teacher demographics, you are a hypocrite for not thinking it's okay that most scientists and mathematicians are men.

[Anonymous No.5294386]

>>5294340
This would make a fantastic study (if the j00s would ever let it see print). Send out a bunch of apps from "Cletus", "Jebediah", etc., and a bunch of apps from "James Brown", "Benjamin Washington", etc. Use the results to "prove" deeprooted systemic racism against whites.
>academia explodes

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294394]

>>5294365
Who the fuck cares who you are in 2014?

Did you not see anything about what the individual means in the last 6 years?

[Anonymous No.5294398]

>>5294360
>that encourages men to study science and women to do more womanly things
Studying science is a one-way ticket to nowhere, at least in the cold calculus of capitalism. "Womanly things" on the other hand, at least stereotypically, includes things like dealing with people, brainstorming, holding meetings---exactly the useless garbage which gives you a jetpack up the corporate ladder

[Anonymous No.5294399]

>>5294360
>Your explanation for this, I assume, is biology, since you're not ready to blame a sexist culture that encourages men to study science and women to do more womanly things. So why do women do just as well or sometimes better than men on standardized tests of math and science skills? Culture is a powerful force, and even though it does not directly and explicitly stop women from entering fields, it reduces the amount that do.

I don't see why this is so often touted as a response to everything, nor do I see how it only applies to women.

First, there are programs at almost every university to get women into STEM fields. It is much easier to get into those field (in terms of qualifications) as a woman than it is as a man. In spite of this, women still stay out of it. Maybe it just doesn't interest them as much? Maybe women don't need technical degrees as badly because more of them end up raising a family.

You know that more women than men graduate from every level of education in the United States? There are no programs to get men into colleges, to keep them from dropping out of High School, or to make sure that men catch up with women. More often they find themselves leaving school because of pressure to support family or other "societal" forces. Why don't you fight for them too?

Finally, if men are pushed into STEM too often, shouldn't you try to encourage men to take fashion studies, psychology, and women's studies? The fact that I am a physics major is possibly caused by the societal pressure for me to be technically oriented as a male, and you don't give a shit that I'd rather study literature?

[Anonymous No.5294400]

>>5294334
fuck off

[Anonymous No.5294403]

I don't know. From personal experience the feminist females I've met are usually damaged people who are really fucked up and just hate men. Every once in a while I meet a normal one, and that's cool. I like those, but they seem to be outnumbered. The internet in general seems to show this too but I understand they only surface precisely because they are crazy, but damn, there's a lot of them.

It's also, I believe, an ideology that is incredibly rife with hypocrisy and double-standards. Listening to a feminist can get really tiring, because they keep asking to be taken seriously and then get favors at the same time, and they keep yelling at us men that we shouldn't stereotype based on gender and sexuality etc, but meanwhile demonizing all white men.

I'm just not very receptive to an ideology that is in essence divisive. I read a few months back about Mujeres Libres in Spain, and they refused to call themselves feminists for much the same reason. And I think the reason MRAs and feminists don't get along is for the exact same reason: chauvinism. Neither side really gives a crap about "justice" or "fairness" or anything like that. Then what's the point?

Whatevs.

[Anonymous No.5294406]

>>5294363
The problem isn't with the anons (within reason), it's with the people who are actually attaching those weird ideals and political involvements onto what should essentially be gender equality in an attempt to siphon momentum. They're being fused together unfortunately. When you attach things like removing pronouns to something, people are going to start blindly rejecting the entire package, it's just human nature not to separate it.

[Anonymous No.5294413]

Feminism is hard to take seriously because the majority of women LOVE the patriarchy and don't want it to change. It makes the progressives seem like agitators with a weak premise.

[Anonymous No.5294414]

>>5294360
>Because that part was (I thought obviously) about specifically sexist power structures?

So? It is subsumed under a more general category. Why 'feminism'?

>Because feminism is specifically about combating sexism?

Against men also? If so, why 'feminism'?

>Why would an anarchist not also call him or herself a feminist if he or she opposes sexist power structure as well?

Because that's assumed. An anarchist that isn't consistently against biased power structures isn't consistently an anarchist, and hence is not an anarchist at all. The only thing feminism implies by definition is partisanship of the female gender--in a word, women's issues.

I don't call myself a feminist and would never consider it, yet I certainly don't subscribe to any ideas of male superiority of personhood. If you call me an 'unconscious' feminist, you're just playing with semantics. I don't care about any women's issues simply *because* they are women's issues nor do I care about any women's issues that exclusively concern women. In fact, any issue that exclusively concerned women would be necessarily sexist. So...

Why 'feminism'?

[Anonymous No.5294416]

>>5294403
Why is with all this fallacious "middle-wayism" trying to equate MRAs with feminists? As far as I can tell MRAs are just men who want equal custody of their kids, and to address the fact that boys are doing significantly worse in schools than women. How is this equivalent to slut walks and whining about unfalsifiable garbage like "white male privilege"?

[Anonymous No.5294423]

>this much effort for such a bad troll

[Anonymous No.5294428]

This is a literature board so can you bring me some examples of feminist lit?
Also i think that in the Western world gender equality has been achieved, meaning workers are getting fucked equally, so i don't think there is a need for a feminist movement (that is not true for alot of countries thought)
MRA and anti-feminists are just as, if not more, retarded.

[Anonymous No.5294434]

>>5294399
Its funny, at university girls massively outnumbered boys in the first year of biology undergrad. But by third year it was almost 50:50 and when you get to PhD students and actual academics its equal or shifted towards guys. Even when they start it they just don't stick with it as often. And a huge portion of the girls did biology because they liked cute animals but had no stomach for the science.

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294438]

Does anyone seriously think feminists hate men and weak women

[Anonymous No.5294447]

[Anonymous No.5294455]

>>5294434
When will university administrators admit that organic chemistry is sexist and unfair and ought to be removed from the biology major :'( #triggers

[Anonymous No.5294456]

>>5294434
Exactly. That's why we shouldn't be concerned with quotas or ratios, just with results and equality of opportunity. In my relatively small engineering school, there is one female physics major out of a dozen or so in my class year. She is smarter and a harder worker than myself and many (if not all) of the males, and I respect that. If anyone wanted to take part in one of the most time-consuming fields at my university I would welcome them regardless of their gender, race, etc. That doesn't mean I should go proselytize the importance and excitement of studying physics to every female I see, in order to counter oppression. There's no point because if you don't actually want to do it you'll drop out anyway.

[Anonymous No.5294461]

>>5294438
Betty Friedan, one of OP's recommended authors, agrees. In fact she repeatedly warned that organized feminism could easily devolve into a lesbian front... and that is exactly what happened in America.

http://isteve.blogspot.ca/2013/02/betty-friedan-v-lavender-menace.html

[Anonymous No.5294466]

>>5294447
did you make that? that's actually pretty good

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294472]

>>5294461
There's tons of conspiracist lesbians all over the world. What makes America the prime suspect for paranoid lesbian feminists?

[Anonymous No.5294475]

>>5294472
I think he means the west.

[Anonymous No.5294480]

>>5294472
Because Betty Friedan is an American and she was talking about America? I don't know if the situation is the same in Europe.

[Anonymous No.5294485]

>>5294360
>Your explanation for this, I assume, is biology
False assumption. I can agree that it is due to culture, but the idea that it is sexist, or at least that this is male-enforced sexism, I disagree with. Nearly every university I know of (eurofag here) actively tries to recruit more women to enter STEM studies, and the numbers are rising, albeit very slowly. Can you please answer me why the feminists who see this as a big problem themselves do not enter STEM studies?

>Nobody's arguing for quotas
This is not true. New Zealand has implemented a gender quota that will ensure 45 per cent of its MPs are women after the next election and at least 50 per cent are women in 2017. Norway has also introduced a gender quota that will ensure 45 per cent of its MPs are women after the next election and at least 50 per cent are women in 2017. Several countries are following. If you are limited to the situation in America only, I can forgive your ignorance though.

> culturally worshipped men WITHOUT impressive physiques and then look at the amount of women
To some extent I can agree, although I don't have concrete numbers on the subject. Let us ignore the likes of Oprah Winfrey, Ellen DeGeneres, Hilary Clinton etc. But the men who are worshipped are worshipped for a reason: they have something, such as artistic skill or creativity or a pretty face. Is the lack of women caused by a sexist system, or a lack of women attempting to reach popularity?

>"In another country you'd be shot" is closer to a threat than an argument.
How so? How can it in any way be threatening unless you're displaying the exact kind of paranoia which makes people discredit feminism for seeing threats where there are none?

[Anonymous No.5294486]

>>5294456
from the list of items that would inspire me to laugh if they didn't inspire me to drink:
the millions and millions spent trying to lure women into science. it would be more efficient to use those millions to just give them "scientist" sinecures where they didn't have to do anything

[Anonymous No.5294491]

>>5294297
>people who read hundreds of novels, gain insight into how the world works

>this is what intellectuals really believe

[Anonymous No.5294492]

>>5294367
>Still, they used these names but made the exact same resume otherwise.

You're saying that as if the name is irrelevant. A dude by any other names does not smell as sweet. Names are connected to socioeconomic backgrounds, which are connected to culture, work ethic, aspirations, etc. Why would an employer disregard such a signal? Note "Applicants living in better neighborhoods receive more callbacks", which works the same way.

Also there's absolutely no mention of whether this makes sense or not on the part of the employer. If names are genuinely a predictor of work performance, then discrimination is not racist and entirely rational.

[Anonymous No.5294505]

>>5293974
feminism 2edgy4me
mra 5edgy6me

[Anonymous No.5294512]

>>5293974
What's the point of it anyways?
The way I see it, this is the shifting of paradigms:
There's a massive group of people who are completely devoid of common sense, and full of prejudice, and a small group of people who are reasonable.

The mob will parrot whatever they're taught. If it's racism, they will spout racism, if it's gender discrimination, it's gender discrimination.

To go on a mission for feminism isn't to spread common sense, the small group of people who have it already realise that gender discrimination is ridiculous. It's just to get the masses to parrot the next paradigm without realising why they're doing it.

[Anonymous No.5294522]

>>5294492
Valid points. I was just making sure the fact that their resumes were otherwise identical was known. I'm not here to comment on the morality or economics of prejudicial treatment of any kind. Some prejudice is always appropriate, the fact is just that there is a prejudice here.

>>5294486
Sounds like you have some black humor to write about.

[Anonymous No.5294571]

>>5294371
You are correct that I was accidentally conflating school performance and standardized testing into one category. But the achievement gap on standardized tests is minimal and much less likely to account for observed differences than the perception of that gap: http://news.sciencemag.org/math/2014/03/both-genders-think-women-are-bad-basic-math

What would constitute a K-12 teacher bias against boys? I think the onus is on you to pinpoint that and measure it. If there is some anti-male bias in elementary schools, that would be a problem, but I have absolutely no reason to believe there is as it stands.

>>5294399
>Maybe it just doesn't interest them as much? Maybe women don't need technical degrees as badly because more of them end up raising a family.
Maybe both of those are intimately related to how men and women are treated differently for their entire lives. You seem fine with any explanation for this gap except one that would call the gap a problem.

>Why don't you fight for them too?
I am way too lazy to fight for anything, feminism included, if it takes more effort than having arguments on 4chan. I'll read, and talk about things with friends and family, but my weakling toothpick arms cannot hold up even the lightest protest signs.

>you don't give a shit that I'd rather study literature
Was some invisible hand stopping you from studying literature? Har har har. But sure! I think men should take more classes in areas perceived as "female"! I double majored in English and Math because I wanted to, and I think everyone else should be able to follow their interests.

>>5294414
You seem really mad at me for someone mostly talking about how much you agree with me. Do you show up to protests of Wal-Mart and shout MCDONALDS IS BAD TOO WHY ARENT YOU PROTESTING THEM. We agree on this issue, let's leave it at that.

[Anonymous No.5294586]

>>5294339
http://www.socant.su.se/polopoly_fs/1.55389.1321514449!/SULCISWP2007_7.pdf

[Anonymous No.5294587]

anti-racists are just as annoying as feminists imo. I really don't fucking care about identity politics and wish people would shut up about them. I don't see the difference between a white supremacist and vegan communist, theyre both just annoying people who won't be quiet about their precious worldviews and think we care.

Feminism is particularly bad because they're tied up in 'critical theory', which is fucking poison for literature

[Anonymous No.5294593]

>implying you've even begun to understand it

Feminism is a conspiracy against women.

The feminists have never aimed to promote healthy women in the world, on the contrary. They saw these women as too well provided for and sought to depose them from their place at the top of the female hierarchy. To this end they have poisoned the healthy woman with false ideas about her identity and slandered her enthusiasm so as to make her adopt their own. The crowning piece of malice was the invention and widespread distribution of hormonal contraception. This is the tool with which the feminists have tried to destroy all healthy, fertile women. They perverted social perceptions of a woman's role in society, created the lie of patriarch oppression, and turned the healthy women away from precisely that lifestyle which for thousands of years has guaranteed her security and prosperity in the world. And while this has been taking place, the feminist have gone to great lengths to find ways of correcting their own sterility, even while defaming the institution of motherhood.

There are two things that a feminist will defend to the death. Can you guess what they are? The full weight of this conspiracy becomes apparent when you understand this.

Firstly: A woman's 'right' to abortion
Secondly: A woman's 'right' to infertility

Credo experto

There is also no such thing as genuine misandry. Misandry is only a more covert form of misogyny. Feminists who claim to despise men are lying: what they truly despise are healthy, fruitful women. But in order to give a discreet vent to this hatred (which otherwise would reflect badly on them and discredit their thesis that men are the entire problem and women are helpless victims) they choose to despise men, who are responsible for empowering these better types.

[Anonymous No.5294617]

>>5294571
>Maybe both of those are intimately related to how men and women are treated differently for their entire lives. You seem fine with any explanation for this gap except one that would call the gap a problem.

This might be true but you need to be much, much more specific. What is happening, and is it bad? Why can't the explanation stem from the long history of gender roles in the evolution of the human species?

Finally, why does it matter? Even if we take it for granted that women are encouraged to take certain majors or professions, if there are no actual barriers to them doing other things it's not a problem. If someone is perfectly happy doing what society wants them to do then more power to them.

The question of actual importance is not numbers, quotas, ratios, or anything else. The only thing that matters are barriers, and I find that there are at least as many barriers for men who have higher requirements to get accepted into schools and don't see the benefit of many "equal opportunity" measures.

[Anonymous No.5294627]

>>5294571
>What would constitute a K-12 teacher bias against boys?
This is an example of undefeatable feminist-think.
Any evidence showing bias against boys will be twisted around and described as evidence of the inherent superiority of girls.
(Any evidence showing bias against girls will be taken for what it is, god forbid one gender be inherently superior over the other!)

[Anonymous No.5294634]

>>5294571
>I think everyone else should be able to follow their interests.

But they can. Society constantly bombards girls with the idea that they need to do more science and maths.

[Anonymous No.5294639]

>>5294571
>What would constitute a K-12 teacher bias against boys? I think the onus is on you to pinpoint that and measure it. If there is some anti-male bias in elementary schools, that would be a problem, but I have absolutely no reason to believe there is as it stands.

http://cee.lse.ac.uk/ceedps/ceedp133.pdf

[Anonymous No.5294649]

Feminism is cancer, both for men and woman

[Anonymous No.5294651]

>>5294593
I don't know about this dude. There have been very well-provided and sought-after women who have been very feminist and even advanced the cause subtantially. What would be their incentive for doing so?

Also misandry definitely exists, as 'hatred of men'. It exists in both sexes the same way misogyny does, to deny that people hate men is just silly.

[Anonymous No.5294663]

>>5294634
this. it's like feminists have some notion that there's a shadowy cabal in every math department weeding out women. it couldn't be further from the truth. in fact all a girl has to do is show up and say "i have a vagina" and every STEM department in the city will be sending her invitations to special conferences, all expenses paid.

[Anonymous No.5294664]

>>5294360
>So why do women do just as well or sometimes better than men on standardized tests of math and science skills?

Really? Studies show its female bias for other females in k-12 classes. As in, feminism has created a reverse sexual bias.

>http://ideas.time.com/2013/02/06/do-teachers-really-discriminate-against-boys/
>"It seems like out-and-out discrimination, except there is an interesting wrinkle: teachers didn’t downgrade boys who had identical test scores to girls if they seemed to share the girls’ positive attitude toward learning. In fact, the opposite seemed to occur: the well-socialized boys received a small grade “bonus” for their good behavior relative to other boys, suggesting that teachers may be overcompensating when they encounter boys whose behavior exceeds expectations"

We created an environment were educators feel the need to downgrade students based on their opinions and gender. Oops. Let's also mention that traditional "masculine" childhood activities are actively policed against, like drawing any sort of weapon, horse-playing, etc.

>Nobody's arguing for quotas
Come on.

>Look at the amount of culturally worshipped men WITHOUT impressive physiques, and then look at the amount of women. You've got to have blinders on not to see that beauty standards affect women disproportionately.

This is a reflection of the fact that more men than women are CEO's, athletes, analysts, and so on. Women also have a cultural bias that is rarely brought up--women and men are biased towards women. Look at the very overt handling of rape accusations in the public discourse. The pressure is always on the accused to prove himself innocent, as people have more or less already condemned him. "Chivalry", if we can still call it that, is also rarely mentioned. Men feel a quasi-responsibility in protecting women. Its a big reason why allowing them to serve as infantry is a problem, as shown in the Israeli military were they do serve such roles. Units with women suffer much higher injury/causality rates.

In order for feminism to "work", women will have to both uplift and lower themselves in certain cultural spheres. This great push for more and more, even when its starting to negatively effect men as shown by college graduation rates (as a single example) will only lead to backlash, as we are beginning to see.

[Anonymous No.5294667]

>>5294663
>>5294663
But they can't say they like STEM because they do and don't at the same time due to the subliminal gender roles enforced by the patriarchy which is pretending to want more women in STEM but is also making them not take it.

[Anonymous No.5294669]

>>5294651

>There have been very well-provided and sought-after women who have been very feminist

name three, please

[Anonymous No.5294679]

>>5294571
>You seem really mad at me for someone mostly talking about how much you agree with me.

Your interpreting criticism as anger is instructive, to say the least.

>Do you show up to protests of Wal-Mart and shout MCDONALDS IS BAD TOO WHY ARENT YOU PROTESTING THEM.

Is this usually how you engage in discourse? Perhaps that is part of what turns people off of the term 'feminist'.

>We agree on this issue, let's leave it at that.

On what issue do we agree? Certainly not that feminism is a worthy movement. My position is that it is not at all and never has been.

I couldn't care any less than I now do about the number of female CEOs. I don't give a mother's tear over the wage gap. I wouldn't scratch my arse over a female president.

As if corporate management was somehow a matter of equality and not performance, seniority, and private ownership. As if the wage gap was determined by something other than economic causes of supply and demand on the labour market, which are every bit as much sexist as they are racist and ableist and anti-union. As if presidents were elected on the basis of their genitals and not their platform and moneyed backers first and foremost.

The only time in history that 'feminism' has meant as much as a slick hand of cards is when it was piggy-backing on a more general issue of democracy and economic progress. Yet, here we are, in a thread promoting the literary escapades of pettifogging 'intellectuals' chasing after their own bums.

By all means, feel free to refer to polemics as anger a second time, and perhaps lambast me with accusations of micro aggressions.

[Anonymous No.5294686]

because feminists are basically women who hate being women. they're a reproductive and cultural dead-end, and should be despised as such

[Anonymous No.5294687]

>>5294669
Woolf, de Beauvoire, K. Hepburn

[Anonymous No.5294698]

Feminists play "hide the ball" with statistics too often.

Also, a lot of them are batshit insane.

[Anonymous No.5294719]

think of a loser.

now, what gender was (s)he?

male.

always male.

yet as a guy you can never blame the powers that be, because guys are supposed to stand up for themselves. it sucks, and it's not what feminists want in theory, but it's always what happens in practice.

that's why i dislike feminism. fucking bag of hypocrites

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294726]

>>5294719
>not liking losers
>never knowing the joy of a cathartic loser

[Anonymous No.5294732]

>>5294719
The double standard about virginity is the worst. A male virgin is always a socially retarded loser, a female virgin is always a pure, innocent 2D-tier waifu.

[Anonymous No.5294736]

interacting with someone identifies as a feminist is usually a strong argument against feminism

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294752]

>>5294736
Usually in what circles

[Anonymous No.5294756]

Got to catch 'em all, /lit. Collect the knowledge. Knowledge for knowledge not for wisdom. Wisdom muddies up the logic. Flawwed as it is. Perfezione! All and only.

Good a place as any, I suppose. No. I dn't suppose: I guess. I'd guess. Big audience which is only gettin' bigger. People will see..People will solve! HA! The saint was good and so is life. Ask for more: vanity. Ask for more: selfishness. Ask for more: gluttony. That's we must watch for. It is the easiest to maintain.

Harls are recules and easily replaced. Home: a samcloth.

The girl will be another girl and those feelings will be those.

He sits up straight. Maybe not the best audience, I guess. I'd reckon so.
No more urge at all: nothing.

Champion of self. Huzzah! Who wants who needs a celebration which only feeds! teehee.

As they pass: Oils and perfumes on witches. Up to the task? I'd suppose no?

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294763]

I want to know in what circles you would find an illiterate feminist

[Anonymous No.5294764]

>>5294282
It's not lost on me. It's like The Twilight Zone Episode "Four O'Clock". But I assure you, one thing I cannot tolerate is intolerance!

[Anonymous No.5294775]

>>5294687

Virgina Woolf was not a feminist. Her works have been interpreted along feminist lines, but only because they contain lesbian themes. (Hint: the lesbianism is a sign all was not right with her as a woman. Ditto with Beauvoir)

There was nothing desirable at all about Beauvoir. She took a cross-eyed philosophaster as her lover and engaged in sexual misconduct with several of her female students, which she described in repulsive detail in her private journals (read Between the Sheets if you're interested in her bizarre love life). Almost certainly barren to begin with

Hepburn had mixed reception in the feminist community:

>She was not universally revered by feminists, however, who were angered by her public declarations that women "cannot have it all", meaning a family and a career.

Such things would be grounds for dismissal from the movement today, of course.

An independent, intelligent, self-oriented and successful woman is not by default a feminist, nor should she be considered one.

[Anonymous No.5294783]

>>5294243

do you have any evidence that cherry-picking is involved?

if a whoel bunch of people disagree with you, and your only evidence is "my wife is reasonable", it seems liek you're the one thats cherry picking

[Anonymous No.5294795]

>>5294485
>male-enforced sexism
C'mon, keep up. The point is that sexist power structures are enforced by culture at large, which is not localized in either men or women.

>why the feminists who see this as a big problem themselves do not enter STEM studies?
I ignored this the first time because it is such an obviously bad argument. When white cops kill unarmed black kids, do you tell black people they should go into the police force and not kill kids to improve things? Are you not allowed to criticize Coca-cola's treatment of labor unions unless you've applied for the job of CEO of Coca-Cola? Are you really saying that only attempts to work through a system are valid, and attempts to change the system are not? I don't even know how to engage with an argument this bad.

>Is the lack of women caused by a sexist system, or a lack of women attempting to reach popularity?
I'm going with sexist system, you are, somehow, going with "women aren't trying."

>How so?
"You should be grateful that you can even say things" is not an argument. We should all be grateful that a dog did not rip our faces off at age 2, but it has no bearing on this.

>>5294617
>Why can't the explanation stem from the long history of gender roles in the evolution of the human species?
It does! The long history of gender roles in the evolution of the human species is also a supremely sexist one! You could say the same about the history of racism. This doesn't excuse either racism or sexism.

There are no "actual barriers" to a homeless man being elected president, but that doesn't make it likely, and it doesn't mean we should stop trying to help them because why don't they get off their lazy asses and become the president.

>>5294627
So, you have nothing, is what you're saying?

>>5294639
Or maybe you have this, but it's 50 pages long. Summarize for me?

>>5294664
The Time article doesn't really make the case you're trying to make, but the NYT one it linkes does decently well. Especially:

"boy-averse trends like the decline of recess, zero-tolerance disciplinary policies, the tendency to criminalize minor juvenile misconduct and the turn away from single-sex schooling"

I 100% agree that this is a problem and support attempts to correct it!

>>5294664
>This is a reflection of the fact that more men than women are CEO's, athletes, analysts, and so on.
Ah, good point. Maybe we should look at the underlying causes of that, and try to correct them!

>Come on.
Well, I'm not arguing for quotas. Sorry for generalizing.

>"Chivalry", if we can still call it that, is also rarely mentioned.
To me, the biggest problem in the world, at least after the War on Christmas, is the mainstream media's bias against chivalry.

[Anonymous No.5294797]

>>5294310

this is true, which is why you have to clarify that its not just poverty levels but geographical segregation too, and cultural segregation

poor black people all live together in shitty little neighborhoods so the pressure to join anti-social gangs is higher than for poor whites. also black people have an anti-social culture, they speak a unique dialect that makes their kids suffer in school, they generally do not trust the local authorities, all these combine to make a culture of poor kids more likely to turn to crime than poor whites

[Anonymous No.5294802]

>>5294571

It's really not that complicated m8

[Anonymous No.5294808]

>muh privilege

[Anonymous No.5294822]

DAILY REMINDER FEMINISM IS BULLSHIT AND IS A CANCER IN SOCIETY

[Anonymous No.5294835]

>>5294667
math major here and i find it hilarious how women think they're special bc they're doing math.

idgaf about you fucking special snowflakes, im just here to do math bc its my passion. nobody gives a shit about your meta self-awareness perception of reality and how the math dept is 20% women bc the men there are smart enough to not give a shit about petty social situations.

just let me do fucking math.

/rant

[Anonymous No.5294836]

>>5294679
No, this is not how I usually engage in discourse, this is how I make fun of people. I am holding a pretty low bar for the intelligence of the arguments I'm engaging with and you're below it. Sorry. Please feel free to conclude that's because I'm scared of or don't understand your insanely great opinions about how feminists are just sexist anarchists or whatever.

[Anonymous No.5294841]

>>5293974
Lmao NERD ALERT

[Anonymous No.5294844]

>>5294732
in reality, both are socially retarded losers

[Anonymous No.5294851]

Who the fuck cares about any of this bullshit.

[Anonymous No.5294864]

>>5294795
>There are no "actual barriers" to a homeless man being elected president, but that doesn't make it likely, and it doesn't mean we should stop trying to help them because why don't they get off their lazy asses and become the president.

Actually, the things that make it unlikely are barriers. Homeless men don't have millions of dollars at their disposal to run a campaign, lack name recognition, and generally haven't garnered the support of a political party. We allow this discrimination against homeless people because most people agree that they would make bad presidents.

If you want to point out the barriers to women which do not exist to men other than citing unfalsifiable claims of "social pressure" then please be my guest. Otherwise, take your poorly thought out argument through analogy back to /b/.

[Anonymous No.5294875]

>>5293974
Go eat shit and die from it

I mean it. GO EAT SHIT AND DIE FROM IT.

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294884]

>>5294875
no

[Anonymous No.5294886]

>>5294836
>No, this is not how I usually engage in discourse, this is how I make fun of people.

You're apparently not good at that either.

>I am holding a pretty low bar for the intelligence of the arguments I'm engaging with and you're below it.

Oh, that stings. You really countered my argument with that one.

>Please feel free to conclude that's because I'm scared of or don't understand your insanely great opinions about how feminists are just sexist anarchists or whatever.

The question was put and never answered: Why 'feminism'? Not a single issue you have mentioned is, strictly speaking, a women's issue. Feminism is seen as a bogeyman for that very reason. It doesn't cover anything more than general democratic and egalitarian movements, and includes people that are anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian, as is plain. This puts those identifying as feminists in the same movement with anti-egalitarians and doesn't really leave them with anything over actual egalitarian movements. Yet, here you are, wondering naively and bantering poorly over those who feel antipathy toward those who count themselves with certain sexist philistines.

Why 'feminism'?

[Anonymous No.5294896]

>>5294884
YES. Thats where you belong. Eating shit and dieing from it.
hush hush, fuck off, eat. I'll shit it for you on a plate. EAT. UP.

[Anonymous No.5294897]

>>5294795

>I ignored this the first time because it is such an obviously bad argument. When white cops kill unarmed black kids, do you tell black people they should go into the police force and not kill kids to improve things?

fuck you cunt, are you serious? you have the audacity to say that his argument is bad when you pull this false equivalency out of your ass?

there is no STEM conspiracy keeping out women, even if the feminists are correct, its a matter of subtly convincing women from early on that they don't want to join STEM, in which case, as soon as females are made aware of this, joining STEM themselves would be the simplest and most effective way to rectify this situation

goddamn i hate you and your strawmen

>I'm going with sexist system, you are, somehow, going with "women aren't trying."

another straw man, women really AREN'T trying in as great of numbers to be CEO's and revolutionary business leaders, that's a fact. Women are known to ask for promotions less often, ask for pay raises less often, and their choices in study correspond with less prestigious careers

>There are no "actual barriers" to a homeless man being elected president, but that doesn't make it likely, and it doesn't mean we should stop trying to help them because why don't they get off their lazy asses and become the president

so don't you think boys should be helped seeing as they are underperforming in school? why is it just women that need help overcoming non-barriers ?

>Ah, good point. Maybe we should look at the underlying causes of that, and try to correct them!

why does it need to be corrected? what is wrong with people choosing what they want to do?

[Anonymous No.5294899]

>>5294795
>which is not localized in either men or women.
Are you then denying that the feminist movement, in general, blames/accuses men for these problems, or at least direct their anger and frustration against men more than against women?

> When white cops kill unarmed black kids, do you tell black people they should go into the police force and not kill kids to improve things?
This is a poor argument as you assume that one part is already guilty of a crime. However, if the black community feels that it is a problem that there are few black cops compared to white cops, then yes, getting more black people to become police officers is certainly the way to go.
Let us say that an area is 50% black and 50% white, the police force in said area is, however, 90% white. This is considered a problem by people in the black community, and they wish to even out the percentage, to represent the actual demographics. Will there be 50% black police officers by A)Getting more black people to become cops or B)Getting more black people to blog about how unfair it is that there aren't 50% black cops?

>We should all be grateful that a dog did not rip our faces off at age 2
If you grew up with a nice dog whereas your neighbour's dog was a viscious beast, you should appreciate your dog, if not exactly displaying gratitude per se.

>Well, I'm not arguing for quotas
You're not as extreme as a lot of your fellow feminists and the governments in countries such as Spain, Iceland, Norway, New Zealand and the Netherlands then. Do you understand it if people living in such countries aren't too fond of what the modern feminist movement has become and done?

[Anonymous No.5294915]

>>5294797
>poor black people all live together in shitty little neighborhoods so the pressure to join anti-social gangs is higher than for poor whites. also black people have an anti-social culture, they speak a unique dialect that makes their kids suffer in school, they generally do not trust the local authorities, all these combine to make a culture of poor kids more likely to turn to crime than poor whites

This is very true, and is something which is, sadly, reinforced by mass media through the glorifiation of "gangster" lifestyle.
There was an uproar over the Blurred Lines song because it was percieved as sexist and enfrocing rape culture, yet nobody protests against Jason Derulo and Snoop Dogg's Wiggle, which is also clearly pushing a sexist view of women.

[Anonymous No.5294917]

>>5293974
It's so old seeing the edgemasters on this site circlejerk over their ability to put away C-grade tumblr logic. Worse than /r/atheism, easily. I can't wait for the day this "SWJs be like 'check yur privilege' rapelord" shit usurps the fedora as chief signifier of euphoria.

[Anonymous No.5294921]

>>5294864
Its just a waste of time and money, there is huge pressure from educational institutes, feminists and the media for girls to do science and they simply do not want to as often as men do. I do not understand this absurd belief that men and women would naturally be identical with identical career goals and aspirations without the evil patriarchy.

[sauce(dead)pan No.5294922]

>>5294896
if you're not the girl I'm thinking about i'm not eating it

[Anonymous No.5294927]

>>5294917
>edgemasters

SJW's are horrible people, the fact you would condemn people for disagreeing with them is troubling.

[Anonymous No.5294935]

>>5293974
Feminism is good for the East, currently, not the West

[Anonymous No.5294939]

>>5294921
I agree

[Anonymous No.5294941]

>>5294927
Spoiled tumblrites maybe, the ones I know in real life are some of the most compassionate and admirable people I've met. And none from either group are worse than actual bigots

[Anonymous No.5294980]

>>5294899
>>5294897
It's cool how people got so mad at the cop analogy that they just stopped reading and didn't even get to the two questions after that

[Anonymous No.5294982]

>>5294922
rest my case.

[Anonymous No.5295002]

>>5293974


discrimination is both necessary and inevitable.

youre gona have to find something better than than to create your Post-Enlightenment Universal Categorical Imperative by Which All Ethical Claims May be Made.

also known as the PEUCIWAECMM.

[Anonymous No.5295010]

>>5294941
>using the word "bigot" unironically
kill yourself ;)

[Anonymous No.5295021]

>>5294088
Immense post anon, keep it up.

[Anonymous No.5295025]

>>5294512
>them sheeps, huh?

[Anonymous No.5295055]

>>5294980
No, it's just that the other analogies were pretty similar and thus it was not really necessary to reply to them to get the point across. Alright
>Are you not allowed to criticize Coca-cola's treatment of labor unions unless you've applied for the job of CEO of Coca-Cola?
No, but if you believe that you'll achieve more change through blogging about Coca-Cola than becoming the CEO, you're extremely naive. Regardless, Coca-Cola actively treating labour unions unfairly is in no way comparable to the lack of women applying for STEM studies.
>Are you really saying that only attempts to work through a system are valid, and attempts to change the system are not?
Again, no, but are you denying that working through a system is the most efficient way of changing it? Are you even bringing any proper suggestions for changes? OP has stated that he/she/xen/zet is against quotation. If he/she/zet/xen still considers the lack of women in CEO positions a problem, what does he/she/zet/xen suggest be done to change this if more women don't apply for the job?

Now please answer what should be done to get more female CEOs and more black cops. Feminists often talk about the existence of "social pressure" preventing women from becoming CEOs, but is this really such a strong force that it keeps even the enlightened feminists away, or do they all just happen to be more interested in Gender Studies than business? Is the pressure against women entering business stronger than that against gay people joining politics?

Are women too weak-willed to overcome social pressure? If so, that doesn't bode well for feminism.
Is the social pressure against women is such a powerful force that it is extremely difficult to overcome and much effort must be spent on eliminating it before women even have a chance?

[Anonymous No.5295067]

I am so much of a feminist that I never talk to women unless I have to.

[Anonymous No.5295088]

>>5295055
you're killing it brah

[Anonymous No.5295089]

>>5295025
All very well, but you know there is truth to it.
People haven't been murdering eachother for thousands of years over myriad reasons because they were free thinkers.

Now we have the whole apologetic and non-offensive paradigm, where every joke with a ''racist'' edge is abhorrent, everyone has to love everyone else, everyone deserves equal respect, everyone is just as special as the other, etc. Fifty years ago they were hanging niggers, and beating black kids to death for whistling at white women. Women were deemed kitchen hardware not long before that, and everyone saying that was just the way it was supposed to be claimed to be smart, and reasonable aswell.

Nobody will say they're dumb, everyone will act as if they came to their conclusions through their free thinking, but we all know it's simply not true, now is it?

[Anonymous No.5295108]

>>5294941
>bigots

Which fully describes a lot of people who subscribe to feminism, SJW or political correctness.

[Anonymous No.5295111]

>>5295089
you got a point, actually

[Anonymous No.5295118]

>>5294371
>you know that 80-90% of K-12 teachers are female, right?
you are saying this as though it proves discrimination against men
when you should be wondering
if there is this one extremely low-paying job that is hiring mainly women
how many more whole career tracks are there out there that are dominantly male.
it's very easy to say HEY, IF THEY WANT TO BE CEO'S SO MUCH THEN WHY DON'T THEY JUST GO TO SCHOOL, HAHA B)
but that's basically ignoring existing power structures
and also: yes, of course there are people that don't have super-elite privilege who also happen to be white males, but no, feminists aren't oppressing them when they try to advocate for themselves.

most MRA's on the internet seem to think of feminists as necessarily opposed to them, but it seems like they mostly got their ideas of feminism from listening to other MRA's stereotypes, which is kind of a bummer.

[Anonymous No.5295132]

>>5295118
For what I've seen feminists are belligerent against MRA all the time, calling them a hate group even.

[Anonymous No.5295164]

>>5295132
The entire MRA movement is oriented around deprecating feminism

[Anonymous No.5295166]

>>5295108
Not really, actually. But I'll amend it to racists, homophobes, and sexists for you

[Anonymous No.5295184]

>>5295164
and?

[Anonymous No.5295185]

>>5295055
I'm OP, and I think any way people want to fight unjust systems is valid, even apparently dumb stuff like blogging. I kind of have to defend stuff like that, and honestly, you sort of do too, if either of us wants to in any way defend having arguments on 4chan.

"Apply for the job of CEO" was supposed to be silly--you don't apply for CEO jobs. You have to navigate the corridors of power for years before you're even considered, and the system is such that we could never have accurate statistics as to how many women "apply for CEO jobs."

Cultural problems are hard to change! How do you convince rich people that they should care about poor people? There are no easy answers. The best thing that can be done, in my eyes, is to try to make more people aware of the sexism they have already internalized and work to combat it in themselves and in others. If you take a second look at a job application because you've read studies about how people in hiring positions unconsciously judge women more harshly, then that's a tiny step in the right direction! If you raise a daughter with sympathy toward the body image issues she faces in this culture as a woman, that helps too!

But generally, I have no strong opinions about "the most efficient way of changing the system." I think everybody should do what they can, inside the system and outside of it, and I think coming up with challenges to various types of action (you have to enter engineering fields or you can't criticize them!) is ridiculous, bad faith arguing.

>Are women too weak-willed to overcome social pressure? If so, that doesn't bode well for feminism.
>Is the social pressure against women is such a powerful force that it is extremely difficult to overcome and much effort must be spent on eliminating it before women even have a chance?
Are you willing to consider the possibility that the disproportionate representation of women in positions of power has nothing to do with women being biologically or constitutionally weak? Because if you're not, I'll give up.

I'll probably give up soon anyway because I've argued a lot in this thread and it seems about time for it to die.

[Anonymous No.5295192]

>>5295118
Are you serious? Male K-12 teachers are actively discriminated against. In some places they're not even allowed to be alone with students, by law, because the justice system assumes that men are rapists and perverts by default. Male teachers are considered creepy by parents.

How about nurses being mostly female despite it being an extremely well-paying career track? That has nothing to do with societal and institutional discrimination against males?

>>5295164
The entire MRA movement is oriented around fathers who are pissed about not getting equal custody of their children.

[Anonymous No.5295200]

>>5295118
>how many more whole career tracks are there out there that are dominantly male
Lumberjack, coal miner, garbage truck driver, butcher, welder, plumber, sewer cleaner, carpenter, I could go on.
>but that's basically ignoring existing power structures
Can you please define the term "power structures" properly and give us some information about how it works in practice?

[Anonymous No.5295206]

>>5293974
LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT 4CHAN.

Everyone here is addicted to one form of digital opium or another. The difference between feminists and other groups we might be mean towards is that feminists are now trying to pull that opium pipe from our hands. Now, what they thought was an easy target turned out to be an intangible monster, even without the /pol/ shit.

People on here have been gorging themselves on video games, on comics, anime, on PORN, all filled with ridiculous sexist shit. Feminists don't care that these nerds are confined to their basements and generally harmless. Their soma is now leaking out all over the internet like semen-stained spaghetti and so how fucking dare you, men! How dare you be unemployed and jacking off to chinese cartoons in your room all day! Now let me try tugging on that opium pipe again, only to enrage an entire generation of teenagers who all want the same freedom their predecessors had!

The result, as I'm sure you're aware, is a spectacular clusterfuck.

[Anonymous No.5295226]

>>5293974
>afraid of the feminist bogeywoman, convinced they're being ... held down by feminist radicals

This is my fetish.

Judith gives me such a boner.

[Anonymous No.5295245]

>>5293974
I read the first tome of Le Deuxième Sexe and she's right, Beauvoir, but her philosophy is also nearly anti-existentialist, based on both fact and fallacy, but overall it provides a virile Weltanschauung, taking into account the ideas and spirit of Hegel, Havelock Ellis, Stendhal, Wollstonecraft, Woolf and D.H. Lawrence. Other so-called feminists can only imitate her in despair, because she composed a convincing, open-minded, sex-positive essay where others lose themselves in her pitfalls and assumptions.

One of the most cogent driving forces behind her work is Hegelian, that we must overthrow the world of adults set in their ways and not any onerous and vague patriarchy, a word she uses sparingly and perhaps only once or twice in 500 pages.

The abeyance feminists suffer, she argues, is wholly deserved and provides no threat to the positive, revolutionary will behind feminism, although it seems inherently plagued by female disinterest from the bourgeoisie, ignoring the common red herring of menacing male dominance behind the mocement's shortcomings and failures. This is a unique notion of feminism still shoved under the rug today.

So yes, I detest the feminism discussed here, but certainly not out of fear. If I weren't a man, I'd still avoid calling myself feminist however. Although I believe in racial equality, I'm not eager to proclaim myself a civil rights activist, let alone think of contributing to any pertinent discussion on it but in vain.

[Anonymous No.5295265]

>>5295185
>Are you willing to consider the possibility that the disproportionate representation of women in positions of power has nothing to do with women being biologically or constitutionally weak?
Have I ever actually argued that women are biolgically or constitutionally weak? I think that the problem is that women, in general, do not strive for positions of power as individuals. I think that the problem lies within every single woman who would like to study and work towards an influential position, but doesn't. But unlike you, I don't put the blame on society or the "system" as I don't believe that will ever change anything.

>The best thing that can be done, in my eyes, is to try to make more people aware of the sexism they have already internalized and work to combat it in themselves and in others
When you put it like this I can agree with you, but please see the pic in my first post about traditional gender pronouns being replaced with gender neutral ones: is that a necessary step, or is it misguided fanaticism that results in feminism being percieved as a movement full of crazy people?

>If you raise a daughter with sympathy toward the body image issues she faces in this culture as a woman, that helps too!
Certainly, just as I want my son to feel good about himself even if he doesn't turn out being Zyzz, but this is just rational. My point has been to point out how feminism has evolved into a movement that isn't really focused on actual "body acceptance", but is a circlejerk of obese women try pushing the idea that being obese is just as healthy as not being obese, where slim people who care about their health (and looks) are bashed and accused of supporting a patriarchal system intended to keep "real, curvy" women down, etc.

I won't contribute to this thread further as I'm going to bed, but something tells me you're a feminist who reads more books and studies than tumblr blogs. The tumblr feminist is the face of feminism today. It's not a normal woman who wants to be respected and treated like a person, it's a 350lbs woman claiming to look like Marilyn Monroe who thinks that her degree in gender studies should earn her as much money as being a petroleum engineer.

[Anonymous No.5295271]

I don't inherently oppose hierarchy or value individuality and liberty.

[Anonymous No.5295276]

>>5295184
This would explain the lack of charitableness.

[Anonymous No.5295277]

>>5295166
>But I'll amend it to racists, homophobes, and sexists for you

Does not change anything, SJW's and feminists can be and often are all of these things.

[Anonymous No.5295279]

this is why I stopped going on /lit/. Feminister and le butterfly go unchecked while kissless virgins give them attention

[Anonymous No.5295284]

>>5295265
Just putting a few more examples of how modern feminism is percieved by a lot of people, to give OP an idea of why people are sceptical of it,
And yes, I know this is probably a tiny minority of self-proclaimed feminists, I certainly hope so, but whoever shouts the loudest gets heard, and these are the people who are visible.

[Anonymous No.5295294]

>>5295284
"Serious feminists" are just as radical and scrutinizing as the mainstream counterpart, they're just more articulate.

[Anonymous No.5295297]

>>5293974
>I'm extremely convinced now
10/10 literally lold and wished I had a relevant reaction pic

I believe it's fine now, there's people still clamoring for Hilary to be President, and there's Merkel

I really can't waste enough days protesting Congress about third world countries and their women rights to have anything done, and neither can you, which is why feminism has the famous picture of
>give me free things because I say so!

[Anonymous No.5295299]

>>5295284

[Anonymous No.5295310]

>>5294054
too late, scum
already alerted the police

[Anonymous No.5295312]

>>5295284

>end father's day

Guarantee you those "women" are btards playing at one their little ruses.

[Anonymous No.5295324]

If feminists stopped

>calling you a rape supporter for telling women to be aware of their surroundings, act responsibly and avoid putting themselves in dangerous situations
>blaming men for everything and assuming all men are paedophiles and rapists
>continuing to believe in the mythical patriarchy
>trying to tell men how they can act, what media they can enjoy, what jokes they can make and who they can dislike for what reasons
>telling women how to live their lives and that it makes you immoral and a traitor to change your last name when you marry, be a housewife or other such things

And all the other illogical, sexist, hateful bullshit they do then they might be less disliked.

[[e-mail] No.5295339]

>>5294042
Word. No one should expect culture to be "fair." Culture is a tool of the powerful to control the masses.

[Anonymous No.5295348]

>>5295277
Can? Sure. Are? This is exaggerated to, and well past, the point of absurdity here. The whiniest bullshit that be found on tumblr is taken as representative of feminist theory, fake news stories are posted, and endless greentext circle-jerking further parodies the already skewed sample.

Meanwhile all kinds of horrible shit said at the expense of minorities is tolerated, even lauded as expression of free speech. To pretend the former category does close to as much harm is delusional.

[Anonymous No.5295353]

>>5294732
That's because you're looking at it through a man's lens of the world

13 year olds are rampant sluts in public schools because they act like little shits behind each other's backs for attention, and they laugh at each other for sex/relationships comparison, too

>>5294719
>can never blame the powers that be
Uh yes they can

How do you think revolutions happened? By everyone writing enough angry letters?

As stupid as this thread is, both of you keep your stupid teenage level comprehension out of this board

[Anonymous No.5295360]

>>5295279
come on /lit/ is still fun
There was an excellent poetry thread yesterday about someone asking about it

[Anonymous No.5295363]

Is this prevalent in lit circles? my english class is 75% female and I don't want to contend with this bullshit all year.

[Anonymous No.5295372]

Tumblr pls go, stop trying to act like you are one of us.

[Anonymous No.5295375]

I think the field of actuarial science would be an interesting one to study for some answers to the question of whether women avoid STEM due to societal forces or otherwise. If you look at actuarial/statistics bachelors programs across the US, you will see a pretty healthy representation of females; in many cases more than 40% of completed actuarial science degrees from a given class will be held by women.

The fact that so many women are entering and completing these programs suggests that they aren't being subconsciously pressured from a young age to avoid mathematics and science, and in fact may have even been influenced by feminist undertones to pursue such a route.

Where you begin to see more significant divergence is after college. Of those graduates, the proportion of men who go on to complete the required exams and become fully credentialed actuaries does quite markedly outweigh that of women. I think this would be something useful for feminists to explore further.

Perhaps women in their early to mid twenties are less willing than men to sacrifice many months of their social lives to study for difficult exams? Maybe they are feeling more societal pressure to find a husband than men of the same age feel to find a wife? Maybe biological pressure plays a role here as well? Or maybe they take a genuine crack at the exams and then realize they simply don't like actuarial science that much?

I'd like to hear some thoughts on this.

[Anonymous No.5295382]

>>5295111
Just remember that the label ''sheep'', if that's what you want to go with, always applies to everyone on certain subjects. The best you can do is try and escape prejudice in certain fields of knowledge. You'll always be ignorant of all the others, and deemed to just accept what you're being told about them.
So it's not like there is a black and white distinction between idiots and clever people.

>>5295312
Well, it's either /b/, or it's just a 0.01% of the population, that seems to be an overwhelming majority if you visit the places they all meet. The internet making this ten times easier.

[Anonymous No.5295389]

>>5294012
/thread

[Anonymous No.5295394]

>>5295265
I don't have strong feelings on gender pronouns and I'm fine with using "he" to mean "he or she," so I'm probably the wrong person to talk to about that. I think there are decent arguments against it but I don't care enough to ruin the aesthetics of language. (Which are completely subjective, but I still can't bring myself to take "xe" seriously.)

You're right that I don't read Tumblr for gender politics, and I don't think the rush to point out "problematic" things is a feminism I really recognize or identify with. I think the difference between our viewpoints is that I'm thinking of the best of feminist thought as "feminism," and you're thinking of the worst of feminist thought as "feminism." While your representation may be closer to the average woman who considers herself a feminist, I don't think you can get much of anywhere by reducing a movement to its worst tendencies and only engaging with it on that level.

>>5295299
pretty sure the first 2 of those 3 are satirical

>>5295284
no clue how many of these are satirical, but I hope, uh, at least some of them

[Anonymous No.5295395]

>>5295324
>calling you a rape supporter for telling women to be aware of their surroundings, act responsibly and avoid putting themselves in dangerous situations
You're not a "rape supporter", but the onus is not on women to behave in a way that prevents men from raping them.
>mythical patriarchy
Take an intro to soc class please
>>5295324
No Orwellian conspiracy here, just expect to be called out if you say horribly offensive things in public

Embarrassing/10, next time don't start by wildly misrepresenting your opponent's actions and opinions

[Anonymous No.5295398]

>>5295363

Let me tell you, you are in a world of trouble. If you don't want to argue and defend yourself the entire time I suggest you either leave or dare not mention feminism. Unless you're a white knight faggot that will try to empathize with the she-hags.

[Anonymous No.5295403]

>>5295348
But its not just on Tumblr. There are entire rallies of idiots that take to the streets to proudly defend their right to do whatever they want and put themselves in risky situations without being harmed. And if you dare to point out how fucking stupid that is you get called a rape supporter. If there was a 'phone walk' for people who think they should be able to walk through the ghetto using an iphone at 3AM they would be called a bunch of fools and rightly so.

Feminists have also done things like protest heavily against the creation of domestic abuse shelters for men or men's rooms on university campuses despite the same facilities existing for women because they cannot fucking stand the idea that men might not be the root of all problems. This is not some fringe, extremist view, just look at how society assumes men around children are potential rapists or that men are all perverted and violent. Continuing to blame men for everything and denying that women can be at fault does far more harm than some teenager on 4chan calling someone a nigger.

[Anonymous No.5295405]

>>5295363
don't worry, you won't leave your basement much so it'll be a-okay

[Anonymous No.5295423]

>women
>on 4chan

You guys don't actually believe this, right? You guys know you are being rused by teenage neckbeards pretending to be girls, right?

[Anonymous No.5295426]

>>5293974

I think you better put those strawmen back in the fields.

[Anonymous No.5295428]

>>5295398
It used to come up a lot but people were pretty chill about it so it was constructive rather than hostile. Things like post-colonialism, marxist & feminist perspectives etc will come up, I just want to avoid that bullshit academically.

[Anonymous No.5295433]

>>5295395
The onus is not on people to act in a way that prevents them being mugged either but at the end of the day you are the one responsible for your own safety and it is not wrong to tell people to act sensibly. And frankly I am fed up of feminists defining any sex they later regret as rape so they can absolve themselves of all responsibility for their own actions. You even get people who think cheating on their boyfriend while drunk makes them a rape victim instead of a horrible person. Then they act surprised and call 'rape culture' when they get dumped.

And I am not 'misrepresenting' anybody, you are the one pretending this is some fringe belief.

[Anonymous No.5295434]

>>5295405
That's horrible

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5295444]

>>5295423
I've got proof.

But go away /pol/

[Anonymous No.5295448]

>>5295426
uh, have you read the thread you're currently posting in? if there's a hundred posts doing exactly what OP was calling people out for, it's kind of hard for me to say that's a strawman argument.

[Anonymous No.5295451]

>>5295444
>I've got proof.

Prove it then.

[Anonymous No.5295453]

>>5295423
There absolutely are women on /lit/. Or a number of men whose personalities are so genuinely feminine that their writing exactly resembles that of a woman. In any case, there is no neckbearded troll who could so accurately simulate a woman's persona as is present in so many posts on this board.

[Anonymous No.5295455]

>>5294144
Oh fuck this comment made laugh so hard, I wasn't expecting that. Thanks /lit/

[Anonymous No.5295460]

>>5295403
>But its not just on Tumblr. There are entire rallies of idiots that take to the streets to proudly defend their right to do whatever they want and put themselves in risky situations without being harmed. And if you dare to point out how fucking stupid that is you get called a rape supporter. If there was a 'phone walk' for people who think they should be able to walk through the ghetto using an iphone at 3AM they would be called a bunch of fools and rightly so.
They're absolutely right about that. It's not a woman's responsibility to jump over hoops to avoid being raped.

>Feminists have also done things like protest heavily against the creation of domestic abuse shelters for men or men's rooms on university campuses despite the same facilities existing for women because they cannot fucking stand the idea that men might not be the root of all problems
I've never heard of this happening, and can't find anything on it- please link me to a story. I have, however, heard of women's shelters receiving all sorts of abuse. In fact it was just recently MRAs organized a mass filing of false rape complaints against a rape crisis center. Also, feminists work to challenge the ideas that make predatory assumptions about men and rampant male violence and rape possible

[Anonymous No.5295468]

>>5293974
>I agree, there are far too many female CEOs, presidents, and Best Director Oscar winners. Let's take back the night from the people who took back the night from us.

and then

>>But some feminists on Tumblr are dumb!
>Some people everywhere are dumb, congratulations for realizing that.

[Anonymous No.5295471]

>>5295395
> but the onus is not on women to behave in a way that prevents men from raping them

There was some movie with Omar Epps about a gang kid who gets sent to jail and turns his life around. When he first gets sent into gen pop, there's a white kid getting sent in. The guard asks him if he wants protective custody. The white kid says no. The guard says, "Last chance. I ain't going to fight all of them off of you." The white kid refuses. He goes in. Sharks in a feeding frenzy.

If you want to live outside the law you must be honest. Don't come running to the citizens to risk their necks for you when the other outlaws start feeding on you. It's tough enough protecting fellow citizens. You don't have to make it harder for us.

[Anonymous No.5295483]

>>5295433
>I am fed up of feminists defining any sex they later regret as rape
PROTIP: if somebody later regrets having sex, that is probably because they didn't want to have sex in the first place. and if somebody has sex but doesn't want to have sex, what would you call that?

[Anonymous No.5295491]

>>5293974
I don't like it for the fact that the stupid ones even tumblr tier ones are getting positions of influence. That Anitta chick is a good example. Never played video games, was most likely a con-women, and had no clue what she was talking about. Gets a position in the video gaming industry and will be consulted on video games. I'm not against equal opportunity, but I don't like ideas like gender quotas, suppressing art forms (Video games, literature. movies ect) in the name of some cause of "equality".

[Anonymous No.5295511]

>>5295483
There is a thing that exist as women lying for personal gain you know. Not saying it happens all the time, but there are cases where it does, and it is becoming a real fear for men.

[Anonymous No.5295515]

>>5295491
I am also mad about feminism due to its insanely huge impact on the video gaming industry

[Anonymous No.5295516]

>>5295460
But what do they expect to achieve exactly? Rape culture is entirely mythical, people already know rape is wrong. All these campaigns do nothing since the rapists don't care and all the other guys just get insulted by how they get patronised and treated like children or assumed to be a threat. Hearing over and over again that you support rape culture and are bad for existing just makes people think feminism is out to get them.

It does not help that many feminists seem utterly determined to stretch the definition of rape until it loses absolutely all meaning.

[Anonymous No.5295519]

>>5293974
The problem with feminism is the victim mentality. You see society as oppressing you and you aren't wrong. Society oppresses everyone. It is the nature of human structures. Stop bitching and take control of your own fucking destiny and stop expecting others to do so for you. I think a fundamental linguistic difference between the race issue and the gender issue is there are people are racist and then there is everyone else. It's an opt in to be this. Feminism has become a thing unto itself. You see it as an opt out to a part of your fucking group mind think. It's long since become divorced from fighting misogyny and simply spinning it's wheels creating issues to fight issues. It's just a way to preserve intellectual and emotional immaturity.

[Anonymous No.5295530]

>>5295483
Right, so a guy who wakes up next to a fat or dodgy girl and regrets it he was 'raped'? What about when two drunk people fuck and regret it the next day, did they rape each other?

You cannot just let women declare any sex rape as they see fit, if they agreed to it at the time and they were not forced then they cannot decide later it was illegal and ruin the guys reputation if not his entire life. If you voluntarily choose to have sex it was not rape no matter how much you regret it later, you making a mistake does not make the other person a criminal.

[Anonymous No.5295531]

>>5295471
>If you want to live outside the law you must be honest. Don't come running to the citizens to risk their necks for you when the other outlaws start feeding on you. It's tough enough protecting fellow citizens. You don't have to make it harder for us.
literally what the fuck are you talking about

[Anonymous No.5295542]

>>5295460
>It's not a woman's responsibility to jump over hoops to avoid being raped.
>Individuals are not responsible for their own safety and well being.
The world is a bad place, for women and men alike. I don't get why is so frowned upon to care for women safety, I should be able to walk and talk showing my expensive phone in a bad neighbour, in a perfect world in any case, but how retarded would I look if I insisted that we should: "educate the muggers instead of telling me not to be a special unique snowflake that exposes himself to crime willingly"

[Anonymous No.5295548]

>>5295483
Protip: sometimes in life we have no one to blame but ourselves for our mistakes and regrets. History has instilled in men an innate understanding of this truth, but the concept of accountability is still relatively new to women.

[Anonymous No.5295551]

>>5295395
>You're not a "rape supporter", but the onus is not on women to behave in a way that prevents men from raping them.

I agree, but there is something spurious in the dogma of "don't teach women not to get raped, teach men not to rape!", because men are already taught not to rape. Men already know it's a crime. By suggesting preventative measures for women in the name of protection, you're not a rape apologist. You're a pragmatist. Criminals gonna crime. I agree that stuff like Stuebenville is disgusting, when you have news anchors lamenting the tainted future of those "poor boys"—that is rape apology. That is reprehensible. Advocating precaution however, is not.

Women should be allowed to wear whatever they want and not feel like they're inviting trouble for it. You don't waive your right to safety by wearing "the whore's uniform". However, it's naive to ignore the reality that by doing so, you're endangering yourself, because there are people out there, criminals and rapists specifically, who do not care. They will always flout the law, and take whatever they want. And they will always exist.

[Anonymous No.5295553]

>>5295433
> but at the end of the day you are the one responsible for your own safety
In the sense that you have to live with it, yes.

>and it is not wrong to tell people to act sensibly.
It is wrong to lay the focus on what women have to do to remain safe, and not the behavior and attitudes that necessitate those steps.


>I am fed up of feminists defining any sex they later regret as rape so they can absolve themselves of all responsibility for their own actions. You even get people who think cheating on their boyfriend while drunk makes them a rape victim instead of a horrible person. Then they act surprised and call 'rape culture' when they get dumped.

This is all obviously horrible stuff. I've found the oft made claim of women using rape culture as an "out" to little to no basis in reality.

>I am fed up of feminists defining any sex they later regret as rape so they can absolve themselves of all responsibility for their own actions. You even get people who think cheating on their boyfriend while drunk makes them a rape victim instead of a horrible person. Then they act surprised and call 'rape culture' when they get dumped.

These are transparently terrible things, and they should (and often are, in my experience) be called out when observed

[Anonymous No.5295560]

Is there a particular reason SJW's in general seem unable to understand jokes? I continually see them insist that racial jokes or women jokes or whatever else are wrong and must not be allowed because it perpetuates inequality. Do they actually think making a joke means you are prejudiced or that you agree with what you said in the joke?

[Anonymous No.5295569]

>>5295560
Because they have rejected traditional religion and made equality their god. Blasphemy is always going to piss people off.

[Anonymous No.5295577]

>>5293974
men and women already have equal legal rights

social differences arise because men and women are biologically different and nothing can change this fact

biology =/= patriarchy

[Anonymous No.5295579]

>>5295483
PROTIP; if you don't want to have sex, the burden is on you to express that. Men are not empaths who can instantly divine the inner workings of the female mind with 100% accuracy 100% of the time.

If she says she wants to have sex, gives signals that she wants to have sex, and participates willingly during sex, how is a man supposed to know he's actually raping her? It's bogus. Non-consent can't always be inferred.

>"Well I fucked him but I didn't really want to but I didn't say anything because I thought he might get upset. So it was rape."

Never really had a chance, in that scenario.

[Anonymous No.5295584]

>>5295560
Most humor is harmless and they know it, but they are making an incredible effort to find things that show oppression and stuff to be offended about. If inocent jokes are what's equivalent to systemic discrimination in America, women have it pretty good I think

[Anonymous No.5295599]

>>5295542
nobody exposes themselves to crime willingly jesus christ
and usually rapists are somebody the victim knows. so maybe you're saying that if your rapist is most likely to be somebody you trust, then you shouldn't trust anybody and completely segregate yourself from all men
and then i'm sure then you'd be saying WHY DON'T WOMEN TRUST MEN WHY DO THEY TREAT US ALL LIKE RAPISTS

[Anonymous No.5295602]

>>5295569
I couldn't have said it better myself. Just look at the way they are trying to control the language and words one uses. They are literally trying to create their own form of newspeak.

[Anonymous No.5295609]

>>5294360
Stop talking out of your ass.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE

[Anonymous No.5295612]

>>5295516
>rape culture is a general lack of social knowledge that rape is wrong
No.

>>5295531
>>5295542
This mugging is analogy is always brought up, and it's always bad. The desperateness arising from economic tension is pretty much a fixed effect. Also "irresponsibility" leading to theft involves indiscreet management of one's possessions. Likening rape to this would be comparing a woman to an object ready to be plundered in a vulnerable setting. There's nothing "inevitable" about this happening; it stems from cultural normalization of objectification and suppression of empathy

>>5295560
They're hurtful, almost always unfunny and said for the sake of being edgy, perpetuate racist stereotypes

[Anonymous No.5295615]

>>5295579
so men shouldn't actively seek consent? it's on the woman to say "you're raping me right now"?

[Anonymous No.5295619]

>>5295519
>everyone is oppressed, you see
Easily the most naive post in this thread

[Anonymous No.5295623]

>>5295599
I'm just saying, there's nothing wrong with telling women to be safe. Sadly rape is not going anywhere.

[Anonymous No.5295626]

>>5295615
Yes, it is on you to refuse things you don't want. This literally applies to just about everything. If you are in someone's home and they cook food for you, it is up to you to say you are a vegetarian and that you don't like meat. They aren't oppressing the vegetarian and you aren't being oppressed. You should not expect a society that caters to your every need and whim. This desire is at the source of feminism and the feminists dramatize it and play it up when really it just an extension of the female role where they want other people to take care of them. I would go so far as to say a large portion of feminist theory actually supports gender roles.

[Anonymous No.5295635]

>>5295612
not "normalizing" the issue would be just ignoring a fact of life, sadly there's rape, It'll never go away so acknowledge it and be safe, that's all.

[Anonymous No.5295636]

>not understanding that modern day feminism is just a tool for marketing

[Anonymous No.5295646]

>>5295626
Or maybe it's on you to get consent for things you want, especially when it involves another person.

[Anonymous No.5295651]

>>5295615
If you have any self-respect at all, why wouldn't you? If you don't resist at all, even with words, and you're also conscious, you're basically pretending to consent.

[Anonymous No.5295655]

>>5295619
Easily the most egotistical post in this thread. Your experience is so special and so especially hard that manly men can't possibly understand your oh so difficult struggle. Fuck you. You discredit those who are actually suffering. Certainly there are kinds of over oppression that are especially caustic, but please don't pretend this is the case with women. You are dramatizing being uncomfortable. Do you know why alot of men don't take you seriously? Because any man worth his salt simply grits his teeth and works through it and then sees that trial as proving his character. You want to be coddled like a child and housewife.

[Anonymous No.5295656]

>>5295651
women pressured into sex often feel unsafe (physically) to say no. if they are already being sexually abused it's not too far a leap to physical abuse.