"Even if I say yes, it doesn't mean I mean yes" - Feminists
Options
Comments
-
Hmmmm, stupidity at its finest...
Don't be surprised if somehow this DOES get passed that y means n or whatever the h3ll they talking about....... -
smh... so "yes" means "no" and "no" means "no".... yet chicks hate rejection....
-
Bruh, I honestly have no clue whatsoever about this feminist thing or trend that has been going on.
-
1. the one when those beautiful educated nubian queens was on. Talking about it's hard to find a black man that's on their same level(or above) in society. If they do find one they are either ? , intimidated by a successful woman, don't mess with sistas, or playas who don't want to get married etc etc. Women don't really need men anymore, we're taking over, black men don't know how to treat black women but white men do blah blah blah OH LOOK, IT'S STEVE HARVY!!. (You know witch one i'm talking about.)desertrain10 wrote: »BARON_$AMEDI wrote: »@desertrain10
I have three questions.
1. Where was all the "sane" black feminist when the "extreme" black feminist went on national T.V and embarrassed the movement and our race AT THE SAME DAMN TIME!!? Like somebody said already, didn't see too many of these "sane" black feminist denouncing them. We mostly seen "you go girl!, talk to'em!!!". Now this was the worst blow to "SANE" black feminist ever. How come you guys didn't ban together and expose these lunatic THOTS in "sane" feminist clothing? where's the "sane" black feminist N.B.C special?
2. Since a lot of positive gentlemen(such as myself) have a lot of the same views(some are completely stupid though) on female equality as you. Can a male be a feminist too?
3. How would you feel about men starting a "masculinist" movement. It would focus on how men are
- Treated unfairly by women when it comes to paying the bill/tab on a date
- Treated unfairly during a pregnancy and having little say in the matter
- Treated unfairly by the law compared to women
- Paying more for our car insurance than women
- Treated unfairly in a fight with a women(physical, mental, or emotional)
- Treated unfairly when it comes to child custody and child support
- Treated unfairly when it comes to sexual advances in any form towards a woman depending on how she's feeling
- Looked down upon by most women for not having a car or not having their own place
- Expected to keep a cool head while woman act a complete fool
- Expected to treat a woman like gold, chase them, and try to impress them instead of it being the other way around
- Painted as cheaters and dead beat parents. While females are painted as fragile victims and the strong/loyal half
- Having our maturity lowered beneath a woman's level of maturity. When we see everyday that this is far from the truth.
1. You have to talk to NBC and the corporate media about that...and what television specials are u referring to?
2. Why not
3. Sure...Though I feel some of your grievance conflict with my own considering I believe a woman should have the right to terminate an early pregnancy without the consent of the father. But we do share a common foe: patriarchy
2. I've often wondered why there's never any "straight" men involved with the movement. Plenty of guys(such as myself) think women getting paid less is beyond stupid amongst other things. I guess female empowerment can only be given by other women...... ... .. I guess fathers, brothers, or strong male figures in women's lives are not enough empowerment.
3. Wow, so what happened to the equality here? So how do you feel about a father choosing not to take care of the child or pay child support? It's weird how the "it takes two to make a baby" argument goes out the window depending on how the woman feels at the time.
I was dropping playful positive R.N.S in my other post. But I stand by my view on feminist logic. It's really about how women "feel" at a certain time and moment. Here's just a few examples:
- A guy you find attractive flirts with you(to any degree) it's cool. Ugly dude does this it will turn into harassment. He's thirsty, creepy, gets no ? etc etc.
- A man calls a woman who is doing hoish/slutty things all the time a ? /? , he's a woman hater. A woman does this same thing even if the woman hasn't really showed these qualities and nothing is said(a woman will call another woman a ? , ? , nasty, and a ? before a man will). But here goes the funny part. If a woman doesn't like this particular woman then those men aren't woman bashers/haters all of a sudden.
- Destiny's child makes a video with buff oiled up half naked gyrating men, not one complaint. A male does this with females in his video. He's a nasty misogynists who doesn't respect women.
- A man makes a song about no good women and how he craps on them. Depending on if the female likes the song/artist or not will decide it's fate as women bashing or "dats my song!!!!!!"(starts twerking).
-
Of Course it's about how women feelFeminist Ethics is an attempt to revise, reformulate, or rethink traditional ethics to the extent it depreciates or devalues women's moral experience. Among others, feminist philosopher Alison Jaggar faults traditional ethics for letting women down in five related ways. First, it shows less concern for women's as opposed to men's issues and interests. Second, traditional ethics views as trivial the moral issues that arise in the so-called private world, the realm in which women do housework and take care of children, the infirm, and the elderly. Third, it implies that, in general, women are not as morally mature or deep as men. Fourth, traditional ethics overrates culturally masculine traits like “independence, autonomy, intellect, will, wariness, hierarchy, ? , culture, transcendence, product, asceticism, war, and death,” while it underrates culturally feminine traits like “interdependence, community, connection, sharing, emotion, body, trust, absence of hierarchy, nature, immanence, process, joy, peace, and life.” Fifth, and finally, it favors “male” ways of moral reasoning that emphasize rules, rights, universality, and impartiality over “female” ways of moral reasoning that emphasize relationships, responsibilities, particularity, and partiality
-
Feminist =/= feminist extremist. I think that's the overall point here.
Although, I must say that I've never met a feminist that ACTUALLY wanted women to enjoy rights equal to men, in all arenas. Political, economic, social, etc. -
Shizlansky wrote: »Women are taking over this country.
Smmfh
I was gonna read the rest of the pages on this thread but no need after reading this.
This is true and its going to continue because the masses follow the norm, ? help us if we ask them to change they ways. -
And I wish six would stop flagging people and type why she disagrees.
-
mryounggun wrote: »Feminist =/= feminist extremist. I think that's the overall point here.
Although, I must say that I've never met a feminist that ACTUALLY wanted women to enjoy rights equal to men, in all arenas. Political, economic, social, etc.
The problem is there nothing that really dictates that those feminists are extremists. The "reasonable" feminists don't really do anything denounce the so called extreme views and in many cases show support them. It's not like these "feminist extremist" are some fringe group we never hear about. There views are just as widely spread as the so called reasonable views. It's not like the the extremist views are somehow isolated among extremists. Plenty of the reasonable feminist share some of the extreme views. Really there is no such thing as extreme feminists given that their portion of the feminism umbrella is just as prevalent as any other. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »Feminist =/= feminist extremist. I think that's the overall point here.
Although, I must say that I've never met a feminist that ACTUALLY wanted women to enjoy rights equal to men, in all arenas. Political, economic, social, etc.
The problem is there nothing that really dictates that those feminists are extremists. The "reasonable" feminists don't really do anything denounce the so called extreme views and in many cases show support them. It's not like these "feminist extremist" are some fringe group we never hear about. There views are just as widely spread as the so called reasonable views. It's not like the the extremist views are somehow isolated among extremists. Plenty of the reasonable feminist share some of the extreme views. Really there is no such thing as extreme feminists given that their portion of the feminism umbrella is just as prevalent as any other.
I don't really have any evidence that this statement is true. I'd go so far as to say that you probably don't either. What are we basing this on?
Not that it is or isn't true. I'm just not really comfortable making that grand a statement with no evidence. -
ThePayPalPimp. wrote: »And I wish six would stop flagging people and type why she disagrees.
She has no good refutations only feelings -
on the i.c. men feel like they're being oppressed by women and militant feminists pose a real threat to their lives. it's absurd.
tell that to any man who has to suffer under the family court system. or pay child support for children that are not his or pay alimony to a functional adult. or be forced to be a father to children he did not want In the first place
None of those problems have anything to do with feminists or feminism. It's actually quite the opposite if you think about it.
You guys seem to want to continue having a patriarchal society but get all sad when society forces you to do some patriarchal ? . -
mryounggun wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »Feminist =/= feminist extremist. I think that's the overall point here.
Although, I must say that I've never met a feminist that ACTUALLY wanted women to enjoy rights equal to men, in all arenas. Political, economic, social, etc.
The problem is there nothing that really dictates that those feminists are extremists. The "reasonable" feminists don't really do anything denounce the so called extreme views and in many cases show support them. It's not like these "feminist extremist" are some fringe group we never hear about. There views are just as widely spread as the so called reasonable views. It's not like the the extremist views are somehow isolated among extremists. Plenty of the reasonable feminist share some of the extreme views. Really there is no such thing as extreme feminists given that their portion of the feminism umbrella is just as prevalent as any other.
I don't really have any evidence that this statement is true. I'd go so far as to say that you probably don't either. What are we basing this on?
Not that it is or isn't true. I'm just not really comfortable making that grand a statement with no evidence.
It's just my general impression. That's all any of us are giving because none of us are putting up any stats or scientific evidence to back what we're saying. However, I don't see where more reasonable feminist stances are being pushed any harder than the so called extremist ones. I also don't see where any of the reasonable feminists are publicly denouncing the stances of the extremists. So if I'm not seeing either of those things, I'm not sure why I should consider the views of the "extremists" to be extreme. I think the stance that men don't have any say whatsoever in the aborting of a child that is partially theirs is a bit extreme. Yet, desertrain believes that and considers herself to not be an extremists. So you guys keep saying feminism =/= feminist extremist, but I don't even see any real delineation that allows for a feminist to be isolated in the extreme category. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »Feminist =/= feminist extremist. I think that's the overall point here.
Although, I must say that I've never met a feminist that ACTUALLY wanted women to enjoy rights equal to men, in all arenas. Political, economic, social, etc.
The problem is there nothing that really dictates that those feminists are extremists. The "reasonable" feminists don't really do anything denounce the so called extreme views and in many cases show support them. It's not like these "feminist extremist" are some fringe group we never hear about. There views are just as widely spread as the so called reasonable views. It's not like the the extremist views are somehow isolated among extremists. Plenty of the reasonable feminist share some of the extreme views. Really there is no such thing as extreme feminists given that their portion of the feminism umbrella is just as prevalent as any other.
I don't really have any evidence that this statement is true. I'd go so far as to say that you probably don't either. What are we basing this on?
Not that it is or isn't true. I'm just not really comfortable making that grand a statement with no evidence.
It's just my general impression. That's all any of us are giving because none of us are putting up any stats or scientific evidence to back what we're saying. However, I don't see where more reasonable feminist stances are being pushed any harder than the so called extremist ones. I also don't see where any of the reasonable feminists are publicly denouncing the stances of the extremists. So if I'm not seeing either of those things, I'm not sure why I should consider the views of the "extremists" to be extreme. I think the stance that men don't have any say whatsoever in the aborting of a child that is partially theirs is a bit extreme. Yet, desertrain believes that and considers herself to not be an extremists. So you guys keep saying feminism =/= feminist extremist, but I don't even see any real delineation that allows for a feminist to be isolated in the extreme category.
But can we really say that because we don't see the non-extreme feminist standing up and denouncing the extremists, that all feminists are extremists, by default? I think that's the conclusion that a lazy mind comes up with. You better than that, B.
I'd just as soon assume that feminists want to present a united front, like other social groups, and don't want to public denounce one of their own, even if they feel like they are out of order. That happens ALL the time. Not saying that this is the reason we don't hear non-extreme feminists standing up, just saying that it's not as easy as 'non-extreme feminist don't stand up and denounce the extremists, therefore they aren't extremist and feminism as a movement is just like this'. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »Feminist =/= feminist extremist. I think that's the overall point here.
Although, I must say that I've never met a feminist that ACTUALLY wanted women to enjoy rights equal to men, in all arenas. Political, economic, social, etc.
The problem is there nothing that really dictates that those feminists are extremists. The "reasonable" feminists don't really do anything denounce the so called extreme views and in many cases show support them. It's not like these "feminist extremist" are some fringe group we never hear about. There views are just as widely spread as the so called reasonable views. It's not like the the extremist views are somehow isolated among extremists. Plenty of the reasonable feminist share some of the extreme views. Really there is no such thing as extreme feminists given that their portion of the feminism umbrella is just as prevalent as any other.
I don't really have any evidence that this statement is true. I'd go so far as to say that you probably don't either. What are we basing this on?
Not that it is or isn't true. I'm just not really comfortable making that grand a statement with no evidence.
It's just my general impression. That's all any of us are giving because none of us are putting up any stats or scientific evidence to back what we're saying. However, I don't see where more reasonable feminist stances are being pushed any harder than the so called extremist ones. I also don't see where any of the reasonable feminists are publicly denouncing the stances of the extremists. So if I'm not seeing either of those things, I'm not sure why I should consider the views of the "extremists" to be extreme. I think the stance that men don't have any say whatsoever in the aborting of a child that is partially theirs is a bit extreme. Yet, desertrain believes that and considers herself to not be an extremists. So you guys keep saying feminism =/= feminist extremist, but I don't even see any real delineation that allows for a feminist to be isolated in the extreme category.
In the coursework and curricula -
mryounggun wrote: »But can we really say that because we don't see the non-extreme feminist standing up and denouncing the extremists, that all feminists are extremists, by default? I think that's the conclusion that a lazy mind comes up with. You better than that, B.
I'd just as soon assume that feminists want to present a united front, like other social groups, and don't want to public denounce one of their own, even if they feel like they are out of order. That happens ALL the time. Not saying that this is the reason we don't hear non-extreme feminists standing up, just saying that it's not as easy as 'non-extreme feminist don't stand up and denounce the extremists, therefore they aren't extremist and feminism as a movement is just like this'.
I'm not saying all feminists are extremists. I'm saying that I don't see where there is a basis to define one feminist as an extremist when parts or her philosophies are intertwined in the beliefs held by plenty of other feminists that aren't considered extremists. When you call someone an extremists, you're basically saying that their platform is way on the periphery of what the movement stands for. However, I don't see where that's the case with feminists.
And I'm not saying that feminists not denouncing extremists means that all feminists are extremists. I'm saying, I don't see how we're supposed to believe that these views are held only by extremists if the supposed nonextremists aren't doing or saying anything to distance them from those views. The average Republican might be racist as ? , but even the average Republican knows enough to distance himself from the KKK or other extremist groups. When you stand for something, you want to do everything to make sure that something comes to fruition. If cutting of the part of your group that would hold you back from that goal would further your cause, then you would do that. No group is going to embrace a segment that is hurting the cause. That doesn't even make sense. And if you do go that route, then you don't have the right to complain when people characterize your group by those extreme elements because by refusing to distance yourself from those elements your are effectively embracing those criticisms.
In the coursework and curricula
You're kinda making my point for me. If I have to take a class on feminism to hear the positive points of the movement strongly espoused, but on any given day I can hear some harpy bashing all men. The extremist views clearly aren't all that less prevalent than the nonextremist views. -
Have you guys actually ran into these issues in real life?
-
What issues?
If you're asking if we've run into women with crazy philosophies that consider themselves feminists in real life, the answer is yes. If you're asking if I've ever had a woman make my life hell by trying to throw those crazy philosophies on me, the answer is no. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »mryounggun wrote: »But can we really say that because we don't see the non-extreme feminist standing up and denouncing the extremists, that all feminists are extremists, by default? I think that's the conclusion that a lazy mind comes up with. You better than that, B.
I'd just as soon assume that feminists want to present a united front, like other social groups, and don't want to public denounce one of their own, even if they feel like they are out of order. That happens ALL the time. Not saying that this is the reason we don't hear non-extreme feminists standing up, just saying that it's not as easy as 'non-extreme feminist don't stand up and denounce the extremists, therefore they aren't extremist and feminism as a movement is just like this'.
I'm not saying all feminists are extremists. I'm saying that I don't see where there is a basis to define one feminist as an extremist when parts or her philosophies are intertwined in the beliefs held by plenty of other feminists that aren't considered extremists. When you call someone an extremists, you're basically saying that their platform is way on the periphery of what the movement stands for. However, I don't see where that's the case with feminists.
And I'm not saying that feminists not denouncing extremists means that all feminists are extremists. I'm saying, I don't see how we're supposed to believe that these views are held only by extremists if the supposed nonextremists aren't doing or saying anything to distance them from those views. The average Republican might be racist as ? , but even the average Republican knows enough to distance himself from the KKK or other extremist groups. When you stand for something, you want to do everything to make sure that something comes to fruition. If cutting of the part of your group that would hold you back from that goal would further your cause, then you would do that. No group is going to embrace a segment that is hurting the cause. That doesn't even make sense. And if you do go that route, then you don't have the right to complain when people characterize your group by those extreme elements because by refusing to distance yourself from those elements your are effectively embracing those criticisms.
In the coursework and curricula
You're kinda making my point for me. If I have to take a class on feminism to hear the positive points of the movement strongly espoused, but on any given day I can hear some harpy bashing all men. The extremist views clearly aren't all that less prevalent than the nonextremist views.
Maybe this is where we disagree. Where do you see feminist extremists being embraced by other feminists? I've never, ever seen that. I've only ever seen feminist extremists be embraced by other extremists. -
on the i.c. men feel like they're being oppressed by women and militant feminists pose a real threat to their lives. it's absurd.
tell that to any man who has to suffer under the family court system. or pay child support for children that are not his or pay alimony to a functional adult. or be forced to be a father to children he did not want In the first place
None of those problems have anything to do with feminists or feminism. It's actually quite the opposite if you think about it.
You guys seem to want to continue having a patriarchal society but get all sad when society forces you to do some patriarchal ? .
are you serious if those laws were supportive of patriarchy then they would not disadvantage men the way they do. before the feminist began their ? divorce was at it's low. and children had two parents living with them. so there is a connection between those laws and the feminist movement -
That's correlative not causal
Women also made less and could not support themselves before
But once again it's only correlative not causal -
mryounggun wrote: »
Maybe this is where we disagree. Where do you see feminist extremists being embraced by other feminists? I've never, ever seen that. I've only ever seen feminist extremists be embraced by other extremists.
If you're not denouncing, you're embracing. To embrace something you don't have to get on a mountain and scream your support for all to hear. You only have to include it in what you're doing. Hell, the term "extreme feminist" by itself does just that. You can't say you don't embrace them, but also acknowledge they are part of your movement.
-
That's correlative not causal
Women also made less and could not support themselves before
But once again it's only correlative not causal
that should be enough -
If you look at the history of feminists from the early days, they always relied on half truths.
They talk about how much agency women lacked but fail to mention the role the temperance movement played in getting alcohol banned.
They want to talk about voting rights but they don't want to mention how even other women didn't want suffrage because they didn't want to be required to sign up for the draft, which is still the cost for males today.
Feminists want to talk about how women were treated as property but they don't mention how husbands were responsible for the shared property as well as the property that exclusively belonged to his wife that she was under no obligation to support the needs of the family with.
I can go on and on but feminists literally rely on people not knowing history in order to talk their ? .
Funny enough, none of it still has anything to do with Black females. -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bf4yHgXdjPY
http://youtu.be/7BJEYqylhEk