Does True Feminism Exist Anymore?

[Chemaki]

See, this is the kind of nonsense feminism peddles. Their gender is, and should be, utterly irrelevant to any consideration you give them.

So, let's have body fat percentiles that aren't based on healthy levels of male body fat, but healthy levels of body fat for each sex. Women naturally have a higher % of body fat, so they should have more leeway.

Or, perhaps, have an average between the two sexes (i.e. body fat percentage is higher), where slightly overweight men can also join the Marines.

It kind of makes you want to stand up to the lot and tell them:
"You want to be equal? Than man up and realize that life isn't fair. And no one has any obligation to make life fair for you just because you are female. We only have the obligation and enjoyment of making it as unfair for you as it is for everyone else."

I think this sums up perfectly the opinion of many posters in this thread:

"I'm not sexist, I believe in equality; now let's use some sexist slurs to get my point across."

[Dakini]

The MRA's have raised funds for domestic abuse shelters for men.

You know, I've heard this claim, but I've never actually seen any evidence for it...

[Orham]

Some men are born naturally fatter than most women. Should we not compensate when they have more fat because they are males?

See, this is the kind of nonsense feminism peddles. Their gender is, and should be, utterly irrelevant to any consideration you give them.

Oh, they have a higher body fat and it caused them to fail. Sucks for them. They can go hang out with the other fat people we failed.
As opposed to

"I demand compensations because I was born with a higher fat index."
"We fail males for that too."
"THAT DOESNT COUNT! PATRIARCHY!!!! You are oppressing women"
"No, we're telling people who are too fat to be marines that they cannot be marines. This one is a woman. She has an abnormally low fat index for a woman, but nonetheless, we let her into the corps. Because she isn't fat. Do you get it yet?"

I was looking for something more along the lines of how accounting for the modest difference in body fat mass between male and female candidates of comparable readiness on all other measures is problematic from a performance standpoint, and ceding that it's possible that the present compensation (if one is justified at all) is excessive.

If that wasn't clear, I certainly hope it is now.

[Purpelia]

I think this sums up perfectly the opinion of many posters in this thread:

"I'm not sexist, I believe in equality; now let's use some sexist slurs to get my point across."

You can't be picky with equality. It includes equal opportunities to be offended by people.

[Dakini]

I think this sums up perfectly the opinion of many posters in this thread:

"I'm not sexist, I believe in equality; now let's use some sexist slurs to get my point across."

You can't be picky with equality. It includes equal opportunities to be offended by people.

Ah, so one should use racist slurs to express their anti-racist views too?

Makes perfect sense. Totally.

[Orham]

I prefer grow up to man up. Man up carries sexist connotations that are used to prevent males expressing individuality.

Not whining about nonsense and demanding special treatment isn't being a man, it's being an adult.

Ordinarily I'd agree with you. But the subtle comedic undertone of the post demanded it. As in, the undertone of: "You want to be treated like a man? So man up!"

It is funny though, how feminists are the biggest argument ever in favor of treating women like children. If the shoe fits. Maybe women should be a bit more annoyed about how they are "represented" by these petulant brats.

The issue as far as I figure is that most women don't care about what these brats say because it either favors them (quotas and such) or does not effect them directly. That's the down side of being people too. People are idiots.

WHY?!!! I asked a question, leaving the possibility that I may be looking at things wrong. What did I say to elicit this sort of a response?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Equality = Equalism
Feminism =/= Equalism
Feminism's name by itself gives the perception of entitlement, whilst Equalism considers that no one is entitled. That it the key difference.

Feminism gives the perception of entitlement only to the ignorant, as you aptly displayed yourself to be, by demonstrating a lack of understanding of the word "synonym".

Watch it. Keep the gloves up. (consider this an unofficial warning and/or a friendly reminder to back away a bit from the flaming fine line)

[Anubas]

feminism exists and people who claim most or all feminists are misandrist bastards need to spend less time on tumblr. quotas have good intentions. however, there has to be better ways to get more women and minorities into different career fields.

[Orham]

feminism exists and people who claim most or all feminists are misandrist bastards need to spend less time on tumblr. quotas have good intentions. however, there has to be better ways to get more women and minorities into different career fields.

Can we get a "for instance"? Not that I'm advocating for quotas or anything, but I'd like to see what you've got in mind.

[Purpelia]

You can't be picky with equality. It includes equal opportunities to be offended by people.

Ah, so one should use racist slurs to express their anti-racist views too?

Makes perfect sense. Totally.

Should no, can yes. Life sucks. Life ain't fair. Being equal does not mean you get things to be otherwise. It means you get to experience the same sucking and unfairness as everyone else.

WHY?!!! I asked a question, leaving the possibility that I may be looking at things wrong. What did I say to elicit this sort of a response?

You didn't. I was responding to someone completely different than you. It's right there in the quote tag.

[Ostroeuropa]

feminism exists and people who claim most or all feminists are misandrist bastards need to spend less time on tumblr. quotas have good intentions. however, there has to be better ways to get more women and minorities into different career fields.

Can we get a "for instance"? Not that I'm advocating for quotas or anything, but I'd like to see what you've got in mind.

Raising paternity leave to equal maternity leave will make Males raising children less of an unrealistic proposal for most families, leading to more women in the workforce over time.

[Nervium]

Oh god. Morgoroth returned.

[Nervium]

Anyway, there are many forms of feminism, and the most prevalent today seems to be Third Wave Feminism, also, radical feminist is not an insult, it only discribes a different strain of feminism.

MRA's are a joke.

That is all.

[Dakini]

Ah, so one should use racist slurs to express their anti-racist views too?

Makes perfect sense. Totally.

Should no, can yes. Life sucks. Life ain't fair. Being equal does not mean you get things to be otherwise. It means you get to experience the same sucking and unfairness as everyone else.

Ah, is this the part where you tell me that the n-word is equivalent to cracker because clearly all slurs are equal and have equal power because we live in a fantasy world where perfect equality has been achieved?

[Divair2]

Should no, can yes. Life sucks. Life ain't fair. Being equal does not mean you get things to be otherwise. It means you get to experience the same sucking and unfairness as everyone else.

Ah, is this the part where you tell me that the n-word is equivalent to cracker because clearly all slurs are equal and have equal power because we live in a fantasy world where perfect equality has been achieved?

Ah, but clearly only whites can be racist!
*nod*

[Orham]

Raising paternity leave to equal maternity leave will make Males raising children less of an unrealistic proposal for most families, leading to more women in the workforce over time.

I can't see the harm in making paternity leave comparable to maternity leave, the fact that they're different strikes me as a residual effect of the declining notion that women are homemakers and men are breadwinners. I don't know how dramatic an impact that would have on female work participation in fields which have generally been primarily occupations men have populated, but then I don't think that all fields which are that way have become so as a consequence of sexism. It may simply be a statistically significant difference in the amount of interest in a given field. It's a hypothesis worth examining further, anyway.

That's not to say that sexism in hiring/firing/promoting doesn't exist, or that it isn't a problem, but rather that is to say that it isn't necessarily the sole cause (or even the primary cause) of some disproportional distributions. Each would have to be taken on a case-by-case basis.

Now about those readiness standards: I wasn't saying I want special treatment, I was asking if it's reasonable to account for a biological difference which is just the result of my sex provided my performance isn't inhibited by that difference. I'd still have to run as fast, complete exercises a standard amount of times in a set duration, and so forth. I'm open to all of that, Occupied Deutschland made a really good point. I'd really only be asking for the assessment to account for the fact that I've grown breasts, hips, and have a slightly thicker fat layer under my skin than most males when evaluating my physical fitness. The problem isn't that I'm too fat to be able to perform as effectively, the problem is that I'm carrying more fat than males of comparable BMIs. Unless my performance is inhibited by that difference, I don't see why it should be an issue.

[Dakini]

Can we get a "for instance"? Not that I'm advocating for quotas or anything, but I'd like to see what you've got in mind.

Raising paternity leave to equal maternity leave will make Males raising children less of an unrealistic proposal for most families, leading to more women in the workforce over time.

...not exactly. In countries that already have excellent parental leave programs allowing both parents to take leave, women still aren't making all the inroads...

Granted, the fact that in the USA there is no requirement for employers to give maternal or parental leave at all probably doesn't help women who are trying to build careers.

[Dakini]

Ah, is this the part where you tell me that the n-word is equivalent to cracker because clearly all slurs are equal and have equal power because we live in a fantasy world where perfect equality has been achieved?

Ah, but clearly only whites can be racist!
*nod*

Obviously.

[Ammar]

There is no such thing. Ever heard of 'No True Scotsman'?

[Divair2]

Ah, but clearly only whites can be racist!
*nod*

Obviously.

We should check our privileges.

[Orham]

Raising paternity leave to equal maternity leave will make Males raising children less of an unrealistic proposal for most families, leading to more women in the workforce over time.

...not exactly. In countries that already have excellent parental leave programs allowing both parents to take leave, women still aren't making all the inroads...

Granted, the fact that in the USA there is no requirement for employers to give maternal or parental leave at all probably doesn't help women who are trying to build careers.

Which countries specifically did you have in mind?

[Purpelia]

Should no, can yes. Life sucks. Life ain't fair. Being equal does not mean you get things to be otherwise. It means you get to experience the same sucking and unfairness as everyone else.

Ah, is this the part where you tell me that the n-word is equivalent to cracker because clearly all slurs are equal and have equal power because we live in a fantasy world where perfect equality has been achieved?

I don't even know what cracker means. But yes, all slurs are equal. They are just words used to insult people that only have power to do so if you feel insulted by it. Sticks and stones and all that. Or if you want to be less politically correct "suck it up". You did earn the equal right to be told to do so after all.

[Greater-London]

Well it depends what you count as feminism.

If you mean the belief that there should be equality between genders then yes, I'd say MOST people are feminists and subscribe to that view point.

It starts to get complicated when you take into account 'feminist' radical's who dislike men or think women should be treated more favorably than men. These are people who as self described feminists but its a dubious claim as they don't support equality between genders which I've always thought to be the main argument within feminism.

[Ostroeuropa]

In this thread, feminists.
http://factcheckme.wordpress.com/2010/0 ... -violence/

Take a look at the comments here.
This is a patter repeated across all their little hugboxes.
Either you "good" feminists are sure being a quiet bunch, or this misandry is the norm.


Here are some choice quotes, emphasis added. Trigger warnings for victims of domestic abuse abound.

Another thought occured to me… men will fight tooth and nail for even the most basic facts about their worldwide infamy being made known. They have a vested interest in always counterattacking, accusing women of being as violent as they are. Remember, men don’t see women, they see reflections of their imaged idea of women.
I don’t think men have the slightest clue as to how violent they appear to be to women. They seem so self-centered, so oblivious, so sexually obsessed, one wonders if they are ever human.

The irony here is palpable ofcourse. They aren't fighting tooth and nail to prevent basic facts about domestic violence being known, it's the feminists doing that as regards male victims.
Here is an example.

I can’t watch the videos because I’m at work… but I can well imagine how it goes.

Possibly my favourite thing about MRAs is how they seem to be convinced that they have some hugely groundbreaking, compelling argument, when a) I could come up with better at 8 years old and b) we’ve heard it all before. If there are any MRAs reading, I shall repeat, for clarity. WE’VE HEARD IT ALL BEFORE – it was bullshit then, and it’s still bullshit now.

Whenever women try to discuss domestic violence, indignant men force their way into the discourse and say “MEN ARE ABUSED TOO!!!”, because as always, their attitude is ME ME ME ME ME WHAT ABOUT ME, and their theoretical abuse of men (which they personally, have invariably never been a victim of) is deemed so important that it needs to be acknowledged and placed at the top of the agenda whenever domestic violence is discussed, far above the REAL LIFE ABUSE of millions, if not billions of women, daily. In Europe, 1 in 4 women (at least) are the victims of domestic violence. Women are killed every single day by abuse in their own domestic environment, and I’m expected to give a shit because a man got hit and his manly pride is hurt? Because, lets be honest, since droves of men aren’t fearing for their lives at the hands of violent women, that is exactly what it boils down to. Give me a god damn break.

Their attitude isn't "Me me me what about me." it's "Why the fuck are you pretending to be special, you entitled asshole. It's happening to all of us regardless of gender so lets focus on that." but nope. Telling feminists that it isn't all about women makes them hear "It's all about me."
Narcissism. Plain and simple.
The underlined/bolded is an example of them being callous to the problems of others. When I say I hate feminists and think anyone who identifies as one is either evil unempathetic scum, or dangerously deluded to what being a feminist actually means, this is the type of person i'm talking about.

Spoilering this one. The italicized is nonsense perpetuated by the idealogues. It has no basis in reality.
It is also fucking HILARIOUS.
Like, HILARIOUS, coming from a feminist. These people have absolutely no sense of introspection.

what they really dont want to diuscuss is the fact that when men are abused in intimate relationships, including rape, its almost always BY OTHER MEN, not by women. but you know, the MRAs and the “faggots” dont really get along too well, and the MRAs dont want to get real about mens violence at all, even when it victimizes other men. they would rather focus on what *women* are doing to them, even when statistically and realistically, it doesnt even compare. why would that be? this is not a rhetorical question.

and you are right sam, about the “manly pride” being hurt, as well as their sense of “whats fair!” yeah, its not fair for a woman to hit you. but it doesnt make it “sexist”, and it also doesnt make it DV. DV is a cycle of abuse that escalates over time. DV is a pattern, not an event. if my partner hit me once, or i hit him, neither would be DV, although either one of us would be more than justified in leaving the relationship over it. but teh mens like to pretend that they are victims, even when (for example) they piss off their female partners to the breaking point and she slaps him, or even goes fully off on his lying/cheating/gambling ass (or whatever). THIS IS NOT THE SAME, people. cant you see that? all people have their breaking point, and women are people. (yes, they are). ask a self-reported male “victim” of DV whether that wasnt the exact scenario in which they were hit. the answer is ALWAYS YES (if the men are being honest). male-victims of DV are a fucking urband legend. we have all heard they exist and have yet to meet one. all in all, i am surprised that women dont hit thier male partners MORE. FFS. look what men are doing. they fucking deserve a wakeup call of some sort.

even if it were a pattern, where a woman consistently battered a man, men have financial and social resources to start over, when their relationships fail. so true DV is a pattern of escalating abuse that exists within a framework of institutionalized misogyny, where women are dependant on the very men who abuse them. very often the abuser sees to it personally that she is dependant on him in every way, by isolating her and controlling the finances etc. to the extent that the physical and social dynamics of it are not the same, its not the fucking same. to call what men experience “at the hands of women” DV is a fucking insult. even if they get beaten to a fucking pulp, all the time. and they hardly ever do (except by other men).

1st underlined bolded.
Hit women when they have it coming. You heard it from the feminists folks. That'll make it not domestic violence. It's about equality, right?

2nd underlined bolded.
An urban legend. Who's covering up and denying what again?

3rd underlined bolded.
Males deserve to be beaten by women. Ok.

4th underlined bolded (May seem like a continuation. It isn't. Seperate the paragraphs.)
This isn't true of all males. Many lack the social and financial capital, but fuck them because they are males and don't matter.

That one was a bit twitch-inducing to get through.

oh, and i am a total asshole for not mentioning in the article that one thing that makes women so vulnerable is that they are the primary caretakers of kids. it makes it that much harder to leave, because they dont want to leave their kids with an abuser so they have to have an escape plan AND the cash on hand for not just one person but two, three, TEN or whatever to include all their kids. and if women are primary caretakers, their earning potential is probably in the toilet as compared to the noncaretaking partner, who has been increasing his earning potential the whole fucking time by remaining in the labor market or going to school etc.

i will do an edit/update this weekend to address the kids.

You're shitting me. This entire one is just ridiculous for the complete lack of introspection it reveals. Anyone who understands what the line is about child custody will understand how this kind of shit is just breathtaking.

sheila, i love your point about men seeing their own image mirrored back to them. its something i have been thinking about ever since the first time you mentioned it here. they certainly appear to be oblivious as to how violent they are, and about how *they* appear to *us.* one interpretation of that is that they are lying about both things, and that they really do know. i mean really. how could you not see whats real? they have to be lying, right? these MRA fuckwits seem to be just pure evil, and the mindfuck is so obvious and yet so complete, it really does feel like a lie.

then, i wonder what if they are telling the truth about what the world really looks like, to them? how literally insane would they have to be, to not see whats real? the implications of that (that they really are insane) settle in and things look really scary. they are in charge of everything, and they are insane?

so are those the choices then? they are either liars, or crazy? which brings me to your question: why would any adult woman choose to live with them? the obvious answer is that most women, worldwide, dont have a choice. as for western-privileged straight women like myself…well i will have to think about that one for awhile. but i am sure its…complicated.

Hey, it's my signature again!
We're not the problem! It's EVERYONE ELSES view that is the problem! Even though we're the minority!
Politicized Narcissism.
Men are either liars or insane. Also, tacit lesbian seperatism.

i have been thinking about the ways het women spend their money, since the first time you mentioned it here. we spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars a year on products and clothing in order just to “pass” as women in this doodbro culture. with compound interest, this would amount to hundreds of thousands lost to our retirement funds. money thats spent and we will never see it again, and for what? seriously. women have less disposable income than men do, and we have a hundred more ways to spend it. this is a disaster in the making, and one we participate in daily. thing is, its mandatory. its the cost of doing business, if you will. and it costs women so much more, in every way.

It isn't mandatory you deluded idiots. It may be mandatory if you don't wear makeup and then get all butthurt about a PARTICULAR man not wanting to fuck you anymore, but just because you don't get what you want doesn't mean that you have to wear makeup. This is a problem absolutely fucking rife with feminists. They think that unless they get absolutely everything their way, they are being oppressed.
Don't wear makeup, and you will still be able to find men willing to be with you. Oh, you don't think they are good enough? Well choose.
No. That isn't oppression you completely insane asshole.

I can't read any further.
I can't do it anymore. I can't pretend that whenever some normal person identifies as feminist I don't see someone lending these blatant fuckwits credibility, and completely undermining gender equality. All of you are responsible for letting these idiots think they are far more numerous than they actually are. This is what feminism looks like when it gathers in one place to talk to itself in a hugbox. This is what they actually think.
Do any of you """"""Feminists"""""" actually bother going to places that house exclusively other feminists?
Did you think it might be worth a try to see if you actually understand what you are talking about?

Yes. I have a personal bias. And a lot of you know why. So maybe you should consider why feminists don't seem at all goddamned interested in making their movement a place where domestically abused males will feel comfortable. When you call yourself a feminist, you are making me worried "Oh shit. This person is gonna say shit like i had it coming. Or they are going to deny it happened and call me a liar. Maybe they accept it happened but think I don't matter because I have a dick."
it isn't nice. And when you then turn out to be normal people i'm stuck questioning, why the fuck would you freak people out like that. CONSTANTLY.
I'm on edge around you people all the time. Because out of the blue, suddenly there it is. Another nonsensical position designed to fuck over men. You all have one. It's just the crazies have all of them at once.

[Dakini]

...not exactly. In countries that already have excellent parental leave programs allowing both parents to take leave, women still aren't making all the inroads...

Granted, the fact that in the USA there is no requirement for employers to give maternal or parental leave at all probably doesn't help women who are trying to build careers.

Which countries specifically did you have in mind?

Sweden and Canada off the top of my head. Both allow for a year off split between the parents, in Canada the parents can choose who takes which time and in Sweden (iirc) the parents each get 6 months off.

In Canada this typically means that men opt to let their wives take most or all of the time off (though I personally know of a few cases where the new father took almost all the time off and the new mother went back to work as soon as she was recovered). In Sweden, men typically end up just working from home during their parental leave.