Should a women-only hour at the gym be the standard policy?

[Uinted Communist of Africa]

This thread just got real....

[Camaalbakrius]

Praise be to The Lord, there is still hope

idk how f folks are still bringing up the gender studies bogeyman then there probably isn't

But hey I wouldn't trust a Milo fanboy with school matters and even less with gym matters

And I will love and respect you too. No matter your opinions.

[Camaalbakrius]

This thread just got real....

The edge became real. Not naming names

[Chessmistress]

Who cares about surviving?
Women could "survive" even under patriarchy.
We did it for so long.

Feminism isn't about "surviving".
Feminism is about thriving.

Humans thrive when they're able to modify the surrounding environment.
Now it's women's turn, and it'll happen even if you don't like it, since more and more women are outperforming men within education.
It's just a matter of time.

Equality isn't enough, then?

Radical Feminism is about control.

You've just proven the narrative of the anti-Feminists, Poe.

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

[Camaalbakrius]

Equality isn't enough, then?

Radical Feminism is about control.

You've just proven the narrative of the anti-Feminists, Poe.

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

You would know this, being a man, correct?

[Thermodolia]

Equality isn't enough, then?

Radical Feminism is about control.

You've just proven the narrative of the anti-Feminists, Poe.

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

No you are talking about subjugating men and all people you and your sect of feminism don't consider to be women

[Camaalbakrius]

Equality isn't enough, then?

Radical Feminism is about control.

You've just proven the narrative of the anti-Feminists, Poe.

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

Also, I made a list of questions I would like your opinions on a few pages back. I hope you can read them and respond so we can converse constructively

[Kubra]

idk how f folks are still bringing up the gender studies bogeyman then there probably isn't

But hey I wouldn't trust a Milo fanboy with school matters and even less with gym matters

Ooh, edgy.

sorry bruv, but the dude admits that he likes making fun of overweight people in gyms. Yeah. I ain't gonna listen to anyone on gym matters when they're in to that sort of guy.

[Kubra]

idk how f folks are still bringing up the gender studies bogeyman then there probably isn't

But hey I wouldn't trust a Milo fanboy with school matters and even less with gym matters

I'd watch how you throw around epithets.

ehh, yeah, that was admittedly a bit much.

[Chessmistress]

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

No you are talking about subjugating men and all people you and your sect of feminism don't consider to be women

Not even close.
Even the things you can see as "inequality" cannot hurt men and are meant to compensate an unbalancement of power.
A good example is about women-only carriages: I said that the ideal situation would be 10% carriages reserved to women-only use and 90% for all.
Men cannot be "subjugated" in a similar situation.
It's, technically, "unequal".
But it becomes equal when we take in account the number of women who are groped, assaulted, harassed, and so on.
People can pretend that men are groped and assaulted at the same rate by unknown women, but that's just deflection, I think.

[New haven america]

Actually, Womyn is an even more sexist term, considering it was coined 150+ years ago in order to try to separate males and females as much as possible, considering men were considered: Stronger, smarter, and more important socially and economically. (It was more of a slang term though, IIRC, it never became official English spelling)

By Chess and other 3rd Rate Feminists using the "Womyn" spelling, they're literally admitting that they're worth less compared to men.

Actually, "womyn" is an Older Scots alternate spelling of "woman." Nothing to do with separating the sexes any more than they were already separated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womyn

Then tell the people who added that little tidbit in my college level Sociology textbook that.

[Uinted Communist of Africa]

I'm lost here this conversation keeps going around in circles.


Did we forget to take a right at "reality"?

[New haven america]

Equality isn't enough, then?

Radical Feminism is about control.

You've just proven the narrative of the anti-Feminists, Poe.

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

If you actually want to help women, why don't you try doing work in areas where actual Patriarchy exists?

Or are you so unwilling to give up your privileged life to actually help others?

[Uxupox]

No you are talking about subjugating men and all people you and your sect of feminism don't consider to be women

Not even close.
Even the things you can see as "inequality" cannot hurt men and are meant to compensate an unbalancement of power.
A good example is about women-only carriages: I said that the ideal situation would be 10% carriages reserved to women-only use and 90% for all.
Men cannot be "subjugated".
It, technically, "unequal".
But it becomes equal when we take in account the number of women who are groped, assaulted and so on.
People can pretend that men are groped and assaulted at the same rate by unknown women, but that's just deflection, I think.

???

[Camaalbakrius]

Ooh, edgy.

sorry bruv, but the dude admits that he likes making fun of overweight people in gyms. Yeah. I ain't gonna listen to anyone on gym matters when they're in to that sort of guy.

And I'll say it again. I will not judge you either. I will respect you and your opinions just the same.

[Kubra]

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

If you actually want to help women, why don't you try doing work in areas where actual Patriarchy exists?

Or are you so unwilling to give up your privileged life to actually help others?

how do you know what she does in RL
Are you of the opinion that posting on an internet forum is mutually exlcusive with doing things in rl

[Farnhamia]

Actually, "womyn" is an Older Scots alternate spelling of "woman." Nothing to do with separating the sexes any more than they were already separated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womyn

The tell the people who added that little tidbit in my college level Sociology textbook that.

Give me their address, I'll send the Farnhamian Guards to discuss it with them.

[Camaalbakrius]

No you are talking about subjugating men and all people you and your sect of feminism don't consider to be women

Not even close.
Even the things you can see as "inequality" cannot hurt men and are meant to compensate an unbalancement of power.
A good example is about women-only carriages: I said that the ideal situation would be 10% carriages reserved to women-only use and 90% for all.
Men cannot be "subjugated" in a similar situation.
It's, technically, "unequal".
But it becomes equal when we take in account the number of women who are groped, assaulted, harassed, and so on.
People can pretend that men are groped and assaulted at the same rate by unknown women, but that's just deflection, I think.

*imbalance, not unbalancement. Unbalancement is not a word.

The Grammar Nazi Strikes again

[Soldati Senza Confini]

No you are talking about subjugating men and all people you and your sect of feminism don't consider to be women

Not even close.
Even the things you can see as "inequality" cannot hurt men and are meant to compensate an unbalancement of power.
A good example is about women-only carriages: I said that the ideal situation would be 10% carriages reserved to women-only use and 90% for all.
Men cannot be "subjugated" in a similar situation.
It's, technically, "unequal".
But it becomes equal when we take in account the number of women who are groped, assaulted, harassed, and so on.
People can pretend that men are groped and assaulted at the same rate by unknown women, but that's just deflection, I think.

The problem here is that this is still unequal.

The other problem is that such a policy would be discriminatory under many nations' civil rights statutes is not even funny.

Equality is not the same as exclusivity. Exclusivity can, at times, be used to protect a class of people, but it cannot be used to claim equality.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

If you actually want to help women, why don't you try doing work in areas where actual Patriarchy exists?

Or are you so unwilling to give up your privileged life to actually help others?

How is this a question?

Most people, when it comes between giving up their privileged life, and not helping others, will almost always choose the latter.

Chess is doing what everyone else would in her situation, she's self-interested, and while I can respect that, I think she's wrong in claiming that her ideas would help all women. It wouldn't. It would help women, but only women in her same socioeconomic position.

[Camaalbakrius]

I'd watch how you throw around epithets.

ehh, yeah, that was admittedly a bit much.

No, it's fine. I forgive you.

[Farnhamia]

I'd watch how you throw around epithets.

ehh, yeah, that was admittedly a bit much.

A bit but on the other hand, I got to use the word "epithets."

[Chessmistress]

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Misogynists can't tell the difference between women controlling their own life and "subjugating men", because they have male entitlement. It's just that: they're losing unfair privileges, and they feel it as "oppression".

If you actually want to help women, why don't you try doing work in areas where actual Patriarchy exists?

Or are you so unwilling to give up your privileged life to actually help others?

Once communists were told by capitalists: "if you wish to abolish private property why don't you begin to donate all your properties to the poors?"
First: because I have not even an hint how it works in such countries. I would be totally uneffective.
Second: because I'm not just only Feminist, I even have other interests here, I cannot move abroad.
Third: in fact more and more women will progress in the west, more and more women living within more patriarchal countries will follow us: it's already happening.

[Uinted Communist of Africa]

We all are feeling the (non homo, unless that's your thing in that case...forget it) love .

[Hirota]

Feminists alway prove the narrative of anti-feminists, because Feminism, not just only Radical Feminism, IS about control.
But it's about women controlling our own lifes.

Provided they comply with the feminism ministry of truth. Can't have the freedom to question the narrative can they.