Criticisms of Feminism

[Herskerstad]

No, I don't think it's about "anatomy", it's about male entitlement of few males.

FEMINISTING - that article was wrote by a MAN
http://feministing.com/2013/12/11/on-sp ... sculinity/

Oh wow, a man wrote something about men, that must make him the ultimate authority on men much like each time women write something about women, it must be true. There is nothing entitling about spreading ones legs to not have once balls pinched as it is a general manner of comfort. Much the same as stretching ones legs if one is stale. It is an entirely different level of issues if one rather creepily, I might add, take pictures of strangers for such. I could take pictures on women who park their bags on open seats, eat on the subway and go and on and on, but I don't, due to A - Not having the time or the care and B - It's creepy and dumb.

JEZEBEL - that explains even better the entitlement
http://jezebel.com/5967972/fuck-you-dud ... t-that-big

[/quote]

Wow, great title. 'fuck-you-dudes-who-sit-with-their-legs-spread-so-wide-ect' Do you have another scholarly masterpiece on religion from something like http://www.neildegrassetysonismyhomeboi ... ogtown.net?

I am sorry to break it to you, but you are factually impaired if these are your sources and probably imagine each slight as a hierarchical extension of power, and given that I've not gotten my patriarchy check in quite a while, I can guarantee to you it is not so.

[Imperializt Russia]

I never saw a woman with so much baggage.
I took photos of males spreading their legs during the campaign, and there where even some males lying occupying up to THREE seats on public transport.
It is worth noting that the vast majority of men are educated and do NOT these things, from my experience I can say that those who practice the manspreading definitely are not more than 10%, maybe just the 5%.
The saddest part is that I noticed that such thing was performed equally by both young men and the elderly ones, and it is precisely for this reason that I think an intervention was absolutely necessary: that habits seem to not change through generations.

You do realize men have two glands, that are open to outside stimulation, and are very sensitive to heat and pressure? did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe that that is possibly a reason other than your so-called "patriarchy", that men do not cross their legs? or are you really that much of an idjit?

Spreading your legs may be more comfortable, but closing them is not uncomfortable.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

Spreading your legs may be more comfortable, but closing them is not uncomfortable.

That really depends on the anatomy of the individual in question.

[Vanta Island]

You do realize men have two glands, that are open to outside stimulation, and are very sensitive to heat and pressure? did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe that that is possibly a reason other than your so-called "patriarchy", that men do not cross their legs? or are you really that much of an idjit?

Spreading your legs may be more comfortable, but closing them is not uncomfortable.

Depending on what position everything is in, yeah, but most people would rather not see someone adjust their junk in public.

[Imperializt Russia]

Spreading your legs may be more comfortable, but closing them is not uncomfortable.

That really depends on the anatomy of the individual in question.

I do still have my external genitalia, so...

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

That really depends on the anatomy of the individual in question.

I do still have my external genitalia, so...

It's a loaded statement, but size does play into it as a factor, as does pain threshold.

[New Edom]

You do realize men have two glands, that are open to outside stimulation, and are very sensitive to heat and pressure? did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe that that is possibly a reason other than your so-called "patriarchy", that men do not cross their legs? or are you really that much of an idjit?

Spreading your legs may be more comfortable, but closing them is not uncomfortable.

It can be uncomfortable. But that's not really the point, is it? Just because someone is being oblivious to others doesn't mean that they are 'entitled' or that it is symbolic of anything. It means that someone has their headphones volume too high, that they are not aware of what is going on. Everyone does that at some time or other. There is nothing stopping people from asking others for space. This is just another thrust at trying to make men feel self conscious around women.

I think humanist people should ignore 'problems' like this, because it simply blames one gender for everything yet again. What should be done instead is generally encouraging greater courtesy. If feminists think women are never rude on any scale worth mentioning, they need a dose of reality.

[Imperializt Russia]

I do still have my external genitalia, so...

It's a loaded statement, but size does play into it as a factor, as does pain threshold.

If closing your legs is actually painful for you, I suggest you get that looked at.

[Imperializt Russia]

Spreading your legs may be more comfortable, but closing them is not uncomfortable.

It can be uncomfortable. But that's not really the point, is it? Just because someone is being oblivious to others doesn't mean that they are 'entitled' or that it is symbolic of anything. It means that someone has their headphones volume too high, that they are not aware of what is going on. Everyone does that at some time or other. There is nothing stopping people from asking others for space. This is just another thrust at trying to make men feel self conscious around women.

Being oblivious to your impact on others around you is part of what entitlement is, I'm pretty sure.

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

It's a loaded statement, but size does play into it as a factor, as does pain threshold.

If closing your legs is actually painful for you, I suggest you get that looked at.

Less the closing on their own, and more the overcrowding involved. I've sat next to many a person who's taken up near two seats due to bulk, and had my junk squashed because I couldn't open my legs.

This isn't a binary issue, as people would have you believe. There are many, many factors. Not the least of which is simply communicating between aggrieved parties instead of sloganeering.

[Nierra]

It can be uncomfortable. But that's not really the point, is it? Just because someone is being oblivious to others doesn't mean that they are 'entitled' or that it is symbolic of anything. It means that someone has their headphones volume too high, that they are not aware of what is going on. Everyone does that at some time or other. There is nothing stopping people from asking others for space. This is just another thrust at trying to make men feel self conscious around women.

Being oblivious to your impact on others around you is part of what entitlement is, I'm pretty sure.

....how?

[The Empire of Pretantia]

It's a loaded statement, but size does play into it as a factor, as does pain threshold.

If closing your legs is actually painful for you, I suggest you get that looked at.

His wife has to look at it every night.

It can be uncomfortable. But that's not really the point, is it? Just because someone is being oblivious to others doesn't mean that they are 'entitled' or that it is symbolic of anything. It means that someone has their headphones volume too high, that they are not aware of what is going on. Everyone does that at some time or other. There is nothing stopping people from asking others for space. This is just another thrust at trying to make men feel self conscious around women.

Being oblivious to your impact on others around you is part of what entitlement is, I'm pretty sure.

But not all obliviousness is caused by entitlement.

[Imperializt Russia]

Being oblivious to your impact on others around you is part of what entitlement is, I'm pretty sure.

....how?

That you feel entitled to be inconvenient and then not care sufficiently to notice that.
That you're not sat there thinking "am I being inconvenient to others?"

[Lyrian Oligarchic Royal Empire]

....how?

That you feel entitled to be inconvenient and then not care sufficiently to notice that.
That you're not sat there thinking "am I being inconvenient to others?"

That is not solely the domain of either gender however.

A woman placing her shopping all around her, a woman stretching her legs out into the aisle, a woman talking on her cellphone and thrusting her elbow near the people near her?

These all could just as easily be covered under "space invasion", instead of a gendered and directional term which ignores broader contexts.

[Nierra]

....how?

That you feel entitled to be inconvenient and then not care sufficiently to notice that.
That you're not sat there thinking "am I being inconvenient to others?"

I wonder what individuals would get done if they had to think about every single action they took and its effect on others.

Get over yourself.

We don't want more super self conscious people in our society

It's not calling yourself tall, it's called being busy or enjoying the moment.

[Ostroeuropa]

Why do feminists and the feminist media feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?

The mad-max boycott is basically non-existant.
Go to the mens rights reddit and you'll find them confirming as such.
Another case of fact check everything feminists say.

I'd love a feminist to be able to explain this behavior to me. Why do they feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?
I engage in hyperbole on occasion. But all my accusations of the nefarious shit feminists get up to is true, same for the MRM.
I might call feminists jackbooted thugs akin to nazis for their work on the duluth model and call the hundreds of thousands of male victims they've systematically fucked over a feminist holocaust, and that language might be inflammatory, but it remains fundamentally true that they HAVE fucked over hundreds of thousands of male domestic abuse victims, some of whom are probably dead from their actions.
Sometimes, my emotions get hold of me and I engage in hyperbole. I'll admit it.

But I don't feel the need to declare that they caused the hiroshima meltdown, because there's plenty of actual shit to call them out on.

So why is it feminists feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?
I submit it's because they have nothing else but lies and defamation. They know their arguments are inferior.

[Gauthier]

No, just good placement on the map and lucky rolls of the dice.

life isn't Catan

This from the one who thinks life is Game of Thrones. Hilarious.

[Fartsniffage]

Why do feminists and the feminist media feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?

The mad-max boycott is basically non-existant.
Go to the mens rights reddit and you'll find them confirming as such.
Another case of fact check everything feminists say.

Who's talking about a Mad Max boycott and why should anyone care? Why would there be one in the first place?

[Ostroeuropa]

Why do feminists and the feminist media feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?

The mad-max boycott is basically non-existant.
Go to the mens rights reddit and you'll find them confirming as such.
Another case of fact check everything feminists say.

Who's talking about a Mad Max boycott and why should anyone care? Why would there be one in the first place?

Several feminist media sources are claiming that the MRM is advocating a boycott of the new mad max movie, because feminism.


The MRM, bewildered at this, had a thread or two about it where they said the movie was pretty much fine.
Some people said see it, some said don't it's kind of crap, some said don't because fuck cinemas, and some said "Whatever, I don't like action movies."


I'd say you should care because it's the latest in a long line of lies told by feminists about the MRM.
Eliot rodgers is another one.
Constantly pretending PUA, TRP, and TRK are MRA sites.

It's their entire modus operandi in order to delegimize a human rights movement.
You should care because you should care about facts, and not let people lie about their political opponents.
ESPECIALLY when the media is engaged in upholding those lies, either through being feminist ideologues themselves, being shit journalists who don't fact check, or being unable to challenge it due to feminist lynch mob behavior.

It sets terrible precedent.

[Nierra]

Why do feminists and the feminist media feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?

The mad-max boycott is basically non-existant.
Go to the mens rights reddit and you'll find them confirming as such.
Another case of fact check everything feminists say.

Who's talking about a Mad Max boycott and why should anyone care? Why would there be one in the first place?

The point is feminists delude themselves and go insane searching for an enemy, but there is none. It's subconscious judgement, and feminists would be much better of having a nice smile and posting some signs instead of searching for a distinct faction to bash.

[Kyuji]

Who's talking about a Mad Max boycott and why should anyone care? Why would there be one in the first place?

The point is feminists delude themselves and go insane searching for an enemy, but there is none. It's subconscious judgement, and feminists would be much better of having a nice smile and posting some signs instead of searching for a distinct faction to bash.

Actually some feminists have come up with an enemy , The Patriachy !
And in most cases they just use the word to blame everything bad on men

[Ostroeuropa]

The point is feminists delude themselves and go insane searching for an enemy, but there is none. It's subconscious judgement, and feminists would be much better of having a nice smile and posting some signs instead of searching for a distinct faction to bash.

Actually some feminists have come up with an enemy , The Patriachy !
And in most cases they just use the word to blame everything bad on men

Worth noting that in spite of feminist insistence that mens problems stem from the patriarchy, mens suicide rates are increasing, their education standards are falling etc, despite feminist victories for women.
Surely we'd see mens problems lessening if their ideology had any basis in reality, or at least remaining stable, not mens problems steadily getting worse the more society caters to the feminist narrative.

[New Edom]

Why do feminists and the feminist media feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?

The mad-max boycott is basically non-existant.
Go to the mens rights reddit and you'll find them confirming as such.
Another case of fact check everything feminists say.

I'd love a feminist to be able to explain this behavior to me. Why do they feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?
I engage in hyperbole on occasion. But all my accusations of the nefarious shit feminists get up to is true, same for the MRM.
I might call feminists jackbooted thugs akin to nazis for their work on the duluth model and call the hundreds of thousands of male victims they've systematically fucked over a feminist holocaust, and that language might be inflammatory, but it remains fundamentally true that they HAVE fucked over hundreds of thousands of male domestic abuse victims, some of whom are probably dead from their actions.
Sometimes, my emotions get hold of me and I engage in hyperbole. I'll admit it.

But I don't feel the need to declare that they caused the hiroshima meltdown, because there's plenty of actual shit to call them out on.

So why is it feminists feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?
I submit it's because they have nothing else but lies and defamation. They know their arguments are inferior.

One thing I find rather interesting is the extent to which members of the MRM are former supporters of feminism. Far from being some bastion of male traditionalist authoritarianism, it represents another approach to gender equality. So of course it is regarded wth suspicion and attacked. Merely by existing it threatens the role of feminism which is to define the nature of sexism and therefore demand social change on the basis of those definitions. Without this role, feminism would become like any other ideology and would become merely one of several viewpoints on any given issue.

[Ostroeuropa]

Why do feminists and the feminist media feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?

The mad-max boycott is basically non-existant.
Go to the mens rights reddit and you'll find them confirming as such.
Another case of fact check everything feminists say.

I'd love a feminist to be able to explain this behavior to me. Why do they feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?
I engage in hyperbole on occasion. But all my accusations of the nefarious shit feminists get up to is true, same for the MRM.
I might call feminists jackbooted thugs akin to nazis for their work on the duluth model and call the hundreds of thousands of male victims they've systematically fucked over a feminist holocaust, and that language might be inflammatory, but it remains fundamentally true that they HAVE fucked over hundreds of thousands of male domestic abuse victims, some of whom are probably dead from their actions.
Sometimes, my emotions get hold of me and I engage in hyperbole. I'll admit it.

But I don't feel the need to declare that they caused the hiroshima meltdown, because there's plenty of actual shit to call them out on.

So why is it feminists feel the need to constantly lie about the MRM?
I submit it's because they have nothing else but lies and defamation. They know their arguments are inferior.

One thing I find rather interesting is the extent to which members of the MRM are former supporters of feminism. Far from being some bastion of male traditionalist authoritarianism, it represents another approach to gender equality. So of course it is regarded wth suspicion and attacked. Merely by existing it threatens the role of feminism which is to define the nature of sexism and therefore demand social change on the basis of those definitions. Without this role, feminism would become like any other ideology and would become merely one of several viewpoints on any given issue.

The vast majority of MRAs are ex-feminist in my experience. Traditionalists are usually derided. "Tradcon" is a simple dismissal that typically gets thrown at threads posted to the MRM reddit with a traditionalist flavor.
"You are in the wrong place." etc
This is why Return of Kings wrote that article about the MRM being "A terrible place for men." because the MRM advocates gender equality.
And yet feminists still routinely insist on conflating the two.

I agree that feminism is in the midst of a crisis in the respect you outline here. The emergence of a coherent alternate explanation for sexism in society renders feminist monopolization of the gender dialogue extremely questionable, and in fact points to it being a sexist endeavor.
I see it going one of a few ways.

We'll have a reform of the feminist movement and the schism will end. (This will almost certainly require abandoning the feminist label as a token gesture.) and gender equality will be pursued using both a male and female lens on the issue.

We'll see the feminist movement self-destruct in a fit of temper tantrums and denigrating men, because despite their control of institutions and the media, the MRM is growing in numbers and making people aware, at which point the MRM will dominate gender politics.

We'll see the feminist movement vastly weakened and forced to share power.

Or we'll see the feminist movement being even more totalitarian and authoritarian in an attempt to crush the opposition. In my opinion, this will eventually lead to societal collapse due to feminism being untenable in the long term, at which point, self-destruct and MRM dominance occurs anyway, just the feminists make a lot of people miserable in the meantime.

[Grave_n_idle]

Actually some feminists have come up with an enemy , The Patriachy !
And in most cases they just use the word to blame everything bad on men

Worth noting that in spite of feminist insistence that mens problems stem from the patriarchy, mens suicide rates are increasing, their education standards are falling etc, despite feminist victories for women.
Surely we'd see mens problems lessening if their ideology had any basis in reality...

That doesn't even begin to make sense.

If the paradigm of an oppressive patriarchy that has always favoured men at the expense of oppressing women is 'true' - we'd expect men's problems to get worse, not better. Because the oppressed class is no longer as easy a target, and so the men are less favoured.

By trying to link increasing male suicidal behaviour with the feminist movement (rather than allowing it might not be related, or might correlate with, rather than being caused by, feminism) - you're actually providing evidence that the feminist 'patriarchy' target is real.