The NationStates Feminist Thread

[New Larthinia]

Wait, what? I actually said racism DOES exist in USA because it IS a multicultural country and it is ALIVE and well. What do you mean?

By the way, I quoted him when I said that racism doesn't exist, I think it was pretty damn obvious.

Ohhhh, I'm sorry, you did not put quotations around "There is no racism in the United States." So I read that as you saying that. Again I apologise. That should be directed at the person who said that. But may I request next time you do something like that you put it in quotations.

Well, I thought it was obvious because I quoted a post with the exact same quote in it, and I quoted that specific part of it to make sure nobody gets confused. Turns out I actually caused more confusion.

[Valystria]

It's for discussing feminism.

The fact that they have almost nothing to discuss that isn't based on lies and bullshit isn't our problem. So pretty much it went from us saying "Well, that's a lie." "That's incorrect." "That's statistically untrue." to them going "Well, feminism as a broad nebulous concept, since all our specific talking points were shown to be utterly bigoted or based in unreality, is for equality." and us going "No it isn't and here's why."

If you want to actually know about womens issues, go ask the MRM. They know some real ones. Be nice about it though and point out you're aware it's a mens space, you're just wondering about their perspective on womens issues.

In a feminism discussion thread, ANY feminism discussion thread, where open debate is allowed, this is the INEVITABLE conclusion.

That is why they are so fucking obsessed with controlling and censoring what is and isn't acceptable to say. Their paychecks depend on it.

It basically is for supporting feminism.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah, even when the goal of it is to oppress women involved in sex work or women who want to watch porn. Or women who may be against the policy of systematically ignoring male victims of rape and domestic violence.

[Italios]

Ohhhh, I'm sorry, you did not put quotations around "There is no racism in the United States." So I read that as you saying that. Again I apologise. That should be directed at the person who said that. But may I request next time you do something like that you put it in quotations.

Well, I thought it was obvious because I quoted a post with the exact same quote in it, and I quoted that specific part of it to make sure nobody gets confused. Turns out I actually caused more confusion.

No, this was really my fault. It's good to be nit-picky and find the specific parts you want to address, but I just meant put quotations around it.

[New Larthinia]

Well, I thought it was obvious because I quoted a post with the exact same quote in it, and I quoted that specific part of it to make sure nobody gets confused. Turns out I actually caused more confusion.

No, this was really my fault. It's good to be nit-picky and find the specific parts you want to address, but I just meant put quotations around it.

Will do next time.

Anyway, have to go to sleep now, I am tired. Make sure you continue the never-ending gender-related hellhole war.

[Galloism]

You can't make rules as an OP - not in general.

His rules are as enforceable as your neighbor who screams across the fence that you can't wear white after labor day.

That's true, but my point was this thread was created for supporting feminism and it has gone into the exact opposite: ranting feminism.

We discuss things on nationstates - both good and bad. Such is the nature of a debate forum.

[Chessmistress]

2. That's not the case. The thing is most of the supposed 'inequalities' are merely individual cases that should be dealt within the justice system, not by rearranging society to bolster male privilege. The fact is I don't face discrimination and when I do, it is because of my skin colour. Male privilege is very much existent, because from my point of view it is very much existent. Whenever I am hindered or face discrimination, it is because of my race, not my gender.
3. Society acknowledging the fact that women are fundamentally unequal is bad? What's next, pay rises should be banned because it goes against 'shareholder's rights' to high profits and low costs?

You're literally supporting "KILL ALL MEN" bahar mustafa in your signature.

* irony and sarcasm mode*
Wrong.
Bahar Mustafa didn't tweet "KILL ALL MEN"
She tweeted "KILL ALL WHITE MEN".
Kill all men would be too expensive, and also Chinese males would be likely to harshly react with thermonuclear bombs and the likes
* end of irony an sacasm mode*

Seriously.
I support Bahar Mustafa too.
She was unjustly treated.
It was just a stupid joke, not a real threat.

The police investigation of her is largely down to pressure from pro-men groups who are demanding something be done about it. The university failed to act, and so the police shall.

It seems MRAs have some power, right?

It's been explained to you numerous times that men can in fact be discriminated against due to their gender, and often are. You just refuse to accept that because it runs counter to your weird religious ideology that is obsessed with womens victimization.

*irony and sarcasm mode again*
Maybe Wolfmanne isn't white, so that's why he don't care about "KILL ALL WHITE MEN"
*end irony and sarcasm mode*

Or maybe he understand there's nothing particularly threatening in Bahar Mustafa...

[Italios]

It basically is for supporting feminism.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah, even when the goal of it is to oppress women involved in sex work or women who want to watch porn. Or women who may be against the policy of systematically ignoring male victims of rape and domestic violence.

[Italios]

You're literally supporting "KILL ALL MEN" bahar mustafa in your signature.

* irony and sarcasm mode*
Wrong.
Bahar Mustafa didn't tweet "KILL ALL MEN"
She tweeted "KILL ALL WHITE MEN".
Kill all men would be too expensive, and also Chinese males would be likely to harshly react with thermonuclear bombs and the likes
* end of irony an sacasm mode*

Seriously.
I support Bahar Mustafa too.
She was unjustly treated.
It was just a stupid joke, not a real threat.

The police investigation of her is largely down to pressure from pro-men groups who are demanding something be done about it. The university failed to act, and so the police shall.

It seems MRAs have some power, right?

It's been explained to you numerous times that men can in fact be discriminated against due to their gender, and often are. You just refuse to accept that because it runs counter to your weird religious ideology that is obsessed with womens victimization.

*irony and sarcasm mode again*
Maybe Wolfmanne isn't white, so that's why he don't care about "KILL ALL WHITE MEN"
*end irony and sarcasm mode*

Or maybe he understand there's nothing particularly threatening in Bahar Mustafa...

There's a fine line between making a touchy joke and a hateful statement. I'm all for the freedom to offend, but that's beyond offensive. That's rude and hateful and if she didn't mean it why did so many people react negatively. You want white men to laugh that sort of thing off? If I said "kill all feminists" you wouldn't laugh and you know it.

[Valystria]

The police investigation of her is largely down to pressure from pro-men groups who are demanding something be done about it. The university failed to act, and so the police shall.

It seems MRAs have some power, right?

But feminists somehow don't have power even when a prime minister is a feminist.

I already answered, but I'll answer again: Convention of Istanbul was not passed by Feminists, but by governments, because European governments are full aware that women have it far worse when it comes to domestic violence. European governments are also aware that Feminism is the only ideology suited to deal with this issue: that's why the GREVIO is composed just only by women, ALL Feminists, most them Radical Feminists.
It's the same even in USA: Duluth Model is a Feminist policy.

Uhuh, so, you insist on refusing to admit you falsely claimed feminists have no power.

Indeed, the best country is Iceland, where a radical feminist prime minister banned prostitution and even strip clubs (I agree!)
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle ... st-country

Right. How does that happen? I mean, you said feminists have no power. So how do they run governments like Iceland's? Not to mention getting things like the Convention of Istanbul passed which you of course will deny is an example of feminists having power. Do learn what soft power is.

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

Your movement has immense soft power. That's a form of power. That's how you get things like the Convention of Istanbul passed when you don't have outright control of a government, like when a government is run by an openly feminist prime minister passing laws conforming to your ideology of oppressing women who may want a career in sex work. But feminists still have no power. Somehow.

I'd say feminism as a movement is terribly suited to dealing with domestic violence when your idea of "dealing with it" is ignoring more than 40% of the victims of it for no other reason than because they happen to be men.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence

Tsk, tsk. Feel free to reply. But you seldom do when wrong.

[Val Halla]

You're literally supporting "KILL ALL MEN" bahar mustafa in your signature.

* irony and sarcasm mode*
Wrong.
Bahar Mustafa didn't tweet "KILL ALL MEN"
She tweeted "KILL ALL WHITE MEN".
Kill all men would be too expensive, and also Chinese males would be likely to harshly react with thermonuclear bombs and the likes
* end of irony an sacasm mode*

Seriously.
I support Bahar Mustafa too.
She was unjustly treated.
It was just a stupid joke, not a real threat.

The police investigation of her is largely down to pressure from pro-men groups who are demanding something be done about it. The university failed to act, and so the police shall.

It seems MRAs have some power, right?

It's been explained to you numerous times that men can in fact be discriminated against due to their gender, and often are. You just refuse to accept that because it runs counter to your weird religious ideology that is obsessed with womens victimization.

*irony and sarcasm mode again*
Maybe Wolfmanne isn't white, so that's why he don't care about "KILL ALL WHITE MEN"
*end irony and sarcasm mode*

Or maybe he understand there's nothing particularly threatening in Bahar Mustafa...

Funny how you're all for oppressing men and women yourself, but when one of your precious RadFem heroes gets in trouble for doing something incredibly stupid, you leap to their defence

[Ostroeuropa]

It seems MRAs have some power, right?

Some, yes. Laws still leftover from when feminists were zealously assuming that simply demanding equality was what they wanted can be leveraged by MRAs who aren't as blinded by gynocentrism as those feminists were and understand men have issues too.

That's why feminists are pissing themselves and running around to rig the laws in womens favor and against equality. An example was when Labour in the UK had to scrap the equality act and pass a new one that allowed them to discriminate against men with all women short lists.

In areas feminists haven't managed to cover up their predecessors mistakes from actually believing in feminist rhetoric, the MRM can force action through raising funds.

This led to the utterly delightful lulz article that the MRM loved so much.

"Protect women entrepeneurs from EQUALITY SEEKERS!!!" when the national coallition for men sued a number of women-only business clubs.

The hate speech laws are broad and haven't been corrupted by feminists yet. But still they'll argue it doesn't count and try and kick up enough of a fuss to get the charges dropped.

Almost certainly, their influence will prevent anything of substance happening. And their influence meant she kept her position at the university despite numerous bigoted comments and hateful policies.

[Chessmistress]

It seems MRAs have some power, right?

Some, yes. Laws still leftover from when feminists were zealously assuming that simply demanding equality was what they wanted can be leveraged by MRAs who aren't as blinded by gynocentrism as those feminists were and understand men have issues too.

That's why feminists are pissing themselves and running around to rig the laws in womens favor and against equality. An example was when Labour in the UK had to scrap the equality act and pass a new one that allowed them to discriminate against men with all women short lists.

In areas feminists haven't managed to cover up their predecessors mistakes from actually believing in feminist rhetoric, the MRM can force action through raising funds.

This led to the utterly delightful lulz article that the MRM loved so much.

"Protect women entrepeneurs from EQUALITY SEEKERS!!!" when the national coallition for men sued a number of women-only business clubs.

The hate speech laws are broad and haven't been corrupted by feminists yet. But still they'll argue it doesn't count and try and kick up enough of a fuss to get the charges dropped.

Almost certainly, their influence will prevent anything of substance happening. And their influence meant she kept her position at the university despite numerous bigoted comments and hateful policies.

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

[Italios]

Some, yes. Laws still leftover from when feminists were zealously assuming that simply demanding equality was what they wanted can be leveraged by MRAs who aren't as blinded by gynocentrism as those feminists were and understand men have issues too.

That's why feminists are pissing themselves and running around to rig the laws in womens favor and against equality. An example was when Labour in the UK had to scrap the equality act and pass a new one that allowed them to discriminate against men with all women short lists.

In areas feminists haven't managed to cover up their predecessors mistakes from actually believing in feminist rhetoric, the MRM can force action through raising funds.

This led to the utterly delightful lulz article that the MRM loved so much.

"Protect women entrepeneurs from EQUALITY SEEKERS!!!" when the national coallition for men sued a number of women-only business clubs.

The hate speech laws are broad and haven't been corrupted by feminists yet. But still they'll argue it doesn't count and try and kick up enough of a fuss to get the charges dropped.

Almost certainly, their influence will prevent anything of substance happening. And their influence meant she kept her position at the university despite numerous bigoted comments and hateful policies.

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

It does not matter what other hateful things she's done or supports. It's still hateful. If I said "kill all feminists" you would not forget it in a hurry and you'd probably take every oppurtunity as one to say, "Remember that time when you said that nasty thing about feminists...."

[Luminesa]

Some, yes. Laws still leftover from when feminists were zealously assuming that simply demanding equality was what they wanted can be leveraged by MRAs who aren't as blinded by gynocentrism as those feminists were and understand men have issues too.

That's why feminists are pissing themselves and running around to rig the laws in womens favor and against equality. An example was when Labour in the UK had to scrap the equality act and pass a new one that allowed them to discriminate against men with all women short lists.

In areas feminists haven't managed to cover up their predecessors mistakes from actually believing in feminist rhetoric, the MRM can force action through raising funds.

This led to the utterly delightful lulz article that the MRM loved so much.

"Protect women entrepeneurs from EQUALITY SEEKERS!!!" when the national coallition for men sued a number of women-only business clubs.

The hate speech laws are broad and haven't been corrupted by feminists yet. But still they'll argue it doesn't count and try and kick up enough of a fuss to get the charges dropped.

Almost certainly, their influence will prevent anything of substance happening. And their influence meant she kept her position at the university despite numerous bigoted comments and hateful policies.

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

I'd say that's a pretty extreme policy right there.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Some, yes. Laws still leftover from when feminists were zealously assuming that simply demanding equality was what they wanted can be leveraged by MRAs who aren't as blinded by gynocentrism as those feminists were and understand men have issues too.

That's why feminists are pissing themselves and running around to rig the laws in womens favor and against equality. An example was when Labour in the UK had to scrap the equality act and pass a new one that allowed them to discriminate against men with all women short lists.

In areas feminists haven't managed to cover up their predecessors mistakes from actually believing in feminist rhetoric, the MRM can force action through raising funds.

This led to the utterly delightful lulz article that the MRM loved so much.

"Protect women entrepeneurs from EQUALITY SEEKERS!!!" when the national coallition for men sued a number of women-only business clubs.

The hate speech laws are broad and haven't been corrupted by feminists yet. But still they'll argue it doesn't count and try and kick up enough of a fuss to get the charges dropped.

Almost certainly, their influence will prevent anything of substance happening. And their influence meant she kept her position at the university despite numerous bigoted comments and hateful policies.

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

Irrelevant. You don't get to fly on many planes if you make bomb jokes in the terminal.

[Valystria]

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

Irrelevant. You don't get to fly on many planes if you make bomb jokes in the terminal.

Oh, come on. Apart from the stupid bomb joke, what else has my client done? Pfft.

* irony and sarcasm mode*
Wrong.
Bahar Mustafa didn't tweet "KILL ALL MEN"
She tweeted "KILL ALL WHITE MEN".
Kill all men would be too expensive, and also Chinese males would be likely to harshly react with thermonuclear bombs and the likes
* end of irony an sacasm mode*

Seriously.
I support Bahar Mustafa too.
She was unjustly treated.
It was just a stupid joke, not a real threat.




It seems MRAs have some power, right?



*irony and sarcasm mode again*
Maybe Wolfmanne isn't white, so that's why he don't care about "KILL ALL WHITE MEN"
*end irony and sarcasm mode*

Or maybe he understand there's nothing particularly threatening in Bahar Mustafa...

Funny how you're all for oppressing men and women yourself, but when one of your precious RadFem heroes gets in trouble for doing something incredibly stupid, you leap to their defence

Defending them by saying "Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?" isn't a good defence. It amounts to handwaving away what they did and saying it doesn't matter.

[Ostroeuropa]

Some, yes. Laws still leftover from when feminists were zealously assuming that simply demanding equality was what they wanted can be leveraged by MRAs who aren't as blinded by gynocentrism as those feminists were and understand men have issues too.

That's why feminists are pissing themselves and running around to rig the laws in womens favor and against equality. An example was when Labour in the UK had to scrap the equality act and pass a new one that allowed them to discriminate against men with all women short lists.

In areas feminists haven't managed to cover up their predecessors mistakes from actually believing in feminist rhetoric, the MRM can force action through raising funds.

This led to the utterly delightful lulz article that the MRM loved so much.

"Protect women entrepeneurs from EQUALITY SEEKERS!!!" when the national coallition for men sued a number of women-only business clubs.

The hate speech laws are broad and haven't been corrupted by feminists yet. But still they'll argue it doesn't count and try and kick up enough of a fuss to get the charges dropped.

Almost certainly, their influence will prevent anything of substance happening. And their influence meant she kept her position at the university despite numerous bigoted comments and hateful policies.

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

How about the time she held a diversity event and banned white cis straight men from attending, saying they weren't welcome?
(Despite being a minority on campus.)

[Dumb Ideologies]

Apart from the stupid tweet about °killallwhitemen" what are her "hateful" policies?

How about the time she held a diversity event and banned white cis straight men from attending, saying they weren't welcome?
(Despite being a minority on campus.)

Can't have the crowd be too diverse at a diversity event.

[USS Monitor]

* irony and sarcasm mode*
Wrong.
Bahar Mustafa didn't tweet "KILL ALL MEN"
She tweeted "KILL ALL WHITE MEN".
Kill all men would be too expensive, and also Chinese males would be likely to harshly react with thermonuclear bombs and the likes
* end of irony an sacasm mode*

Seriously.
I support Bahar Mustafa too.
She was unjustly treated.
It was just a stupid joke, not a real threat.




It seems MRAs have some power, right?



*irony and sarcasm mode again*
Maybe Wolfmanne isn't white, so that's why he don't care about "KILL ALL WHITE MEN"
*end irony and sarcasm mode*

Or maybe he understand there's nothing particularly threatening in Bahar Mustafa...

There's a fine line between making a touchy joke and a hateful statement. I'm all for the freedom to offend, but that's beyond offensive. That's rude and hateful and if she didn't mean it why did so many people react negatively. You want white men to laugh that sort of thing off? If I said "kill all feminists" you wouldn't laugh and you know it.

Yeah, man, if you kill all white men, I won't have any officers. That is not funny. My officers are good men.

[Ostroeuropa]

How about the time she held a diversity event and banned white cis straight men from attending, saying they weren't welcome?
(Despite being a minority on campus.)

Can't have the crowd be too diverse at a diversity event.

Diversity means everyone is a black disabled transwoman lesbian with an undiagnosed mental illness. Who uses myspace.

[Kisinger]

There's a fine line between making a touchy joke and a hateful statement. I'm all for the freedom to offend, but that's beyond offensive. That's rude and hateful and if she didn't mean it why did so many people react negatively. You want white men to laugh that sort of thing off? If I said "kill all feminists" you wouldn't laugh and you know it.

Yeah, man, if you kill all white men, I won't have any officers. That is not funny. My officers are good men.

"The USS Monitor, the last bastion for white men!"

[Valystria]

How about the time she held a diversity event and banned white cis straight men from attending, saying they weren't welcome?
(Despite being a minority on campus.)

Can't have the crowd be too diverse at a diversity event.

>diversity event
>bans diversity

[Valystria]

There's a fine line between making a touchy joke and a hateful statement. I'm all for the freedom to offend, but that's beyond offensive. That's rude and hateful and if she didn't mean it why did so many people react negatively. You want white men to laugh that sort of thing off? If I said "kill all feminists" you wouldn't laugh and you know it.

Yeah, man, if you kill all white men, I won't have any officers. That is not funny. My officers are good men.

No women or racial minorities among your officers? Looks we're going to have to board your ship and enact workplace diversity quotas.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Can't have the crowd be too diverse at a diversity event.

>diversity event
>bans diversity

Don't worry, guys, I speak fluent idiot.

One day you'll all realize the fundamental truth that if everyone is diverse, no-one is.

[Davinhia]

Now I'm not what you call a "feminist"
BUT I am however, all about women's FULL equal rights as the next guy
my only problem with the feminism today is well... feminism today
yeah, females are still ever so slightly behind males with rights, and that 10 cents max wage gap are an issue for the most part, yes, BUT for the most part i think Females are pretty equal to males now

Modern feminism is a HORRID version of what feminism should be, and people like Anita Sarkeesian are bad examples of womens rights
but women still have some way to go, but my guess is in the next few years they'll be fully equal

That's just my side of the fence