The NationStates Feminist Thread II

[GabrieIa]

Well i know that physically men are stronger, but i will disregard that here. I know it is fact, but eventually manual labor will be replaced. But i have seen wit my own life, others lives that except for what we call Third Wave feminists that women are generally more able to control men. I have seen throughout history there is more peace when a woman is in power. But that is where the point it stops. That is when equality sets in. Think about the 1940's-50's Untied States of America, that is what i think but more inverted

So what is your ideal world and how do we get there?

I said the basics of my ideal world. Do you want more? Not to sure how to get there yet

[Keventle]

You clearly, have no goddamn clue, what equality is.

Wow not sure how much you read about me or know about me.

We are giving you a chance to give more detail. Explain your ideal world and how do we get there

[GabrieIa]

Wow not sure how much you read about me or know about me.

We are giving you a chance to give more detail. Explain your ideal world and how do we get there

No i am talking to someone else. He was wondering why i said equality, but i dont think he knows that i am a Female Dominate

[Keventle]

So what is your ideal world and how do we get there?

I said the basics of my ideal world. Do you want more? Not to sure how to get there yet

Well give more detail than a small paragraph for a rather radical idea. So where do you see women in jobs and family life? Where are men at and what does this dynamic look like?

[Frenline Delpha]

Well i know that physically men are stronger, but i will disregard that here. I know it is fact, but eventually manual labor will be replaced. But i have seen wit my own life, others lives that except for what we call Third Wave feminists that women are generally more able to control men. I have seen throughout history there is more peace when a woman is in power. But that is where the point it stops. That is when equality sets in. Think about the 1940's-50's Untied States of America, that is what i think but more inverted

I see nothing wrong with this.

I also see nothing wrong with keeping all women in the kitchen.

Yea, that was sarcasm.

[Philjia]

Explain what makes women superior to men.

Well i know that physically men are stronger, but i will disregard that here. I know it is fact, but eventually manual labor will be replaced. But i have seen wit my own life, others lives that except for what we call Third Wave feminists that women are generally more able to control men. I have seen throughout history there is more peace when a woman is in power. But that is where the point it stops. That is when equality sets in. Think about the 1940's-50's Untied States of America, that is what i think but more inverted

Women are just as capable of violence, depravity, and malice as men. Wu Zetian of China. Mary I of England. Ranavalona I of Madagascar. Margaret Thatcher. The corruption of power is not confined to men.

[GabrieIa]

Well i know that physically men are stronger, but i will disregard that here. I know it is fact, but eventually manual labor will be replaced. But i have seen wit my own life, others lives that except for what we call Third Wave feminists that women are generally more able to control men. I have seen throughout history there is more peace when a woman is in power. But that is where the point it stops. That is when equality sets in. Think about the 1940's-50's Untied States of America, that is what i think but more inverted

Women are just as capable of violence, depravity, and malice as men. Wu Zetian of China. Mary I of England. Ranavalona I of Madagascar. Margaret Thatcher. The corruption of power is not confined to men.

Dont you think i dont know that. But do those women present the majority?

[Alvecia]

We are giving you a chance to give more detail. Explain your ideal world and how do we get there

No i am talking to someone else. He was wondering why i said equality, but i dont think he knows that i am a Female Dominate

Is that an actual term? Cause it sounds more like a category of porn

[Philjia]

Women are just as capable of violence, depravity, and malice as men. Wu Zetian of China. Mary I of England. Ranavalona I of Madagascar. Margaret Thatcher. The corruption of power is not confined to men.

Dont you think i dont know that. But do those women present the majority?

Since when has the majority ever wielded power?

[GabrieIa]

I said the basics of my ideal world. Do you want more? Not to sure how to get there yet

Well give more detail than a small paragraph for a rather radical idea. So where do you see women in jobs and family life? Where are men at and what does this dynamic look like?

Well for one, the economic system that i know that works, Capitalism, stays as it is. Not Keynesian but more free market. I see women working, but you know manual labor such as mining, construction, etc (add your own had to do hob here) being manned by robots, and anyone who wants to do such things. Men would be more like house husbands but can work if they want. This would be similar to the 1950's dynamic inverted.

[Keventle]

No i am talking to someone else. He was wondering why i said equality, but i dont think he knows that i am a Female Dominate

Is that an actual term? Cause it sounds more like a category of porn

it is a term... I guess??

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

[Frenline Delpha]

No i am talking to someone else. He was wondering why i said equality, but i dont think he knows that i am a Female Dominate

Is that an actual term? Cause it sounds more like a category of porn

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[GabrieIa]

Dont you think i dont know that. But do those women present the majority?

Since when has the majority ever wielded power?

What do you mean? I was talking about how a small minority of women do not represent the whole group

[GabrieIa]

Is that an actual term? Cause it sounds more like a category of porn

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

It is both. But i take more of the non porn look on it

[Alvecia]

Well give more detail than a small paragraph for a rather radical idea. So where do you see women in jobs and family life? Where are men at and what does this dynamic look like?

Well for one, the economic system that i know that works, Capitalism, stays as it is. Not Keynesian but more free market. I see women working, but you know manual labor such as mining, construction, etc (add your own had to do hob here) being manned by robots, and anyone who wants to do such things.

How is that any different from the case now?

Men would be more like house husbands but can work if they want.

Again, this is literally the case now. I don't know what you want changed.

[Frenline Delpha]

Since when has the majority ever wielded power?

What do you mean? I was talking about how a small minority of women do not represent the whole group

But your argument is that women are better leaders than men. However, if woman are as capable of violence as men, you have no leg to stand on.

[GabrieIa]

What do you mean? I was talking about how a small minority of women do not represent the whole group

But your argument is that women are better leaders than men. However, if woman are as capable as violence as men, you have no leg to stand on.

They are, but if history has shown anything it shows women as less violent.

[Keventle]

Well give more detail than a small paragraph for a rather radical idea. So where do you see women in jobs and family life? Where are men at and what does this dynamic look like?

Well for one, the economic system that i know that works, Capitalism, stays as it is. Not Keynesian but more free market. I see women working, but you know manual labor such as mining, construction, etc (add your own had to do hob here) being manned by robots, and anyone who wants to do such things. Men would be more like house husbands but can work if they want. This would be similar to the 1950's dynamic inverted.

Robots are far off to be capable of manuel and creative tasks, one might ask if robots will ever be able of creative tasks since software is only good for repetitive actions. Furthermore, the inverted 1950s can be seen as sexist to males? Why not offer the opportunity for both sexes to work at home or go to work? Why push males to be subordinates?

[Sareva]

Before I get in a debate, let me just post something from another NSer's signature.

Women belong in the kitchen
Men belong in the kitchen
Everyone belongs in the kitchen
Kitchen has food

[Alvecia]

But your argument is that women are better leaders than men. However, if woman are as capable as violence as men, you have no leg to stand on.

They are, but if history has shown anything it shows women as less violent.

Arguably that more a perception thing than anything.

[Philjia]

Since when has the majority ever wielded power?

What do you mean? I was talking about how a small minority of women do not represent the whole group

Matriarchy would simply be a gender swapped version of the current system, with all it's inherent problems, compounded with the fact that there are suddenly thousands of disenfranchised men about to fulfil their lifelong fantasy of going to war with the state.

[Frenline Delpha]

What do you mean? I was talking about how a small minority of women do not represent the whole group

Matriarchy would simply be a gender swapped version of the current system, with all it's inherent problems, compounded with the fact that there are suddenly thousands of disenfranchised men about to fulfil their lifelong fantasy of going to war with the state.

It takes but a single match to blow the powder keg.

[Raoganya]

Feminism as a mode of equality is good. It should run along the lines of egalitarianism. That's why traditional feminism was so intimately tied with other civil rights groups. Frederick Douglass was an avid member of the women's rights movement and abolition was widely favored in feminist circles. To campaign for the equality of only one group isn't campaigning for equality at all. This has been understood since the beginning. The problem with the modern feminist movement is that it's selfish. Specifically, postmodernist philosophies concerning the subject. These questions about the purity of the movement are not built on nothing. Men and women feel alienized by the elititst tone of leaders who have taken feminism off of its origins and into a rabbit hole of victimization and demonization.

What we have to acknowledge is that feminism isn't just an ideology, it's a movement, a tangible organization made up of tangible people. Actions speak louder than words. It doesn't matter what you define it as, the influence of the movement of its namesake makes it into whatever it really is regardless, and the truth is that this modern ideology is anything but about equality. It takes mundane issues and blows them out of proportion, breeds hatred of men through fallacious dogma, is woefully inconsistent on most social issues, embraces sexist notions that shield women like fragile beings while raging against social norms, derails other issues to make them about themselves, shames dissenters into submission, fails to recognize that it is woefully out of touch with what the average woman actually wants and lives like and then completely ignores the situations where they are legitimately needed.

Long story short: a feminist in America will complain about male privelage, surpress other civil rights issues in pursuit of their own agenda, and rant against an invisible patriarchy. A feminist in Saudi Arabia will smuggle school books to young girls on the risk of being covered in acid and decapitated for not being with her husband. Why does it seem like the modern feminist movement is more concerned with the former than the latter?

The world does need feminism, but in certain areas and on certain issues. The world needs selfless feminism. It just seems like it's lost its way once it had to change gears and find a new topic of discussion.

Contrary to popular belief, there are actually feminists who acknowledge that modern feminism in the west to too focused on the west, and in particular on the white middle-class.
Also, on your first point, I guess you don't know about intersectional feminism which, if a majority of feminists don't already identify as this, its certainly a significant amount and growing rapidly.

I speak of the movement as a whole, not on an individual level. Thank God there are people working to reform. We need them. I'm mainly ranting against the "elitist" feminists that fall under this description. Until their influence is extinguished the integrity of feminism will be compromised.

*reads a recent couple posts from this thread*

Oh frick they're already here aren't they

[Des-Bal]

They are, but if history has shown anything it shows women as less violent.

And less capable. Great leaders, scientists, explorers, basically any group of people that was particularly good at doing something is almost completely male. If you're going to take such an idiotic approach to history at least be consistent.

[Wallenburg]

They are, but if history has shown anything it shows women as less violent.

And less capable. Great leaders, scientists, explorers, basically any group of people that was particularly good at doing something is almost completely male. If you're going to take such an idiotic approach to history at least be consistent.

I didn't realize you found it appropriate to respond to sexism with sexism.