The NationStates Feminist Thread II

[Kelinfort]

Also, the Left has a significant portion of members that I refer to as "Leftist-Rightists". They embrace capitalism and accept the realities of the world we're in, while renouncing the ludicrous platform of the Left. As a result, they call themselves, "Social Democrats", and "Social Liberals." Which is all well and good, but they keep denying reality if they say they're on the same side as the Left.

The rest of your post doesn't address my points. I'll focus on this one because it's a bit I didn't address previously.

Leftist-rightist is internally contradictory.
MRA-Feminist isn't.

Your analogy failed on almost every level.

What was that you said, "dodging the question"?

Hmm...I wonder if that's applicable now.

[Ostroeuropa]

The rest of your post doesn't address my points. I'll focus on this one because it's a bit I didn't address previously.

Leftist-rightist is internally contradictory.
MRA-Feminist isn't.

Your analogy failed on almost every level.

What was that you said, "dodging the question"?

Hmm...I wonder if that's applicable now.

Only if you think that refusing to answer you twice is dodging the question. Simply repeating the same nonsense again until people get tired of answering you isn't good debating. I've already gone over previously how you are basically an MRA. Try and find me a feminist intellectual who you support, and i'll point out why you in fact, do not.

You ignore the roots of your ideology and whitewash the feminist movement in order to pretend it isn't anti-male by presenting your pro-female, pro-male views as feminist when only half of them are, when there is no reasonable explanation for how the other half originated within the movement, and in fact, seems to have only been coherently developed after your prolonged exposure to the MRMs arguments.

You continue to identify as a feminist and as such passively encourage people to read feminist literature and perspectives, ignoring that this will leave them with gynocentric and sexist views, rather than identify as an MRA-feminist and thus encourage people to read the works of both movements and come to understand your actual beliefs.
It's self-defeating, and only done so you don't have to acknowledge the feminist movements hateful nature for identity reasons.

Like I said, you seem not to care about equality as much as you care about your movement. Go ahead, tell me a feminist intellectual or publication you want people to read to come to your views.
Oh, none fucking exist, because you're in denial. Where did you get them then?
From feminists AND the MRM. And yet you don't seem to want to admit that.

[Russo-Byzantine Empire]

An often under discussed topic in feminism is absolute gender equality in monarchial succession. As a monarchist and a moderate feminist, I feel as though this is extremely important. One day I hope to see a queen of Jordan, or an Empress of Japan, or any monarch of the US, but that is a separate issue.

[Kelinfort]

An often under discussed topic in feminism is absolute gender equality in monarchial succession. As a monarchist and a moderate feminist, I feel as though this is extremely important. One day I hope to see a queen of Jordan, or an Empress of Japan, or any monarch of the US, but that is a separate issue.

If it's going to happen anywhere, it'll happen in Jordan.

[Ostroeuropa]

An often under discussed topic in feminism is absolute gender equality in monarchial succession. As a monarchist and a moderate feminist, I feel as though this is extremely important. One day I hope to see a queen of Jordan, or an Empress of Japan, or any monarch of the US, but that is a separate issue.

I think this issue gets fixed with the prevalence of women politicians increasing in general, or when a succession crisis would be forthcoming otherwise. Perhaps also following a prolonged regency with a woman in charge, or a prolonged period of the monarch being incapacitated with their wife taking over their duties.
It's something of a bootstraps situation.

The UK changed the rules, i suspect because of evolving standards in general, but also because we've had a number of women monarchs already and the rules seem a little absurd after that.

[Zapato]

Huh? Have feminists hijacked any states? What states are engaging in violence on the behalf of feminists?


Their demand being, "End domestic violence" and "Make domestic violence an issue for the state". Around 1400 women have been killed by their current or former partners over the last decade, their demand is that this stops and the number of women killed are reduced. But you think it's best not to give in to their demands?


¿Qué?


The Conservatives, Partido Popular, was a part of the demonstration. VOX, a minor offshoot of PP, was behind the small counter-demonstration.

By the way, AHIGE (Asociación de Hombres por la Igualdad de Género) also supported the main demonstration. Are they part of your hate movement as well?

Any which support the Duluth model, and that's merely one policy.

And what states are engaging in violence on the behalf of feminists?

If that's "merely one policy", can you please provide other examples?

Their demand being not to acknowledge domestic violence against men.

That didn't happen.

Funny how you ignored that aspect of it and went right on back to gynocentralizing the discussion by waffling about women victims. Also funny how you ignored all their slogans used at the rally had nothing to do with DV really and were more about hating men.

I haven't seen any of the slogans you claim were used. Please point them out for me:

http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2015/11/07/actualidad/1446888439_982462.html
http://www.publico.es/sociedad/directo-historica-marcha-madrid-terrorismo.html
http://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2015/11/07/nota/5226588/marcha-feminista-madrid-le-dice-no-violencia-machista
https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/190810-marcha-violencia-machista-madrid
Some links with many pictures and videos. Go ahead, point out the slogans.

I just outlined the incidents. If you can't be bothered to go back in a post chain, don't reply to one.

I saw you make a claim. I did not see you attempt to back up that claim. I saw you link to a random Reddit-post with no sources of his own. I did not see you contribute anything solid.

I don't know enough about the AHIGE, though if they are akin to the good men project, then yes. They are typically as bad as radical feminists.

You know nothing of them, yet condem them? Interesting approach...

[Ostroeuropa]

Any which support the Duluth model, and that's merely one policy.

And what states are engaging in violence on the behalf of feminists?

If that's "merely one policy", can you please provide other examples?

Their demand being not to acknowledge domestic violence against men.

That didn't happen.

Funny how you ignored that aspect of it and went right on back to gynocentralizing the discussion by waffling about women victims. Also funny how you ignored all their slogans used at the rally had nothing to do with DV really and were more about hating men.

I haven't seen any of the slogans you claim were used. Please point them out for me:

http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2015/11/07/actualidad/1446888439_982462.html
http://www.publico.es/sociedad/directo-historica-marcha-madrid-terrorismo.html
http://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2015/11/07/nota/5226588/marcha-feminista-madrid-le-dice-no-violencia-machista
https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/190810-marcha-violencia-machista-madrid
Some links with many pictures and videos. Go ahead, point out the slogans.

I just outlined the incidents. If you can't be bothered to go back in a post chain, don't reply to one.

I saw you make a claim. I did not see you attempt to back up that claim. I saw you link to a random Reddit-post with no sources of his own. I did not see you contribute anything solid.

I don't know enough about the AHIGE, though if they are akin to the good men project, then yes. They are typically as bad as radical feminists.

You know nothing of them, yet condem them? Interesting approach...

How do you explain the violent attacks on people pushing a non-gendered narrative? How do you explain the slogans about violence against women? Why then, did you respond to this post at first by whining about violence against women and ignoring the men?

The reddit post did have sources on it's claims.

I've seen similar groups in the west. They have a focus on deconstructing masculinity and rebuilding it into a positive form, that seems to be their focus on the site you linked too. Given that they are in association with feminists, it'll amount to the usual victim blaming and refusal to acknowledge womens participation in the problem.

I'll be honest, i'm not very interested in responding to you. In all our previous interactions you've proven to be akin to Natapoc and Chessmistress. Even here you ignore the sources in the reddit post I linked.

[Gauthier]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

[Ostroeuropa]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

The MRM is explicitly anti-violence and whenever someone brings up that they think violence might be necessary to achieve change given the entrenched nature of the enemy, there are usually long conversations about why that is neither moral nor practical. Such a person wouldn't originate from within the MRM unless there were substantial radicalization. I won't say it's impossible. A sufficient sense of urgency and lack of momentum could lead to a splinter group, but so long as slow and steady progress is being made, I don't see it as likely.

MGTOW is hermetic and isolationist, they won't do it. At worst they might hysterically assault/kill a feminist who insists on intruding on a private commune they've built together to live in seperation from women, though even this I consider unlikely.

TRP and ATRP?
They're your best bet, as evidenced by Rodgers and the like.

Tradconservatives are another possibility, and the historic perpetrators of violence against feminists.

Another possibility is a lone wolf scenario if a victimized man snaps and decides to go on a rampage against feminists for issue relating to the MRM, but without contacting the MRM.

Such a Jack The Ripper, if sufficiently educated on who the enemy are and how they work, would be largely indistinguishable from a generic revolutionary until they began targeting university professors in addition to politicians and media outlets.

I'm of the opinion that one of these scenarios may well be inevitable unless the MRM maintains its momentum. We already see some MRAs burnout and drop into MGTOW-TRP radical mindsets after failing to generate sufficient change.
But most of the violence happens as a result of not taking mens issues seriously as an incidental thing, nor a direct motivation. I just worry it'll be the eventual outcome at some point.

[Wallenburg]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

He'd actually be caught though.

[Ostroeuropa]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

He'd actually be caught though.

Depends on the country of origin and methodology frankly. It's not as simple as you might think to catch people, especially if they're relatively quiet about their beliefs and not associated with organizations. In any case, their being caught would only occur after a period of activity, by which time the precedent is set, and the damage is done.

[Sanctissima]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

There actually have been quite a few.

Most have been the shooty, shooty, suicide types though. I remember this one guy from Montreal who went to a university class and killed all the women there. I'm pretty sure his suicide note said something about feminism and why he did it.

The guy was pretty nuts.

[Zapato]

And what states are engaging in violence on the behalf of feminists?

If that's "merely one policy", can you please provide other examples?


That didn't happen.


I haven't seen any of the slogans you claim were used. Please point them out for me:

http://politica.elpais.com/politica/2015/11/07/actualidad/1446888439_982462.html
http://www.publico.es/sociedad/directo-historica-marcha-madrid-terrorismo.html
http://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2015/11/07/nota/5226588/marcha-feminista-madrid-le-dice-no-violencia-machista
https://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/190810-marcha-violencia-machista-madrid
Some links with many pictures and videos. Go ahead, point out the slogans.


I saw you make a claim. I did not see you attempt to back up that claim. I saw you link to a random Reddit-post with no sources of his own. I did not see you contribute anything solid.


You know nothing of them, yet condem them? Interesting approach...

How do you explain the violent attacks on people pushing a non-gendered narrative?

A couple of people went too far when they grabbed her wrist. Unfortunate, but such things can happen in the heat of debate.

How do you explain the slogans about violence against women?

By the fact that 1400 women have been killed by male family members during the last decade.

Why then, did you respond to this post at first by whining about violence against women and ignoring the men?

How many men have been killed by female family members?

The reddit post did have sources on it's claims.

Still waiting for you to find a single picture, or a video frame. If the reddit post had sources, go grab a couple of pictures. Show these slogans.

I've seen similar groups in the west. They have a focus on deconstructing masculinity and rebuilding it into a positive form, that seems to be their focus on the site you linked too. Given that they are in association with feminists, it'll amount to the usual victim blaming and refusal to acknowledge womens participation in the problem.

I'll be honest, i'm not very interested in responding to you. In all our previous interactions you've proven to be akin to Natapoc and Chessmistress. Even here you ignore the sources in the reddit post I linked.

Huh?

[Ostroeuropa]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

There actually have been quite a few.

Most have been the shooty, shooty, suicide types though. I remember this one guy from Montreal who went to a university class and killed all the women there. I'm pretty sure his suicide note said something about feminism and why he did it.

The guy was pretty nuts.

Yeh, it's mostly spree killers, and mostly from tradcon or neo-tradcon mindsets. (Neo-tradcon being TRP radicalism that portrays women as incapable of love or empathy and feminism as the organized expression of female nature.)

I'm more concerned about a mad bomber scenario, since this would be harder to stop and could mean multiple targets in a short period of time.

[Wallenburg]

He'd actually be caught though.

Depends on the country of origin and methodology frankly. It's not as simple as you might think to catch people, especially if they're relatively quiet about their beliefs and not associated with organizations. In any case, their being caught would only occur after a period of activity, by which time the precedent is set, and the damage is done.

Well, naturally. But if you take into consideration non-Western nations, we already have such people going around killing women just because they want to learn to read, etc.

[Ostroeuropa]

Depends on the country of origin and methodology frankly. It's not as simple as you might think to catch people, especially if they're relatively quiet about their beliefs and not associated with organizations. In any case, their being caught would only occur after a period of activity, by which time the precedent is set, and the damage is done.

Well, naturally. But if you take into consideration non-Western nations, we already have such people going around killing women just because they want to learn to read, etc.

Yep, that's true. Though we also have people killing men for gender role bullshit. In non-western nations, your best bet is tradcons. They're historically the sort to engage in violence against feminists.
Here, i'd wager it's TRP/ATRP radicals, or dark enlightenment types, with tradcons in second place.

[Wallenburg]

Well, naturally. But if you take into consideration non-Western nations, we already have such people going around killing women just because they want to learn to read, etc.

Yep, that's true. Though we also have people killing men for gender role bullshit. In non-western nations, your best bet is tradcons. They're historically the sort to engage in violence against feminists.
Here, i'd wager it's TRP/ATRP radicals, or dark enlightenment types, with tradcons in second place.

I haven't heard of straight up killing, but I can definitely agree that some radicals have gone too far in trying to oppress men as some sick form of justice for historical sexism against women.

[Sanctissima]

There actually have been quite a few.

Most have been the shooty, shooty, suicide types though. I remember this one guy from Montreal who went to a university class and killed all the women there. I'm pretty sure his suicide note said something about feminism and why he did it.

The guy was pretty nuts.

Yeh, it's mostly spree killers, and mostly from tradcon or neo-tradcon mindsets. (Neo-tradcon being TRP radicalism that portrays women as incapable of love or empathy and feminism as the organized expression of female nature.)

I'm more concerned about a mad bomber scenario, since this would be harder to stop and could mean multiple targets in a short period of time.

True.

Mind you, I'm not too concerned about the mad bomber scenario. I find that most of those types of people usually tend to go for the government instead of specific groups.

[Ostroeuropa]

Yep, that's true. Though we also have people killing men for gender role bullshit. In non-western nations, your best bet is tradcons. They're historically the sort to engage in violence against feminists.
Here, i'd wager it's TRP/ATRP radicals, or dark enlightenment types, with tradcons in second place.

I haven't heard of straight up killing, but I can definitely agree that some radicals have gone too far in trying to oppress men as some sick form of justice for historical sexism against women.

I was talking about TRP radicals, not feminist radicals.
TRP is kind of like Cosmo, for men, and talks about how women think and all that and what you should do to get laid.
Where it goes sour is when you delve deeper into it and they start hypothesizing on WHY women think/act this way. Then you start coming up with models of parasitism and such, an androcentric view of gender relations.
On the very extremist fringes you'll find some people saying women aren't really sentient, and are more like complex insects responding to stimuli in an effort to acquire more resources, as evidenced by the efficacy of the red pill techniques and womens consistent sociopathy as regards men.

The crossover with evolutionary psychology and such is when it starts getting really bad, as opposed to sexist nonsense. I stress, this is only if you buy into it and go really far with it. You'll see shit like;

"Empathy and a moral code is evolutionarily disadvantageous for women. Women who murder their children during times of famine are more likely to survive and reproduce later anyway, whereas for men this isn't the case. Nature has selected for selfish and sociopathic women over the course of millions of years. We shouldn't blame them for what they are, merely learn to live with them."

This type of consistent dehumanization and demonization occasionally results in one of their members snapping and going on a rampage, ala elliot rodgers.

This is also why TRP regards MRA as a useless endeavor sometimes. They argue women simply cannot be made to treat men fairly, as it is beyond their capabilities, and all that can be done is to learn to live with them as best we can.

[Wallenburg]

It's a genuine astonishment that there hasn't been a modern day Jack the Ripper that goes after feminists instead of prostitutes yet.

There actually have been quite a few.

Most have been the shooty, shooty, suicide types though. I remember this one guy from Montreal who went to a university class and killed all the women there. I'm pretty sure his suicide note said something about feminism and why he did it.

The guy was pretty nuts.

Jesus fucking Christ...

[Sanctissima]

There actually have been quite a few.

Most have been the shooty, shooty, suicide types though. I remember this one guy from Montreal who went to a university class and killed all the women there. I'm pretty sure his suicide note said something about feminism and why he did it.

The guy was pretty nuts.

Jesus fucking Christ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_L%C3%A9pine#L.C3.A9pine.27s_suicide_statement

Yeah, he was... a bit of a nut.

Mind you, later analysis showed that mental illness and a really shitty childhood ultimately led to the massacre.

[Wallenburg]

*SNIP*

Both groups can do some pretty messed up shit.

Also, could you clarify what TRP means?

[Ostroeuropa]

*SNIP*

Both groups can do some pretty messed up shit.

Also, could you clarify what TRP means?

[/quote]

The Red Pill.

Many feminists and governmental officials view it as an illustration of misogynist violence committed against women.

*Sigh.*

As Sanc said, this is bollocks. But that won't stop them. So the problems will persist, and more people will end up dead.

[Wallenburg]

Both groups can do some pretty messed up shit.

Also, could you clarify what TRP means?

The Red Pill.

It's a shame that the blue pill has tricked them into believing it is the red one.

[Ostroeuropa]

The Red Pill.

It's a shame that the blue pill has tricked them into believing it is the red one.

It's more complicated than that tbh.
It'd be more like if taking the red pill woke you up from a dream into entering reality, but then the slow-release portion of it caused hallucinations after a few hours until you were a gibbering maniac.

There are portions of TRP with good insights and such, though you have to remember they are often biological determinists as opposed to social constructivists.

It's best to give it a light read through without getting too deep into it, or to read it all while also reading gynocentric publications to see the similarities in the problems and the dehumanizing view it leads to. (Without accounting for the other narrative, women seem like parasitic and soulless monsters, and men seem like domineering and violent tyrants.)

TRPers will often say that their tricks and methods work, and as such, this empirically proves their ideology.
The MRM would differ and say their tricks and methods work because of gender roles and womens sexism, not an inherent defect in women.