The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[The Blaatschapen]

Yes, the challenge sort of is to find ways to earn income, without requiring too much help if you just can't handle dealing with other people. More often than not, you do need some help. Which is why businesses hire people. Because they can do needed work the people in charge can't do on their own in facilitating a business' growth or financial well being.

If you're not it, its tough. It probably not impossible to change, but if I can't I can't. I say let fate play out however it will.

Yeah don't do that. Fate is not real. Do something you hate for money to the absolute best of your ability, then volunteer doing something tangentially related to something you like. Make contacts doing the second thing and when someone somewhere is hiring jump at the opportunity.

I am still waiting for someone to pay me for making puns

[Kowani]

Yeah don't do that. Fate is not real. Do something you hate for money to the absolute best of your ability, then volunteer doing something tangentially related to something you like. Make contacts doing the second thing and when someone somewhere is hiring jump at the opportunity.

I am still waiting for someone to pay me for making puns

we'll pay you in exposure

[Sanghyeok]

Gio, could you please share with me your earlier links to refute TERF talking points? Unfortunately it seems some rather ignorant views have been spreading on NS again:
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=497401

[Auzkhia]

Gio, could you please share with me your earlier links to refute TERF talking points? Unfortunately it seems some rather ignorant views have been spreading on NS again:
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=497401

He could have just brought it here or over to the trans discussion thread, which seems to have been a bit stagnant recently.

[Sanghyeok]

Gio, could you please share with me your earlier links to refute TERF talking points? Unfortunately it seems some rather ignorant views have been spreading on NS again:
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=497401

He could have just brought it here or over to the trans discussion thread, which seems to have been a bit stagnant recently.

Is trans discussion thread only for the community or are allies welcome too?

[Auzkhia]

He could have just brought it here or over to the trans discussion thread, which seems to have been a bit stagnant recently.

Is trans discussion thread only for the community or are allies welcome too?

Anyone is welcome, allies too, even some transphobes because that's how debate threads work!

[Fahran]

What is masculine stuff?

What is feminine stuff?

Feminine Stuff: Pink, Baking Cookies, Makeup, Horses, Vintage Skirts, Ballet, Burning Persepolis to the Ground to Avenge Athens (Thais), Knitting, Brunch and Mimosas, Beheading the Oppressors of Israel (Judith), Amassing a Ginormous Pirate Fleet and Terrorizing the Chinese Coast (Ching Shih), Shopping at Hobby Lobby, Reading Romance Novels. You know? Just girly things. :^)

[Odreria]

>beheading the oppressors of Israel

[Fahran]

>beheading the oppressors of Israel

I was making a reference to Judith killing Holofernes/Nicanor. It's a common subject of Renaissance and Early Modern paintings. The image is a bit iffy, but I think it's within site rules based on the fact that you could see it at an art museum.

[Odreria]

>beheading the oppressors of Israel

I was making a reference to Judith killing Holofernes. It's a common subject of Renaissance and Early Modern paintings. The image is a bit iffy, but I think it's within site rules based on the fact that you could see it at an art museum.

I know who Judith is

[Kowani]

and this is why i've started previewing my posts

[Stellar Colonies]

>beheading the oppressors of Israel

Well, Israel drafts its female population along with their male one, so.

(This isn't intended to reflect on the whole Israel/Palestine thing)

[Fahran]

and this is why i've started previewing my posts

Do not bully me. It has been a long day.

Also, I'm a bit surprised how people caught the reference to Judith but just breezed over how Thais convinced Alexander the So-So to torch one of the wealthiest cities on Earth.

I know who Judith is

Oh, good. *whistles innocently*

[Kowani]

and this is why i've started previewing my posts

Do not bully me. It has been a long day.

Also, I'm a bit surprised how people caught the reference to Judith but just breezed over how Thais convinced Alexander the So-So to torch one of the wealthiest cities on Earth.

bullying you is always good policy

besides, Alexander the Mediocre's campaigns are, imo, very boring
let your dad do all the hard work of building up the army core and setting the tactics and then riding it to victory
yeah okay buddy

[The Blaatschapen]

What is masculine stuff?

What is feminine stuff?

Feminine Stuff: Pink, Baking Cookies, Makeup, Horses, Vintage Skirts, Ballet, Burning Persepolis to the Ground to Avenge Athens (Thais), Knitting, Brunch and Mimosas, Beheading the Oppressors of Israel (Judith), Amassing a Ginormous Pirate Fleet and Terrorizing the Chinese Coast (Ching Shih), Shopping at Hobby Lobby, Reading Romance Novels. You know? Just girly things. :^)

Sounds like a fun Saturday What are they doing the rest of the week?

[Ostroeuropa]

https://observer.com/2015/10/guys-heres-what-its-actually-like-to-be-a-woman/

How much of this article would people here say is true? It is trying to explain why so many men "strike out" with women during courtship/dating. It is supposedly because the perspectives are inherently different between the sexes. Whilst the gender roles that exist nicely align with preexisting culture/tradition, it doesn't seem to actually do much for anyone anymore because most people seem to now need to do both masculine and feminine stuff all the time.

Women are totally different. In these interactions, they are not much afraid of rejection. Rather, when a woman interacts with a man, she is afraid of being physically harmed or sexually assaulted.

This is a neurotic sentiment that only feminists seem to espouse.

But she doesn’t know that: when she meets you, you could be Jack Ryan, Jack Sparrow or Jack the Ripper. Any one of those is equally likely.

"Equally likely".
This is anti-male propaganda that arises from the neurotic tendencies being tolerated and validated as a normal thought to have rather than put into perspective. It's as silly as thinking "There's two options, the plane could arrive at it's destination just fine, or the plane could crash, and they're both equally likely.".

Even more terrifying is the fact that, over the course of her life, the biggest threats to her are men she knows.

Let me try and do a meninism (parody feminism) for a moment.
"Oh my god, why don't women understand that it's not about not respecting women, they're so selfish and they don't understand our perspective. The reason men are anxious about women having positions of authority is that most male rape victims are raped by women in positions of authority, so if women could just stop raping people maybe they could be president. Why do you hate rape victims? You're such a misandrist for complaining about this, it's entirely womens fault that men don't trust them in these positions".

Did I do it right?

And their fears don’t stop at physical harm; they are just as vulnerable to social and emotional harm, as well. Socially, you can spread lies about her or damage her reputation (with men and women), sometimes just by being associated with her.

These are fears that a man has to contend with far more prevalently. I notice how they spin "Harm her reputation by being associated with her" as a thing "Women" have to put up with, rather than it being a result of how society views men, typical gynocentrism.

You can pretend you love her, get her pregnant and then abandon her.

"What if she cucks me?"

And yet men, as the article notes, don't base their dating behavior around this.

We cannot emphasize this enough: mating success requires cross-sex insight.

It does. It's just a shame that women don't have insight into women and so listening to the things they say about themselves are contrary to this goal.

You need to understand how women evaluate your qualities and how they perceive the status, danger, opportunities and threats that you could present.

"Status".

Mhmm.
Notice that none of this is; "Does she like to be around you?".

The better you learn to see these things from women’s points of view, the less unattractive you will be to them and the less confused, resentful and frustrated you will be by how they respond to you.

"The better you learn to be ignorant of womens flaws like women are, the less you will irritate them by acting upon them, and the less aware of their mistreatment of you you will be.".


So now we get to the stuff.

1. "Wah wah, objectification." I.E, don't just view me as a sex object, but appreciate me for me and my personality please.

Hmmm.

*Flashbacks*

"Status".

Mhmm.
Notice that none of this is; "Does she like to be around you?".

Hmmm.

Here's an experiment women can conduct to understand mens point of view. Firstly, you are not allowed to leave your partner as a result of this experiment (to simulate that men don't really have a choice in much of this but to put up with it). Secondly, they have to be as rude and inconsiderate as possible to you for a month. They have to give absolutely zero consideration to you or your perspective. You meanwhile have to pretend this is not happening and always be considerate and supportive of them and agree with their demands of you.

So when they say things like "How come you never cook anything I want you to cook?" and the thought pops into your head that "You never cook anything at all for me", you keep your mouth shut and smile and say "Thankyou for teaching me to be a better person, i'll be more considerate of your perspective.".

If you make it one month, do the next month, and the one after that, and the one after that. When you finally just don't have the energy to be considerate of your partner and they flip out and call you evil for not doing so because all the partners engaged in this experiment have validated to them this is how things should go, you will finally understand men.

You might just understand misogyny too.

2. "But men are bigger."

There's that neurotic shit again.

Some of the same male traits that frighten you the most also seem to be the most attractive to you. The guys who pose the greatest physical threat are also the same guys you can envision making you feel the safest. The guy who seems like the most egotistical player in the bar is also the one making you laugh so hard that your ribs hurt.

DING DING DING. It's almost like the problem is with women seeking out particular men. It's almost like their view of men is self-destructive and they've swallowed so much misandrist bile that they view men this way and then actively keep selecting certain men as a result because of the reduced capacity to have awareness of and take responsibility for their choices that feminism has fostered in them.

Men stare at them, leer at them, make crude passes at them, and interact with them all day every day, with sex clearly the subtext of every interaction—even the briefest, most innocuous non-mating exchanges.

"Male sexuality bad, this is mens fault, not mine.".

And;

Think about how weird that whole situation is: to be sexually attracted to beings that could so easily do irreparable physical harm to you. Think about the anxiety that internal contradiction could create on a daily basis.

"Think about how difficult it would be to to be afraid of white genocide on a daily basis."

Before you approach her, she’s already decided whether she wants you to talk to her, and she’s already judged your mate value and your status before you toss the first lame, derpy pickup line at her.

"Don't objectify us".

The psychological research, for instance, shows that, from a woman’s point of view, most guys she meets will be less kind, less agreeable, less empathic, less conscientious, less reliable, less clean—less everything really—than she and her friends are.

Right. I'm sure this is accurately reporting *from a womans point of view*.

By contrast, the average woman finds the average man sexually invisible, neutral, disgusting or repulsive.

Right.

Honestly I cba for the rest of the article.

*Sigh*. I'm increasingly certain we're never really going to get anywhere as a society on these topics because of the fundamentally broken worldview women have as a result of feminism having inoculated them from self-awareness and self-criticism. It's a constant parade of men being punched in the face and women asking 'Why did you hurt my hand? Is this patriarchy?'.

We have all the evidence and stats and polls and show on to show them their perspective is broken like the women are wonderful bias and so on, but they don't want to accept that and listen to men on these topics.

It's like we've demonstrated every way that the color green exists, but someone with green colorblindness just doesn't accept it. There is nothing more we can do.

*I'm* going to keep trying nonetheless, but I do understand why more and more men turn to "They're not capable of it" and the subsequent thoughts "Because they're inferior" or "So it's us or them".

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

-snip-

It’s not very often that I side with Ostroeuropa on things, but in this case I will. Seconded.

Sai’s article broadly boils down to women and men are inherently different and men will find more success in the dating market if they are considerate of those differences.

To which... what? The fundamental premise of gender equality is that society should act as if there are no substantive differences between the genders, unless such differences have been ingrained by social conditioning.

Of course people - not just men, but women - will find better success in the dating market if they are more willing to accept a relationship in which their partner’s needs and desires are prioritised over their own, but one has to seriously question whether this is a desirable thing to have. Perhaps I’m a naive youth for thinking this, but it’s my belief that a healthy romance is built on an equitable partnership.

Women cannot simultaneously assert that they are as capable as men and insist that they need to be protected from men. I cannot accept that women need to be given consideration for their innate weaknesses, because I don’t believe that any such weaknesses exist in any substantive manner.

[Ostroeuropa]

-snip-

It’s not very often that I side with Ostroeuropa on things, but in this case I will. Seconded.

Sai’s article broadly boils down to women and men are inherently different and men will find more success in the dating market if they are considerate of those differences.

To which... what? The fundamental premise of gender equality is that society should act as if there are no substantive differences between the genders, unless such differences have been ingrained by social conditioning.

Of course people - not just men, but women - will find better success in the dating market if they are more willing to accept a relationship in which their partner’s needs and desires are prioritised over their own, but one has to seriously question whether this is a desirable thing to have. Perhaps I’m a naive youth for thinking this, but it’s my belief that a healthy romance is built on an equitable partnership.

Women cannot simultaneously assert that they are as capable as men and insist that they need to be protected from men. I cannot accept that women need to be given consideration for their innate weaknesses, because I don’t believe that any such weaknesses exist in any substantive manner.

They can and do simultaneously assert those things and it's pointless to try and convince them to stop with words or logic because they have an entire industry based around rationalizing and making excuses for themselves while blaming the people who note their flaws as being "misogynist", furthermore their in group bias is self-reinforcing such that they value other irrational perspectives from women more highly than rational ones from men. Like, imagine a room with 10 people, 5 are incredibly biased and if they agree on something, then no matter what the other 5 say, they will think it has to be wrong because "Well if us 5 are saying one thing then it obviously has value. It is literally impossible for all of us to be wrong and you to be right, because we are superior to you.".

The only thing men have control over is how we respond to it. The appropriate response is to take note of it, and view the behavior and those who engage in it with contempt while allowing that contempt to influence or treatment of them.

This way, women who don't behave this way will be better treated and incentive will do the rest.

[Des-Bal]

-snip-

"This is not okay" is not an argument against "this is true" if it was holocaust deniers and non-idiots would pretty much switch sides. In fact much of your anger seems to come from the fact you believe it's true.

[Ostroeuropa]

-snip-

"This is not okay" is not an argument against "this is true" if it was holocaust deniers and non-idiots would pretty much switch sides. In fact much of your anger seems to come from the fact you believe it's true.

Some of it is true, some of it is a truthful reporting of womens biases and prejudices, some of it is flat out false.

[Des-Bal]

Some of it is true, some of it is a truthful reporting of womens biases and prejudices, some of it is flat out false.

What parts are not correct? You've complained about the fact that the spiel about improving your romantic odds didn't detail all the problems men have but neither do most recipes or mathematical formula.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Anyone who thinks a man is equally likely to be a rapist as they are to be cool has some serious phobias and needs to talk to someone. Like I'm not even joking, you gotta be kidding me if you think it's equally likely that I'm a rapist as it is that I'm not.

I'm pretty sure a super majority of American men have not raped someone, at least under the definition of rape in 2010 before everything became problematic. You know, forcing yourself on someone sexually without getting their permission.

[Ostroeuropa]

Some of it is true, some of it is a truthful reporting of womens biases and prejudices, some of it is flat out false.

What parts are not correct? You've complained about the fact that the spiel about improving your romantic odds didn't detail all the problems men have but neither do most recipes or mathematical formula.

"Equally likely" is an example of not correct.

[Des-Bal]

"Equally likely" is an example of not correct.

Sure, if you read it as meaning 1 in 3 men are rapemurderers but why stop there? Why not read it to mean 1 in 3 men are literally jack sparrow, jack Ryan, or jack the ripper? That shocks the conscious, it would mean all nonficitional men are one english prostitute killer, it would require a conspiracy of a magnitude I can hardly imagine!

Of course this would be undercut by the previous sentence saying you probably aren't someone who would ever hurt a woman and be a shocking departure from the general tendency of the text to focus on women's feelings.

[Ostroeuropa]

Anyone who thinks a man is equally likely to be a rapist as they are to be cool has some serious phobias and needs to talk to someone. Like I'm not even joking, you gotta be kidding me if you think it's equally likely that I'm a rapist as it is that I'm not.

I'm pretty sure a super majority of American men have not raped someone, at least under the definition of rape in 2010 before everything became problematic. You know, forcing yourself on someone sexually without getting their permission.

The externalization and politicization of some womens internal pathologies is a major problem and has been for a long time now in large part because of feminist theory and the compulsive validation of womens perspectives alongside the presentation of those paranoid viewpoints as normal and desirable to the point that much of feminism and feminist theory is characterized by it. To some extent this has caused irrational and pathological viewpoints to spread and become normalized in society as feminism has become normalized.

The breakdown of societies willingness to tell a woman "This is not right, you are not normal, you are wrong about this and should seek professional help for your mindset, not validation for it" and the impulse to instead validate these views as normal and accurate has led to a phenomanae similar to if we just validated a particular groups paranoid conspiracies about communists sapping our precious bodily fluids and water flurodization and kept that up for a hundred years.

Eventually it is not only the pathological and neurotic who adopt that view, but it becomes entirely normalized, and the presence of these thoughts with an origin in mental pathology cause a memetic hazard that leads to otherwise healthy people developing disordered and unhealthy frames of mind when they internalize them because being trained to be paranoid all the time causes mental unwellness. Hence the stuff about how ordinary interactions make women "anxious" and so on. The figures are pretty clear, men are raped at comparable rates, but men do not have their interactions with women dominated by this anxiety and paranoia. I think you'd be hard pressed to even find male rape victims who adopt that mindset. Because it is not in fact a reaction to reality or experiences, but an expression of internal pathology and mental unwellness.

There's a series of videos from the sister of one of the people who advanced patriarchy theory who describes her as basically a paranoid schizophrenic and says that most of the people involved in that section of academia when she was younger were mentally unwell in various ways and points out how this formed the basis of much of feminist theory and its conspiratorial undertones.

Through feminism as a vector and internalizing the cognitive patterns of unwell women, many women have in effect caught a mental health problem, similar to if someone with a biological brain problem that caused depression mapped out their mental framework and someone without that biological problem adopted it and used it as a frame of reference to view the world. That person would develop depression even if their underlying brain structure was otherwise normal. It's the difference between "You need cognitive behavioural therapy" and "You need medication".

We put feminists in asylums at first for a reason. That reason was not misogyny.

To be clear, this is only one aspect of why feminism is a problem. It is not the totality of it. I'm also sure that some feminists manage to avoid this pitfall by having other mental frameworks present that innoculate them from the deleterious effects, but nonetheless remain vectors for this transmission of mental unwellness by spreading this memetic hazard in a fashion akin to a asymptomatic carrier.

It's incredibly straightforward and you're right. This is not normal, this is not functional, this is unhealthy. So the question becomes, why did this unhealthy pattern of thought become the norm for women? Why do we uphold the mindsets and mental frameworks of paranoia, conspiratorial thinking, narcissism, and in general mental illness as something that society should accept and validate rather than challenge?