The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[Cekoviu]

are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

cek sux shes wrong about everything such a dumb misandrist

(u never said i couldnt join in)

[Kowani]

Appear, and your enemies shall organize against you.

I, a non-socialist, used to post in the "how to save socialism in the us" thread, but I got tried for getting bullied for not reading Marx and using dictionaries for definitions.

As is deserved.
Read Marx.
I’ll even TG you some links if you want.

are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

cek sux shes wrong about everything such a dumb misandrist

(u never said i couldnt join in)

swing and a miss

[Sundiata]

Stop it.

tell me I'm wrong. i'd love to be wrong.

We can have this conversation in the thread dedicated to trans issues or have this conversation in private, but I will not acquiesce to being bullied.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

tell me I'm wrong. i'd love to be wrong.

We can have this conversation in the thread dedicated to trans issues or have this conversation in private, but I will not acquiesce to being bullied.

i don't see how i'm bullying you, but you can telegram me or take it to the trans thread if you want.


viewtopic.php?f=20&t=463149&p=37734357#p37734357

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

cek sux shes wrong about everything such a dumb misandrist

(u never said i couldnt join in)

interesting, but you forgot to criticize cek for using the third person to refer to herself. maybe stonks can get that one.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

I, a non-socialist, used to post in the "how to save socialism in the us" thread, but I got tried for getting bullied for not reading Marx and using dictionaries for definitions.

As is deserved.
Read Marx.
I’ll even TG you some links if you want.

alright. *reluctant capitalist noises*

marks is when your test gets finally gets graded, but everyone gets the same grade

[Cordel One]

As is deserved.
Read Marx.
I’ll even TG you some links if you want.

alright. *reluctant capitalist noises*

marks is when your test gets finally gets graded, but everyone gets the same grade

Here's the Marxists Internet Archive if interested

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

[Cordel One]

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Oxford defines feminism as "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes", so definition-wise it is not.

Not going by definitions - also no

[Albrenia]

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Depends on how one defines feminism. By the anti-SJW crowd's standards, yeah, misandrists can be feminists. By the more PC definition of people desiring equality between the sexes, no they are not.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

a better way to phrase the question would have been "are misandrists correct and why/why not".

i say no, they're wrong in their dislike/hatred for men. there's nothing inherently wrong with men or being a man. there is something inherently wrong with misandry and being a misandrist.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Some misandrists can be feminists I believe, but not all feminists are misandrists, and not all misandrists are feminists. A feminist is merely someone who advocates for women's rights and interests. Some people (like Cek), believe that it is in women's interests to be misandrist. That would make them both misandrists and feminists. Some feminists also harbour less explicit biases against men.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Some misandrists can be feminists I believe, but not all feminists are misandrists, and not all misandrists are feminists. A feminist is merely someone who advocates for women's rights and interests. Some people (like Cek), believe that it is in women's interests to be misandrist. That would make them both misandrists and feminists. Some feminists also harbour less explicit biases against men.

wouldn't all misandrists be feminists? like a square-rectangle type of thing. they do seem v e r y interested in advance women's rights/interests/power/the matriarchy.

[Albrenia]

Some misandrists can be feminists I believe, but not all feminists are misandrists, and not all misandrists are feminists. A feminist is merely someone who advocates for women's rights and interests. Some people (like Cek), believe that it is in women's interests to be misandrist. That would make them both misandrists and feminists. Some feminists also harbour less explicit biases against men.

wouldn't all misandrists be feminists? like a square-rectangle type of thing. they do seem v e r y interested in advance women's rights/interests/power/the matriarchy.

I guess one could hate all men while simultaneously not caring about other women or their issues. Be a rare and particularly unpleasant sort though, I'd imagine.

Egalitarianism is just way easier. I prefer to save my hate for individuals who earn it, not roughly half the entire world's population.

[Celritannia]

Or we could just have each case judged individually and based on their own merits or lack there of.

You're right.

What are the merits of this man and his views on racial equality?

Case by case?

We should hear him out. He might have something valid to contribute.

As I said, nobody calling themselves a feminist can expect to be taken seriously as a gender equality advocate by anyone who knows the history of the movement. Because if they cared, they wouldn't call themselves feminists.

At best you can say they care, just not enough to consider how offensive it is because they're super-duper attached to that label and don't wanna give it up no matter how justifiably alienated it makes men and victims of that movement, nor how much it would remind them of their victimization and so on.

You *do* realize there's men in this thread who have put up with the duluth model and feminist activism on rape laws and so on, right?

Go ahead. Sit down there and explain to us all how your confederate flag isn't a bad thing. I'm sure all us slavery descendents are dying to hear it.

This is not abstract celrit.

You are directly being obnoxious and insensitive as a result of feminism brainwashing you, and you should stop doing it. But you behave that way, and then expect us to believe feminists care about men, their participation in this conversation and so on. It is plainly ridiculous.

Using a race issue to justify an argument that involves legal marital issues is terrible.
The two are not the same and you should stop.
It does not help your argument.

Also, there was a big civil war to say why the confederacy is bad, and the general consensus is that confederate ideals are terrible, especially those who hold racist thoughts.
So comparing this to why fathers should be able to see their children after a custodial battle is even more terrible.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

wouldn't all misandrists be feminists? like a square-rectangle type of thing. they do seem v e r y interested in advance women's rights/interests/power/the matriarchy.

I guess one could hate all men while simultaneously not caring about other women or their issues. Be a rare and particularly unpleasant sort though, I'd imagine.

Egalitarianism is just way easier. I prefer to save my hate for individuals who earn it, not roughly half the entire world's population.

i like when equal rights. i don't have the emotional stamia to continously hate anyone that i actually know irl, but i don't hate people for things with no bearing on morality, like gender.

[Ostroeuropa]

Legal depends on where you're talking about but the privilege we're talking about are broader than that. If a child is victimized by a teacher the outcry is consistently dependent on the sex of the parties involved. Further fe,inists have stood in opposition to recognizing that it is rape to fuck a man against his will if you are a woman, theyve done it in terms of both reporting statistics and lobbying to change or prevent the changing of laws.

Well, I see what you're saying but I still am not seeing evidence of oppression or a systemic assault on men's rights. Rape has a specific definition depending upon the jurisdiction. It isn't necessarily the same thing as sexual assault. Or even sexual battery, for instance, which can happen regardless of the nature of the persons involved.

Sexual assault, sexual battery, and rape aren't always necessarily the same things as a matter of jurisprudence. I also think you'll be hard pressed to find a feminist who isn't prepared to say that these these crimes are wrong.

The UK does not define rape in a way so as to include female perpetrators, that is an example of legalistic and systemic discrimination against men. While the theoretical maximum sentences are the same, they require aggravating factors to reach it.

A man who kidnaps, tortures, and rapes a woman will get the maximum sentence, same as a woman who does.

This is used to obscure the fact that if a rape lacks other forms of violence, home invasion and so on, then women rapists *may not even face any jail time*, compared to the mandatory minimum of 2 years for men. This is because they are classed as separate crimes.

Consider how the UK sexual offences act has been updated 3 times in the last 20 years with feminist groups consulting on it, and how none of them addressed this but instead repeatedly put it into the version of the bill they recommended.

Mary Koss, former president of NOW (the largest feminist organization in the world), testified to the senate that rape should not include things women do to men, but that they should call it "Unwanted sexual contact" and so on.

[Ostroeuropa]

are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Not all misandrists are feminists, but all feminists are misandrists for reasons i've covered elsewhere, since the act of saying feminism is an equality movement is an act of misandry that whitewashes it's history of anti-male discrimination.

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Oxford defines feminism as "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes", so definition-wise it is not.

Not going by definitions - also no

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

Oxford defines feminism as "the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes", so definition-wise it is not.

Not going by definitions - also no

Disagree.

You can advocate for genocide on the basis of national security. Or tax cuts for the rich on the basis that it'll help the poor. Or any number of things.

Plenty of misandrists advance womens rights and privileges beyond equality, but do so "On the basis of equality." rhetorically.

The dictionary definition notes how feminists justify their actions through rhetoric, nothing more. It's also striking that absent from this definition is mens rights, despite all the defensive "feminism cares about mens issues too" we see. Guess it doesn't, if we're going by "definitions".

Cek probably isn't a feminist under that definition because she has abandoned the equality rhetoric. But that's all that is required to be a feminist, rhetoric.

"I'm a Nazi because I believe germany should be strong and secure, but genociding the Jews isn't making us stronger, so that can't be Naziism" is the kind of thing someone who doesn't understand this dynamic would say. Plenty of those types in the feminist movement who don't understand what feminism actually is. (I.E, a misandrist hate movement that uses a particular rhetorical justification), and instead identify with the rhetorical values.

You know. The type of people empty suit politicians try and appeal to with vapid "I believe in the middle class!" statements despite policies designed in such a way that willl fuck over the middle class. There's got to be a word for that type of person, but for the life of me I can't think of one.

[Ostroeuropa]

You're right.

What are the merits of this man and his views on racial equality?

(Image)

Case by case?

We should hear him out. He might have something valid to contribute.

As I said, nobody calling themselves a feminist can expect to be taken seriously as a gender equality advocate by anyone who knows the history of the movement. Because if they cared, they wouldn't call themselves feminists.

At best you can say they care, just not enough to consider how offensive it is because they're super-duper attached to that label and don't wanna give it up no matter how justifiably alienated it makes men and victims of that movement, nor how much it would remind them of their victimization and so on.

You *do* realize there's men in this thread who have put up with the duluth model and feminist activism on rape laws and so on, right?

Go ahead. Sit down there and explain to us all how your confederate flag isn't a bad thing. I'm sure all us slavery descendents are dying to hear it.

This is not abstract celrit.

You are directly being obnoxious and insensitive as a result of feminism brainwashing you, and you should stop doing it. But you behave that way, and then expect us to believe feminists care about men, their participation in this conversation and so on. It is plainly ridiculous.

Using a race issue to justify an argument that involves legal marital issues is terrible.
The two are not the same and you should stop.
It does not help your argument.

Also, there was a big civil war to say why the confederacy is bad, and the general consensus is that confederate ideals are terrible, especially those who hold racist thoughts.
So comparing this to why fathers should be able to see their children after a custodial battle is even more terrible.

You really should have been clearer what exactly you were replying to.

Presumed Joint Custody sets joint custody as the default that has to be moved away from if you have case-by-case evidence it should be. Feminists have opposed it for decades.

So if you're saying it should be case-by-case you either agree with the MRA agenda, or you think that we should default to the primary caregiver doctrine like feminist organizations demand and only deviate from it if there is evidence the primary caregiver is unfit.

Presumably you think the first, which makes your post pointless. It's "Presumed joint custody", not "Enforced joint custody".

[Suriyanakhon]

someone should give me a medal for how many threads I derail. anyways are misandrists feminists? argue against cek for the next week discuss.

No, being a misandrist does not necessarily mean that one advocates for women's rights and there's a lot of modern misandrist tendencies in men with toxic masculinity too (denying men can be raped, claiming men are inherently violent and sexual, etc.) There are misandrist strains of feminism such as some forms of lesbian feminism which believes in gender segregation, others which are much more egalitarian.

[Albrenia]

Ostro, you might wanna be careful with the 'not all misandrists are feminists but...' statement, I'm not sure if it's entirely within the rules.

[Stellar Colonies]

tbh this being an MRA thread instead of a feminist thread isn't because of the forum's demographics, because even on less male-dominated, more left-wing websites, female-only spaces are still invaded by men. this is nothing more than that: men being so entitled that they can't possibly picture there being a space that isn't for them; it's just hidden behind a thin mask of pseudo-argumentation here.

It is more likely they are here because there isn't an MRA thread, as opposed to 'being entitled'.

Legal depends on where you're talking about but the privilege we're talking about are broader than that. If a child is victimized by a teacher the outcry is consistently dependent on the sex of the parties involved. Further fe,inists have stood in opposition to recognizing that it is rape to fuck a man against his will if you are a woman, theyve done it in terms of both reporting statistics and lobbying to change or prevent the changing of laws.

Well, I see what you're saying but I still am not seeing evidence of oppression or a systemic assault on men's rights. Rape has a specific definition depending upon the jurisdiction. It isn't necessarily the same thing as sexual assault. Or even sexual battery, for instance, which can happen regardless of the nature of the persons involved.

Sexual assault, sexual battery, and rape aren't always necessarily the same things as a matter of jurisprudence. I also think you'll be hard pressed to find a feminist who isn't prepared to say that these these crimes are wrong.

There is the concerning trend of some jurisdictions carefully defining 'rape' in such a way that the number of male victims in rape statistics is artificially deflated...

...especially when countries such as Israel and the Phillipines do not appear to legally acknowledge the existence of it at all, with it defined in a gendered way which leaves only male perpetrators and female victims.

*It is possible that these definitions are not what they seem and do allow for male victims of rape to be legally recognized as such, but they unfortunately seem rather straightforward.

Also the strange way that people needlessly gender genital cutting, but that's a separate discussion.

[Albrenia]

Also, this isn't men invading a 'female only' space, because this is a forum thread, not a female only space.

[Ostroeuropa]

Ostro, you might wanna be careful with the 'not all misandrists are feminists but...' statement, I'm not sure if it's entirely within the rules.

I've noted specifically what my argument is, that the act of calling yourself a feminist is itself an act of misandry. This is not some vague generalization, but a specific argument about the nature of the act being performed. As I noted previously, a comparison can be drawn to the confederate flag. "Everyone who flies the confederate flag is a racist, because doing so is an act of either overt racism, or attempting to whitewash a racist symbol.".

There's also a debate on language between whether terms like racist, misandrist, misogynist and so on are useful compared to "doing racism" "doing misandry" "doing misogyny", and I think that has at least some merit, but i'll note that such examples really only apply to people who aren't aware of the argument.

So, I suppose I can ammend it to; "Not all misandrists are feminists, but all feminists are misandrists, or are only "Doing a misandry" and very imminently about to stop calling themselves feminists, because to call yourself feminist and to call feminism an equality movement is to whitewash the movements history of human rights abuses against men.".

tbh this being an MRA thread instead of a feminist thread isn't because of the forum's demographics, because even on less male-dominated, more left-wing websites, female-only spaces are still invaded by men. this is nothing more than that: men being so entitled that they can't possibly picture there being a space that isn't for them; it's just hidden behind a thin mask of pseudo-argumentation here.

It is more likely they are here because there isn't an MRA thread, as opposed to 'being entitled'.

There was an MRA thread. Feminists invaded it and kept shitposting rather than actually engage in debate. So we came here to debunk the nonsense they were posting. Over time, they shut up, probably because they can't think of anything to say that doesn't have a well documented counter to it. There's also far less feminists on the forum now and many more ex-feminists as a result.

A trend replicated in wider society, by the way:

In 2013, 28% of Americans were feminists.

By 2015, it was 18%.

I noticed they stopped polling the public on how many are feminists around 2017, when the BBC article showed only 20% of young women and 7% of young men were feminists, after a recent poll showed 33% of young adults were explicit anti-feminists (42% of men, 25% of women). Got too embarrassing I guess.

[New haven america]

Also, this isn't men invading a 'female only' space, because this is a forum thread, not a female only space.

This is a very common problem.

Some people don't understand what the term "Open forum" means.