The NationStates Feminism Thread IV: Fight Like A Girl!

[Malphe II]

Me and my parents had the whole goddamn tradition row over this silly shit.

"Well it's the father's last name that goes at the end"

"Why"

"Cuz it's the law"

"No it's not"

"... Oh. Well it's tradition"

"Says who"

"... It's tradition".

You may ask, how did this tradition get started?

[Ostroeuropa]

Italian Constitutional Court rules that the current practice of automatically giving newborns' the father's surname is discriminatory, mandates that children should be given both parents' last names, in whichever order the parents decide, unless the parents agree to use just one

The tradition has arisen because a mothers paternity was not in question, but in bestowing his last name on a child a father has accepted paternity. I'm in favor of scrapping the automatic nature of it for that reason if nothing else, but I'd also question including the fathers name at all without his consent and would suggest that if he is inclined to not do so his wishes not to be involved should be respected.

I also think immediate patternity testing should be available upon request and without the mothers knowledge.

[Union of States of America]

As a guy, concerning the last names:

WHO GIVES A FLIPPING TROUT?

Furthermore, I wish people would stop calling me 'toxic' because I hold a door for a girl. Apparently it's 'sexist because I'm treating her like she's weak and incompetent'. Yeah right, cause I definitely do it cause I think she's too stupid to know how a doorknob works, and not at all because its a sign of politeness and respect. Furthermore, I wish they would stop saying 'holding doors for other men equals male chauvinism.' Again. Where do they come up with this? Perhaps I hold doors for men and women, because it's nicer than letting the door SLAM IN THEIR FACE.

Ps: your nose will hurt after a door gets slammed in your face. Don't ask how I know.

[GuessTheAltAccount]

It's damned if you do, damned if you don't on the door-holding thing. My mom taught me to always hold the door open for a lady. For me it's not an absolute. It depends on the sex of the individual, the distance they are away, and maybe what mood I'm in at that moment. But I guess people are so sick of its negative connotations in some contexts that they go too far in the opposite direction, giving people in the middle shit for being caught in a damned if you do, damned if you don't, instead of taking up their quarrel with the people most insistent on that gender role.

. . .

Anyway, I'd like to reiterate a tangent I went to in the abortion thread in response to an "abortions will happen anyway" remark. I'm wondering if it'd be more fitting here than there:

Playing devil's advocate here, as I don't think abortion is wrong anyway, but how come this argument is nowhere near as popular in the context of prostitution? In the context of prostitution, popular opinion calls it appeasement to not continue the uphill battle against it, but here the unenforceability of the law is considered enough reason on its own to scrap it, despite the myriad of better arguments against it.

I'm aware prostitution and abortion are engaged in for different reasons, and most patients of the latter probably don't resort to the former. But that alone doesn't make arguments applicable to one invalid for the other.

[Stellar Colonies]

I just hold it open for someone if I and them are close enough.

[Kowani]

In historic first, German woman convicted of sexual assault for secretly poking holes in her partner’s condoms

[Tarsonis]

In historic first, German woman convicted of sexual assault for secretly poking holes in her partner’s condoms

Good

[New haven america]

On the name thing, honestly I'd take my wife's last name if she took mine. (If it's a name that works with mine that is, I have a very Frenchy last name, other names can be very awkward when paired together)

Now, onto a question I've been sitting on, Has Modern Feminism Created a Generation Wide Victim Mentality?

I ask because in lieu of the SCOTUS BS, I've noticed a lot of people just aren't doing anything to stop it. They're not.

(I posted something similar earlier) ~1/2 of the women I've seen IRL or online are calling for sex strikes or shaming male masturbation in response, when evidently they have no clue that that's exactly what the conservatives want. The conservatives hate out-of-wedlock sex and believe sexual liberation is sinful behavior. They want women to keep their legs closed. (Likewise, if a woman was a rape victim, they blame her for not being modest enough) They've horseshoed into supporting the GOP.

On the other hand, the other ~1/2 I've seen just... Accept it. They're just making plans in order to live with the law. Stocking up/updating BC, getting self-defense gear, etc... Don't get me wrong, I understand being better safe than sorry, I do, but why the fuck are they acting like the ban is already in place? They're not even trying to do anything else, they're just accepting the new reality that may be imposed come June and continuing on with day-to-day life.

The best part is that neither side can come up with any possible solution to the fight back against this. Most of them are acting like helpless children with no agency, which coincidently, is a major theme/idea behind Modern Feminism. Under the doctrine of Modern Feminism, women are perpetual victims that are weak and helpless with no agency in life, this is especially rife in online spaces. (Try going on a feminist area on Reddit and saying women have some semblance of agency in life, you'll be downvoted into the double negatives within the hour, maybe even banned) And this is exactly how most are reacting, they're just acting helpless and clueless as to what to do in this situation. "Fight for our rights? How?"

What happened to the "I am woman, here me roar!" or "A woman scorned" mantras? Where'd those go? Cause the above isn't empowerment, it's defeatism and victimhood, and it's infuriating.

Protesting doesn't count either, no. It took 32 million people protesting against The US-Iraq War and the Republicans still did it anyway. These people will not be swayed by weekend protests, their beliefs and will to perform an action are stronger than steel.

Also, the reason why this is here and not somewhere else is cause I got banned for victim blaming... That brings the total to 7 feminist bans, 5 MRA bans.

[Kowani]

the answer to the above is that the only option is violence aimed at the members of the court
for what I hope are obvious reasons, this is not something anyone can actually advocate in society outside the far-fringes of the internet
there is no legislative out! The stopgap solution is “codify abortion rights in blue states, elect democratic governors in purple ones, and make it possible for women to move from the red/purple states to blue ones”
That’s it, that’s the whole range of moves until the next Democratic trifecta!

[Ostroeuropa]

On the name thing, honestly I'd take my wife's last name if she took mine. (If it's a name that works with mine that is, I have a very Frenchy last name, other names can be very awkward when paired together)

Now, onto a question I've been sitting on, Has Modern Feminism Created a Generation Wide Victim Mentality?

I ask because in lieu of the SCOTUS BS, I've noticed a lot of people just aren't doing anything to stop it. They're not.

(I posted something similar earlier) ~1/2 of the women I've seen IRL or online are calling for sex strikes or shaming male masturbation in response, when evidently they have no clue that that's exactly what the conservatives want. The conservatives hate out-of-wedlock sex and believe sexual liberation is sinful behavior. They want women to keep their legs closed. (Likewise, if a woman was a rape victim, they blame her for not being modest enough) They've horseshoed into supporting the GOP.

On the other hand, the other ~1/2 I've seen just... Accept it. They're just making plans in order to live with the law. Stocking up/updating BC, getting self-defense gear, etc... Don't get me wrong, I understand being better safe than sorry, I do, but why the fuck are they acting like the ban is already in place? They're not even trying to do anything else, they're just accepting the new reality that may be imposed come June and continuing on with day-to-day life.

The best part is that neither side can come up with any possible solution to the fight back against this. Most of them are acting like helpless children with no agency, which coincidently, is a major theme/idea behind Modern Feminism. Under the doctrine of Modern Feminism, women are perpetual victims that are weak and helpless with no agency in life, this is especially rife in online spaces. (Try going on a feminist area on Reddit and saying women have some semblance of agency in life, you'll be downvoted into the double negatives within the hour, maybe even banned) And this is exactly how most are reacting, they're just acting helpless and clueless as to what to do in this situation. "Fight for our rights? How?"

What happened to the "I am woman, here me roar!" or "A woman scorned" mantras? Where'd those go? Cause the above isn't empowerment, it's defeatism and victimhood, and it's infuriating.

Protesting doesn't count either, no. It took 32 million people protesting against The US-Iraq War and the Republicans still did it anyway. These people will not be swayed by weekend protests, their beliefs and will to perform an action are stronger than steel.

Also, the reason why this is here and not somewhere else is cause I got banned for victim blaming... That brings the total to 7 feminist bans, 5 MRA bans.

You're noticing that pretty much all that most of them know how to do is lash out at men and talk about being oppressed. The chickens have come home to roost where the conflation of hating men with helping women has finally entirely crippled them and left them devoid of any meaningful political agency not through external factors, but through the poison they took themselves willingly. You can see this strange confusion manifesting with the constant pitiable discussions of vengeance policies against men for this as well as sex strikes, and inevitably one of them with a bit more of a lucid mind will pipe up "Don't men support abortion rights as much as women do?" and they'll stand in the circle and open and shut their mouths in mute silence for a while, at a loss for what else to do.

Before going right back to seething at men. They have no other ideas, no other plan of action. It is all they know how to do after having spent years brainwashing eachother into thinking that this is good and normal and beyond that 'the only way'. They are reduced to this by their own refusal to take men seriously when they told them to stop listening to feminists. Men warned them it would make them bad people, but I do not think anyone really understood just how badly it would genuinely cripple them. It has not only made them bad, it has made them weak, helpless, and childlike as you said.

Feminism has made women inferior, and the consequence of it, is they shall be treated as such under the law as a result of their genuine inability to properly participate in the political process (Not all women blah blah) and defend themselves against the minority of people who seek to subjugate them. They have the vote, They have bodies, They have materials to make signs and so on. It is not the rights they lack. It is the ability.

Give a dog the same rights and threaten to take away their bones and you'd see much the same level of efficacy. (Arguably, the dog would be better at defending its rights. It would be friendly and personable and might actually manage to guilt people about what they were doing rather than pissing them off constantly, and there's an outside shot it'll just maul anyone who tries.).

That's the simple fact of the matter. By their own doing, they have crippled themselves. It won't change until they change, frankly. But the nature of the problem is such that all problems are cast as external and to say otherwise is misogyny. You saw this yourself with your ban for "Victim blaming" them.

It may be the case that and the end of the day, when the process is finally complete, all feminism will have done is to make women contemptible rather than actually secure them any liberties, as one by one they are rolled back and they find themselves unable to conceive of a way to stop it, unable to consider the problem might be them, and unwilling to try anything other than seethe and spout misandry.

The total abdication of responsibility is not a firm foundation for rights, because rights are not ultimately secured by what you "deserve", but by your effective ability to participate.

Animals do not deserve to be in slaughter houses. And yet, there they are. Because they cannot stop us and it is in our interests to do it to them.

Traditionalist women invested and profiting from the enforcement of gender roles participate very effectively in that system. They're arguably its most active and effective participants.

[Vassenor]

In historic first, German woman convicted of sexual assault for secretly poking holes in her partner’s condoms

Good.

[New haven america]

1. the answer to the above is that the only option is violence aimed at the members of the court
2. for what I hope are obvious reasons, this is not something anyone can actually advocate in society outside the far-fringes of the internet
3. there is no legislative out! The stopgap solution is “codify abortion rights in blue states, elect democratic governors in purple ones, and make it possible for women to move from the red/purple states to blue ones”
That’s it, that’s the whole range of moves until the next Democratic trifecta!

1. That's not the only option. Can't openly say if it's good or bad one though...
2. Ireland in the 90's and Mexico in the 80's would like to have a word with you.

Mexico got it legalized within 1 day after the government declared they'd be keeping abortion illegal. 14 hours IIRC.

3. Oh look, things that aren't going to happen. Let's have fun in the Christian Fascist dictatorship then.

[Kowani]

1. the answer to the above is that the only option is violence aimed at the members of the court
2. for what I hope are obvious reasons, this is not something anyone can actually advocate in society outside the far-fringes of the internet
3. there is no legislative out! The stopgap solution is “codify abortion rights in blue states, elect democratic governors in purple ones, and make it possible for women to move from the red/purple states to blue ones”
That’s it, that’s the whole range of moves until the next Democratic trifecta!

1. That's not the only option. Can't openly say if it's good or bad one though...
2. Ireland in the 90's and Mexico in the 80's would like to have a word with you.

Mexico got it legalized within 1 day after the government declared they'd be keeping abortion illegal. 14 hours IIRC.

ignoring the fact that neither of these are applicable and you don’t really understand the Mexican situation at all do you understand why [terrorism] is not mainstream politics

3. Oh look, things that aren't going to happen. Let's have fun in the Christian Fascist dictatorship then.

Some are, some aren’t, that things are going to be awful does not change the calculus

[Tahar Joblis]

You're noticing that pretty much all that most of them know how to do is lash out at men and talk about being oppressed. The chickens have come home to roost where the conflation of hating men with helping women has finally entirely crippled them and left them devoid of any meaningful political agency not through external factors, but through the poison they took themselves willingly. You can see this strange confusion manifesting with the constant pitiable discussions of vengeance policies against men for this as well as sex strikes, and inevitably one of them with a bit more of a lucid mind will pipe up "Don't men support abortion rights as much as women do?" and they'll stand in the circle and open and shut their mouths in mute silence for a while, at a loss for what else to do.

Or, in the converse case, someone pointing out that conservative women are the driving force in anti-abortion activism.

In this case, it's not simply true on the level of grassroots organizing or single-issue voters mobilizing, because the decisive change from, say, one of the most recent times the court upheld abortion rights is that there's now a conservative woman on the court. Who, in fact, is the one who pointed out during questioning that the law in no way forces women to assume the responsibilities of parenthood, thanks to the proliferation of safe haven laws. If anyone convinced Roberts in the court's deliberations to concur with overturning Roe and Casey and make it a 6-3 decision (which is rumored to be the case, and would be a change from his prior voting behavior on the issue), it was most likely Amy Coney Barrett.

[New haven america]

1. That's not the only option. Can't openly say if it's good or bad one though...
2. Ireland in the 90's and Mexico in the 80's would like to have a word with you.

Mexico got it legalized within 1 day after the government declared they'd be keeping abortion illegal. 14 hours IIRC.

1. ignoring the fact that neither of these are applicable and you don’t really understand the Mexican situation at all do you understand why [terrorism] is not mainstream politics

3. Oh look, things that aren't going to happen. Let's have fun in the Christian Fascist dictatorship then.

2. Some are, some aren’t, that things are going to be awful does not change the calculus

1. No, they're 100% applicable.

Actually, they're more applicable, as those were people fighting for rights they never had, our situation is fighting for a right that's getting taken away, people should be more quick to action in this case. Not less.

Likewise, most of the GOP are terrorists. They use the threat of force, violence, and removal of rights to get their way.

2. This Wishy Washy bullshit is why things are going to be awful. You're helping the GOP's cause, congrats.

[Stellar Colonies]

Instead of wasting their time with something actually helpful like Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court should make itself useful and bring down the axe on decisions like this, assuming it's within their purview.

[New haven america]

So been looking around and it seems some feminist spaces are finally semi-introducing the idea that maybe they should be a tad bit more proactive than they have been in order to deal with the current issue at hand.

I say "semi-introducing" because most of the content is still ranting about how much they hate men (Even though the majority of men support keeping Roe) and how they're utterly powerless to do anything (Been a week and they still haven't come up with better ways to deal with the Feds), but you know, baby steps. (When we desperately needed adult steps last week)

[Indiana Controlled Florida]

1. ignoring the fact that neither of these are applicable and you don’t really understand the Mexican situation at all do you understand why [terrorism] is not mainstream politics

2. Some are, some aren’t, that things are going to be awful does not change the calculus

1. No, they're 100% applicable.

Actually, they're more applicable, as those were people fighting for rights they never had, our situation is fighting for a right that's getting taken away, people should be more quick to action in this case. Not less.

Likewise, most of the GOP are terrorists. They use the threat of force, violence, and removal of rights to get their way.

2. This Wishy Washy bullshit is why things are going to be awful. You're helping the GOP's cause, congrats.

Most of the GOP are terrorists? Are you calling the politicians terrorists or the followers terrorists? Also, do you mind giving at least 5 sources where they use force and violence to get things they want?

[New haven america]

1. No, they're 100% applicable.

Actually, they're more applicable, as those were people fighting for rights they never had, our situation is fighting for a right that's getting taken away, people should be more quick to action in this case. Not less.

Likewise, most of the GOP are terrorists. They use the threat of force, violence, and removal of rights to get their way.

2. This Wishy Washy bullshit is why things are going to be awful. You're helping the GOP's cause, congrats.

1. Most of the GOP are terrorists? 2. Are you calling the politicians terrorists or the followers terrorists? 3. Also, do you mind giving at least 5 sources where they use force and violence to get things they want?

1. Yes, that is correct, they fit the definition to a T.
2. Depends on which ones are performing the terrorist action of the week. Hitting protestors with cars (A tactic taken directly from ISIS' playbook)? The followers. Using government force to kill protestors standing against the GOP's authoritarianism? The Party itself.
3. January 6th Coup Attempt, George Floyd Protests where police killed peaceful protestors and turned them into riots, Charlottesville where they took cues from ISIS and hit peaceful protestors with cars, the militia takeover of several federal buildings in Oregon during 2015-2016, and The Orlando Nightclub Shooting.

Would you like more? I could get you more.

[Des-Bal]

1. Yes, that is correct, they fit the definition to a T.
2. Depends on which ones are performing the terrorist action of the week. Hitting protestors with cars (A tactic taken directly from ISIS' playbook)? The followers. Using government force to kill protestors standing against the GOP's authoritarianism? The Party itself.
3. January 6th Coup Attempt, George Floyd Protests where police killed peaceful protestors and turned them into riots, Charlottesville where they took cues from ISIS and hit peaceful protestors with cars, the militia takeover of several federal buildings in Oregon during 2015-2016, and The Orlando Nightclub Shooting.

Would you like more? I could get you more.

Every individual thing you said was ridiculous.

[New haven america]

1. Yes, that is correct, they fit the definition to a T.
2. Depends on which ones are performing the terrorist action of the week. Hitting protestors with cars (A tactic taken directly from ISIS' playbook)? The followers. Using government force to kill protestors standing against the GOP's authoritarianism? The Party itself.
3. January 6th Coup Attempt, George Floyd Protests where police killed peaceful protestors and turned them into riots, Charlottesville where they took cues from ISIS and hit peaceful protestors with cars, the militia takeover of several federal buildings in Oregon during 2015-2016, and The Orlando Nightclub Shooting.

Would you like more? I could get you more.

Every individual thing you said was ridiculous.

What you just posted was ridiculous. Most of the GOP are fascists and it's foolish to think otherwise.

Hope you weren't too attached to Birth Control and Gay Rights, as Alito had plans for those in his leaked draft~

[Fahran]

Every individual thing you said was ridiculous.

What you just posted was ridiculous. Most of the GOP are fascists and it's foolish to think otherwise.

Hope you weren't too attached to Birth Control and Gay Rights, as Alito had plans for those in his leaked draft~

You have got to stop reading Twitter talking points, my guy.

There's no sensible or coherent definition of fascism that can be applied to the GOP. It does not bear a strong resemblance to the Italian Fascist Party, the National Socialist German Workers' Party, the Falange, or the Justicialist Party in terms of structure, aesthetics, programs, or platform. Even supposing (correctly) that Trump has autocratic tendencies and poses a danger to democracy, this would not imply that he was a fascist. Because most authoritarians throughout history have not been fascists - even if we narrow the field to just the right-wing ones.

There's no sensible definition of terrorism that can be applied to the GOP either. While we're seeing a worrying trend towards the normalization of political violence, on both the right and the left, I would not classify most of our current street hooligans as terrorists - and they do not reflect the mainstream political parties or their membership on the whole. The vast majority of people in the United States were and are liberals of one type or another. And do not go around murdering their political opponents.

I still owe Ostro the post I promised, but I'll probably weigh in on the abortion discussion as well. Tomorrow. When my eyelids are less heavy.

[Ostroeuropa]

I still owe Ostro the post I promised

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jozSU5PmZas

(3 minutes).

[New haven america]

What you just posted was ridiculous. Most of the GOP are fascists and it's foolish to think otherwise.

Hope you weren't too attached to Birth Control and Gay Rights, as Alito had plans for those in his leaked draft~

You have got to stop reading Twitter talking points, my guy.

There's no sensible or coherent definition of fascism that can be applied to the GOP. It does not bear a strong resemblance to the Italian Fascist Party, the National Socialist German Workers' Party, the Falange, or the Justicialist Party in terms of structure, aesthetics, programs, or platform. Even supposing (correctly) that Trump has autocratic tendencies and poses a danger to democracy, this would not imply that he was a fascist. Because most authoritarians throughout history have not been fascists - even if we narrow the field to just the right-wing ones.

There's no sensible definition of terrorism that can be applied to the GOP either. While we're seeing a worrying trend towards the normalization of political violence, on both the right and the left, I would not classify most of our current street hooligans as terrorists - and they do not reflect the mainstream political parties or their membership on the whole. The vast majority of people in the United States were and are liberals of one type or another.

I still owe Ostro the post I promised, but I'll probably weigh in on the abortion discussion as well. Tomorrow. When my eyelids are less heavy.

Just because you don't like have your beliefs called out as fascistic doesn't make them any less fascistic.

[Ostroeuropa]

Just because you don't like have your beliefs called out as fascistic doesn't make them any less fascistic.

I'm really not convinced Fahran is a fascist. I think they're probably closer to a high tory if anything, but without the open tendency towards demographic hierarchy.