Misandry disguised as feminism

I have encountered this attitude one too many times. I have run into one too many women who will happily list all the many virtues of women and all of the negative attributes of men, and yet they seem to live under the delusion that this counts as "feminism." They seem to think they need to do this in order to stand up for themselves. This is bogus. No, you don't get to call yourself a "feminist" if you bash on men and all things masculine. This just means that you are recreating the evil that feminism was put there in order to abolish. I have a right to defend my own sex and its worth in society, and I also have a right to fend off broad, sweeping generalizations against it. I am not obligated to be even-handed when the person I'm dealing with is bent on attack. And no, you do not have a higher pain threshold. Men do.

Buyers beware: the last person who got my dander up over this subject ended up showing her desperation by making lame attacks targeted at my physical appearance. I think she was hoping to get me to come off as some kind of narcissist or something and then upbraid me for that. You know who you are, prey. Come hither. We could have SO MUCH FUN.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Am I your prey? Geeze, I thought I was your lab rat and monkey, your sexual toy or your beat boy.
The one to ridicule or hope that he dies. Loses is kids soul or becomes a target of your narcissistic plays of attention and ego

I fend myself well from deires which proclaimwrog in our worldandourlife.

Geeze, whats the problem with your keyboard struts anyway.

Like I was saying in hitherto thread, men may have a higher pain threashold and yet consider that it is women which hit this pain on us in the first place.

I knowmy rights as a citizen... to be unharmed if I ask for it. So what's the deal here guy?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's a good point I guess
Still though was only trying to help. I suggest that women are usually to blame in that feminism, in it's usual usage, attempts to proclaim them as superior and many other relevant things and so this is a serious concern to the men who usually see feminism as a misues of a womans power

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Besides, that's hardley misandry when the feministic world is seeking their applause as superior or more advanced or equal to men (I cannot find a justification for it & it is a bogus claim). Also note that, the more bogus a claim is the more open to misfiring it is. That means that if they say that they are equal to us, they are actually not they're more like saying they have rights over us that they dont have. Like if they wanna take away our computers from us wouldn't you feel a bit de-masculanated. I would. To be sure. So, I TAKE NO WORDINGS OF ANY feminist without acceptance or justification that says that they are correct with their claims. Thus far I have found no reason to believe what they say regarding my non valid acceptance of their "authority which does not exist." IMHO, any female (desite th fact that they have full rights to do so), who claims somehing which is not true, is mis abusing THEIR powr (not mine),.

 

Infact what I'm proclaiming is amazing.

 

So shove it aliencockroach

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Nope. She'll show up eventually, though.

Sorry, lady, but you don't appeal to my tastes. I tend to go for hairy-chested Marines, and I happen to like being other people's lab rat and sexual toy. It is really fun, and I think you sell it short. I happen to have a high appreciation for a passionate, rabidly affectionate lover. I am only speaking for my perverted self, though, and this is off the point.

The point is that there are a number of women out there who THINK they are feminists, but they are really misandrists. They are deprecating toward men, and they are arrogantly bigoted. They seem to suffer from a complete lack of empathy. All I hear from them is really nasty, incredibly negative generalizations.

 

Its traditional 'second wave' feminism that built or widened this antagonism and chasm between the sexes though I think 'Third Wave' feminism (or what is becoming post feminism) is or was an attempt to resolve these issues where men become the enemy which is false. The attitude you mention is the reason why men feel excluded from feminism.

 

I haven't read much which procaims they aren't although I wouldn't tend to disagree with you without proper reason to do so.

Most of the feminism I hear is without men, as there usually is no feminism which regards men not being excluded. Most of the good feminism proclaims their rights as tey should be and I haven'theard much good come from it (alas I know thisis a mistaken concept but yet I can never grasp it (probably rightfully).

 

Did somebody hurt your feelings? Awww

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

What is the point? Why would you seek and enjoy a hostile reaction from women?

Women proclaiming the evilness of men and female superiority to men was so 1970s and 1980s and was a reaction to male dominance. If you are finding a lot of "Bashing on men" in this current age then you or your associates are probably doing something negative to provoke the "bashing on men".

 

I believe that this thread raises an important issue that has been ignored or brushed aside for far too long. Our society will always be in danger of slipping back into the same pattern of behavior from which we escaped.

This kind of justification is part of the problem that I am getting at. The women who started this are ultimately responsible for their own decisions and attitudes, not men.

 

It hasn't been ignored. It's been unignored in my surroundings to the point of me seriously thinking of sacrificing one of my own socks, many times.

 

I believe that third-wave feminism has done a great deal for society as a whole, not just women. I believe that third-wave feminist ideology has helped to build a number of important bridges. I see it as having a much broader sense of what the movement stands for. However, I don't think that the movement is really equipped to address the problem of misandry. We don't really have time for it at this point because we have a lot of other bridges yet to cross.

 

If that was directed at me, no. With my SO, it's a wonder I haven't turned into a complete daffodil.

However, I take the spirit of those insults very seriously. There are some people out there who suffer from serious problems with body image, and they are very vulnerable to disparaging comments that are targeted at ridiculing their physical appearances. They can often be helped through modest improvements in their grooming habits, which is usually more than a small part of the problem, but their self-esteem can be very fragile.

Unfortunately, there are others out there who are immoral and sick enough to exploit this vulnerability, and they are usually such devoted lowlifes that they feel no remorse at all if their comments lead to serious emotional damage in their victim. They are undeserving and low human beings, and I regard them as prey. The only purpose they could possibly serve to society is becoming a source of food because they are otherwise worse than useless.

 

I agree with ya.

I think what happened with feminism was the same as what happened with a lot of movements or forms of activism: a few people tried to make a difference in a constructive way...and then along came a bunch of idiots who only had a vague idea what the movement was about, and ruined it.

Kind of like those animal rights activists who only get involved with activism as an excuse for some violence.

 

Thank you, VI. The bandwagon effect does seem to be a major culprit. The thing is, most people who are culprits here are not really stupid. I think they are stupid as far as what the movement is really all about. I think they are ignorant of its history. However, I am one of those people who like to see the silver lining when regarding the human race.

I think the feminist movement would REALLY benefit from coming to the realization that women really are coming to power in our society. This isn't like the Crusades, where it was okay to deal with victory by looting the villages and slaughtering a cow. In this case, the incredible success of third-wave feminism carries a great weight of responsibility.

In a world where men have always been in power, we are not accustomed to dealing with the idea of men being victims of discrimination. Because we don't really have much experience with it, a lot of people come down with a weird form of cognitive dissonance when they are faced with the idea that it's going to become a reality, and it's going to come to town quicker than most people are prepared for.

For example, a common excuse for laying off a worker is "not a team player." Well, this usually means that the worker in question is taciturn and prone to doing things on his/her own. It could also mean that the worker in question wasn't spending enough time bonding with his/her coworkers, which there is often an implicit demand for on certain jobs. Men tend to be more prone to this solitary, retiring, taciturn behavior than women. If a company suddenly cuts a large number of men from its staff, then, on the premise of "not a team player," we need to be prepared to deal with it as sexist discrimination if there is evidence that the cuts were motivated by sexism.

The thing is, if ONLY men are concerned about this problem, then it's just going back to the old sense of antagonism between the sexes. It's going to make the issue worse. The people who NEED to be convinced here are women. That is who is coming to power, right now.

Tech jobs are usually a stronger attraction to men than they are to women, and hi-tech jobs are only going to continue to grow in coming decades. Hell-O, but this is going to end up being a brain drain on many of those industries that are presently dominated by men only due to their historical dominance in these fields. I think we are set to see a huge surge of women coming into positions of executive power in politics and business. Personally, I think they are likely to do much better in at least some of these fields than men ever have, and I see it as an improvement on the whole. It's a much more efficient apportionment of human resources. However, power is a very important responsibility, and history tells us how open power is to abuse.

Look ahead ten years or twenty years. When women are running the show, which is completely inevitable at this point even if I didn't approve of it overall, who is going to care whether a man is being discriminated against on the job? The men aren't going to be in power anymore, so it won't help much for them to care. Who is going to care, then? It is up to those women who truly believe in the idea of social justice. In a workplace that is dominated by women, they will be the only people available to stand up for some socially awkward male who, although he can perform his duties well, has a little trouble fitting in. It will be up to THEM to care.

 

i am yet to actually hear an argument which says the name "feminisium" is even a good thing. After all should we really be fighting for "womens rights" or should we be fighting for "human rights" which includes equality for all? Its the same with the arguments for chaning marriage laws for instance. They arent arguing for "homosexual marriage", the only people who express it like that are the bigots. They are arguing for equality under the law. You can do that just as easerly by arguing under gender netural language (if not more easerly) as you can under gender specific.

For instance one of the biggest "womens rights" issues currently is domestic violence (as it should be). Goverments both at the state and fed level are trying to deal with this and public awearnesss are an important part of that. However the former federal gov (most noticably but all goverments at the moment) fell into the trap that because it more often effects women it ONLY effects women. So they ran the "Violence against women" campain when they should have run a gender netural "domestic violence and sexual assult campain" with the potentual effect that a group with the lowest incidence of reporting these crimes have the potentual to feel further victomised because of it.

Another example was the "womens housing board" which was set up to look at women who were in vulnerable positions because of divorce or low super into retirement. There first recomendation was that a "mens housing board" should be set up (which has sadly never been taken up) to look into the same issues for elderly men.

by spliting the genders i think that the feminist movement has done a lot of harm to there own cause

 

I've been saying the same thing for a long time. If there is such a thing as human rights then we wouldn't need to focus on women's rights since these rights are about the same. This often comes up in developing countries where aid agencies canvas for donor money to help with women's rights issues. In these societies, many of them being patriarchal, the average man of no wealth nor status has no rights never mind that of women but its a good selling point to draw funds.

 

Lucysnow its the aniversary of the introduction of the geneva convention and there for there were lots of speaches in parliment yesterday. One in paticular caught my attention (though im not sure which sentor gave it). (cant rember the exact words for the first part so no quote marks) war causes dreadful harm to "vulnerable civilan populations, especially women and children". Now ignore the children bit (because protection of children SHOULD be specific) but what matters if the suffering is on adult males or adult females? do children care if its the mother or the father who is tortured and murdered? I certainly wouldnt pick my dad or my mum to suffer that. Either would be equally abhorent