# Feminism

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Macky Avelli, Apr 30, 2013.

1. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
Explain how a "patriarchal and misogynistic" what ever, can oppress men and benefit women, as in the case of my uncle, as in the case of many men. It breaks the very definition of patriarchy and misogynistic if it oppresses men and benefits women! To continue to use such terms is like saying a junk yard is a transportation system or that a cat is trash compactor, its moronic!

Contrary to the tenets of feminism? Tenets that claim every man is a rapist and batterer? tenets like these:

"The annihilation of a woman's personality, individuality, will, character, is prerequisite to male sexuality." -- Andrea Dworkin

"The male is a domestic animal which, if treated with firmness...can be trained to do most things."
-- Jilly Cooper, SCUM (Society For Cutting Up Men, started by Valerie Solanas)

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he's a machine, a walking dildo."
-- Valerie Solanas, Authoress of the SCUM Manifesto

"All men are rapists and that's all they are"
-- Marilyn French, Authoress

"If anyone is prosecuted for filing a false report, then victims of real attacks will be less likely to report them." - David Angier

"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." - Catherine Comins

"I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it."
-- Barbara Jordan; Former Congresswoman.

"The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist" (National NOW Times, January, 1988).

"We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men." -- Elizabeth Cady Stanton

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them." -- Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor.

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism--the lie that there can be such a thing as 'men's liberation groups.' Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group, specifically because of a 'threatening' characteristic shared by the latter group--skin, color, sex or age, etc. The oppressors are indeed ****ED UP by being masters, but those masters are not OPPRESSED. Any master has the alternative of divesting himself of sexism or racism--the oppressed have no alternative--for they have no power but to fight. In the long run, Women's Liberation will of course free men--but in the short run it's going to cost men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily. Sexism is NOT the fault of women--kill your fathers, not your mothers".
-- Robin Morgan

Exactly what privilege did my uncle have when he got to the court? How could he have divested him self?

If you care about inequality in the world then your an egalitarian, if you only care about the oppression of women then your a feminist, of course this means you don't give a shit about the oppression of men, the oppression of races, the oppression of the old, etc, etc, if you do care about those issue but have so far only acted on feminist issue because those are the most precedent to you then your still an egalitarian, we all got to pick our fights, can't solve every problem in the world, but if you were witnessing a women beating up a man would you stop it? If so then your not a feminist, a feminist would walk by and cheer, as the quotes above from the most outspoken feminist imply.

Yeah that makes no sense at all when there are many women that make these presumptions and oppress men with them, to keep blaming men as the sole "societal dominators" when the issue is clearly more complex and gender diverse then that is either delusional, sexist, or both.

3. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,999
I'm a feminist and I wouldn't "walk by and cheer."

5. ### iceauraValued Senior Member

Messages:
30,994
Nothing oppressed "men" and benefited "women" in the case of your uncle. The setup damaged your uncle, not "men". The patriarchal and misogynistic presumption of docility and kindness and weakness of women cost your uncle in particular heavily, is all.

Male imposed misogynistic patriarchy does not benefit most men, btw - that doesn't mean it hasn't dominated Western society for the past 2000 years.

Patriarchal misogyny has a lot of downsides afflicting men, from denying them willing sexual partners, to sending them all the bills because they are supposed to have all the money, to screwing up their psychological health. As Abbey put it, "There are no free men without free women".

As a point of observation, yes (I don't see anything in there about women being weak and docile and unable to abuse) - but that's taking your weird selection of quotes from nutcases as some kind of representative "tenets" of feminism, which I don't: try the dictionary.

Messages:
18,523

8. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
Thousands of men pay that cost, any man in fact will likely pay that cost if the situation present it self of an abusive wife or a women that likes to lie about abuse or rape. Call a judicial system that is skew against men and favors women "patriarchal and misogynistic" breaks the definition of those terms!

Male Imposed? So women don't take part in this? no women walks by a man being abused with glee?, I got video proof that some do! Sexism in what was classically patriarchy dominates much of the world today, most of it not "the west", and did dominate the west for more then 2000 years, but in the last few decades it does not exist as a matter of law in many western countries and in fact as a matter of law has been replaced with misandry.

yeah this is just an attempt to try to make sense of the evidence of misandry as if it was patriarchy and misogyny, the world is more complex then that: there is both misogyny and misandry, both patriarchal and matriarchal social structures, the supporters of all that is usually men but not always men or all men, and a fair if not majority percentage of women as well. More so the cases you mention are historical and/or non-western: by matter of law in most western countries men are "not sent all the bills": women own property, own capital, pay for themselves if single and pay mutually as joint files if married. In some cases in fact a women can get half of a man property regardless of the amount of work she did (Not saying house wives don't in fact deserve significant compensation, it just the compensation is not proportional to the husbands income: a house wife did not do 10 of millions of dollars worth of work simply be living and sleeping with a muli-millionare for a few years)

Definition of Nazism: "The ideology and practice of the Nazis, especially the policy of racist nationalism, national expansion, and state control of the economy." says nothing in there about a few "nutcases" that happen to give Nazism a really bad name. Likewise a "few" feminist happen to make feminism in practice as system of misandry, not gender equality.

9. ### BellsStaff Member

Messages:
24,170
Your argument is one based on and steeped in stereotyping all feminists with a broad brush.

If I were to use your standards in this debate, and look at the cases where women are raped and their screams for help are ignored, then by your ridiculous logic, all men are rapists and will ignore women who are seeking help while being raped and attacked and after their attack.

That video you speak of, did you watch it to the end? Clearly not. Because in the end, it was a group of women who stopped and gathered, tried to stop her and then called the police on the abusive woman. The men who walked past ignored it completely.

The male police officer also said he would dismiss it in most circumstances.

But yes, blame feminists for male stereotyping. You're good at that.

Gender roles were imposed by men. Feminists have been fighting gender roles for generations.

Right.. Now consider how much he would have made if she refused to stay home and he had to care for the house and possible children instead?

Instead, you demean and lower the woman's role as being just some woman who slept with him for a few years.. the lowly housewife... You just reaffirmed the gender roles set by men and the misogyny behind it.

It all comes down to money for you, doesn't it?

So tell me, how much should a housewife get paid for working 24/7 on the job - having children - there is no job or employment that requires people to put themselves through something like pregnancy and childbirth. Then caring for those children, maintaining the home and all that comes with it on top of that. And all this is literally 24/7. She gets no holidays or medical insurance. She gets no monetary benefits for working overtime.. Well, her job is 24 hours.. non-stop. She gets no sick pay.

10. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,999
Oh, I definitely am. I support women's rights, both the rights they share with men (i.e. most of them) and the rights they have alone (i.e. abortion.) I do not support violence, and I do not believe that a woman battering a man has anything to do with women's rights and/or women's equality.

11. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
You don't understand what I'm saying, feminism has come to mean what the gender feminist have made of it: misandry. Stop calling your self feminist, unless you in fact believe that the plight of men is ignorable, even righteous. It's not that all feminist are misandrist, most are for genuine equality, but they stand by silently and let the misandrist speak for them to the point that most women (and men) don't want anything to do with word "feminism". The solution is a better more inclusive term like egalitarian, or equalist or something that does not in its first prefix imply women only. Either that or you going to have to waste significant time and energy simply defending the term you label your selves by. It like a Socialist movement of somekind calling themselves Nazis and then getting tired of people bad mouthing them!

Yes I did watch it to the end, what is your point? Are you imply their not a man on earth that would have done something? I stated repeatedly that there are many women who do believe in equality, who stand up for injustice when they see it no matter its form, as there are men as well, and there are many women who do not, as there are many men as well. To say it only men are the cause of sexual oppression is to say you don't actually believe in equality, that you deny that a women can oppress. The very fact which you refuse to raise, that there were some women in that video that approved of abuse of men.

I'm not blaming them for it, I'm just calling them out for being apart of it.

This should be added to the quote of horrible things feminist say. You can't even agree that women too oppress themselves and men with the gender roles they perpetuate or generate, you deny such a thing exist, no no men must be blamed in the end, for it all? Why is blaming men important you? Blaming is not helpful, you not going to get people to change their ways by blaming them and making them defensive. In retort Feminist aren't to blame, they just are apart of the sexism of the world, a philosophy that has been hijacked my misandrist or label as such, jump ship now.

Usually only the ones that oppress women and privilege men, when it comes to the ones that are reverse they are far more silent even outright deny it, and blame the problem completely on men.

He probably would not have had kids if it was not for her, probably would have been even richer, I would say in this hypothetical that she owes him money! Some women "entrap" men with children, will lie about their fertility, will sabotage contraceptives, because the legal system will guarantee them alimony and child support and the system will generally grant them custody, ow but that is the patriarchy right? Forcing the man to be the diligent and supporting father because he has no reproductive rights?

The house wife is not lowly! but the women that marries a millionaire for a few years and then takes half of everything are lower then low. The legal system needs to treat the two separately, not judge them all the same simply because they were women!

About the same as a full time live in maid + full time prostitute. Not that I want to be demeaning with those terms but the law should be neutral and calculate her share accurately on the labors she provided. The total cost should come out as several dozen thousand dollars, probably higher then the average man's income in fact, several times if we assume a high end call girl's prices!

Surrogote mother: pay roughly $27,000 -$37,500 some cases of 50,000+. Of course in Surrogote does not own* the baby, if the women is granted custody this cost should not be added in.

*Don't get me started about parents "owning" children.

If she gets insurance and medical care paid for by the husband I don't see how that is not equivalent for corporate medical insurance, Most working husbands of housewives will file their wives as insurance depends or co-depends! More so the husband often cares for her if she is sick, paying for her fully.

As for holidays and vocations, often enough a housewife can get that too, even alone if she demands some alone time, the courts should count luxury things and events the husband paid for her, if any, and deduct the costs.

All of this also ignores the growing tend of househusband, who deserve the same breakdown of services provided by a working wife: Cook-Butler, Gigolo, sperm donator (ok yes that not as costly as surrogate mother), deductions of luxury and services provided by the working wife.

12. ### parmaleeperipatetic artisanValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,224
OK then, if you actually believe this to be the case, then why is it that your "evidence" for such is all from texts nearing 30 to 50 years old? Got anything contemporary to back up your contention? Are you actually familiar with anything contemporary?

13. ### TiassaLet us not launch the boat ...Staff Member

Messages:
37,424
The Obvious Question

You know, part of that is up to the poor, beleaguered multimillionaire male.

No, really. He married her.

Why did he marry her?

I would suggest this example undermines whatever point you're trying to make. Practically speaking, we must remain mindful of just how rare it is a multimillionaire man marries an undesired mate under remotely coercive force.

My point being that if it was my friend complaining about his wife having community property while "just" being a housewife, the first thing I'd try to figure out is, "Well, why did you marry her?"

14. ### parmaleeperipatetic artisanValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,224
And you believe that this millionaire (pretty much any millionaire IMHO) actually DID do "tens of millions dollars worth of work"? Fascinating. So how many ditches would one have to dig in order to earn tens of millions?

15. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
Did you see the videos I post, that certainly less then a decade. The incident of "the View" talk show hostess laughing with glee over the mutilation of a man's penis for example happen in 2011, how come no feminist groups were openly offended? But if you want the most resent hate, youtube and Google can provide in abundance.

16. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,999
A lot! But inventing a single digital communications technology can earn one tens of millions, as can starting a profitable company, developing a new piece of software, releasing a hit song etc.

17. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,999
Same reason men's rights groups weren't openly offended by the hotel-worker rape that happened here in San Diego about six months back, I'd imagine. Because it's not the sort of thing they launch PR offensives on.

18. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
Oh i have my problem with the rich, and would love to see their money re-distributed, but that does not mean that any injustice they receive no matter how minor, is not an injustice.

Do you have statistics on how rare this is? I've personally seen it, a doctor friend of mine, it does happen, I don't care how rare it is, our justice system should not be design around generalities and allow for a minority of injustices: it should judge each case as neutral and unbaisesly as possible.

Because before she was different? I don't know man, people are scrupulous and liers? A better question is why did he not get her to sign a prenup?

19. ### ElectricFetusSanity going, going, goneValued Senior Member

Messages:
18,523
I don't give a shit about men's right organizations, they are the mirror opposite of feminist and equally dismissive of the other genders problems.

Don't get me started. Anyways said housewife simply did not do equal amounts of "work" as compared to her rich husband.

20. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,999

To answer your question a slightly different way - why weren't YOU openly offended by the rape here in San Diego?

21. ### parmaleeperipatetic artisanValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,224
A hostess on The View is about as representative of contemporary feminism as Taco Bell is of Mexican food. And I asked for some contemporary references and citations, not for a "go look on google and youtube."

22. ### parmaleeperipatetic artisanValued Senior Member

Messages:
3,224

Sure, but who is to say that any of this could have been accomplished without the assistance of a housekeeper, cook, etc.?

23. ### billvonValued Senior Member

Messages:
20,999
None of it could have been accomplished without the help of literally thousands of people extending way back in history all the way to the present (Newton, Maxwell, von Neumann, patent attorneys, technicians etc.) In some cases that includes a housekeeper and/or a cook.