Fuck Feminists

[Poeta Demonio]

You were talking about the radical ones, yeah?

Haha nah, I meant for the most part, feminists are rational, logical people. But the word feminism has become synonymous with radical. Like when someone say's Islam or Muslim in the modern age, folks think extremism, ignoring the 99.999% of muslims that don't go around scream Allahu akbar, cutting peoples heads off!

[Emily]

Haha nah, I meant for the most part, feminists are rational, logical people. But the word feminism has become synonymous with radical. Like when someone say's Islam or Muslim in the modern age, folks think extremism, ignoring the 99.999% of muslims that don't go around scream Allahu akbar, cutting peoples heads off!

I get what you're saying. I'm talking about the one's wanting everything entirely equal,
yet at the same time want doors opened for them,
their meals paid for when they're taken to dinner, etc.
I'm talking about feminazis.
And...all those chicks in that vid.
Its the reason I underlined the words radical feminism and revamped name.
And the reason I said the revamped name should be 'Stop ya bitchin'

- - - Updated - - -

am i the only person here who doesnt give a shit about the any of this, except that Emily called a light bulb a light GLOBE?

globe?

It's a more common term in Australia.
But its regional. Some say globe, some say bulb.
A globe might be for a light in the house and a bulb might be for a torch.

[Poeta Demonio]

I get what you're saying. I'm talking about the one's wanting everything entirely equal,
yet at the same time want doors opened for them, their meals paid for when they're taken to dinner, etc.
I'm talking about feminazis.
And...all those chicks in that vid.

Nah, see that's where you have it twisted. Radical feminists aren't looking for equality, their asserting that women should essentially take over the patriarchy and convert it into a matriarchy, becoming the dominant gender both socially and politically. True equality surely can't be argued against? As for 'chivalry' it certainly acts as mode of infantalizing women, but the real point of relevance is choice. If a woman has the CHOICE then she can be a housewife, be the submissive part of a relationship or do any other thing that radical feminists would restrict them from doing. But the mass majority of feminists understand and adhere to the more than reasonable notion of equality, but that youtube video wouldn't be very entertaining if reasonable people were given a podium where it would devalidate a significant amount of his argument.

[Poeta Demonio]

I get what you're saying. I'm talking about the one's wanting everything entirely equal,
yet at the same time want doors opened for them, their meals paid for when they're taken to dinner, etc.
I'm talking about feminazis.
And...all those chicks in that vid.

Nah, see that's where you have it twisted. Radical feminists aren't looking for equality, their asserting that women should essentially take over the patriarchy and convert it into a matriarchy, becoming the dominant gender both socially and politically. True equality surely can't be argued against? As for 'chivalry' it certainly acts as mode of infantalizing women, but the real point of relevance is choice. If a woman has the CHOICE then she can be a housewife, be the submissive part of a relationship or do any other thing that radical feminists would restrict them from doing. But the mass majority of feminists understand and adhere to the more than reasonable notion of equality, but that youtube video wouldn't be very entertaining if reasonable people were given a podium where it would devalidate a significant amount of his argument.

[Emily]

Nah, see that's where you have it twisted. Radical feminists aren't looking for equality, their asserting that women should essentially take over the patriarchy and convert it into a matriarchy, becoming the dominant gender both socially and politically. True equality surely can't be argued against? As for 'chivalry' it certainly acts as mode of infantalizing women, but the real point of relevance is choice. If a woman has the CHOICE then she can be a housewife, be the submissive part of a relationship or do any other thing that radical feminists would restrict them from doing. But the mass majority of feminists understand and adhere to the more than reasonable notion of equality, but that youtube video wouldn't be very entertaining if reasonable people were given a podium where it would devalidate a significant amount of his argument.

The people in that video think they're reasonable.
But they're gremlins who shouldn't eat after midnight or get wet.

[Godwasheeeeeeeeeeeeere]

It's one thing to state that there exists an extremity in certain facets of the feminist movement, yet another all together to de-validate the movement given that historically at least it has responded to critical socio-political injustices and helped to fight against societal oppression. The ilk of people chosen to represent feminism in that video are the type of feminists that patriarchal society likes, because they are ill equipped to represent or even comprehend a rational existentialist perception of callas gender binaries, or roles within a given society and more to the point, it's easy to deconstruct their argument; in turn feeling validated in the belief that there exists no inequality because women have the vote, allowed to drive, and work. Yet are their wages the same as a man in the same role at a company? No. As for his argument against that notion, I've always worked labor/outdoors jobs and worked with many women doing 'hard jobs' and they genuinely don't get paid as much for the same job, as seen on wage slips. Are they still marginalized sexually? Yes.

To a degree however geography is a key element as women's rights may have been subject to modernization and positive change in many nations, yet in MANY MANY more we have either as bad conditions and freedoms for women as our societies were before feminist movements began to form or in a lot of cases worse as domestic abuse is simply considered part of a functioning household, with no legal protection.

I believe we must cease to be so secular in our thoughts, understanding that the problems we face are not localized to a city or a country, or even a continent, yet rather a global blight upon our species that reveal inherent flaws in our social perception. The status quo (the everyday) is forcefully upheld in our minds so anything that manifests into tradition becomes entirely allegorically neutral, not adhering to any particular moral extreme. For instance, slavery. Do you think the societies that kept and cultivated slave labor thought they were morally unjust? No. Why? Because they were conditioned to see those people as different to them, in fact subhuman, so they become talking horses essentially, plowing the land and singing. Though some may consider that an extreme example, it serves to show that inequality is usually only realized by the society inflicting those inequalities after the fact. Only ever in retrospect.

In conclusion, (haha) Fuck western rich white girl feminism. Absolutely yes to global efforts to make ALL of humanity equal. I feel people get way too caught up in the ambiguous word 'feminism' and often fail to recognize that words such as sexism, or racism, homophobia all come from the same wider superstructure that you can chose to call the patriarchy, or you could chose to call a superstructure of control born from a corrupted capitalist ideology that doesn't discriminate based on race or gender but rather monetary relevance within the economic hierarchy. In specific regards to feminism as a word it has become synonymous with radical feminism and therefore possibly needs a revamped name haha Switch it to post-humanism or something!

Andddd false..

[Godwasheeeeeeeeeeeeere]

Nah, see that's where you have it twisted. Radical feminists aren't looking for equality, their asserting that women should essentially take over the patriarchy and convert it into a matriarchy, becoming the dominant gender both socially and politically. True equality surely can't be argued against? As for 'chivalry' it certainly acts as mode of infantalizing women, but the real point of relevance is choice. If a woman has the CHOICE then she can be a housewife, be the submissive part of a relationship or do any other thing that radical feminists would restrict them from doing. But the mass majority of feminists understand and adhere to the more than reasonable notion of equality, but that youtube video wouldn't be very entertaining if reasonable people were given a podium where it would devalidate a significant amount of his argument.

Again you are wrong, where ever you are getting your facts from are againw rong. A huge part of feminism has became 3rd wave feminists. So much to the fact that feminist scholars and etc are asking not to be called feminists anymore. and the majority is not first wave feminists, also the wage gap is false, there is more variables that play into that. Likeeee men work longer hours then women that is a proven fact, women take more days off, work less hours andddddddddd work less over time. It is illegal to pay someone less based on their gender. So if someone in your office is getting paid 800 a week and a woman who works there gets paid 500 its because she works less, or negotiates worse. It is a work place not a place to be coddled.

[Poeta Demonio]

Again you are wrong, where ever you are getting your facts from are againw rong. A huge part of feminism has became 3rd wave feminists. So much to the fact that feminist scholars and etc are asking not to be called feminists anymore. and the majority is not first wave feminists, also the wage gap is false, there is more variables that play into that. Likeeee men work longer hours then women that is a proven fact, women take more days off, work less hours andddddddddd work less over time. It is illegal to pay someone less based on their gender. So if someone in your office is getting paid 800 a week and a woman who works there gets paid 500 its because she works less, or negotiates worse. It is a work place not a place to be coddled.

As I was saying, you're arguing the semantics of a word. I don't think anyone but these stupid bitches actually agree with what they're saying. In this country, it does still work like that. If it doesn't in America, then wunderbar!

- - - Updated - - -

Also, the fact you referenced a youtube video clearly meant (though with an agenda) to be comical, I don't feel that really holds weight as a reliable source haha

[Pair-A-Dyce]

All GOWs sources are 100%

[Godwasheeeeeeeeeeeeere]

As I was saying, you're arguing the semantics of a word. I don't think anyone but these stupid bitches actually agree with what they're saying. In this country, it does still work like that. If it doesn't in America, then wunderbar!

- - - Updated - - -

Also, the fact you referenced a youtube video clearly meant (though with an agenda) to be comical, I don't feel that really holds weight as a reliable source haha

The video is for HUmor but the modern day feminist is that type of feminist. there is no "old" feminist. feminist means what it means now and sjw/feminist has became one with each other.

[Poeta Demonio]

The video is for HUmor but the modern day feminist is that type of feminist. there is no "old" feminist. feminist means what it means now and sjw/feminist has became one with each other.

Even using modernity as an argument doesn't undo the historical value that the women's rights movement had to the basic human rights we enjoy today in the overwhelming majority of the western world. The point remains however, attacking what something has become and attacking what something once was or stood for simultaneously is simply offensive to logic and to general historical significance!

I will concede though that radical feminism is of course an issue, but I don't think I've suggested otherwise, so your objections are slightly confusing to me haha

[Godwasheeeeeeeeeeeeere]

Even using modernity as an argument doesn't undo the historical value that the women's rights movement had to the basic human rights we enjoy today in the overwhelming majority of the western world. The point remains however, attacking what something has become and attacking what something once was or stood for simultaneously is simply offensive to logic and to general historical significance!

I will concede though that radical feminism is of course an issue, but I don't think I've suggested otherwise, so your objections are slightly confusing to me haha

well, go download this rofl

http://www.datpiff.com/Royce-Da-59-T...pe.849525.html

[Poeta Demonio]

well, go download this rofl

http://www.datpiff.com/Royce-Da-59-T...pe.849525.html

Cool. I win the debate. haha :P

[Emily]

.... I don't think anyone but these stupid bitches actually agree with what they're saying.

I think it'd be pretty ignorant to assume these are the only misguided, nasty, men hating,
women out there.

All that video does is show a snippet of the problem society faces with women like this.

It's more wide spread than you'd like to admit, and nastier than you could probably fathom.

[Poeta Demonio]

I think it'd be pretty ignorant to assume these are the only misguided, nasty, men hating,
women out there.

All that video does is show a snippet of the problem society faces with women like this.

It's more wide spread than you'd like to admit, and nastier than you could probably fathom.

How did you deduct that I'm saying that the people in this video are the only radical feminists? I did however say that radical feminism is a blip in an otherwise historically necessary movement. If it wasn't for strong women that fought for your rights you'd have no vote, you'd have no job and you'd be a virtual sex slave with no legal protection. Oh wait, shit, you're an Australian woman... you're still not respected in your own society 'sheila' haha

And what problem? On large they are ridiculed and hated. And if radical feminism did have a massive insurgence of popularity, well then you'd be the minority vote, and guess what? That means fuck your opinion. So either it's not a problem, and your opinion is over dramatized, or your opinion is correct and most women in that case disagree with you