Feminism
- Iniciador del tema homerbeoulve
- Fecha de inicio
-
🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Estado
- Registrado
- 12 de Feb, 2013
Re: Is this what you want, radical feminists?
As much as I have contempt for the MRA as a whole due to the widespread insistence that feminism is to blame for the unfair stereotypes and biases against men (rather than the same history and culture that spawned the unfair stereotypes and biases against women which feminism was created to combat), the fact they are going after the radfems means they do serve some useful purpose.
However, while feminism as a whole definitely needs to disown radfems shitstains ASAP, portraying radfems as typical feminists as some like the amazingatheist have been doing, is complete BS and disengenuous as hell, the same way calling all progressives North Korea worshipping Stalinists would be.
homerbeoulve dijo:
As much as I have contempt for the MRA as a whole due to the widespread insistence that feminism is to blame for the unfair stereotypes and biases against men (rather than the same history and culture that spawned the unfair stereotypes and biases against women which feminism was created to combat), the fact they are going after the radfems means they do serve some useful purpose.
However, while feminism as a whole definitely needs to disown radfems shitstains ASAP, portraying radfems as typical feminists as some like the amazingatheist have been doing, is complete BS and disengenuous as hell, the same way calling all progressives North Korea worshipping Stalinists would be.
Bob's Fries
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 9 de Feb, 2013
Re: To women in this forum: Are we(men) pigs and inferior to
From what I learned in my Woman's Studies class, women can become as strong as men through training. It just takes more time. Case in point, weight-lifters.
CompyRex dijo:
From what I learned in my Woman's Studies class, women can become as strong as men through training. It just takes more time. Case in point, weight-lifters.
- Registrado
- 26 de Mar, 2013
Re: To women in this forum: Are we(men) pigs and inferior to
Saito dijo:From what I learned in my Woman's Studies class, women can become as strong as men through training. It just takes more time. Case in point, weight-lifters.
Bob's Fries
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 9 de Feb, 2013
Re: To women in this forum: Are we(men) pigs and inferior to
You happy?
Dr. Cuddlebug dijo:Saito dijo:From what I learned in my Woman's Studies class, women can become as strong as men through training. It just takes more time. Case in point, weight-lifters.
You happy?
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
Re: Is this what you want, radical feminists?
The only problem with this is that "The Amazing Atheist" is himself a terrible person.
So you've got an atheist turd making a commentary on a group of feminist turds who are disrupting a meeting for "men's rights," which is, LOL, what? "Men's rights?"
So there's three levels of stupid here.
Well, yeah, once you throw steroids in the mix anything is possible I guess. Including them growing facial hair.
homerbeoulve dijo:
The only problem with this is that "The Amazing Atheist" is himself a terrible person.
So you've got an atheist turd making a commentary on a group of feminist turds who are disrupting a meeting for "men's rights," which is, LOL, what? "Men's rights?"
So there's three levels of stupid here.
Saito dijo:Holdek dijo:
From what I learned in my Woman's Studies class, women can become as strong as men through training. It just takes more time. Case in point, weight-lifters.
Well, yeah, once you throw steroids in the mix anything is possible I guess. Including them growing facial hair.
- Registrado
- 12 de Feb, 2013
Re: Is this what you want, radical feminists?
Well turd vs tard vs turdy tards is always a nice sight to behold. No matter who loses, the sane onlookers win.
As for MRAs, from what I understand they started with a single tiny spark of a good point (i.e. the harmful stereotypes of Men adversely affecting many men), but decided that dem damn dirty lesbo feminists were to blame instead of the society which has been allowed to perpetuate these stereotypes since long before feminism even existed solely because said stereotypes appear to be positive at first glance (for example badass "macho" men without any feelings or weaknesses, who could endure any and all shit thrown at them), despite the fact that feminism was created to fight the closely interrelated harmful stereotypes of women (i.e. weak and submissive skivies eternally slaved to their fealings who needed big badass macho men to protect them), and would have thus been the most logical ally imaginable.
Long story short whatever vaguely positive role they could have played may have been, they quickly degenerated into a haven of potential/acting loveshies, men who feel bitter about "feminism" due to the fact they buy into any and all horror stories about radfems and assume this is the case with every feminist, and men who simply get pissy that "their side" is not getting the same attention.
Holdek dijo:
Well turd vs tard vs turdy tards is always a nice sight to behold. No matter who loses, the sane onlookers win.
As for MRAs, from what I understand they started with a single tiny spark of a good point (i.e. the harmful stereotypes of Men adversely affecting many men), but decided that dem damn dirty lesbo feminists were to blame instead of the society which has been allowed to perpetuate these stereotypes since long before feminism even existed solely because said stereotypes appear to be positive at first glance (for example badass "macho" men without any feelings or weaknesses, who could endure any and all shit thrown at them), despite the fact that feminism was created to fight the closely interrelated harmful stereotypes of women (i.e. weak and submissive skivies eternally slaved to their fealings who needed big badass macho men to protect them), and would have thus been the most logical ally imaginable.
Long story short whatever vaguely positive role they could have played may have been, they quickly degenerated into a haven of potential/acting loveshies, men who feel bitter about "feminism" due to the fact they buy into any and all horror stories about radfems and assume this is the case with every feminist, and men who simply get pissy that "their side" is not getting the same attention.
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
I'm just gonna leave this here...
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
Re: Is this what you want, radical feminists?
Problems with this video is that it's cherry-picked because The Amazing Atheist is very clearly biased on the topic. What he doesn't mention is that "MRA" has no credibility. They have a tendency to demonize feminism for no reason, despite feminists supporting the majority of their points through their own activism (examples of this are the idea that men are meant to pay alimony, since the idea that women can't support themselves stems from patriarchy, which is what they oppose.)
Now don't get me wrong, the MRA has a valid point in that men are also forced into a gender role even when it doesn't fit... but the idea that "men are oppressed" is kinda stupid. You can look at any given set of gender statistics to prove that wrong. Women often get paid less, women routinely get reduced to sex objects, etc. There's also the fact that, as stated before, there's no reason for the MRA to villainize the feminist movement.
In all honesty, equality between genders has advanced significantly in the past years, but it's still not at a point of true equality yet. There's plenty of examples of women being raped, then being blamed for "destroying the lives" of the men who did it when the rapists get arrested. There's still a gap in wagers, even when women perform the job just as well as men do. There's still a reason for feminism to be around, and I think people would do well to actually look into what feminism is before deciding that they hate it because of some cherry-picked example of someone who identifies as a feminist being angry. Actually look up what the movement is about and what it does, what it already has done, and THEN decide where you stand on the issue.
Pro-tip: don't use the Amazing Atheist when making any argument on anything ever.homerbeoulve dijo:
Problems with this video is that it's cherry-picked because The Amazing Atheist is very clearly biased on the topic. What he doesn't mention is that "MRA" has no credibility. They have a tendency to demonize feminism for no reason, despite feminists supporting the majority of their points through their own activism (examples of this are the idea that men are meant to pay alimony, since the idea that women can't support themselves stems from patriarchy, which is what they oppose.)
Now don't get me wrong, the MRA has a valid point in that men are also forced into a gender role even when it doesn't fit... but the idea that "men are oppressed" is kinda stupid. You can look at any given set of gender statistics to prove that wrong. Women often get paid less, women routinely get reduced to sex objects, etc. There's also the fact that, as stated before, there's no reason for the MRA to villainize the feminist movement.
In all honesty, equality between genders has advanced significantly in the past years, but it's still not at a point of true equality yet. There's plenty of examples of women being raped, then being blamed for "destroying the lives" of the men who did it when the rapists get arrested. There's still a gap in wagers, even when women perform the job just as well as men do. There's still a reason for feminism to be around, and I think people would do well to actually look into what feminism is before deciding that they hate it because of some cherry-picked example of someone who identifies as a feminist being angry. Actually look up what the movement is about and what it does, what it already has done, and THEN decide where you stand on the issue.
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
The only time it's acceptable to turn to The Amazing Atheist for help is when you need advice on jamming a banana up your ass. Otherwise, everything he says is just a collaboration of primitive grunts.
- Registrado
- 4 de Abr, 2013
http://www.conservapedia.com/Feminism
Everything you needed to know about the topic
"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians."
- Pat Robertson
Everything you needed to know about the topic
"The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians."
- Pat Robertson
random_pickle
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 21 de Feb, 2013
[youtube]x64cy3Bcr98[/youtube]
- Registrado
- 12 de Feb, 2013
Meh, Watson, Richards, and sarkeesian are all smallfry compared to the repulsive, bigoted, self righteous, decietful, and chauvinistic sack of crap that is gail dines, the worlds "leading antiporn activist".
She proves her "feminist stripes" by trying to instigate witchhunts against the porn industry by way flat out lying and grossly inflating the least popular fringes of one particular fetish (i.e BDSM or rough sex) to be "the only porn that ever exists" and which is all a capitalist patriachal conspiracy to oppress women (her cowardly fleeing anyone who brings up gay porn and its huge popularity just emphasizes how full of shit she is), dismissing any critic (or person who brings up actual facts and figures rather than the blatantly bullshit anecdotes which she bases all her claims on) as a sexist/porn industry shill/pervert who should be institutionalized.
Most disgusting of all (to me at least, and to many others who see how nastily chauvinistic it is) she demands that all women who work in the sex industry be treated as brainless little children who "obviously" dont know whats best for them and who "obviously" need the protection of those like big mamma gail to speak "for" them, and all while utterly refusing to actually listen to the same people she claims to be "fighting for" or acknowledge their basic agency and choice to work in said industry, and dismisses them as being "brainwashed by the system" whenever publically called out on it.
Unfortunately, idiots like the Guardian newspaper staff and other "leftist intellectual" circles tend to lap up any talk of "capitalist conspiracy" these days, even when the claims are so full of shit even a toddler can see through them, and thus she has gained a lot of status and "mainstream" acceptance in her work.
Long story short, for all the whining sarkeesian and richards may get up to, at least they dont enjoy the support and unearned validation for their idiocy that dines does.
She proves her "feminist stripes" by trying to instigate witchhunts against the porn industry by way flat out lying and grossly inflating the least popular fringes of one particular fetish (i.e BDSM or rough sex) to be "the only porn that ever exists" and which is all a capitalist patriachal conspiracy to oppress women (her cowardly fleeing anyone who brings up gay porn and its huge popularity just emphasizes how full of shit she is), dismissing any critic (or person who brings up actual facts and figures rather than the blatantly bullshit anecdotes which she bases all her claims on) as a sexist/porn industry shill/pervert who should be institutionalized.
Most disgusting of all (to me at least, and to many others who see how nastily chauvinistic it is) she demands that all women who work in the sex industry be treated as brainless little children who "obviously" dont know whats best for them and who "obviously" need the protection of those like big mamma gail to speak "for" them, and all while utterly refusing to actually listen to the same people she claims to be "fighting for" or acknowledge their basic agency and choice to work in said industry, and dismisses them as being "brainwashed by the system" whenever publically called out on it.
Unfortunately, idiots like the Guardian newspaper staff and other "leftist intellectual" circles tend to lap up any talk of "capitalist conspiracy" these days, even when the claims are so full of shit even a toddler can see through them, and thus she has gained a lot of status and "mainstream" acceptance in her work.
Long story short, for all the whining sarkeesian and richards may get up to, at least they dont enjoy the support and unearned validation for their idiocy that dines does.
random_pickle
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 21 de Feb, 2013
^^^^
Just reading your post sent my rage to A-log levels never experienced before. As someone who looks up porn from time to time, let me just say that not only is this hag full of it, her anti-porn crusade in the name of wimmins rivals that of Tumblr Social Justice Warriors in bigotry.
Just reading your post sent my rage to A-log levels never experienced before. As someone who looks up porn from time to time, let me just say that not only is this hag full of it, her anti-porn crusade in the name of wimmins rivals that of Tumblr Social Justice Warriors in bigotry.
- Registrado
- 12 de Feb, 2013
^ Dines is basically a reincarnation of all those hateful, hypocritical old hags during the victorian era who screeched for all women deemed to be "nymphomaniacs" (i.e. those who had been raped, those who worked in prostitution, or those who were percieved to enjoy sex too much) to be interred in insane asylums, as "no virtuous women" would dream of engaging in such "indecencies". Her crusade is driven by her own terror regarding sex and her meglomaniac obsession with controlling women's sexuality "for their own good", and is about as unfriendly to women in the sex industry as Rick Santorum is to gays
random_pickle
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 21 de Feb, 2013
Judge Holden dijo:
That last line gave me an idea. Somebody made a poster of Santorum out of gay porn.
Someone should do the same for Dines.
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
As I said a few months ago, there's a particular brand of feminism that is really unsavory. This example cropped up on my facebook feed. If someone even thinks "privilege" is a thing, they're already doing it wrong. But this has nothing to do with feminism, it's really the SJ crowd at work.
- Registrado
- 3 de Feb, 2013
KatsuKitty dijo:As I said a few months ago, there's a particular brand of feminism that is really unsavory. This example cropped up on my facebook feed. If someone even thinks "privilege" is a thing, they're already doing it wrong. But this has nothing to do with feminism, it's really the SJ crowd at work.
Ugh. Who are these obnoxious cretins? And why would anyone, like the first respondent who seemed rational, keep them on their Facebook friends list?
- Registrado
- 7 de Feb, 2013
Re: Is this what you want, radical feminists?
Although, using AMazing Atheist is never good.
I prefer my bananas in my mouth, with the peel off.
every time I see that red haired bitch's face, I die laughing.homerbeoulve dijo:
Although, using AMazing Atheist is never good.
I prefer my bananas in my mouth, with the peel off.
- Registrado
- 7 de Feb, 2013
HOLY FUCK.KatsuKitty dijo:As I said a few months ago, there's a particular brand of feminism that is really unsavory. This example cropped up on my facebook feed. If someone even thinks "privilege" is a thing, they're already doing it wrong. But this has nothing to do with feminism, it's really the SJ crowd at work.
Reading that is like slamming a knitting needle into my brain.
- Estado