ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Feb 7, 2015 17:13:52 GMT -5
Np...unfortunately to answer your question the only term I can think of is misogynist .. or "chauvinist" could apply too.
I also feel that many women who continue to rant and get on their soap-boxes are the female equivalent of a misogynist - basically man-haters. I notice it in the way they interact or communicate with males - talking down to them or treating them like someone lesser than them. Many of these more aggressive feminists also don't seem to be capable of having a lasting relationship with a male. They want equality, but don't consider their male counterparts as equals - instead, picking apart any little thing that they feel is an injustice to them as women .
Heck, they even get offended at silly chauvinistic humor. A confident woman can laugh alongside of her male friends or family - or co-workers - instead of getting all bent out of shape over a joke.
Aggressive, angry females are counter-productive to their cause.
.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 17:25:30 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 18:04:16 GMT -5
...Feminist doctrines are not hypocritical. Actually where are the doctrines written up? ... "I am not sure what 'doctrines' you are referring to here. Would you please give me a link so that I can assess them. I can then knowledgeably discuss how they are either not hypocritical or not feminist doctrines. Or I see some of the hypocrisy you see." Just a thought. Exactly
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 18:06:11 GMT -5
And I wasn't joking that people that support men's rights are called Conservatives. Pick a men's rights issue and there is a good chance it is Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly have done a show about it. I don't know about conservatives in general or specific, but I used to read on men's rights and I really doubt Limbaugh would support much of it. Do you really believe either support the idea of Dads with full custody, SAHDs, men wearing skirts, and other stuff?
I do think they believe in Dads with full custody and SAHDs. The men wearing skirts I hadn't heard of before. I'm taking it that isn't the same as cross dressing but more of skirts becoming commonplace men's wear.
|
|
Cookies Galore
Senior Associate
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 18:08:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,891
|
Post by Cookies Galore on Feb 7, 2015 18:44:58 GMT -5
Men's Rights Advocate (MRA) NO MA'AM
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,242
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Feb 7, 2015 18:55:51 GMT -5
I don't know about conservatives in general or specific, but I used to read on men's rights and I really doubt Limbaugh would support much of it. Do you really believe either support the idea of Dads with full custody, SAHDs, men wearing skirts, and other stuff?
I do think they believe in Dads with full custody and SAHDs. The men wearing skirts I hadn't heard of before. I'm taking it that isn't the same as cross dressing but more of skirts becoming commonplace men's wear. Correct.
www.men-in-skirts.org/aboutmis.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_skirts
In the 1970s, David Hall, a former research engineer at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), actively promoted the use of skirts for men, appearing on both The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson and the Phil Donahue Show. In addition, he was featured in many articles at the time.[6] In his essay "Skirts for Men: the advantages and disadvantages of various forms of bodily covering", he opined that men should wear skirts for both symbolic and practical reasons. Symbolically, wearing skirts would allow men to take on desirable female characteristics. In practical terms, skirts, he suggested, do not chafe around the groin, and they are more suited to warm climates.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 19:07:54 GMT -5
"I am not sure what 'doctrines' you are referring to here. Would you please give me a link so that I can assess them. I can then knowledgeably discuss how they are either not hypocritical or not feminist doctrines. Or I see some of the hypocrisy you see." Just a thought. Exactly Sweet. So Virgil needs to post a link so you can read what you blindly stated had no hypocrisy. I look forward to your assessment.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 19:11:04 GMT -5
I don't know about conservatives in general or specific, but I used to read on men's rights and I really doubt Limbaugh would support much of it. Do you really believe either support the idea of Dads with full custody, SAHDs, men wearing skirts, and other stuff?
I do think they believe in Dads with full custody and SAHDs. The men wearing skirts I hadn't heard of before. I'm taking it that isn't the same as cross dressing but more of skirts becoming commonplace men's wear. Fighting against social acceptance of female on male violence is an area I am interested in.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Feb 7, 2015 19:11:10 GMT -5
Men in Scotland have been wearing kilts for centuries - ever see the movie "Braveheart"?
It isn't effeminate - it's often cultural. Our police force has a regimental Pipe band that performs at special events and in parades - all the pipers wear the traditional kilt.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 19:17:03 GMT -5
I do think they believe in Dads with full custody and SAHDs. The men wearing skirts I hadn't heard of before. I'm taking it that isn't the same as cross dressing but more of skirts becoming commonplace men's wear. Fighting against social acceptance of female on male violence is an area I am interested in. If it helps at all I don't accept it. I'm happy to say it isn't a big part of my world but I have been in a position to see it happen and I did take a stand against it.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 19:26:40 GMT -5
Fighting against social acceptance of female on male violence is an area I am interested in. If it helps at all I don't accept it. I'm happy to say it isn't a big part of my world but I have been in a position to see it happen and I did take a stand against it. Always great to work to stop it on a personal level. The problem is when it is okay to show it taking place on national television. It takes place at 1:27 on this trailer I have seen repeatedly.
EDIT:Whoops wrong video. But isn't that one great.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 19:33:12 GMT -5
I had never seen that commercial. That's a joke that went horribly wrong. I hope it was taken off the air quickly.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 19:37:02 GMT -5
And now the Feminism thread has become the thread about men's issues....sigh
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 19:41:23 GMT -5
I had never seen that commercial. That's a joke that went horribly wrong. I hope it was taken off the air quickly. Here is the one I meant to post 1:27. And it is still on the air.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 19:43:19 GMT -5
And now the Feminism thread has become the thread about men's issues....sigh Gives us something to talk about while we wait for Virgil to post links and you to assess and report.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 19:45:18 GMT -5
Here is a "joke" from our very own board: ___________________________________________ .... ___________________________________________ While shopping for vacation clothes, a husband and wife passed a display of bathing suits. It had been at least ten years and twenty pounds since the wife had even considered buying a bathing suit, so she sought her husband's advice. "What do you think?" she asked. "Should I get a two-piece or an all-in-one?" "Better get a two-piece," he replied. "You'd never get it all in one." He's still in intensive care.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Feb 7, 2015 19:46:59 GMT -5
Yup, the woman slaps the crap out of the guy in your video, and nobody is outraged. If the roles were reversed, there'd be screaming from the rooftop here.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2015 20:05:04 GMT -5
Yes Virgil Showlion I do like that answer better as you are owning the fact that to you "all those points contained a large kernel of truth". They contained a kernel truth in the same sense that there are a lot of people that call themselves Christians that behave in a way that you don't think is supported in your understanding of Christianity. You don't stop being a christian because of them the same as I won't stop calling myself a feminist because of those women. The difference being that I can readily assess the behaviour of a nominal Christian per the Biblical standards set out by Christ himself, and thus positively affirm or reject whether their claims are true. Conversely, feminism has no authoritative set of doctrines, as you yourself have pointed out. The movement itself is characterized by the doctrines of the individuals who subscribe to it. That, for better or for worse, is the definition of feminism. Feminist doctrines are not hypocritical. Actually where are the doctrines written up? I have never espoused that sex equals rape. What justifies paying a man more for the same job? You acknowledge there is a disparity, what is the difference if it is 20% or 30%? Let's fix the disparity. It's not a big deal to be working out the finer points of how men ought to lend a hand etc, that is going to vary in individual relationships. And finally many of the attacks are on women in general. In the same way that your "joke" contained "a kernel of truth about how you really feel about feminists" You don't claim that sex equals rape, but other women who are every bit as much feminists are you are certainly do. Their doctrines are part of the "mess of doctrines" that I talk about in Reply #124. The disparity in wages was quantified in various places in this thread as being roughly 10%, with some claims as low as 6%. Although you're right to point out that any non-zero number implies an unjust disparity, my specific claims are that i) feminists often exaggerate the magnitude of the disparity (e.g. the oft-cited 78-cents-on-the-dollar myth), and ii) many feminists don't care about practical/justifiable reasons for wage disparity between the sexes, which is why they routinely cite figures like the 78-cents-on-the-dollar myth .Thirdly, a joke can indeed still be a joke even if it contains a kernel of truth. Finally, while misogyny certainly exists, criticism of flawed (hypocritical, counterproductive, etc.) ideas doesn't aspire to misogyny just because the vast majority of people who ascribe to those ideas are women. Bad ideas are bad ideas and deserve to be identified as such. As for this, I couldn't disagree with you more. The term has not been coopted by those women. People like yourself try to use those women to discredit anyone that identifies as feminist. It has indeed been coopted. The fact that we're in this thread debating the definition of feminism might have been your first clue that there is no broad consensus on what doctrines are and aren't included under the umbrella of feminism. What you think feminism ought to be doesn't matter one whit more than what a million feminist authors/ideologues/bloggers think it ought to be, and I'm simply acknowledging that fact. To restate from Reply #124: contemporary feminism is a mess of doctrines whose only fruit has been to foster hostility and bitterness between the sexes, pitting them as rivals rather than coworkers with unique roles and abilities. The PT article by Dr. Kanazawa puts it even more critically than that, and he makes it clear that what he's attacking is the doctrines of a prominent feminist author. You should author a book on feminism. That would at least provide nominal feminists a rubric of laterbloomer-approved doctrines to rally around. You can call it "laterism", and it will provide the same doctrinal anchorage to your vision of feminism that the Bible does to Christianity.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2015 20:14:54 GMT -5
And now the Feminism thread has become the thread about men's issues....sigh Gives us something to talk about while we wait for Virgil to post links and you to assess and report. What exactly am I supposed to post again? Links to feminist websites whose contents laterbloomer will either approve of or else exclude from canonical feminism? I didn't realize she was Chairwoman of the Global Committee on the Acceptable Practices of Feminism. She'll have to point me to her list of credentials and accolades. Then I can waste my time digging up links.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,242
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Feb 7, 2015 20:18:20 GMT -5
This is an opinion it is not fact.
Likewise it is your opinion that feminist X's opinions are just as valid and representative of feminism as feminist Y no matter where they fall in the continuum. That's as silly as saying the Westboro Baptist's beliefs on Christianity is just as valid and representative on Christianity as a noted theologian's would be. Your argument is the equivalent of saying the Westboro Baptists and those who handle snakes in church services *ARE* mainstream Christians and define Christianity.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 20:21:14 GMT -5
I had never seen that commercial. That's a joke that went horribly wrong. I hope it was taken off the air quickly. Here is the one I meant to post 1:27. And it is still on the air. Well that is wrong. I don't agree with that at all. Now see how I did that? I agreed with you without bringing up women's issues or debating the video or any other of the thousands of deflections that are brought up around women's issues.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 20:25:16 GMT -5
No, I don't know who you think said this etc but by no means has anyone accepted by mainstream feminists ever said "sex equals rape" and gotten mass support for it. Feminists tend to want to destigmatize female sexuality. Unless you're thinking of "sex without consent is rape" That is said a lot.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,242
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Feb 7, 2015 20:28:57 GMT -5
Bills, I hated that commercial, but I think in real life that is not acceptable. I think society is OK with men being slapped if they are jerks, sexually aggressive to women verbally or physically and its OK to slap women if they are hysterical.
Overall I think violence on TV has gotten worse instead of better. Its increased against both men and women.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2015 20:30:09 GMT -5
This is an opinion it is not fact.
Likewise it is your opinion that feminist X's opinions are just as valid and representative of feminism as feminist Y no matter where they fall in the continuum. That's as silly as saying the Westboro Baptist's beliefs on Christianity is just as valid and representative on Christianity as a noted theologian's would be. Your argument is the equivalent of saying the Westboro Baptists and those who handle snakes in church services *ARE* mainstream Christians and define Christianity.
I can prove that the Westboro baptists doctrines are not scriptural, their practices are not the practices of Christ, and their laws are not the law of the Bible. God has given me a mind with which to reason, assess, compare, and make logical determinations. You, nor laterbloomer, nor anyone else besides can unilaterally exclude any doctrine or set of doctrine from the feminist rubric because as laterbloomer herself points out, there is no such rubric. While I can't prevent Fred Phelps from calling what he does "Christianity", I can easily demonstrate how his doctrines do not comport with scripture given a sound, logical, and exhaustive analysis. Moreover, it is not unreasonable to narrowly define "Christianity" as the teachings of Jesus Christ and his disciples. When it comes to feminism, what have you got? "I don't think that's really what feminism is."? "She claims to be a feminist author, but she isn't really because I don't like what she has to say." Where is your core doctrine? Where is the evidence that this and this alone is indeed befitting of the label "feminism"?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 16:24:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2015 20:34:59 GMT -5
No you can't. First you have to chose which version of the bible you are going to use as an authority. Then you have to decide which interpretation you are going to accept. And when you do that Fred Phelps will pull out another interpretation that disputes what you have said. And I say Fred Phelps is the real Christian and you are the fraud. ETA - For everyone else, I don't really. I'm making a point.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Feb 7, 2015 20:50:26 GMT -5
The King James Version is a good place to start.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,227
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 7, 2015 20:51:51 GMT -5
So here is the chain. You claimed: ... Many feminist doctrines are hypocritical and hopelessly self-conflicted. ... She said they weren't. ... Feminist doctrines are not hypocritical. Actually where are the doctrines written up? ... But also seemed to not know which doctrines you meant. So I suggested: ... "I am not sure what 'doctrines' you are referring to here. Would you please give me a link so that I can assess them. I can then knowledgeably discuss how they are either not hypocritical or not feminist doctrines. Or I see some of the hypocrisy you see." ... She responded: Exactly So I see us at the point where you could present feminist doctrine you see as hypocritical and she could read it and address it.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,242
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Feb 7, 2015 20:52:49 GMT -5
There are dictionary definitions of feminism and you've failed to prove that 'men are the enemy' and 'penetrative sex' are common beliefs of feminism. See how this works? You can not prove your point because you have nothing to show they are the norm.
Here's a poll on feminism from Seventeen magazine. A magazine for teen girls.
www.seventeen.com/entertainment/reviews/feminism-poll
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Feb 7, 2015 20:53:42 GMT -5
No you can't. First you have to chose which version of the bible you are going to use as an authority. Then you have to decide which interpretation you are going to accept. And when you do that Fred Phelps will pull out another interpretation that disputes what you have said. And I say Fred Phelps is the real Christian and you are the fraud. ETA - For everyone else, I don't really. I'm making a point. We're getting off-topic, but briefly: 1) if a point of doctrine hinges on which translation of the Bible is used (and a few do), we go back to the original Greek manuscripts; and 2) a sound interpretation is one free of all contradictions, backed up by example, 100% fully consistent with all scriptures, and interpreted using the rigorous mechanisms the Bible itself provides for sound interpretation (a very detailed topic). I guarantee you that Fred Phelps cannot do (2), and I can also guarantee you that this isn't the standard by which he evaluates the correctness of his doctrines. My personal goal is to never espouse a "Christian" doctrine where I cannot do (2). Even so, I'm fallible and I endeavour to be correctable via sound (scriptural) argument. Having gotten that out of the way: What is the reason that Billis, I, or anyone else reading this should consider your views on feminism to be authoritative? What standard is there for us to use?
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,242
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Feb 7, 2015 20:58:51 GMT -5
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism
Late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries
Third-wave feminism
In the early 1990s in the USA, third-wave feminism began as a response to perceived failures of the second wave and to the backlash against initiatives and movements created by the second wave. Third-wave feminism distinguished itself from the second wave around issues of sexuality, challenging female heterosexuality and celebrating sexuality as a means of female empowerment.[60] Third-wave feminism also seeks to challenge or avoid what it deems the second wave's essentialist definitions of femininity, which, they argue, over-emphasize the experiences of upper middle-class white women. Third-wave feminists often focus on "micro-politics" and challenge the second wave's paradigm as to what is, or is not, good for women, and tend to use a post-structuralist interpretation of gender and sexuality.[26][61][62][63] Feminist leaders rooted in the second wave, such as Gloria Anzaldúa, bell hooks, Chela Sandoval, Cherríe Moraga, Audre Lorde, Maxine Hong Kingston, and many other non-white feminists, sought to negotiate a space within feminist thought for consideration of race-related subjectivities.[62][64][65] Third-wave feminism also contains internal debates between difference feminists, who believe that there are important differences between the sexes, and those who believe that there are no inherent differences between the sexes and contend that gender roles are due to social conditioning.[66]
political movements
Some branches of feminism closely track the political leanings of the larger society, such as liberalism and conservatism, or focus on the environment. Liberal feminism seeks individualistic equality of men and women through political and legal reform without altering the structure of society. Radical feminism considers the male-controlled capitalist hierarchy as the defining feature of women's oppression and the total uprooting and reconstruction of society as necessary.[8] Conservative feminism is conservative relative to the society in which it resides. Libertarian feminism conceives of people as self-owners and therefore as entitled to freedom from coercive interference.[82] Separatist feminism does not support heterosexual relationships. Lesbian feminism is thus closely related. Other feminists criticize separatist feminism as sexist.[10] Ecofeminists see men's control of land as responsible for the oppression of women and destruction of the natural environment; ecofeminism has been criticised for focusing too much on a mystical connection between women and nature.[83]
Not surprisingly the penetrative sex thing does not appear to have made it into Wikipedia as mainstream feminist thought.
|
|