What do Anti-Feminists Really Want?

Originally posted by Fiberx
the defamation of male culture.

...i've never heard of "male culture"... would you mind explaining what that is?...

Originally posted by whaaa
I hereby grant you the right to stop sounding like a crybaby!

And you elicited the exact response that I intended.

By attempting to sound self-pitying, and stating the fact that I was a man, I knew that someone like you would come and prove my point. ie. Putting me in a box of how you think I should behave, because of my gender.

You could claim that you would have replied in the same way if I had been female, but we both know that what you meant is that I should ''man up'' and stop sounding - like a girl.

It works every time. And always exposes double-standards.

Sure.

Men have customs that are often not seen as appropriate in an environment that includes women or children.

Men tend to play social games with one another that are significantly different that those that women play. Men tend to offer playful insults as a sign of acceptance. Harsh language and even a little controlled physical aggression are generally seen as friendly and even respectful in a certain manner.

Men also have their own social groups in which they simply do not want to include women. They enjoy being able to just "be a guy" without being judged for their sophomoric antics by their wives or girls friends.

We are the sex that invented football and farting on lit matches for heavens sake. We need a little room to unleash the animal within or it gets upset.

Men and women are instinctively separate in their understandings of the world. We have developed, often opposing, sensibilities.

Men have evolved physically and mentally to fight and survive. We tended to do the killing and building and if need be, the dieing, in order to provide the family or the community with safety and stability. Women have developed under very related but also distinct circumstances.

No one is more important or more capable in general, but in we both have traditionally filled different roles in life.

Men certainly do have a separate life, that does not involve women. It is a need to bond with your fellow "warriors" as it were. It is ingrained in us all.

We do not feel that we should have to apologize for our needs, even if women can not, or will not, understand them.

We gave up on understanding you eons ago.. Perhaps it is time for women to surrender to the fact that men do not and actually can not, make sense all of the time.

A little bit of space ladies!!

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
We ( the current generation ) are not responsible for thousands of years of history.

...you are responsible when you continue to embrace male supremacy by posting your opinion that sexually unrepressed females are sluts that NO man would want (as you did on taters misogeny thread)...

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
I've never done anything to supress or subjugate women

...maybe not but, based upon your post that i referred to above, i find that very hard to believe...

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...you are responsible when you continue to embrace male supremacy by posting your opinion that sexually unrepressed females are sluts that NO man would want (as you did on taters misogeny thread)...

Using the dictionary definition of a word to describe a ''promiscuous woman'', when I'm referring to promiscuous women is strange to you ?

I'm stating a fact that no man ( unless he's desperate ) wants to form a relationship with a washed-up 30-something woman that's been around the track a few times.

This is absolutely true. It's not my problem that you can't handle it.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...maybe not but, based upon your post that i referred to above, i find that very hard to believe...

Why would that be ?

What part of my post suppressed or subjugated women ?

Do you normally cast aspertions on other people's character because they post an opinion that you disagree with on an internet forum ?

I don't think anyone really wants to "eradicate feminism" as you put it. If you're speaking of the the fundamentalist conservatives and women haters, then I could see your point. That's an extremely small minority however, no?

I think most people just argue against how militant the movement can become, and how a lot of 'feminists' actually just want to eradicate men and sway rights away from men whenever possible, among other things. Mostly objectives with no real purpose other than being purposefully incendiary and meaningless. Similar to some of PETA's antics. That too, however, represents a rather small minority of feminist women.

On the subject of promiscuity and men/women.

It is not oppressive to say that most men do not want promiscuous women. Men need reliable, trust worthy partners too, you know?

Men, by instinct, want to assure that it is THEIR seed that is passed on. A woman that seeks to mate with multiple men is in violation of that need. What good does it do a man to expend his energy feeding and protecting another mans offspring, biologically?

A woman can choose to disregard that reality if she wishes.. but to say that it should be acceptable to men is running counter to the entire history of male evolution.

We need to stop seeing these things as purely social and as a flawed mentality. The vast majority of our preferences are ingrained in us. This is the result of evolutionary tendencies which exist because they have served the species beneficially over time.

A man (or woman) can do things to consciously adjust their views to an extent.. but there are things in life which are wired into us all quite deeply and which we need to make more effort to understand and less effort to change.

Real Men perfectly comfortable with their own masculinity and overall personal worth are no more disturbed by feminist, even radical ones, than they are by gay men.

reply to post by Fiberx


Exactly.

Yet, I'm being accused of ''embracing male supremacy'' by stating something ( that from my observations ) is true of most men.

Sexual exclusivity is important for a man, as you point out, and most men ( unless they haven't got much choice ), do not want to settle down with a woman who's had numerous sexual partners.

Apart from the obvious ''damaged goods'' implications, logically speaking, someone of either gender would be naturally weary of having a partner with a promiscuous past - in case they were to repeat it in the present or future.

reply to post by vaevictis

What do Anti-Feminists Really Want?

well, there is not one, modern all encompassing strand of feminismso its not possible to say what someone who is 'opposed to feminism wants' based on label alone.

1. The social structure

not really sure what this means...the social structure? do you mean some kind of caste system? women in the work place? errr......? those are all older feminist goals that aren't really part of the newest wave of feminism

One issue raised by critics is the lack of a single cause for third-wave feminism. The first wave fought and gained the right for women to vote. The second wave struggled to obtain the right for women to have access and equal opportunity to the workforce, as well as ending of legal sex discrimination.[21] The third wave of feminism lacks a cohesive goal...

So there you go. I don't consider myself a "feminist" so how do I view the structure of society? Pretty much exactly as it is now. I'm just not one for group politics :p back in the day I probably would have been anti subordination, first or second wave feminist.

2. Women's rights

again, a very amorphous question. women currently have the promise of equal rights in the constitution, due process, yada yada. so i guess I'd want it to be about like today. i do worry about abuse of women's rights under Title VII as we move into the future though. Affirmative action, especially for women, a group who are now earning more degrees then men, i feel is playing with fire and flirting with government sanctioned discrimination against men.

3. Right to vote

there's just no way you expected find someone on here called 'captain anti-feminist' who would be against women's suffrage. that's not even a stated goal of the modern feminist movement. i've met alot of racist folks in my day, but never heard one call for a return to slaver think about it.

4. The military

the laws now are fine.



_____________________


I've never met anyone who calls themselves an "anti-feminist" but if you want to know why I don't consider myself a feminist.....Its because the 'movement' is spinning its wheels. My guess is this post is bate so you can beat up on people who don't think women should be able to vote, and the amorphous categories like 'women's rights' are just designed to give you something to do tonight. And, no offense toward you, but that's kind of my problem with the 'feminist movement.'

if it was a vibrant movement worth joining or worth labeling myself with, why are your categories all well established law already or just amorphous phrases that really aren't at much issue right now? i could see myself being a feminist back in the day when there was no suffrage or wide spread discrimination in education and the work force, but today, there's just no way.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
I'm stating a fact that no man ( unless he's desperate ) wants to form a relationship with a washed-up 30-something woman that's been around the track a few times.

This is absolutely true.

...it is NOT a fact... it is NOT absolutely true... it is JUST your opinion... lots of other people may share your opinion but that still doesnt make it a fact...

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...it is NOT a fact... it is NOT absolutely true... it is JUST your opinion... lots of other people may share your opinion but that still doesnt make it a fact...

My opinion tends to have a pretty close relationship with the facts and the truth.

Now, are you going to retract your baseless claim that I somehow ''embrace male supremacy'' by offering my honest observation on a particular aspect of that other thread ?

I somehow doubt it...

Originally posted by Fiberx
On the subject of promiscuity and men/women.
It is not oppressive to say that most men do not want promiscuous women.

...you included the clarifier "most", which is more accurate than the wide sweeping generalization of "all" - but - its still a presumptious generalization...

Originally posted by Fiberx
Men, by instinct, want to assure that it is THEIR seed that is passed on.

...nonsense... if men only screwed to sire children, there wouldnt be countless fatherless kids... screwing is about a lot of things - procreation is just one of the many...

reply to post by Wyn Hawks


So women who aren't sluts are sexually repressed? Just wondering?

I just thought of a few more things. I want my sons to be able to get to go to the same self esteem boosting empowerment rallys at school that my daughter gets to go to. I see so much emphasis on boosting young girls self esteem, while young males self esteem is taking a serious hit.
All you have to do is study domestic violence for a short while and you will realize that demoralizing our men is actually harmful to women and will increase the abuse rates towards women.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...you included the clarifier "most", which is more accurate than the wide sweeping generalization of "all" - but - its still a presumptious generalization...

I think you might be getting confused.

Men don't mind slutty women for a ''bit of fun'', but they are not in high-demand for alpha males when the male is looking to settle down with someone. Not unless the man's a bit daft.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
are you going to retract your baseless claim that I somehow ''embrace male supremacy'' by offering my honest observation on a particular aspect of that other thread ?

...there is no need to retract, since you proved it wasnt baseless by posting your fact-less statement again on this thread and calling it FACT and absolute truth - and - then, when you were busted, you backpeddled and claimed it was just an observation... one thangs for sure, you're REALLY funny, sherlock... i laughed so hard i snorted and i think i might have spotted a wee bit too...

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...there is no need to retract, since you proved it wasnt baseless by posting your fact-less statement again on this thread and calling it FACT and absolute truth

Behave yourself.

You claimed that I ''embraced male dominance'', yet when I've shown you up on that, you refuse to retract.

Which is fine. I didn't genuinely think that you'd do so, anyway.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
- and - then, when you were busted, you backpeddled and claimed it was just an observation... one thangs for sure, you're REALLY funny, sherlock...

I didn't get ''busted'', and no back-peddling ensued.

There was nothing to ''back-pedal'' from. The only problem was the fact that you haven't got the wit to differentiate between figurative, colloquial usage of a word, and the dictionary definition of the same word.

Still, I know that your behaviour is intellectually dishonest, and you are attempting to bog the discussion down by deflection and semantics, rather than face up to and acknowledge your monumental gaffe that you made about my previous comments.

Still, your problem. And it only reflects poorly on your debating tactics in this discussion.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
i laughed so hard i snorted and i think i might have spotted a wee bit too...

T.M.I.

I, personally, want the most delicious pizza in the world.

But I'd settle for equal rights, not favoring one sex over another, too.

Originally posted by whaaa
Real Men perfectly comfortable with their own masculinity and overall personal worth are no more disturbed by feminist, even radical ones, than they are by gay men.

I disagree.

A ''real man'' ( nice selective use of gender stereotypes, by the way ).knows what's right, and would stick up for equality.

Just as a ''real man'' would stick up for a woman if he sees her suffering from inequality, he would also defend members of his own gender if he sees them on the receiving end of similar unequal treatment.

A man that goes with the flow, and is happy for the law to prescribe his gender unequal rights, is anything but a ''real man''; and is, in fact, a coward ( there's also a less pc term for these men, which is along the lines of a ''cat'' being ''whipped'' ).

Anybody with personal worth does not stand for being treated unfairly, unequally, or with a lack of respect.
So, a real man most certainly does not abide current legislation that treats him in the manner I outlined above !


You are getting confused if you think that people are disturbed by feminists, themselves. It doesn't bother me what other people believe, and even if a feminist was advocating mandatory penectomies, then it wouldn't really bother me ( why should I worry about what other people believe ? ).

The problem is not feminists, but the actual discriminatory laws and attitudes that are based on feminist ideals.

Yes, feminists may come in for some stick on this site and others, but that's because it's people that held similar views to theirs, who were largely responsible for creating unequal rights between the genders.

Just as a man that expresses ''old-fashioned'' views on gender relations will come in for some criticism, because it's people that held similar views to his that led to the initial unequal treatment of women.


Personally speaking, I mainly feel sorry for feminists, as I believe that they are usually embittered women who - for one reason or another - have deep underlying ''issues'' with men.

My problem is not on a personal level with people that hold feminist views, but with the actual harm that the warped ideology has done to modern society.