What do Anti-Feminists Really Want?

Originally posted by PayMeh
Unless you're over 60, you've not been subjugated to any of your so called "male supremacy years." You've not been wronged.

...even today, in the usofa, there are women who do the exact same work as their male counterpart and the women make less money... there are laws in place that are supposed to stop that kind of behavior but, as when civil rights laws were enacted, it takes a long time for society to comply, especially the part of society who believe their religion should dictate laws and social norms...

Originally posted by PayMeh
You see, back before this movement really took hold, people actually only had hard labor as jobs.

...even back in the 1800s, there were MANY non-hard-labor jobs, such as: doctor, nurse, teacher, lawyer, legal clerk, newspaper editor, musician, preacher, insurance salesman, stock broker, banker, bank teller, actor, seamstress, tailor, retail clerk, politician, political aid, senator, congressman, legislator, governor, mayor, city clerk, cop, veternarian - its a LONG list...

Originally posted by SaturnFX
feminism served a purpose and still does for specific aspects...such as making sure there is equal pay in the workplace, and really thats about all there is...

...theres more to it than just that (although thats very important)...

...its becoming very common for men to get paid maternity leave (paternity leave?)... lots of men choose to be stay-at-home dads now or work-from-home dads... i think thats wonderful and i believe its a direct result of the feminist movement promoting equality...

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by Indigogirl
Whilst I completely agree with you that society should be goverened by meritocracy, it seems that you are implying that all Feminists believe in unfair measures in order to eradicate a patriarchal society? Is this correct or have I misunderstood you on this point?

Yes, feminists are interested in their own gender and their rights, first and foremost, they are not interested in equal rights.

edit on 31-10-2010 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)

Well I cannot disagree strongly enough with this. Speaking AS A FEMINIST, I can tell you that I am interesting in EQUAL rights for men and women, NOT foremost for women, so I think you should be careful what you state as FACT.

It is impossible for a political movement to keep changing its name in accordance with the development and evolution of its politics. That isn't even taking into consideration that there are many different branches of politics that come under the umbrella term of Feminism. Of course there are some individuals who's version of Feminist ideology may well conform with the description which you have ascribed to the term 'Feminist', but please do not paint everyone with the same simplistic brush!

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


You are taking the term 'Feminist' in a very simplistic and face-value manner. Your last comment has just ignored exactly what I described to you as my Feminist politics. My politics were formed through the avenue of Feminism, just as yours may have been formed from the orignial starting point of Conservatism for instance. That does not mean that I am unable to carve my own opinions within these signpost political labels. There are many different branches and factions of politics within Feminism - the term itself is almost a loose umbrella term which allows me to give you some idea of where I'm coming from without having to lay out every single piece of ideology I believe in. If it would make you feel more comfortable, I can call myself an 'Equalist', or a 'Leveler' if that would seem more appropriate to you. What I'm trying to say is that surely it is the particular policies and fundamental beliefs that are more important than the label? Feminism has evolved greatly since the First Wave, and evidently, the label 'Feminist' still carries quite a stigma with it.

maybe it's not feminism persay....
it's just what the government does.. like lets say they fund feminist causes much more than anything they would ever for any 'mens rghts' movements.

The industry as well.

So its like, feminism takes all the glory, it's all "women are victims" this and that, but they never stop to think if males ever needed help.. and as soon as one male does talk about this they are quickly portrayed as anti feminist or denied and told to "shut up and be a man about it".

There's no reason a MALE would ever need a MAN'S right movement right?

Because MEN NEVER have problems, and if they did, they are automatically sissies, or incompetent.

reply to post by The Quiet Storm


Take the whole domestic violence campaign. Most men will rather not report assault by a woman, because they are afraid of ridicule, "What a wuss!" He also will most likely not knock her on her ass like he could because he will be arrested for it, and in turn be ridiculed for it. If he does call the cops, it is likely he will be arrested anyway, even if he didn't lay a hand on her. All she has to do is say that he did, and boom, handcuffs, going to jail buddy. Even if they are both beating on each other, more likely than not, only the man is arrested. Yet men are always the badguys in those campaigns. Pictures of woman with black eyes etc.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by The Quiet Storm

 

Take the whole domestic violence campaign. Most men will rather not report assault by a woman, because they are afraid of ridicule, "What a wuss!"

Remember the Tiger Woods thing? Didn't his wife chase him out of the house swinging a golf club? Didn't he need surgery to repair the damage? Did we hear a single word about domestic violence? Was she arrested?

Imagine if it was a man chasing the woman out of the house...

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks

...even today, in the usofa, there are women who do the exact same work as their male counterpart and the women make less money...

Umm, there are both males and females doing the same work that I do, who make more money than me.

The important question is, why? Feminists never ask that, they just assume sexism.

reply to post by SevenBeans


But he deserved it, he was a cheating! He is a dirty dog, a manwhore! Yeah if it was a male, he would have been locked up for sure. It is things like this that boil my blood. There are so many laws that are stacked in female favor, but of course I am not a "real man" or I wouldn't have a problem with it. Totally pisses me off.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by SevenBeans

 

But he deserved it, he was a cheating! He is a dirty dog, a manwhore! Yeah if it was a male, he would have been locked up for sure. It is things like this that boil my blood. There are so many laws that are stacked in female favor, but of course I am not a "real man" or I wouldn't have a problem with it. Totally pisses me off.

Right, and I expect there will be many rolling their eyes saying, "Give me a break he's a big strong man and she's just a whittle sweet girl." When weakness suits their agenda many have no problem playing it up.

I don't care if someone weighs 50 pounds, if they're smacking someone in the face with a golf club that is a serious assault that can royally phuck you up. Amazing that the victim was universally seen as the villian.

Originally posted by The Quiet Storm
maybe it's not feminism persay....

So its like, feminism takes all the glory, it's all "women are victims" this and that, but they never stop to think if males ever needed help.. and as soon as one male does talk about this they are quickly portrayed as anti feminist or denied and told to "shut up and be a man about it".

There's no reason a MALE would ever need a MAN'S right movement right?

Because MEN NEVER have problems, and if they did, they are automatically sissies, or incompetent.

edit on 31-10-2010 by The Quiet Storm because: (no reason given)

Firstly, I see that you are apparently directly quoting, yet you don't reference these quotes. What/who is your source? When has it ever been about 'taking glory'? The reason most movements were set up was to affect positive, pro-equality political change. Who are you purporting to have the sentiments that 'women are victims', because I can tell you right now that it is NOT the ethos of Feminism. Again, who are you suggesting has told any male to 'shut up and be a man about it'? Again, modern Feminism is not about man-bashing! Far from it. In fact the political meetings I attend have a healthy number of male members! I would have no problem whatsoever with a Male Rights group being set up if it was about working for equality, allowed female membership, and was not about taking rights away from anyone. Does this perhaps alter your views of what Feminism is actually about? If you really want to gain a factual insight, why not attend a local meeting? It may turn out to have a very different agenda to what you seem to imagine.

See to know where we started you must understand what your working with. For many it is hard to understand but men and weman are not the same. One is not better than the other instead we both have our "general" strenghts. I say "general" to cover the range of male/female differances as all are not the same but standard feilds exist like physical power fo men and emotional power for weman.


Do to this men naturally accomidate weaknesses of weman as weman do for men. This primarly puts weman in maternal nurturing roles and men in physical stress roles. Thus we naturaly started with this accomidation of feelings and in many aspects they have gone to far and should be changed.

Under this basis as an anti feminist what I want is TOTAL equality.
This would essentially remove sexual harrasment charges overnight as men can not be sexually harressed to the point of charging a woman.
This also would mean any domestic call to the cops would imprision both male and female as currently only the man is taken without cause and required on all domestic calls in CA "and other places".
Abortion would syrocket as it would require both to accept or abortion would be MANDITORY. Men would no longer be guilty until proven inocent, specially in rape cases. Men can not be raped and no longer can you.
Common talk that makes you uncomfortable would no longer be grounds of punishment against men.
Weman would no longer get favored in custody battles and will start paying the "responcipal provider" support where today they do not want to split mother and child though mother does not work much if any and is unable to provide without large sums from the man.

I could go on and on but the fact is the law favors weman and men favor weman but your to focused on what went to far like voting. Yes I think you should be able to vote but if you want to be an feminest and push for equality then its time to be equal acrossed the board.



Carlos Mencia said it best:


What do you come out on the news saying? 'We want to be treated like equals in the workplace.' No you don't. You want to be treated like a woman in the workplace, and you want to get paid like an equal. That's what you want. Because when men treat you like equals, what do you do? You send us to sensitivity training, bitch. That's what you do.
www.jokes.com...

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by The Quiet Storm

 

Take the whole domestic violence campaign. Most men will rather not report assault by a woman, because they are afraid of ridicule, "What a wuss!"

Remember the Tiger Woods thing? Didn't his wife chase him out of the house swinging a golf club? Didn't he need surgery to repair the damage? Did we hear a single word about domestic violence? Was she arrested?

Imagine if it was a man chasing the woman out of the house...

edit on 1-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

The fact that she wasn't charged leads me to believe that the story is not true, and that this was simply editorial license to sell.

reply to post by The Quiet Storm


I think that men can have a men's movement. Too bad the one you have right now is full of men victimized by children, either by making them fathers or by making them screw them.

reply to post by Brood


Ignoring that differences are made and enforced based on your gender is a stinking lie that will never work.

I could also solve poverty this way, by never accounting for the differences between rich and poor. I could just work for "humans" and ignore the particulars.

Originally posted by Aeons

The fact that she wasn't charged leads me to believe that the story is not true, and that this was simply editorial license to sell.

Tiger has said that she clawed his face all to he ll with her fingernails. If a woman runs from the house bleeding and says that a man did it, he would go to jail (even if he didn't do a thing).

Face it, this kind of sexism happens ALL the time and I never hear a peep from "feminists" who are only interested in "equality."

Tiger is actually lucky, most Men who run from the house bleeding end up in jail themselves if the cops are called.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Aeons

The fact that she wasn't charged leads me to believe that the story is not true, and that this was simply editorial license to sell.

Tiger has said that she clawed his face all to he ll with her fingernails. If a woman runs from the house bleeding and says that a man did it, he would go to jail (even if he didn't do a thing).

Face it, this kind of sexism happens ALL the time and I never hear a peep from "feminists" who are only interested in "equality."

Tiger is actually lucky, most Men who run from the house bleeding end up in jail themselves if the cops are called.

edit on 1-11-2010 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)

I would charge her. Tiger can say everything he wants. If he'd reported, she should have been charged.

In case it hasn't occured to you - it isn't up to feminist organizations to lay charges. It is up to police in the field to do so. And should you wish to climb that mountain, why don't you focus on who needs to be changed instead of pretending that by focusing on feminists you'll somehow get police to change?

I know - focusing on feminists is WAY easier. Don't let laziness get in your way. I'll not stand against you.

Originally posted by Aeons

In case it hasn't occured to you - it isn't up to feminist organizations to lay charges. It is up to police in the field to do so. And should you wish to climb that mountain, why don't you focus on who needs to be changed instead of pretending that by focusing on feminists you'll somehow get police to change?

You're missing the point.

If the feminst movement truely represents a movement for GENDER EQUALITY, why don't feminists speak out more forcefully against this obvious and widespread GENDER BIAS (that happens to "benefit" Women)?

And if you think feminists haven't played a key role in getting some of these biases implemented, than you're delusional.

Biases implemented?

Just getting the vast injustices dealt with has been the work of lifetimes.

You think that feminists have had time to go through the legal system and focus on "getting at" men, you are delusional.

You will never fix your problem while blaming Mommy....er...women. You'll only fix it by focusing on the people who creating and enforcing those laws.

Again, please do. I support you. You go brother.

Originally posted by SevenBeans
Umm, there are both males and females doing the same work that I do, who make more money than me.

The important question is, why? Feminists never ask that, they just assume sexism.

...uhmmm - so, you DID ask why you dont make as much as money as your counterparts, right?... what was the answer?... late too often?... sloppy work?... low on the seniority totem pole?... none of those are gender discrimination issues...

...you presumed that women dont ask their boss for an explanation as to why their male counterpart(s) make more than them... why would you presume that?... could it be that you prefer to use generalizations that support your anti-equality stance?...

...based upon 40yrs of being in the workforce (mostly in male dominated fields), the most common reason i was given (and i've heard the same from lots of other women) was - - - - "he has a family to support - he has to work - you have a husband - you dont have to work"...

...that is gender discrimination and its illegal now but it still happens because some bosses are knuckle-draggin idiots and i'm not just referring to male bosses... many females have been programmed to be a misogyny cheerleader (stockholm syndrome, perhaps)...

...not quite a decade ago, i quit a job due to the boss (male) telling me that i was too old, moved too slow... i was only 50 and out-worked people half my age on a daily basis... i laughed at him and asked, "are you saying you want to fire me because i'm too old and slow?"... he said, "why dont you just quit?"... i laughed again and said, "okay, have it your way" and started preparing to leave... he changed his tone (really fast) to somewhat pathetic and said i needed to stay THAT day or he would have to do the work and he had plans to play golf... idiot...


...found out later that before i quit, he had already hired a very young gal (the sarah palin type, dumb) who had zero experience but she was willing to "put out"... one day his wife showed up and caught them in a VERY compromising sit-chee-a-shun... like i said - he's an idiot... he's nobody's boss now, nobody's husband or boyfriend either...