Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Extreme radical "feminists" suffering sexual oppression unto them

1…34689…27

Comments

  • #152
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    All right, since you're so dismissive of my jibe, I'll assume you believe I'm speaking the truth when I say it wouldn't make a difference to me. So thats a start. I don't remember saying those things, in fact I know I didn't even use the word egalitarianism, but I'm getting used to having words put in my mouth in this thread. As someone else pointed out, women are allowed to vote. They have as much say in who gets elected as men do.

    I took that interpretation from your post #100:
    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    I just think any movement that focuses on social issues from one groups point of view leads to more problems down the line. Like the mens rights groups who are popping up in response to extreme feminists like the one in the OP. It just seems to lead to increased division and really I;d just like if everyone could work together to find solutions that suit everyone instead of putting their own group first.

    Sounds like an advocate for what's usually called egalitarianism to me.


  • #153
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    IvySlayer wrote: »
    What do you want, quotas?

    More men apply for those jobs, that's hardly their fault.

    No I want all men killed to make room for incompetent womyn with unshaven legs and the SCUM manifesto tattoooed onto their foreheads...


    Actually what I'd really like for a start is for people to even acknowledge that women are underrepresented before they jump to coming up with more and more justifications why this is actually totally fine and correct and also not true and statisitics can be used to prove anything and even if it is true its not a problem of any kind and it's actually women's fault for not trying hard enough and and and...


  • #154
    IvySlayer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,190 ✭✭✭✭IvySlayer


    B0jangles wrote: »
    No I want all men killed to make room for incompetent womyn with unshaven legs and the SCUM manifesto tattoooed onto their foreheads...


    Actually what I'd really like for a start is for people to even acknowledge that women are underrepresented before they jump to coming up with more and more justifications why this is actually totally fine and correct and also not true and statisitics can be used to prove anything and even if it is true its not a problem of any kind and it's actually women's fault for not trying hard enough and and and...

    I ask again, what is your solution to this?

    Do you care that men are underrepresented in teaching? Family laws? Fathers rights?

    I'm going to take you back to Wibbs post which you have ignored.


  • #155
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    You can't just claim all women are being oppressed because they don't share your outlook. If a woman votes for a politician by choice she is choosing that politician to represent her.

    Who decides which candidates are available for us to vote for?


  • #156
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    IvySlayer wrote: »
    I ask again, what is your solution to this?

    Do you care that men are underrepresented in teaching? Family laws? Fathers rights?

    I'm going to take you back to Wibbs post which you have ignored.

    In teaching women outnumber men and the lower levels, but the majority of senior positions are still held by men.

    http://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Statistics/Se-Si-Gender-in-Irish-Education-Introduction-to-Chapter-9.pdf

    And yes, absolutely men should be encouraged to see being a teacher at primary level as a valid career choice and not a "women's job"; I had both male and female teachers as a child and they were all great and committed people.

    Given that I originally posted about how the Dáil and Judiciary are massively male dominated (Hint: those are the groups that create and implement our laws), I think it is them you should be asking about the imbalances that still remain with regard to Family Law and Father's Rights.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    The political parties which every citizen has a right to vote for.


    Hang on, the parties choose who they want to put forward - if they choose only to put male candidates forward then the electorate has no choice but to vote for men only, or not to vote at all.

    I'd never vote for a candidate simply because she is a woman, but I'd appreciate a wider choice of candidates - different ethnic backgrounds, genders - not an endless succession of Jim Jr, Pat Jr and Michael Jr , all from great political families don't you know...


  • #158
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    So the groups that create and implement our laws are biased for males, yet our actual laws are biased against males. Surely you're defeating your own argument here :confused:

    Also, http://i.imgur.com/4SV4I.png

    No... The laws were written based on the thinking that women would autiomatically be the ones to raise children and if the couple were unmarried then the child would be the responsibility of the fallen woman who bore it.

    Oh, an image macro. Kudos for borrowing someone elses bad joke I guess?


  • #159
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    If you don't like what a party is doing, the obvious solution would be not to vote for that party.

    I'd prefer that as well. No argument from me on that one.

    I can agree with you there, but sadly I've run out of alternative parties to vote for :(


  • #160
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Ok in relation to the statistics of woman in the bodies that hold power in the state I don't think its productive to argue that there wasn't previously significant barriers to woman, this is still impacting the make up of the higher levels due to the time lag, and in the upper levels of the legal and garda bodies there is a very significant lead in time and to some extent in the medical prof too (in relation to medics though the draw of female medics into the gp route can not be discounted). In short if the make up has not changed significantly in a decades time we will know that there is existant barriers at play.

    Political representation.is a separate matter to the other bodies as it is dependent to an extent on personality and a willingness to put oneself forward and fail at least until ones has reached a level of value to which ever party they are associated. I don't think gender is a significant issue for the irish voter well at least compared to what side they're grandfather was on ;-) where i can see an issue at least in rural areas is the gaa which provides a ready made high profile network


  • #161
    Balaclava1991
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 510 ✭✭✭Balaclava1991


    ElvisChrist6 wrote: »
    Now, I should start by pointing out this is INSANELY extreme radical "feminists", I'm not suggesting this is common at all, because it's not (I really bleeding hope), but I just did not know this existed until just now.

    http://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

    These particular extremists are preaching the sexual oppression and guilt as the Catholic church did, but a lot worse. I'm pretty sure most sensible feminists would find this not only damaging to the movement but demeaning, as it suggests a woman can never really have free will or power when it comes to a relationship with a man. I can't see how anyone could be anything less than insane to think this way.

    Again, I know this is a TINY subset of people in a movement (and probably a separate movement, as most sensible feminists greet with open arms sexual freedom and its a large part of their works), but it is really frightening that this could exist - not only are they demeaning women but rape victims they claim to protect. Such hatred towards a whole gender too!
    I wonder if this is an extension of Eve Ensler type writing, such as the story of hers about a grown woman taking advantage of a 13 year old girl who she got drunk portrayed as a good thing, while most relationships with males that I've seen her write about are the opposite. Do these people just take that way too seriously?

    Anyway, the question is WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON!?

    It's a manifestation of their mental illness. Nothing more. People with hyper extreme political views and express virulent hatred are not mentally healthy.

    Men who hate women probably had an overbearing mother who slapped them when they were being potty trained or something like that while women who hate men are probably former tom boys who got excluded from the tree house or something.

    These kinds of people need counselling and psychotherapy or something.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Lyaiera
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭Lyaiera


    It's typical that a thread about nutjob radical feminists gets back to dealing with regular feminism. Goes to show this thread was never going to be about crazy people and everyone just wants another go at feminist bashing.


  • #163
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    So basically, womans issue: blame men. Mens issue: Blame men?

    It's not worse than stealing someone elses awful politics.

    Your paraphrasing is extremely misleading and frankly, deceitful.

    The laws which decide on custody and parental rights in this country were written in the 1960's and reflect the standards of the time. They absolutely need to be updated to reflect modern society.


  • #164
    Jimoslimos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,930 ✭✭✭Jimoslimos


    B0jangles wrote: »
    In teaching women outnumber men and the lower levels, but the majority of senior positions are still held by men.
    The majority of senior positions, across many disciplines are held by certain people for a number of different reasons. Gender may be one, but so are socio-economic status, nepotism, political connections, etc. Ability tends to come a good way down the list.


  • #165
    Lyaiera
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭Lyaiera


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Yes, because everyone should just be good, stay quiet, and not speak out against anything they disagree with.

    Of course, because men don't get a raw deal from the patriarchy either. While you were banging on men in teaching positions and as nurses did you ever think that feminisms fight against a patriarchal system of oppression would do just as much for males teachers because it's fighting a system where certain things are seen as "women's work."


  • #166
    eireannBEAR
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,713 ✭✭✭eireannBEAR


    Family law courts,unmarried dads having as much rights to their child as a stranger on the street does,now can some one point out a more sexist, painful and heartless injustice such as this inflicted upon women by the irish state?

    I just hope the governments browning points in regards to gay marriage will finally force them into writhing legislation for mens equal rights in regards to their own children.


  • #167
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    Jimoslimos wrote: »
    The majority of senior positions, across many disciplines are held by certain people for a number of different reasons. Gender may be one, but so are socio-economic status, nepotism, political connections, etc. Ability tends to come a good way down the list.

    I won't argue against that - I have noticed though that most people would agree that getting ahead because of socio-economic status, nepotism or political connections is unfair but getting ahead because of your gender is somehow unavoidable and is accepted as a natural occurance.


  • #168
    Lyaiera
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭Lyaiera


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    They should be updated, of course. My point is, in this day and age we probably shouldn't be focusaing so much on mens and womens issues, and more on equality across the board.

    There's loads of people fighting for men's rights. The secret to doing it successfully is that they're not doing it in a "What about me?!?" reactionary way to feminism. They're doing it as something in it's own rights. If you look at a lot of MRA stuff they seem to be as focused on denying feminist movements advances as they are about improving men's situations.

    Look at the father's rights situation. Women looking for representation in senior positions benefits men just as much who want access to their families. I know plenty of feminists who are supportive of men in these circumstances. The most recent big event was when a man came under abuse (from other men) for posting an image of him getting his kids ready for school and brushing their hair. There was men and woman appalled by the reaction.

    For every mother and woman wanting access to the workplace there's men looking for the ability to spend time with their family. This system of oppression is a patriarchal system, that's what feminism is against.


  • #169
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    Lyaiera wrote: »
    It's typical that a thread about nutjob radical feminists gets back to dealing with regular feminism. Goes to show this thread was never going to be about crazy people and everyone just wants another go at feminist bashing.

    it would be a pretty short thread though if it stuck. rigidly on topic. One post saying "this woman has Serious Issues" with a Hundred thanks.

    to Bring it Back to something related to the original blog, While my view is actually sympathy/sadness for this clearer highly damaged person. I think its interesting how we don,t view these radfems as a dangerous movement while the dangers of.extreme mra is recognized, i am on phone now so i can't link to previous post which shows how the southern povery law center highlighted mra,s but actually gave trans hating (and SCUM sympathetic) radfems a voice in their justification for not highlighting their hate speech


  • #170
    Lyaiera
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭Lyaiera


    There's no point arguing with you Jimbob. You want to deny the fact that power structures were male dominated for the entirety of history. If you can't get past that then what's the point in discussing anything?


  • #171
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,286 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Who decides which candidates are available for us to vote for?
    If you're an independent candidate then you decide. If the % of independent female candidates was significantly higher than that of the % in political parties then I would agree with you that political parties could be at fault for discriminating against women.

    But as it stands the % female representation in political parties is significantly higher than independent candidates. So it seems like political parties are actually doing a lot to support women candidates.
    1. See garda stats by gender and rank in 2009 here:

    http://i.imgur.com/eo2MMUo.jpg

    Note that while you have 25% of gardaí being female at the lowest rank, the percentage tends to drop significantly the higher up in the ranks you go:

    12% of Sergeants
    7% Inspectors
    5% Superintendents
    6% Chief Superintendents
    9% Assistant Commissioner
    0% Deputy Dommissioner
    And the Chief Commissioner is also a man
    I'd like figures showing how many women applied, and were suitably qualified for those roles, compared to men before coming to a conclusion that women are discriminated against.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Fukuyama
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,023 ✭✭✭Fukuyama


    Femme_Fatale wrote: »
    I don't identify as a feminist but I don't get people not calling themselves one because of what others think. That's like the "I don't believe in god but I would never call myself an atheist because of smug atheists" thing. You are what you are; I don't like this apologising lark.

    Those antiquated laws are being enforced still because of an outdated constitution as a whole. And I find the view that feminists would agree with fathers having limited custody of their children to be strange. Surely feminists would want help with parenting and would want fathers to have an active role as a father? Vengeful women who like to torture their ex by not letting him see his children don't have to be feminist at all. If anything I reckon they're less likely to be, tbh. Any woman I have encountered who bitches and moans about men ironically can't live without a man at all times, and has very little time for other women. Anecdotal I know, but worth putting out there - things aren't always as they seem.

    I don't really care for other peoples opinions of me, I just don't want to misrepresent myself.

    If I were to say "I support the IRA", any reasonable person would presume I was talking about today's band of idiots. It'd be stupid of me to go around speaking like that when I'm actually referring to an organisation/movement from the first half of the last century.

    I think anyone born in this country should have equal rights and opportunities, along with equal burdens and responsibilities. This, sadly, does not describe what calls itself feminism in 2014. Not by a country mile. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either wearing blinkers or just needs a movement to "identify" with.


  • #173
    Daqster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 723 ✭✭✭Daqster


    Lyaiera wrote: »
    If you look at a lot of MRA stuff they seem to be as focused on denying feminist movements advances as they are about improving men's situations.

    That's because those so called "advancements" are creating situations of inequality. Men and women and ying and yang for God sake, both sides of the one seesaw if you like, in that you can't just raise one side up without inevitably lowering the other. Sexism against either sex effects the other, it's inevitable, which makes "equality"groups which focus purely on one sex, ineffectual, in the long term at least.

    The following meeting was held to in Canada to discuss that very point in fact, how 'sexism against either women or men robs all of us of value' and worth and where Dr. Katherine Young was set to speak and Feminist protesters decided to attend and pull the fire alarm:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQzQBTkQZWU



    Guy outside tries to talk to them about what exactly it is that they were objecting to:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XHrUAQEzNg


  • #174
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    Daqster wrote: »
    That's because those so called "advancements" are creating situations of inequality. Men and women and ying and yang for God sake, both sides of the one seesaw if you like, in that you can't just raise one side up without inevitably lowering the other. Sexism against either sex effects the other, it's inevitable, which makes "equality"groups which focus purely on one sex, ineffectual, in the long term at least.

    The following meeting was held to in Canada to discuss that very point in fact, how 'sexism against either women or men robs all of us of value' and worth and where Dr. Katherine Young was set to speak and Feminist protesters decided to attend and pull the fire alarm:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQzQBTkQZWU



    Guy outside tries to talk to them about what exactly it is that they were objecting to:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XHrUAQEzNg

    Wow! Go freedom of speech huh. I think this is what a lot of people mean when they refer to feminism in an academic setting. Pretty intolerant bunch of facists on that video


  • #175
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    Femme_Fatale wrote: »
    Ah... you got a pre-emptive dig in. Good for you. ":)"
    Ah FF, now I have to catch up on two threads to see if youre biting or not ;)


  • #176
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    Lyaiera wrote: »
    There's no point arguing with you Jimbob. You want to deny the fact that power structures were male dominated for the entirety of history. If you can't get past that then what's the point in discussing anything?

    Woah, wait there now. What have 1764, 1527, and 1100bc all got in common? Answer; they have absolutely nothing to do with the point thats been made. To be honest the strawman of woolly academic feminism is just a little bit disingenuous here.


  • #177
    tritium
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,793 ✭✭✭tritium


    Lyaiera wrote: »
    There's loads of people fighting for men's rights. The secret to doing it successfully is that they're not doing it in a "What about me?!?" reactionary way to feminism. They're doing it as something in it's own rights. If you look at a lot of MRA stuff they seem to be as focused on denying feminist movements advances as they are about improving men's situations.

    That if course presupposes that the reaction of certain feminist groups to MRA is justified. I'd be more inclined to point out that while there are many MRA groups with a Paul Elam mentality, equally there are more moderate groups (wow just like feminism). Look at the videos posted a few posts up and tell me who comes across as the more tolerant grouping?


  • #178
    ElvisChrist6
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 595 ✭✭✭ElvisChrist6


    Lyaiera wrote: »
    If you look at a lot of MRA stuff they seem to be as focused on denying feminist movements advances as they are about improving men's situations.

    I haven't really been keeping up with a lot of the stuff on this thread, but a lot of the MRA stuff you see is the Reddit-going mouth-breather type... morons. Whereas what it SHOULD be and can be is just focusing on things like custody and legal issues, treatment and views of male rape/abuse victims, male body issues etc. Not as a group against feminism or what some people think feminism has taken from anyone, but in parallel with it - as feminists should fight for womens rights, men's rights and wellbeing groups should fight for theirs; there's no point having experts in women's issues trying to tackle men's issues too. Harking back to a much earlier post, these "self-serving" groups are important, as it's much easier to tackle issues that you know about and that are specific than trying to tackle all of them. More groups tailored for their respective causes = more good done, in my view. Though it sometimes seems that way, the decent MRAs aren't acting in defense against feminism, but in defense of male needs as well. The main reason I'd associate with that at all is the completely devastating perspective people have on male abuse victims, how society views them and what it says about them. I can't imagine having been raped just to hear someone say a man can't be raped by a woman as some of the things people say is exactly what women would have been told probably not that long ago, and still sometimes are. So, don't go by those gob****es when viewing it.


  • #179
    Foxhound38
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,547 ✭✭✭Foxhound38


    Madwoman wrote:
    I know as a matter of fact that some women do have the capacity to communicate with plants and trees and living beings in different ways, they ask the plant what kind of healing powers she has and the plant may reply, if she wants to

    OK, I'm calling it. This is an elaborate wind-up merchant and someone with too much time on their hands...


  • #180
    Daqster
    Closed Accounts Posts: 723 ✭✭✭Daqster


    tritium wrote: »
    Wow! Go freedom of speech huh.

    Oh it got worse:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWgslugtDow


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80



    Was interesting to see some of these feminist bloggers in the flesh though. They didn't disappoint.
    I think this is what a lot of people mean when they refer to feminism in an academic setting. Pretty intolerant bunch of facists on that video

    Oh they were always intolerant, as the old saying goes: 'Misery loves company but it hates competition'.

    Here's a meeting for battered husbands which Feminists also took exception to.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qodygTkTUYM


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Honest question for those here who are either defending or identifying with the current feminist movement: do you support the censorship / anti free speech drive this movement is currently embedded in?

    We can't talk about mainstream feminism without talking about Blurred Lines, violent porn, and offensive Facebook pages, unfortunately. I support any movement which seeks freedom from oppression but I can never support any movement which approves of censorship, and I view this as a massive elephant in the room when people say "if you don't call yourself a feminist you obviously don't believe in equal rights". It's an absolute straw man which ignores very glaring issues such as "I'm not a feminist because I don't believe any dog should be banned from being played regardless of how offensive some may find it." This has nothing to do with not wanting gender equality.


Advertisement