How relevant to you is the controversy over feminism?

'Upward-thrusting buildings ejaculating into the sky' – do cities have to be so sexist?

Deleted User wrote: »

Well... if they were shaped like breasts, wouldn't it be objectifying women?

Feminists Freak Out After Discovering Men Don’t Want To Date ‘Woke’ Women
By Emily Zanotti
•
Jan 23, 2020 DailyWire.com

That is all just too much for feminists, it seems, who, despite swearing off men so often it’s practically their pledge of allegiance, want desperately to have the pick of men to partner with — and to deny them such a variety is, apparently, oppressive, sexist, and, for good measure, very “Donald Trump.”

Silentcorner wrote: »

What The Guardian and feminists alike need to ask themselves is what will happen when their readers and followers tire of being angry all the time....what then...

[Deleted User] wrote: »

"Sometimes the world seems to neatly divide into two kinds of people: those who are responsible for everything and those who are accountable for nothing."

LOL. So... we're talking about women throughout history and their contributions to society throughout that history?

Silentcorner wrote: »

I've said it before...if you read or listen to anything a feminist has to say in the voice of a 15 year old child it all makes more sense!!!

I Hate Men: Attempts to ban French pamphlet sends sales skyrocketing

Pauline Harmange’s Moi les hommes, je les déteste, explores whether women “have good reason to hate men”, and whether “anger towards men is actually a joyful and emancipatory path, if it is allowed to be expressed”. Its small French publisher, Monstrograph, called it a “feminist and iconoclastic book” that “defends misandry as a way of making room for sisterhood”.

Durham University student's union leader, 21, is self-declared
'man-hater' who lobbied for pronoun badges for staff and undergrads
Nailah Haque's Twitter profile until recently declared her a
'misandrist till I die'
Miss Haque, 21, was elected as undergraduate academic officer in February

[..]

A Students' Union leader at Durham University has described herself as
a man-hater.

Nailah Haque's Twitter profile until recently included the
declaration: 'Misandrist till I die.' A misandrist is a person who
despises men.

Durham Intersectional Feminism Society "announce that we will be
endorsing the following candidates for the upcoming SU election ...
Nailah Haque"

Feminism.

Feminism is just about equality of the sexes.

Feminism really is just about equality – as long as you understand that the word “equality” no longer means what it used to mean.

To those not well versed in the manner in which policy narratives have changed in the last dozen years, prepare yourselves for the radical revision of the meaning of the word “equality” which is now politically and judicially established.

My first encounter with the brave new world of “equality” was in The Corston Report, Ref.1, on women in prison. I quote,

“Equality does not mean treating everyone the same”

The Government’s Guide to the 2010 Equality Act, Ref.2, specifically cautions against treating everyone the same. The advice on the interpretation of the Act is, I quote,

“The Equality Duty does not require public bodies to treat everyone the same”

“Complying with the Equality Duty may involve treating some people better”

Since the man was the manifest legal entity he became responsible for crimes – or torts – committed by his wife. The most common example of this were the Victorian debtors’ prisons. Some 10,000 people, 98% of them men, were imprisoned yearly for debt in the Victorian era. But it is reasonable to suppose that women were responsible for incurring at least 50% of debts. Even if the debt were incurred by the wife it was the husband who went to prison. It doesn’t sound much like male privilege to me.

The beneficial aspects of coverture for wives did not apply only whilst the marriage lasted. The law of “necessaries” extended even to separated wives – and in some cases also to common law wives. An estranged wife could continue to run up debts with which to burden her husband. This was commonly used as a tactic to force the husband to agree to divorce terms favourable to the wife. Such estranged wives could, and did, push the strategy as far as having the husband imprisoned by running up unmanageable debts until he gave them what they wanted.

The law of coverture effectively placed a legal obligation upon husbands to ensure their wives obeyed the law. A particularly egregious example of this is the Skimmington Ride. It is still the case today that society has a hard time accepting that some men may be the victims of partner abuse, rather than the perpetrator. In historical times things were no better. A man who allowed himself to be abused by his wife would be punished for it by his community. A husband was expected to control his wife. If she beat him, then this was regarded as a failing on his part. The punishment was the Skimmington Ride, in which the man was obliged to ride a donkey through the town facing backwards, and thus looking ridiculous, whilst the populace would bang pots and pans and jeer and mock him by calling out insults. The modern equivalent, I suppose, is the male victim of partner violence who phones the police only to find that he is the one they arrest.

The Bill will further strengthen existing powers to constrain, restraint and criminalise those accused of domestic abuse. The escalating sequence of protection notices, protection orders and non-molestation orders can see a man ejected from his home with immediate effect and kept out of it without limit. The new Bill will make breaching the terms of a protection notice or protection order a criminal offence. These arrangements mean that a man may be formally branded a criminal, with a criminal record, and imprisoned, without ever facing trial or any other meaningful test of the accusations against him.