What opinions are mandatory for a feminist?

Post Reply New Topic

Saying the truth about women = misogynystic?

People who say "bad" stuff about men = good people according to you.

all those people crying about islamophobia and misogynistic is inherent butt-hurt.

you did not even read what i wrote, i never said feminism is not about womens rights, what i did was pointing out some stuff that feminism believe in, which for me and others is really emberassing and makes no sense.

Please do tell me why and in what way Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism have respect for gay people and women and also show me a science-fact that only white guys can be violent and racist. I am asking out of curiosity.

What?

Feminists say that the problem with islam, buddhism etc is a cultural problem and some extremists not the whole religions or all/majority of their followers, but when it comes to christianity its the whole religion that is the problem and all christians are "bad" according to feminists. Feminists like you who say "we dont say that" are always shown to actually have these belif that i just accused you of lol. You people are like racists who say "f**k black people" but later say " iam not a racist".

Sorry but attacking wahabism and islamic extremists is not the same thing as attacking all christians and whole chrisitanity, its a huge differnce. Feminists give critic to christianity in a whole other level than you give to other religions. There is no difference from your view on christianity than Trumps view on Islam.

Btw, i have been on all kind of feminists websites, forums, facebook groups, seen feminists debate on many forums, seen so many tv-debates, talked to 100+ feminists in real, its always the same story with you people, even those who say "we dont say that", but they do when you start to ask them questions about christianity versus other religions. Feminists are like these in all nations, even in middle east, africa, asia etc, its always christianity they hate but they have this great respect for islam, hinduism and buddhism. feminists do not view islam etc as inherent anti-women and homophobic but they do view christiatianity as it....

so basically you people hate christians in the same way racists hate muslims and jews.

Oh, i am talking about LEFT-feminists now, nothing wrong with the liberal feminists and the right-feminists, they are okay.

Last edited by white_as_snow on 13 Jan 2018, 6:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My point is that I wonder if you've noticed that none of the people here in this thread who identify as feminist are making any of the statements that you attribute to feminists? I'm sure it would make no difference to you anyway as you've already made up your mind about feminists and aren't interested in talking TO any of us, just AT us. Enjoy talking at me further, I won't bother to respond as there is no point and it makes no difference what I say because you aren't capable of listening to me.

Oh please, just because they dont write anything bad in this thread it does not change the fact that most left-femiinsts do it, and this people in the thread probaly does it anyways, just go through their post history. And most left-feminists like you are not even aware that you are anti-christian and pro other religions, its like brainwashing.

but okay, we 2 can talk,

is christianity the only religion on earth that is inherent homophobic and anti women?
are all christians evil nazis?
do you think KKK is real christians but ISIS is not real muslims?

Guys, guys, if you keep making fools of yourselves, the feminists will win.

The best way to defeat something is to argue poorly in its favour and by that method you guys are doing a better job of defeating MRA than feminists ever could.

But which branch of the feminism would win?

After the MRAs defeat themselves, the different branches of feminism will probably fight it out among themselves. I don't know which of them will win.

Should I point out that MRA is younger than feminism, so it seems the feminists don't need MRA to fight against?

I never said feminists need MRAs to fight against, feminists can fight against society at large. MRAs need feminists to fight against. MRA is a reaction to feminism so MRA couldn't exist without feminism. Without feminism MRA would have no purpose.

There's no need for feminists to fight against or discredit MRAs since the MRAs are doing an excellent job at discrediting themselves. Honestly I'm quite disappointed in them. A couple of years ago I was following them, then I discovered how ineffective they are.

I don't really know if wide society today thinks of it as "well, they are both two sides of the same coin and are equally ridiculous!"

Then why does it look like feminism, even if it's radical or regressive, gained more socially acceptable traction and less hatred than the MRA groups?

Is this conversation still going on? If I had to be a broadcaster on this, I would be Oprah., and lets not bring Britney into the fray..

Because feminism started with women trying to gain the right to legal person hood, to vote, to have equal job opportunities for equal skills and qualifications, and equal borrowing and purchasing opportunities for equal credit worthiness, while the basis of many MRA groups is "Women owe us sex and we are mad that we've been rejected by them (even if we were rejected a normal number of times or have never actually been rejected but are too afraid to approach a woman)".

There was a split in the MRA movement which started in the late 90s. Before that time, the biggest focus of the MRA movement was bias against men in family court and lack of society's recognition of male domestic violence victims. The movement, however, started to attract more and more men who struggled with relationship issues and were mad at women over rejection or fear of rejection, or strings of bad relationships, or the fact that modern women weren't sufficiently submissive to them. They were also upset that the original MRA movement tolerated female allies and women coming in saying "not all women"...the latter which is understandable to be annoyed with if one wasn't talking about all women, but often times, these men would actually use the phrase "all women" when talking about negative attributes.

A breakaway movement was formed by a small group of men who were not so much focused on equality in family courts, or domestic violence resources for men, but on the idea that women should be submissive to men, and men should shun women in their personal lives and elsewhere until women did submit to them. This group remained small for a long time and exploded sometime after 2007, attracting a far larger and more misogynistic crowd than the MRA group from which it fractured from, causing it to become a bastion of hate and misogyny rather than just men, who, at worst, attributed their lack of relationship success to decline in conservative christian ideologies in society.

Anyway, I think the proportion of woman haters among certain MRA groups is greater than the proportion of man haters among feminist groups.

All of those seem pretty accurate. I have had to end many friendships aftet I'd left the cult of feminism several years ago. Any political belief that has you alienating friends/family for not conforming to your beliefs is dangerous and to be avoided.

I'm an ex feminist who is stoked to get married, have babies, and stay home with them. I think its the ideal situation for children to be raised in (ofc many families need a second income, not judging that), and I'm done apologising to feminists for being a "bad woman".

I think a lot of women who identify as feminist lose sight of the idea of women as their own person, which is ironic being that was the point of feminism to begin with. If men are demanding women submit to the will of men, and women are demanding that women submit to the will of women, then who is on the side of personal freedoms for women?

That's almost certainly true but if there are even a small number of man haters among feminists groups then they can't honestly say feminists don't hate men.

Honestly I don't know who to side with anymore. I've found stuff I don't like from both sides. I've seen generalising and stereotyping on both sides. I've seen bias on both sides, both subtle and overt. It's not always a case of the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

I've seen MRAs go from a bunch a whiny self-victimising men to a bunch of angry Trump supporters.

Perhaps as ideologies grow in membership they inevitably lose sight of their original purpose. Perhaps any ideology will eventually reach critical mass and fall into extremism. This is why can't have nice things

The feminists who hate men are a subset of feminists.

I don't think one has to "side with a side". Personally I focus on specific issues and not identity politics.