why feminism and women studies are stupid

Post Reply New Topic

It doesn't seem to me that women are oppressed, and it doesn't seem to me they have any difficulty satisfying their sexual desire.

feminism and women studies exist b/c Universities support them. That's it. If Universities had positions for astrology or alchemy there would be professors and graduate students in it.

Astrology and Palmistry/Occult studies actually DO exist in some places around the world, actually, and to the people that believe, rate as highly to them as theology, so go figure.


As to the rest, you have to realise that less than a century ago, in the United States, that means within the lifetime of some currently living women, many colleges were not co-ed, and women's colleges were typically inferior to their male counterparts, as people seemed to have forgotten why 'separate but equal' doesn't work at all.
For most women, the highest aspiration available was to become a secretary, a nurse, a teacher, a social worker, or some other traditionally female and underpaid profession. For the most part, traditionally female occupation is STILL synonymous with underpaid.
Education and financial power are highly important in regards to having any kind of clout or maintaining freedom.

To this day, women in the same positions as men typically receive a statistically significant amount less. It's wholly possible that their work is often inferior, but there are definitely cases where the only reason for the difference in pay has been gender. This same kind of bias exists towards height.


Switch over to sexuality. Domestic Rape was a non-existant crime in some states until recently; In fact, the reverse was the case. Refusing one's husband sex was criminal. If that sounds ridiculous, you need only look back 3 years to remember that the only reason sodomy laws were stricken off the records entirely (10 states still had them) was because of a Supreme Court ruling.


As to this exact moment in time and onward?
Does the present invalidate the past? If that were so, wouldn't that also remove the merits of historical studies?

People will continue to study things even if they are largely irrelevant to the present to understand them, how they happened, the motivation behind them, etc. in order that they need not happen again.
Mind you, that's not even to say it's at all irrelevant. Particularly if you step back and look at the world as a whole, instead of a few countries.

For the record, I haven't studied the above formally at all. Most of the information I've simply gathered over time, and it's unsourced unfortunately. I hope someone can provide a better quality post, but the points still retain some value.

...Are stupid:

Women make 73 cents on the dollar when compared to men in the US. In most other countries the difference is bigger.

Women do about 75% of all the chores on average (depends on the society AND the individual)... AND THEY WORK TOO! It's called the double-day, the equivelant of 2 jobs, only one of which pays money.

In Egypt, Women are not allowed to drive. In Iran, they aren't allowed to be seen in public, really (veils, but those hide nearly everything). In most of the middle east they aren't allowed to choose who they marry.

Just 200 years ago, Feminism meant the right to vote, to be more than physical PROPERTY! The bare basic rights. In many countries it still means such things.

America has never had a female president. Care to explain why without drawing on Womens' studies?

Men rape in exponentially higher numbers. (Masculinity theories are actually taught in WS; it's not just about Women.)

In some African cultures, children are a symbol of their father's manliness, which drives the birth rate really really high.

WHY are women paid less? What forces keep that happening, and more importantly, how does this screw MEN over in the process?

What makes women the "bread winners" in Mexico? In the Phillippines? In China? They aren't matriarchial nations at all.

(I'm a Sociology major. There is *A LOT* of material that overlaps into Womens' Studies because equality and the "utopian" ideal is an important part of the subject.)

I totally agree with women's rights. However, I also agree with men's rights. Feminism I do not agree with (and one does not need to support an organization to believe in a cause). Feminism is the art of inverted domination through the sex drive over men, and is often very sexist against men. And, they defend this stance through political correctness (which as I have stated, political correctness is basically sacrificing the truth to avoid controversy).
It is correct that a woman has no serious issues in finding a mating partner, even if it's just a one night stand. That is alot better than most men on here can do. And the evidence is right in front of your faces, go to an autism group, count how many females have a boyfriend/husband, and then count how many men do. I will guarantee you over half if not most of the women will be with someone, none of the men will though. This is because the man has to do all the courting, a woman just has to take her pic and say yes to the right one. She's approached more often alot more than a man.

And the rates are only what, ~3-4 autistic men for each woman? I've heard that for HFA and asperger's, it scales up to 15:1.
I find that to be a rather skewed example.

Even if that's not what you're referring to, that's a bit of a ridiculous assertion, equating freedom or equality to the ability to find a sex partner... Maybe it's because of my asexuality, but I don't really see what relevance that has on the subject at all.

To be fair though, economics can probably explain this better than anything. Based on what I've read, this statistic doesn't compare wages in the same profession; it compares wages overall. Thus a likely explanation is that jobs that few people want to do because they are uncomfortable and dangerous (like mining, construction, or guarding a prison) pay a lot more, and tend to be occupied mostly by men. Jobs that many people want to do because they are safer, more comfortable, and more fulfilling pay less, and tend to be occupied by a lot of women.

I certainly wouldn't say women's studies are stupid-that's pretty harsh and doesn't say much-but I do think they are problematic in a number of ways, and I think they have to potential to hurt women as much as they help them. For instance, they tend to paint marriage in a negative light (as being an outdated patriarchal institution that is oppressive to women) when in fact studies have shown that it benefits both men and women more than other kinds of relationships. They celebrate casual sex and sexual exploration while downplaying the emotional and physical harm it can cause women. And they very much downplay the differences between men and women, usually teaching that they are constructs created by a patriarchal society to keep women down, which I think hurts both women and men.

Actually, no I wasn't drawing the ability to get laid to freedom. I was, however, addressing when he said women don't have as hard of a time finding a mating partner as men. I do not think it was a skewed example, because there are atleast about 4 or 5 men in any autism group, and about 1 or 2 females. But, go around this board, and see how many women all ready have a man, versus how many men have a woman.
I mean it's fact.... You stated in my political correctness post about how people talk down on pc, but then turn around and use it in their benefit. All I am stating is ***IF*** (don't get too defensive, this is an if) you are attacking my assumption, which is based on common since, then this would clearly be an act of hypocracy. But I do not make the truth, I acknowledge the truth, even if it isn't pretty (even if the truth means saying something against my own kind, which can only be biological things like race or nuero doversity or gender really, because I do not follow any ideologies but so far)..... I mean honestly, anyone that can deny this basic fact is obviously falling back on political correctness. The woman is in demand, the guy has to do all the approaching/courting. Courting is essentially the art of getting the woman to say yes.

A common middle ground needs to be sought after. A middle ground that could
a) respect the free will and rights of women, and
b) help eliminate involuntary celibacy (which is mostly men, unless she's critically disabled or morbidly obese).

Your asexual, and, I respect that. This is my theory on asexuality, it is another sexual orientation, much like gays and bi's are another orientation. Asexuality is a devolution in the gene pool seeing as it halts reproduction, but this is not neccessarily a bad thing. Here me out here, and you will see how asexuality plays a much needed role in society. Life, as usual, has a purpose to procreate and preserve itself. Hince why, in most non-asexuals, the sex drive cannot be ignored. , but there is healthy and unhealthy asexuality.... There are healthy and unhealthy asexuals. A person who is a healthy asexual was born asexual... An unhealthy asexual was not born asexual, but their asexuality is the result of some sort of illness, either brought on by environmental factors, possible traumatic events, and/or upbringing. Chances are their suppressing their drive. But, it is definately a good thing, because right now our world is grotesquely overpopulated. Also, asexuality does not make you less human, or make your opinion count any less. Asexuals deserve the same recognition and respect as anyone else.

The reason I stated that the middle ground needs to be sought after is because, involuntary celibacy can lead to all sorts of mental, emotional, and physiological illnesses. This is how a signifigant portion of sex offenders become the reulsive animals they are, yet, while they clearly deserve to rot in hell for doing such things, society also carries part of this blame, for denying a human a basic human need. Now, this is not in any way an attempt to downplay women to being sex objects, your not objects, your people, with emotions and opinions, but so are men. Which is why I support a middle ground, something that could respect the woman's rights and freedom, but help incel men to join the gene pool.... Having a baby is not a need, but having sex for a non-asexual is a need, it's nature's way of pushing our species to continue on.

For the record, asexuality, and homosexuality, are not automatic exclusions from reproduction.
A woman does not need to consent or enjoy it to engage in sexual intercourse, and a man can be brought to ejaculation through manual stimulus alone.
None of this requires any kind of modern technology.


I can't see how women are any worse off than men in regards to having a boyfriend/husband, either. Men and women are approximately equal in numbers, and unless those women are sharing men, then the amount of available men and women should be approximately equal.
For every lonely, sexless man without a relationship, there should be a woman.
However, it is true that, while there's a market for female prostitutes, ignoring its legal status, there's very little demand for the male variety. And then, it'd likely only be used by homosexual men.


As to sex as a need, I'm curious there. Being asexual, it's something difficult to relate to.

Edit: Clipped out the questions. I'm researching it on my own.

Ok, I've read more about involuntary celibacy, especially forums. Apparently, it's quite a bit more common than you're willing to admit for women as well. There's more I might say on this subject, but I'll leave it off for now

I must say I am a both a fan and a supporter of women, but I think the Feminism Movement is way to carried away. As was posted earlyer, they tot marraige, having children, and running a household as backwards and barbaric. They demonize men and harp to much on the sexual side of the way things use to be. While the sexual domonation of men over women in classic 50s style cuture (not to mention the protisto-chathlic evilfying) was a big problem, it is a seperate human rites issue and just clutters up the issue.

Bottom line is girls should be taught they can do anything they put their mind to just as boys. Then on top of that both boys and girls should be taught their sexual rights, but the two really don't have anything to do with each other.

I am for teaching anything in colleges that wants or needs to be learned, but we need to stop Radical Feminism where ever it is found.

i find radical feminism quite interesting. anyone ever read the SCUM manifesto? http://www.womynkind.org/scum.htm

No it isn't. There is just a trend of people faking illnesses. They did it with ADD, bipolar, even schizophrenia, and now theyr doing it with AS and incel. Yes, this does sound illogical, but people (atleast most NTs) do not seem to be logical in the least. I mean, if you want another example, look at the emo rock "scene". There you have an entire "scene" based off the ideology of exagerating or even making up problems just to be a drama child.

There is one thing women have a right to complain about: their lower salaries

Otherwise, look at all these advantages they get!
-Affirmative Action (women, for some reason, are considered to be a "minority" )
-Extreme superiority in divorce court (including getting the kids and sucking their husbands dry as a bone)
-The ability to dupe any average straight man into doing her bidding with sexual flirtation etc. (heard of the "corporate whore" ?)

In my honest opinion, most of those hardcore feminists are really just female supremecists in disguise.

i find it difficult to comprehend the way in which most people don't actually see how sexist the world is. can't see the wood for the trees, perhaps.