Feminism and the emasculation of men

Bannasidhe

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

To quote Batman, "Who said anything about stopping it?"



It would indeed be censorship. Some MRAs call for that and whanever I come across them on Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, wherever, I make a point of telling them that they're being incredibly counter productive.



So do I. Do you defend the right of Robin Thicke to sing about whatever he wants to sing about? Do you defend the right of clubs, radio stations, parties etc to play whatever songs they want to play? Do you support the right of a clothes company to sell whatever slogans they want on their t shirts, provided they don't defame any specific individuals?

If you do, you disagree with an absolutely vast, vocal, high profile, and above all powerful and influential feminists around the world. In my opinion, a sizable enough number that you would be well within your rights to legitimately say "I don't support feminism" even if you agree with most other feminist campaigns, and I wouldn't accuse you of being "insecure", "afraid of losing your dominance", "anti equality" or any other such ridiculous arguments.



Of course it is. Please tell me where I said otherwise.

Do you believe in an absolute right to free speech?

Yes or No.

Bannasidhe

Teabag224 wrote: »

Your gambit is going no where as no one has said feminists should be censored, so hurry up, you'll be late for your meeting.

Really?

Why the reluctance from those who scream about free speech to answer a simple question then?

I really have touched a nerve.

WilyCoyote

This thread needs to be renamed:


Manism and the testicularisation of wimmin

hatrickpatrick

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you believe in an absolute right to free speech?

Yes or No.

For the BAJILLIONTH time,

ABSOLUTELY. YES.

KyussBishop

The whole problem with 'feminism', is people have mutually contradictory definitions of what it means, which means any (even slight/mild) disagreement over feminism in a debate, can turn into a shítstorm.

Some people (like me) view 'feminism' as being defined as seeking equal/egalitarian treatment for women and men (all genders/orientations/etc.), but many people view 'feminism' as being defined by the 'idiot' branches of feminism, who (in attitudes) lay on a spectrum of 'mild-overly-PC-nonsense' all the way over to 'outright misandry'.

So when people generalize about 'feminists', they are automatically wrong about their generalization, because 1: Generalizations are always wrong anyway, and 2: Different types of feminists hold mutually-exclusive views.


If in doubt, assume that 'feminist' means: Egalitarianism. If you're talking about feminists who are overly PC or misandrist, don't even bother calling them feminists, just diffrentiate them based on their actions/views, identifying them as people supporting 'positive-discrimination against men' or 'misandrists' - not 'feminists'.


I think the word 'feminist' really shouldn't be allowed to be hijacked by the more extreme types, who are very un-egalitarian in their views - it becomes impossible to debate the entire topic if you let them lay claim to the word 'feminist'.
I think the best way to consider/define the word, is to consider it synonymous with egalitarianism.

Bannasidhe

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

For the BAJILLIONTH time,

ABSOLUTELY. YES.

Then what the hell is your problem with radical feminists exercising their right to absolute freedom of speech?

hatrickpatrick

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Then what the hell is your problem with radical feminists exercising their right to absolute freedom of speech?

I don't have one, I just disagree that they are a radical minority and therefore refuse to support the label "feminist", and am tired of being accused of being anti equality just because I say "I don't support the feminist movement."

I don't know if I can put it any more clearly. At this stage I honestly think you seem to be the only one who doesn't grasp what I'm actually saying, and I can't help wondering if this is merely a deliberate attempt to wind me up for the craic

WilyCoyote

Stop shouting. Ye'll wake the bábóg! Ah, feck it .......... now look what you've started.

Bannasidhe

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't have one, I just disagree that they are a radical minority and therefore refuse to support the label "feminist", and am tired of being accused of being anti equality just because I say "I don't support the feminist movement."

I don't know if I can put it any more clearly. At this stage I honestly think you seem to be the only one who doesn't grasp what I'm actually saying, and I can't help wondering if this is merely a deliberate attempt to wind me up for the craic

It's quite simple.

If you believe people have an absolute right to free speech then no matter how radical a statement anyone who identifies as feminist makes you, logically, should also believe they have the right to make that statement without threats of censorship - even if ironically they are calling for censorship. That is their right.

But post after post you have criticised others who identify as feminist for upholding that right you claim to hold so dear and of not being vigorous enough in combating the radical statements - short of censorship - what do you expect us to do exactly?

No body asked you to like/support/approve of feminism but don't use a freedom of speech argument while at the same time complaining that a radical fringe is exercising that right as justification for your position.

PucaMama

Wibbs wrote: »

I don't even... "Shure tis only the one thing and shure who'd want to listen/read/see it anyway". And this folks is how censorship gets grassroots support.

the song isn't exactly an important piece of information being censored away its a song and a useless one too. Plenty of people wouldn't like to be enjoying their tea in a cafe and then hearing some of the stuff in that song.

Bannasidhe

Teabag224 wrote: »

No one is saying that extreme feminists don't have the right to say what they want.

What some are questioning is why do moderate feminists not seem to criticise the crazy feminists?

Criticism is not censorship.

Sweetest divine.....

They do!!

Just because it doesn't take place in mainstream media outlets does not mean it doesn't happen!

And 'crazy' is an interesting term calling into question people's mental health. Are you qualified to make that call?

Radical.
Extreme.

Yes.

Crazy...hmmmmmmm.....

Baze

Teabag224 wrote: »

What status quo is feminism currently trying to change?

The one with Rick Parfitt. They reckon rockers objectify women too much.

upforit101

I'd wonder Bannasidhe are Feminists mostly;

1. Fat
2. Ugly
3. Lesbian
4. Women with crippling "Daddy issues"

Just wondering?

banned

Wibbs

PucaMama wrote: »

the song isn't exactly an important piece of information being censored away its a song and a useless one too.

Again a perfect example of how censorship takes hold in the common mind. Do you want a list of what is now considered important literature, art, film, theatre that was described as unimportant and useless and ended up being censored. Indeed in Ireland Catcher in the rye and a Brave new world were censored, as was the film adaptation of Joyces Ulysses. Hell the book was banned in the US for a time. No doubt "plenty of people wouldn't like to be enjoying their tea in a cafe" reading certain passages of that book, but that just means they're idiots.

Lyaiera

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I snort. Loudly.

Yeah, I'm in the fortunate position not to have had my life wrecked by them, so I'll do something derisory towards them until that happens.

PucaMama

Wibbs wrote: »

Again a perfect example of how censorship takes hold in the common mind. Do you want a list of what is now considered important literature, art, film, theatre that was described as unimportant and useless and ended up being censored. Indeed in Ireland Catcher in the rye and a Brave new world were censored, as was the film adaptation of Joyces Ulysses. Hell the book was banned in the US for a time. No doubt "plenty of people wouldn't like to be enjoying their tea in a cafe" reading certain passages of that book, but that just means they're idiots.

so they are idiots for not holding the same opinion as you?? Unbelievable.

Bannasidhe

GenieOz wrote: »

If you took it easy on the Columbian sugar you might not have such mental views.

Ha Ha..I nearly laughed.

Bannasidhe

Teabag224 wrote: »

Who is saying "radical feminsts" don't have the right to say what they want?

Have you read the whole thread?

upforit101

And they say Feminists don't hate Men.

"The incident took place on Sunday night, October 7 during the 27th National Women's Conference in Posadas, Argentina when a group of about 500 activists from various feminist groups vented their rage against the Church for its position on abortion and same-sex "marriage." Although the aggression led to the cancelation of Sunday Masses, hundreds of faithful Catholics, mostly young men, stood at the entrance of the Cathedral, forming a protective prayer chain to prevent its desecration.

"Freedom of speech," "dialogue" and "tolerance" were entirely absent in the scenes that unfolded in front of the Cathedral. Far from it, abortion activists, radical feminists and open homosexual -- some, completely undressed -- united to chant phrases such as "Church -- garbage -- you're the dictatorship!" The walls of the Cathedral were vandalized with offensive slurs such as "The only church that illuminates is the one that burns."

Wibbs

PucaMama wrote: »

so they are idiots for not holding the same opinion as you?? Unbelievable.

Unbelievable indeed. Given it was you that feels happy to foist your opinion on others over some song or other and would be happy to see it banned. The irony involved here is majestic in scope.

Bannasidhe

upforit101 wrote: »

And they say Feminists don't hate Men.

You do know there are men who are pro-choice?

Also - not everyone who is pro-choice identifies as feminist...and as has been pointed out there are feminist groups who are pro-Birth'Life'...

So what exactly is the point of a pro-choice march focusing on a Roman Catholic Cathedral to this discussion?

upforit101

Bannasidhe

upforit101 wrote: »

Have you a point or are you busy searching youtube?

upforit101

Bannasidhe wrote: »

So what exactly is the point of a pro-choice march focusing on a Roman Catholic Cathedral to this discussion?

It wasn't a march it was a violent mob (Feminists) attacking and sexually molesting a group of Catholic men who were peacefully protecting the cathedral in the city of San Juan from threats of vandalism.

"The women, many of them topless, spray-painted the men’s crotches and faces and swastikas on their chests and foreheads, using markers to paint their faces with Hitler-like moustaches. They also performed obscene sexual acts in front of them and pushed their breasts onto their faces, all the while shouting “get your rosaries out of our ovaries.”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/horror-mob-of-topless-pro-abort-feminists-attacks-rosary-praying-men-defend

Just marching??

From the Video evidence - Feminism is a hate movement.

upforit101

Teabag224 wrote: »

Yes, I haven't once seen a comment by anyone saying that radical feminists should be censored, merely criticised.

If/When they use violence, then all bets are off.

tritium

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Still reluctant answer the question eh?

It is really very simple.

Yes - you believe in an absolute right to free speech.
No - you do not believe in an absolute right to free speech.

Why are you finding it so hard to answer?

If you'd be good enough to actually read other peoples posts you'll see htp did answer

Almost immediately in fact

And then told you that he'd answered you

More than once!

At this stage I can only suggest he might draw you a map

lufties

upforit101 wrote: »

It wasn't a march it was a violent mob (Feminists) attacking and sexually molesting a group of Catholic men who were peacefully protecting the cathedral in the city of San Juan from threats of vandalism.

"The women, many of them topless, spray-painted the men’s crotches and faces and swastikas on their chests and foreheads, using markers to paint their faces with Hitler-like moustaches. They also performed obscene sexual acts in front of them and pushed their breasts onto their faces, all the while shouting “get your rosaries out of our ovaries.”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/horror-mob-of-topless-pro-abort-feminists-attacks-rosary-praying-men-defend

Just marching??

From the Video evidence - Feminism is a hate movement.

Bunch of ****ing aggressive looneys. I guarantee the men wouldn't get away with that kind of abuse/intimidation.

Carlos Orange

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I do seem to have touched a nerve when I said Radical Feminists are exercising their 'right' to Free Speech....

Given the rate you are posting on this thread I suspect if anyones nerves are being touched they are probably yours.

clairefontaine

lufties wrote: »

Bunch of ****ing aggressive looneys. I guarantee the men wouldn't get away with that kind of abuse/intimidation.

They'd have sexual assault charges and restraining orders on them, possibly incarceration for disturbing the peace too.

PucaMama

Wibbs wrote: »

Unbelievable indeed. Given it was you that feels happy to foist your opinion on others over some song or other and would be happy to see it banned. The irony involved here is majestic in scope.

People are not idiots for disagreeing with me and i never said they were. I said originally what harm its only a song. In my opinion there is a time and a place for songs like that. Not playing a song is hardly censorship.