Modern Feminism-Good for Society?

Wibbs

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’m a woman who has been handed a death sentence by my left boob.

I'm sorry ODB, you just caused the oddest emotional reaction in my reading of that sentence; a mix of sympathy, sadness and snorting my tea out my nose in mirth at the image you painted.

jam_mac_jam

Mr Pyke wrote: »

From the article I read she was 36 and she ran into these North Africans in a park and enquired about their circumstances. They proceeded to gang rape her.

Would she have gone over to a group of scummy looking white men? I doubt it.

Numerous rapes are committed every year in Europe by migrants and yet seems and yet it seems many women blindly support immigration.

I blame left wing politics and feminism.

I blame the men who raped her.

anewme

Mr Pyke wrote: »

So do I and I'd like to see them castrated and hung.

Along with the modern feminists who corrupted her?

Nasty views and actual live "off the cuff" example of the type of hate that is spewed regularly on boards.

Feminism and immigration ...rabble rabble...rabble.

Exactly what I was talking about.

Same poster who was able to tell me earlier what I believe.

There are views like this expressed fairly regularly on Boards, only pulled up when they are this extreme. Toxic, toxic, toxic.

suicide_circus

I have a recollection of hearing germaine greer make a point to the effect that women wanting what men have being a profoundly unambitious goal. She looked at the lives of men in general and they didn't seem like something to aspire to.

From my my own point of view, none of us like the idea that we are hostages to our genes and biological make up but the older i get the more i find it to be the case.

Where ever you go, there you are.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Wibbs wrote: »

I'm sorry ODB, you just caused the oddest emotional reaction in my reading of that sentence; a mix of sympathy, sadness and snorting my tea out my nose in mirth at the image you painted.

Black humour is necessary or I’d go insane!

kildare lad

Tell me how wrote: »

First off, your use of the words 'discriminated against' are trying to mislead the argument. Is it only in the case of outright discrimination that someone can advocate for their situation to be better? It's more of the 'things have improved, what more could you want' mindset.

Someone yesterday used the anecdotal evidence of their sister being an engineer whereas previously, their mother couldn't even work in the 60's. They are correct. That is progress.
On a similar vein, I can talk about 2 of my sisters, one a Phd qualified scientist, the other a chartered engineer. The former was introduced in a formal meeting by her boss as a great little lady while her colleague was introduced in the same conversation with reference to his qualifications. She is the lead scientist for the company in their operations in that country.
The chartered engineer, in one performance review, was told she had done great work 'for a lady'.

None of these are very serious, but both evidence of how they are not viewed equally as male people in their roles/industries and both evidence of an environment where they both feel they are often viewed and assessed in the context of being female above the focus being on their contribution and performance.

The FAI is no great organisation for anyone involved but we had the story recently of how the womens senior team had to change out of their tracksuits in the toilet of Dublin airport to give them to the under 17 girls who were flying out for a competition. The womens team attended an international competition and were given 20 footballs by the organisers. Those footballs were appropriated by the FAI, and given to the mens team.
Indeed sport in general is an area where any conversation about improving the quality, participation and image of the womens game is shot down as being a nonsense 'feminist driven' approach. If women want better sports, they should fund it themselves, watch it themselves and improve it themselves is the tone while ignoring how long male sports have been in existence by comparison, how much support and financial contributions they received to gradually improve their game and facilities and how many women contribute to that both in roles within and in paying money at the gate which then is used to improve the game. Top levels mens sports didn't start at the level it is at now, nor did the change happen overnight, but suggestions for efforts to grow them female version is often slapped away as a politically correct PR exercise and unfortunately is often little more than a token gesture.

Please don't take the above as the extent and limit in which women have it tougher than men. I'm not saying that, I'm not saying that as rule they definitively do in all cases. What I am saying is that those who continue to advocate for improving their lot are largely entitled to do so and shouldn't be dismissed because of one individual who is hoping for the day when women can have babies without men.

Anyway, it's morning here and I have work to do so going to step away from this for now.

Do you ever ask yourself why more women do not go out and support women's. There's no men standing at the gates stopping women from attending games. The sad fact is a lot of women are more interested by the Kardashians and love island than watching women play football or rugby. Whens the last time you seen a gang of woman head off down the pub to watch united play or head into the Aviva to watch Ireland ? I'm not saying women don't go to sports but it's not followed nowhere as the amount of men that follow sports

randd1

joe40 wrote: »

So does modern feminism have much support?If it is such a "**** sandwich" to use your analogy then why would anyone male or female support it.

I have read nonsense purporting to be feminism but in the real world these opinions are less common. In my experience most people, men and women, have fairly balanced views.

Feminism, modern or otherwise is not about to destroy or harm society.

I never said feminism was.


Modern feminism, or more accurately, the modern attempt at feminism, is little more than an attempt at victimhood.


Feminists want equality. Modern feminists want men to pay for the past.


There is a difference. I would class most women, certainly any I know, in the first category, in that they want an equal world just to live their life and try their best. And are no different from fellas.


I know one of the second category. A complete looper, constantly telling people to check their privilege, blames men for everything. Quite clearly, not the greatest outlook for society to take.

anewme

TomTomTim wrote: »

You better show him how he's wrong then. Explain away the falsehoods if it's so easy.

I don't agree with everything he's said, but he certainly has a point about the cultural relativism that is so wide spread in such circles.

I don't agree with anything he said.

He has no point.

Well, he has a point, the point I'm trying to make that people wont post here because of the levels of toxicity and that women are seen as responsible for all evils.

Personally, I find it incredulous that you are even asking someone to explain why blaming feminism on men gang raping a women is wrong, there is nowhere to start with views like that, or those condoning them.

It does show that there is an issue with the content as people have referenced though.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

Everything that genuine posters see as poison and are pushing back against in this forum summed up in 2 lines!

Same Agenda being pushed time and time over-maybe not as obvious, but still there.

Out of the mouth of babes and all that.

But here's what I don't get about the modern feminist / woke / sjw / whatever term you like folks: Why can't you just scroll past it and not engage, if you disagree with it? Why does it have to be out of sight and out of mind in order for you to function? It's very strange, particularly on the internet where random asides, trolls, and segues abound.

Tony EH

anewme wrote: »

Everything that genuine posters see as poison and are pushing back against in this forum summed up in 2 lines!

Why don't you just converse with the "genuine posters" then and ignore the obvious?

You know, scroll by the silly stuff?

anewme

kildare lad wrote: »

The sad fact is a lot of women are more interested by the Kardashians and love island than watching women play football or rugby.

More gross generalisations about women.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

kildare lad wrote: »

Do you ever ask yourself why more women do not go out and support women's. There's no men standing at the gates stopping women from attending games. The sad fact is a lot of women are more interested by the Kardashians and love island than watching women play football or rugby. Whens the last time you seen a gang of woman head off down the pub to watch united play or head into the Aviva to watch Ireland ? I'm not saying women don't go to sports but it's not followed nowhere as the amount of men that follow sports

These are my options? :eek:

Tony EH

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

These are my options? :eek:

We'll let you watch Breaking Bad too.

anewme

Tony EH wrote: »

Why don't you just converse with the "genuine posters" then and ignore the obvious?

You know, scroll by the silly stuff?

Its not silly though, its misogyny at its most basic. Referring to it as "silly" is downgrading it - it is a toxic and unhealthy view to have of women.

Instead of asking me to scroll by - why don't you condemn it rather than scroll by?

Things will only change when toxicity is called out and acknowledged.

Otherwise, its Emperor's New Clothes denial Stuff, everything is ok, while this type of stuff is spewed out. Ah sure he's only messing.

There are posters who agree with this way of thinking, so it is not isolated.

randd1

anewme wrote: »

More gross generalisations about women.

Not untrue though.


That's the thing. It may be a generalisation, but it's also true. Should it be then be ignored because it's a generalisation even if it's true?

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

More gross generalisations about women.

The sad fact is a lot of lads are more interested in mentally undressing Katy Perry and sneaking into the bathroom for a quick fap than doing something constructive with their day and engaging in some self-improvement.

There, a gross generalisation about men. The difference is, as long as there's no double standard involved, lads aren't going to get angry about this. In fact, when this exact type of sh!te is pushed by mainstream feminists, the only reaction you'll generally get from lads is one of "it's unfair that you can say this about us, but we can't say that about you without someone calling for censorship!"

Tony EH

anewme wrote: »

Instead of asking me to scroll by - why don't you condemn it rather than scroll by?

Because there's no point in responding to posts like that. It's a waste of time and bandwidth.

And there's even less of a point in getting worked up about them.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But here's what I don't get about the modern feminist / woke / sjw / whatever term you like folks: Why can't you just scroll past it and not engage, if you disagree with it? Why does it have to be out of sight and out of mind in order for you to function? It's very strange, particularly on the internet where random asides, trolls, and segues abound.

Yeah, I have a friend who has taken a turn for the woke in the last few years (to the point of alienating and getting into arguments with even some of her left-leaning friends, including me). When Donald Trump was banned from Twitter, she said “Great, now I can use Twitter again. Glad that they are banning fascists so I don’t have to see what they write”. I was bemused. Let’s not get into a debate about whether Trump is a fascist or not. I was bemused because I had Trump muted on Twitter. Never ever saw any of his tweets unless I actively went on to his Twitter page. She’s talking like you can’t avoid people you dislike on the platform. I find it really easy to avoid people on it. And if I DID see the odd Trump tweet, so what? I’m still standing.

kildare lad

anewme wrote: »

More gross generalisations about women.

It's not really though , do you think woman are more likely to watch reality tv than sports

https://www.thejournal.ie/love-island-viewings-4112903-Jul2018/

Almost half of all women aged 15-34 who watched TV on Wednesday watched Love Island
The reality TV show has captured people’s attention over the last five weeks.

THE REALITY TV show Love Island is making an impression on Irish viewers – particularly among young women.

If you haven’t watched an episode, it’s difficult to explain – here’s Wikipedia’s attempt, which is the best of the lot:

anewme

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

But here's what I don't get about the modern feminist / woke / sjw / whatever term you like folks: Why can't you just scroll past it and not engage, if you disagree with it? Why does it have to be out of sight and out of mind in order for you to function? It's very strange, particularly on the internet where random asides, trolls, and segues abound.

There's nothing feminist or sjw about pulling someone up who believes feminism is responsible for a woman being gang raped. It is a discussion about modern feminism after all. We have a person who believes that modern feminism is responsible for a woman being raped, even though it was a group of men who raped her?

Nothing woke about it either.

Those terms are just babble used to demean people and gaslight them to believe they are kicking up a fuss over something silly.

I call it good old fashioned decency.

We are all different people, Maybe instead of asking me to scroll by, you should adjust your libertian thinking or whatever it is and call a duck a duck. That's just the way I am and I'm happy to be that way.

anewme

kildare lad wrote: »

It's not really though , do you think woman are more likely to watch reality tv than sports

I dont think women are a hive mind.

People are very individual.

There are many young men or women who watch reality tv, there are many who watch sports.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

Its not silly though, its misogyny at its most basic. Referring to it as "silly" is downgrading it - it is a toxic and unhealthy view to have of women.

Instead of asking me to scroll by - why don't you condemn it rather than scroll by?

It's random sh!t written by random people you don't know on the internet, though. How can it provoke a strong enough emotional reaction to genuinely upset you? If it was real life friends, family, or co-workers writing this stuff, I'd be able to empathise. But we're a bunch of anonymous, faceless strangers. Who cares? Boards.ie is surface level social interaction, it really shouldn't mean that much to anyone.

Things will only change when toxicity is called out and acknowledged.

You mean, people will only self-censor if they're shamed into doing it. Not everyone thinks that's a positive outcome.

Otherwise, its Emperor's New Clothes denial Stuff, everything is ok, while this type of stuff is spewed out. Ah sure he's only messing.

There are posters who agree with this way of thinking, so it is not isolated.

Again though in both cases, strangers. Random internet strangers. Who gives a f*ck? It's not important in any way.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

There's nothing feminist or sjw about pulling someone up who believes feminism is responsible for a woman being gang raped. It is a discussion about modern feminism after all. We have a person who believes that modern feminism is responsible for a woman being raped, even though it was a group of men who raped her?

Nothing woke about it either.

Disagreeing with it is not woke. Policing it is. Expecting it to be censored is. That's the difference. There's disagreement, and there's censorship. They're fundamentally different concepts. Modern feminists tend to push the latter more than the former, and that's why many people like myself fundamentally oppose their ideology.

Those terms are just babble used to demean people and gaslight them to believe they are kicking up a fuss over something silly.

That's why I'm asking what term you'd prefer, because feminist, as I previously mentioned, can encompass both libertarian and authoritarian. Would you be ok with auth-feminist as a term, perhaps?

I call it good old fashioned decency.

This is the internet. There's never been too much of that to be found here.

We are all different people, Maybe instead of asking me to scroll by, you should adjust your libertian thinking or whatever it is and call a duck a duck. That's just the way I am and I'm happy to be that way.

Why should I alter my thinking? I'm happy to be the way I am, and the way I am is culturally libertarian. I don't believe that I, one single, individual human being, has any right to tell any other single, individual human being what they can or cannot say. It doesn't matter how what they say makes me feel emotionally - that's my problem, not theirs. Their freedom does not end where my feelings begin, and I would never, ever want it to.

Silentcorner

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I'm going to try a different approach - can anyone explain exactly how women are discriminated against in Ireland?

What barriers are there to deny us equal access to education, employment and the right to make our own life choices? I'm talking about now, not in the past.

I notice this question has been completely ignored.

How about the gender spend gap?

Women spend or control the spend of up to 80% of the domestic economy...are women being oppressed into spending money they didn't earn?

How about the receipt of Government funds, or taxpayers money, which gender is discriminated in the distribution of State services?

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

I dont think women are a hive mind.

People are very individual.

There are many young men or women who watch reality tv, there are many who watch sports.

In that case, would you also accept that not every woman is thin-skinned and easily offended by the brain farts of random internet strangers, and that to change the rules of the whole playground in order to baby-proof it for the minority who can't hack a grazed knee or twisted ankle from time to time comes across as unbelievably autocratic?

kildare lad

Silentcorner wrote: »

I notice this question has been completely ignored.

How about the gender spend gap?

Women spend or control the spend of up to 80% of the domestic economy...are women being oppressed into spending money they didn't earn?

How about the receipt of Government funds, or taxpayers money, which gender is discriminated in the distribution of State services?

But but but but there's a lack of representation of females as ceos, even though they choose to ignore studies have shown reasons for this , ie children , maternity leave , men working longer hours. If every top position was held by a female, feminists would find something to moan about , where's all the trans CEOs where's all the black CEOs ? It's a never ending journey on the identity politics train .

hatrickpatrick

kildare lad wrote: »

But but but but there's a lack of representation of females as ceos, even though they choose to ignore studies have shown reasons for this , ie children , maternity leave , men working longer hours.

The truth is, feminists tend to believe that the societal structures which result in this disparity - that working longer hours and sacrificing family time give one an advantage over one's colleagues when it comes to promotions, etc - are themselves problems which need to be solved.

The funny thing is, I actually agree fundamentally with that. It's one of many very relevant and well founded criticisms of the competitive capitalist system that we currently live under. What I despise is how feminists dress it up as something it isn't - "the gender pay gap" makes it sound as if they're alleging unequal pay for equal work, which simply isn't true. But they do it anyway because it's more inflammatory, a better battle cry, a better hashtag, a better soundbite. That whole 79c on the dollar thing in the US for example - that very much implies it's about equal pay for equal work.

If one wants to challenge the structure of modern capitalism, by all means go for it. I for one will back you every step of the way. But be honest and upfront about it, and don't dress it up in either misleading slogans, or an unnecessary men vs women thing when in fact it's the male and female 1% vs everybody else.

anewme

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In that case, would you also accept that not every woman is thin-skinned and easily offended by the brain farts of random internet strangers, and that to change the rules of the whole playground in order to baby-proof it for the minority who can't hack a grazed knee or twisted ankle from time to time comes across as unbelievably autocratic?

You keep going on as if I am upset or thin skinned. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I believe in treating others like I'd like them to treat me. I do believe though that somone sometimes has to speak out, and in this case, Im not afraid to do it. There are a number of people similar - people have contacted me privately and told me they are afraid to comment and some people have been very hurt by personal comments. Its easy to knock minorities, but it's really cowards running riot.

What you said about being Liberitan or whatever (excuse spelling) that comes across to me as being a gutless wonder who blows with the wind. Id actually hate to be like that, but you said it makes you happy. Not my bag though

Your idea of baby proofing is my idea of respect and courtesy, so we are very different.

So keep trucking as will I.

And, Im actually more with you on the censorship than you realise - while I believe personal abuse should be removed, I believe posts like the ones we are referring to, ie women are raped because of feminism, should be left - in the interests of transparency for those reading the whole thread. When the posts disappear, it is very easy to deny they were there in the first instance.

anewme

kildare lad wrote: »

But but but but there's a lack of representation of females as ceos, even though they choose to ignore studies have shown reasons for this , ie children , maternity leave , men working longer hours. If every top position was held by a female, feminists would find something to moan about , where's all the trans CEOs where's all the black CEOs ? It's a never ending journey on the identity politics train .

Ahhh stop, another one doing gymnastics.

Feminists would moan about a black CEO or a trans CEO.

Give me a break.

There's a "top position" for everyone.

If not, sure they can always become a binman, sorry bin person as you have an issue with diversity there.

hatrickpatrick

anewme wrote: »

You keep going on as if I am upset or thin skinned. Nothing could be further from the truth.

You're calling for censorship. If this isn't because you find that you've been reading offensive, is it because you're worried other people might?

I believe in treating others like I'd like them to treat me. I do believe though that somone sometimes has to speak out, and in this case, Im not afraid to do it. There are a number of people similar - people have contacted me privately and told me they are afraid to comment and some people have been very hurt by personal comments. Its easy to knock minorities, but it's really cowards running riot.

1: Why would anyone be afraid to comment? Has doxxing generally been an issue on Boards, that I'm not aware of? O_o

2: How is it possible to be hurt by very personal comments from random internet strangers? That's where my entire understanding just falls apart here to be honest. It's the internet. It's a forum. It literally doesn't matter once you close the tab. So why care what anyone writes on it?

What you said about being Liberitan or whatever (excuse spelling) that comes across to me as being a gutless wonder who blows with the wind. Id actually hate to be like that, but you said it makes you happy. Not my bag though

I absolutely do not blow with the wind Check my posting history going back 13 or 14 years, I guarantee you that I've always been economically left, socially liberal, culturally libertarian literally since I was a teenager. Haven't changed much at all. What have I said that makes it sound as if I blow in the wind?

Your idea of baby proofing is my idea of respect and courtesy, so we are very different.

I agree with having respect and courtesy, but I don't believe in forcing others to against their will. If someone else wants to be an obnoxious arsehole, that's their right. That's the beauty of the internet, everyone is free to be whatever they want to be. The fewer rules, the better.

So keep trucking as will I.

....Thanks, I guess?