"Feminist" nightmare

[zippy57]

What is the source of that information?

[jonas_opines]

It's the same reason the term "feminism" has gradually gained a bad impression: Idiots are loud.

Back in the day, "feminism" was a movement to cause women to have the same rights and respect than men, in a time were women were not supposed to have the right to work, earn their money and be independent, but instead, confined to a husband and a kitchen.

I'm all down with that, why should one be forced to a role in society? We should be free to do whatever the hell we want as long as it makes us happy and doesn't damage the rest. We all deserve the same respect

 

Now what's up with these SO CALLED "feminists" who are not actually feminists but "misandrists" (that should be the word for man-hating person)

They ARE NOT feminists

These lack consequence and will never be happy because "men" are always oppressing them one way or another

There will always be "sexism" because men are naturally attracted to women, if we weren't, then we would be objectifying anyway cause we refuse to give them attention.

 

The problem with this is that those criticism have been leveled at "feminism" and "feminists" for the entire course of the movement.  It's only in retrospect that any fictionalized, purposeful, pure, golden age of a movement exists.  It has not gradually gained a bad impression - it has weathered these same criticisms the entire time.  These are not new dismissals, labels, or events. Back in the day, "feminism" was also criticized as being thinly-veiled misandry and really concerned with women's superiority.  The same is true of virtually all cultural movements, and the language and methods used to deligitimize them changes very little.  

 

It's not just that idiots are loud - it's that if you want to dismiss a movement that you consider threatening, one of the most effective ways to do that is to find the most shrill or problematic voices and focus on them, in an attempt to tarnish the movement as a whole.

[zippy57]

Perhaps the sentiment differs depending on location then. It has only been relatively recently that, at least in conversation with those around me in the real world, that feminism has gained the bad impression I spoke of.

[Chaos63]

Anybody claiming to fight for equality in this day and age is full of shit, because that fight was won a long time ago. These new age feminazi ought to be fucking ashamed of themselves for giving a bad name to women who had to spit teeth a hundred years ago to ensure these same shallow shits could even have voting rights today.

Thankfully, most women these days are washing their hands of feminism so I reckon it'll be dead in a decade or less. Best to let it go, I know I will.

[GrimReaper]

 

There are many of them and on which side you are is largely based on your personal opinion rather than scientific evidence.

Yes, because huge empiric data showing that upbringing and socialization have next to no influence on work interests,

prove that you can predict if kids will later show a behavoir that is considered typcial for boys or for girls by examine their blood when they were still in the womb or just born,

researchers having found a correlation between testosterone level, occupational choice and visual thinking for both adult men and women,

or the simple observation that in a country which citizen can choose their occupation freely and with little economical restrictions will most likely choose occupations typical for their sex, even in countries that have implemented a gender sensitive eduction decades ago,

are all totally not of any kind a scientific evidence.

 

 

And how would you prove that? As far as I know no human was ever observed in an environment that was devoid of any kind of socialization. If anything, you're only able to predict what person you might become in our current society. Say you have a newly born boy and based on the data you can gather from his DNA it's pretty likely he will become a lawyer, doctor, scientist etc.

 

If his society/culture/environment however changes in the meantime, that prediction becomes meaningless. Doesn't matter if the scope on the grand scheme of things is big (war for example) or small (personal trauma), predictions can only work if the current status quo is still there. It would be very interesting to know what impact skin color has on the prediction, too.

 

That's the problem I have with popular science, though. It's made by people who usually know what they are talking about but made because they want to push their point of view forward, very well knowing that the hard, cold evidence they imply doesn't really exist. The ordinary person however is easily impressed, especially when confirmation bias is involved. PUA folks want women to be inferior cumdumpsters, so they seek confirmation and ridicule everyone who speaks against their views and ideals. Truth is meaningless, the only thing that counts is that you get confirmation on what you always 'knew'.

[Molevalence]

To put it simply: We are who we choose to be.

 

 

There are many of them and on which side you are is largely based on your personal opinion rather than scientific evidence.

Yes, because huge empiric data showing that upbringing and socialization have next to no influence on work interests,
prove that you can predict if kids will later show a behavoir that is considered typcial for boys or for girls by examine their blood when they were still in the womb or just born,
researchers having found a correlation between testosterone level, occupational choice and visual thinking for both adult men and women,
or the simple observation that in a country which citizen can choose their occupation freely and with little economical restrictions will most likely choose occupations typical for their sex, even in countries that have implemented a gender sensitive eduction decades ago,
are all totally not of any kind a scientific evidence.

 

 

And how would you prove that? As far as I know no human was ever observed in an environment that was devoid of any kind of socialization. If anything, you're only able to predict what person you might become in our current society. Say you have a newly born boy and based on the data you can gather from his DNA it's pretty likely he will become a lawyer, doctor, scientist etc.

 

If his society/culture/environment however changes in the meantime, that prediction becomes meaningless. Doesn't matter if the scope on the grand scheme of things is big (war for example) or small (personal trauma), predictions can only work if the current status quo is still there. It would be very interesting to know what impact skin color has on the prediction, too.

 

That's the problem I have with popular science, though. It's made by people who usually know what they are talking about but made because they want to push their point of view forward, very well knowing that the hard, cold evidence they imply doesn't really exist. The ordinary person however is easily impressed, especially when confirmation bias is involved. PUA folks want women to be inferior cumdumpsters, so they seek confirmation and ridicule everyone who speaks against their views and ideals. Truth is meaningless, the only thing that counts is that you get confirmation on what you always 'knew'.

 

 

[zippy57]

I chose to be omnipotent. Still waiting on that to actually happen.

[nonusnomeni]

 

To put it simply: We are who we choose to be.

 

 

 

 

 

unfortunately wrong

we are product of society(80%) and ours ancestors(home training, parents,grandparents for europeans 20%)

[jonas_opines]

Perhaps the sentiment differs depending on location then. 

 

Change out "location" for "awareness" and you might be on to something.  

 

Curious, though, how do you define "relatively recent" times?  1979?  1990?  2001?  2008?  

[zippy57]

2008 sounds about right. Again, I'm referring to people I actually know in person.

[jonas_opines]

Fair enough.  But understand, for instance, that the "feminazi" label that the poster above tossed out so casually has been coin of phrase since at least the early '90s, for instance, and other instances of backlash anger goes back, in various societal waves, far, far longer than that.  The Suffragettes of the late 1800s become the Bra-Burners of the 1960s become the Feminazis of the current era. 

 

It's fine, of course, for you and the people you know to go through the same evolution of thought and ideas that virtually everybody else has gone through in due course in every generation of enlightenment period history, at the least.  It's just probably best that you don't believe that any of it is, in any way, a new thing.  

 

Hell, on a related topic, every two to four years you hear howling here in America about the Final Death of Conservatism or the Final Death of Progressivism, too.  Been going on for decades at the least, and both are, obviously, still alive.

[zippy57]

What did I say that made you think I thought a backlash was a new development? Whether this is "new" is not under debate because the answer is obvious. The question is whether or not the sentiment has gone from being a minority opinion to being a majority opinion in recent years, regardless of anything that had occurred previously. If it has, then my statement that feminism has gained a bad impression is correct (the phrase "amongst the general public" having been intended as an implication that may very well have been lost). If it has not, then my statement was incorrect.

[skyrimkillmod]

I wonder why the "feminists" complain about this so much.  Being a male is a hell of alot harder, you grow up being told not to cry or be to clingy so you deprive your self of your natural feelings and try to be tuff.  If a woman has a same sex experience they are alot less likely to be told their a lesbo and more likely to just be going through a experimental phase while if your a man and you have a same sex experience even if its just out of curiosity your automatically gay (I beleave most men and woman would agree).  So I feel we all play the hand we are dealt and try finding our selfs in this twisted world.

[Dr. Thang]

I wonder why the "feminists" complain about this so much.  Being a male is a hell of alot harder, you grow up being told not to cry or be to clingy so you deprive your self of your natural feelings and try to be tuff.  If a woman has a same sex experience they are alot less likely to be told their a lesbo and more likely to just be going through a experimental phase while if your a man and you have a same sex experience even if its just out of curiosity your automatically gay (I beleave most men and woman would agree).  So I feel we all play the hand we are dealt and try finding our selfs in this twisted world.

 

As a man, who has had a lot of female friends, I can say with 100% confidence that being a man is exponentially easier than being a woman. If a few anecdotes are the same thing as proof to you, then I have some that are a hell of a lot worse than "people expect me to be tough, and I can't kiss a guy without being called gay"

[jonas_opines]

What did I say that made you think I thought a backlash was a new development? Whether this is "new" is not under debate because the answer is obvious. The question is whether or not the sentiment has gone from being a minority opinion to being a majority opinion in recent years, regardless of anything that had occurred previously. If it has, then my statement that feminism has gained a bad impression is correct (the phrase "amongst the general public" having been intended as an implication that may very well have been lost). If it has not, then my statement was incorrect.

 

The point I'm making, though, is that there has rarely been a point that the feminist movement - or any equal rights type of movement seeking to challenge the status quo - has not been viewed as unfavorable by large segments of majority opinion or the general public.  People hate change.  They don't hold favorable opinions of other people trying to foment change.  

 

It's only generally in retrospect, with those movements that succeeded in their aim, and only after the benefits of their efforts started to reach the general public, that majority opinion is revised to hold them in favorable light.  Up to that point, they remain agenda-driven radical special-interest groups determined to rock the boat unnecessarily.  

[jonas_opines]

I wonder why the "feminists" complain about this so much.  Being a male is a hell of alot harder, you grow up being told not to cry or be to clingy so you deprive your self of your natural feelings and try to be tuff.  If a woman has a same sex experience they are alot less likely to be told their a lesbo and more likely to just be going through a experimental phase while if your a man and you have a same sex experience even if its just out of curiosity your automatically gay (I beleave most men and woman would agree).  So I feel we all play the hand we are dealt and try finding our selfs in this twisted world.

 

Every feminist that I know - every single one - would acknowledge that there are serious problems faced by boys and men, including those brought up.  They would then go on to point out that essentially this is the same issue as the one they are dealing with, that the existing gender roles dictated towards both boys and girls unfairly force certain expectations of behavior on them.  The constant focus for boys on being properly masculine (must be tough! can't be gay!), is just the flip side of the coin for girls on being properly feminine (don't speak up! focus on being pretty!), and they view themselves as fighting the same fight in both cases.  

 

I don't claim that every single feminist that I know is representative of every single feminist, just that my reasonably-sized sample group has a 100% universal opinion on this particular point.  

[NexusCron]

Wow, a reasonable feminist, amazing.

 

Another female gamer here. Truthfully. I'm personally not against all the sexy stuff. I see nothing wrong with a badass female warrior who is lingerie clad, but then, honestly. I'm proud of my sexuality and stuff, so I guess I'm one of the few who fails to give a damn. I love a good story, I love good characters, if said well written character again, dresses like she belongs on a stripper pole, I won't care, the fact is, if a character is WELL WRITTEN, then its a case of she can wear whatever the hell she wants. Wants to murder you dressed like a maid? Go for it, just expect surprise! XD.

 

Current Day Feminists can suck on my fucking shoes. Seriously, sometimes they make me hate having boobs because it puts me as the same gender as these raving egomaniacs.

 

Control the Media control the mind, as they always say.

(For the record, My attitude might seem pretty Unladylike, I dun consider myself ladylike in the least bit, plus my picture I posted on that forum was a dog because I was intentionally being obnoxious.)

 

 

[Quisling]

 

 

I was explicitly talking about the Middle Ages nor only about the profession of a soldier. During most of human history most professions that were dangerous or badly affected your health, i.e. miner, lumberjack, and of course soldier, were almost exclusively performed by men.

 

 

That's not true of mining. In the UK's coal mining industry, for example, women were only banned from working in the mid-19th century, ostensibly because of an accident in which 26 children died, but more likely it was Victorian prudery over a rumour that some women worked topless.

 

Before the ban, entire families worked together, the stronger/elder members mining, the rest pulling the mine carts, and children as young as five looking after the ventilation.

 

After the ban, twice as many men worked down the mines as before, and wages were reduced because of the cost of training all the new ones (according to the pit owners). Naturally, those lost wages were never returned.

 

And that's how the sexist patriarchy fucked over my forefathers.

[Chaos63]

Another female gamer here. Truthfully. I'm personally not against all the sexy stuff. I see nothing wrong with a badass female warrior who is lingerie clad, but then, honestly. I'm proud of my sexuality and stuff, so I guess I'm one of the few who fails to give a damn. I love a good story, I love good characters, if said well written character again, dresses like she belongs on a stripper pole, I won't care, the fact is, if a character is WELL WRITTEN, then its a case of she can wear whatever the hell she wants.

 

It's all about exploiting the assets you're given. Women traditionally have their beauty, virginity and sexuality, while men have dominance, stature and muscle.

Blaming people for wanting to usurp these makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. In fact, the only people I can imagine doing so would be ones who posess none of the above, and one might wonder how badly they must have fucked up to make that happen.

 

[nonusnomeni]

well it's look somebody finally find some courage to hear another side

http://apgnation.com/archives/2014/09/09/6977/truth-gaming-interview-fine-young-capitalists

[nonusnomeni]

thx K.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/gamergate-and-women-in-video-game-culture/543c686878c90a71ff000157

 

[Angrybird]

well it's look somebody finally find some courage to hear another side

http://apgnation.com/archives/2014/09/09/6977/truth-gaming-interview-fine-young-capitalists

 

"We took the top 5 best ideas and assigned them concept artists to design their game."

 

Lolwut?

 

Today was rest day man, I've read some more and holy shit the whole article is rage fuel there's no one to support everyone sucks so bad.

[nonusnomeni]

 

wonderful                 

[nonusnomeni]

   

   

ignore the title

[Ruerl]

 

I clicked play and was ready to be enraged. I was surprised when I found out she isn't a stereotypical Tumblr feminist. She's a normal person with common sense.

 

Listening to Tumblr to get an idea of feminism is like going to sodahead to get an idea of conservatives - you'll only scrape off bottom of the barrel.

 

Feminism gets a bad rep because the people speaking out against it judge it based upon the worst of it - like atheists who judge Christianity based on young earth creationists and Christians who judge atheists based on teenage Dawkins wannabes. 

 

 

^ This. Just because there are crazies out there does not mean they do not have a point. And despire the popular belief to the contrary some of the more extreme people do have a point too. Like Sarkeesian, plenty there to disagree with (especially in how she says it) but just look at the exaggerated reaction she gets or the exaggerated reaction Zoe Quinn got (not to mention the lies, slander and so on).

 

Remember in the not too far past when certain conservative figures wanted to blame video gaming on all violence? Imagine how they would have reacted if the gaming community had responded with death threats? Yeah, its the same thing here. People should just learn to be civil or shut up.

 

Personally I consider myself a feminist too, and I do so simply by the dictionary definition of feminism: Someone who believes in equal rights for women.