Feminism

@ dru is beautiful.
Yeah, and it's all rude, unnecessary, and offensive of them, but you still haven't explained how the behavior, in general, can be defined as threatening and therefore warranting of a law making it illegal. Does it suck? Yeah, but a lot of free speech sucks.

@ dru is beautiful.
Catcalling for the most part are just obnoxious statements like "you look good today, damn!" to other things like that. If it gets to the point where someone is threatening you, then that shouldn't be called catcalling.

That's just harassment and intimidating, not even close to catcalling.


I honestly wish there were better people to teach us about real feminism. You know, the the kind were it isn't just our cis-ters we're protecting, but the trans* women as well, and even women of color. And actually portray the equality of all genders, and abolishing gender roles.

But I don't want to stop there, I also want the hate among women to stop too. I also want the idea that we're all just man hating women who want a worldwide men-ocide, I want there to be a clear definition of this whole movement.

@ SmilingScarlet
The majority of the pages I follow on Facebook are what you are describing. There are lists of intersectional pages and I continue to add feminist pages from other countries on a regular basis. There is a movement of feminism exactly what you're describing.

@ dru is beautiful.
I mean I'd rather not follow pages, I'd rather be physically active in things, and that's my main issue. Tumblr--as much as the heat they get--actually has some decent blogs that portray what I want, and I also have no issue with giving my own spin on things. Thank you though.

I need feminism because I had to falsely claim a stolen topless pic online was underage to get it remove. I also need feminism because Someone thought it was okay to steal my pics and start a fake dating profile.

I need feminism because I told a guy who repeatedly asked for my number that I wasn't interested in guys at all and he immediately turned that into meaning I would be interested in being with him so long as another girl was present and continued to ask me about this threesome even when I saw him on a separate day a week later, and nothing I said deterred him from this thought process.

I'm just...I don't know what I need. I don't know if I want to call it feminism, but it was the first time in a while where I was like, "I NEED FEMINISM...and possibly the cops."

A guy during job training randomly brought up young mothers and when I informed him the youngest mother was like, around 6, his response was, "SIX? If that was my daughter, I would have beaten her." I became horrified and was like, "Why would you beat a rape victim?" And he was like, "Well if it was rape, then that's different." I then informed him that if she's six, then it's always rape. He claimed it's not always.

He got intensely angry when I pointed out that if you, in any way, think that a 6 year old is ever initiating sex or asking for it then you're probably a pedophile.

I am highly against the notion of feminism, I find it lacking true morality and rationality. I call myself nothing, but maybe a egalitarian/humanist, but I just work for civil and equal rights. No reason for me to fight to make women equal too men, because that is an irrational notion.

I need to be able to go wherever I want, wearing whatever I want and feel safe. I can handle myself but everyone still insists that I shouldn't do things because 'men are weird', that's all my mother says. And the fact that my entire family don't even view me as a 'real' woman because I'm not ladylike, I'd rather be myself thanks.

@ Collin Berend
How is it irrational to want men and women to be equal?

@ Collin Berend
How can you be egalitarian yet think it's irrational to want men and women to be equal? Isn't the whole point of egalitarianism for everyone to be equal?

dru is beautiful.:

@ Collin Berend
How is it irrational to want men and women to be equal?

Not irrational to have men and women equal, but to make women equal too men. A false preconceived notion of a philosophy taught to the impressionable women who believe women are oppressed and they need to be made equal too men. This does not include all, but a very large number, such as people like Anita S. She is a good example of the illogical mindset the feminist philosophy makes one think.

Men and women being equal is fine, but making women equal to men is not. Because men are oppressed in areas that also would require making men equal too women. It is, in all rational thought, on both sides. By claiming women need to be equal too men, it preaches women are the ones needing help,not both. And the name alone comes of as a female supporter rather than a supporter of equality that is willing to fight he female gender for equality and fair treatment for men as well.

First off, if you are to find people like Anita Sarkeesian, she blames everything on the men and people who disagree are misogynist. In reality she is a misandrists. She hates men, in all aspects, she does. There is a school shooting and it is a deranged mentally ill male? It is the male patriarchy and men need to be taught not too kill. A rape allegation is told in the media (allegation, not confirmed) men need to be taught fro ma young age not too rape. Domestic abuse with a male hitting a female, men need to be taught to not hit women. In reality I can pull up cased of women abusing men and women in relationships (this was also done by a college study), women have raped men, women have sexually assaulted or harassed men (I am a victim of it multiple times but I never reported it), and so on. It's on both ends but when a man does it it is used against up.

As for the pay less, I can promise you not one study was done by non-bias researchers to prove it and that it actually started like some rape allegations have, a few people do it and than (when theirs are real) others follow suit when it isn't, than a common instance is used against men as if all women are payed less in office. In reality, one must ask, how many are actually payed significantly less when they do literally EVERYTHING the male does, or the male high school grades (I have heard this used against me but grades in school do not matter one bit) and there are so many variable aspects that we can not take a persons word for it. They can report it and have a study or investigation done showing if it was true and if there is a reason (if true) why said person was paid more... Because I have worked with girls paid more than I. But you never hear this because the modern feminist movement tells you otherwise and many would brand me a misogynist, lacking any form of knowledge on that word and it's meaning.

You hear something like the payment issue, that is fine if it is true and can be dealt with, but a vast number of people lie about it also. It is seen the same as a rape allegation, the women's word is taken as an automatic truth without ever being investigated. Just like rape, which you can find out with that whole college frat house being accused of rape because of Jaquelin story, which was proven to be false. It only was taken real because people are irrational enough to think you should believe something before investigating, and Rolling stones never investigated the case. Her story has been taken apart and reviewed and proven to be absolutely false.

I have such a issue with this mainly because accusing someone of rape literally will injure the mans life. Live as male being accused of rape and you will notice a difference. Lucky me it hasn't happened too me, but I have been harassed by girls at work. Not that it matters, I would make that persons like a literal hell if they ruined my life, getting em fire,d possibly arrested and maybe even disowned by family and removed from college because of it. And what is it? Someone saying I raped them and that is without the case being investigated. Something so horrendous, I think when someone falsely accuses someone that deserves prison time or their own life ruined on equal terms to the one they did it. Those college kids had bricks thrown into their window for something they didn't do. Rape allegations need to be investigated, not automatically believed or disbelieved. I even have known people who falsely accused people. It's disgusting and so is rape. But it also happens to both genders by both genders.

You know where feminist are needed if anything? The Middle East, or even India where they used medical teams to kill women for irrational reasons. America and the rest of the first world nations of the west do not need feminism that are targeting video games, the shirt of a scientist, GTA V in Assuie and so on.

If someone needs equal rights help I jump in the best I can. I do not banner a flag from a branch that I am said branch, I just do it because it needs to be done. I do not advocate religious separation from the government because I am a freethinker or an atheist, I do it because it is the right thing. I stand up for homosexual marriage because it is right, not because I am a gay pride activist.

Yes women have their issues in even the UK and the US, it is minute, but so do men. It is both ways, not one way.

I want equality for all, but when people act like the white man is above women and women are below that they need to be equal to us men, I call hog wash because I can point to things where women have it by far better in areas. Why? Because it is on both sides. Both women and men need their levers pulled to levels where they are equal in ways that is rational.

Take the draft, instead o making women do the draft or taking men out, find which is better and what should be done and what is rational. THAN put them on said level. I haven't slept in a while, I have been busy so if that didn't make sense due to incoherency, than I will try to better explain when I wake up in the morning. Because this coffee is not helping.

Think an equalizer, you have men on top on one issue and women on the bottom, and on another issue they might be equal, maybe one less than the other, maybe not, another men are far below and women on top. Like an equalizer, you bring them to a level where they are equal, but that elves is up for debate what is best for both genders to be equal on. And there are things men are not equal to women on and we have it worse in I could complain about like some extreme feminist, but I do not because it is a minute thing for me that I am more focused on my scientific field than if I can be equal in said part, because it hardly matters too me. Plus I am more mature enough to not complain like a child, I will just bring the issue up.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
How can you be egalitarian yet think it's irrational to want men and women to be equal? Isn't the whole point of egalitarianism for everyone to be equal?

I didn't say it is irrational for men and women to be equal, just women equal too men, just as saying men equal to women. I has a heavy implication in ones mind to make many thing men are on a higher level on everything but a few where women are equal and we need to get women equal on the things they are lower on. In reality, it is both ways, not one.

@ Collin Berend
I'm not entirely certain how fair it is to the discussion to only ever talk about one woman as if her words, her actions and her opinions define an entire movement. Yes, if you find rude people in this world, it can make movements look worse. After all, Rush Limbaugh makes men look awful, but he's not a good example to bring up when it comes to how to treat men.

I understand the data on some things has been disputed (whether rightly or not), but your anecdotal experience isn't actually proof one way or another toward any particular trend. You'll always find someone that has experiences that either go with the majority of data or people that go against it. Experiences do matter, so I'd never say that your experiences don't matter. That'd be wrong and I'm sorry if anyone has ever told you they don't.

However, I'm not sure what reports you're watching where a rape allegation is brought up and men are immediately told they shouldn't rape. I've seen news stories where it's talked about how a woman was brutally raped, beaten and left in a ditch and the news mentioned her casually before immediately moving onto the weather. There was never mention of how men shouldn't rape or how this is the sort of thing that should never happen. It was 'well, this happened' and then 'gosh, the weather is so good for the boy scouts to have a picnic here today'.

I'm also intrigued by your example of mentally ill men shooting up schools. I've never heard of someone blaming patriarchy for it. If anything, it becomes an example of stigma toward the mentally ill instead of a gender issue. Like with Aileen Wuornos where people didn't care about her illness or even really want to discuss on how the mental health system failed her. When it comes to the mentally ill, gender and race definitely play parts into it, but it's also not a good example of how men are put upon. Especially considering the history of the mental health system.

I'm also tired, so I probably missed several of your points, but I'll make my big one now: none of your examples actually show that women shouldn't be made equal to men. Even if you think that men aren't equal to women in some aspects, then you come to an area where you can then go 'women need to be made equal to men and in some cases men need to be made equal to women'. It doesn't in any way invalidate the statement that women need to be made equal to men or the statement that there needs to be equality between the genders.

Also, at the insane risk of coming across as offensive, for someone that spouts about science and the scientific field, you seem to be very interested in assuming things and anecdotal evidence. Neither of those things are very scientific.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
I'm not entirely certain how fair it is to the discussion to only ever talk about one woman as if her words, her actions and her opinions define an entire movement.

You are not fairly sure? Well I didn't do it so you do not need to be sure, as it was never once brought up to say feminism is bad because said women. In fact I used multiple women that are involved to display the irrationality of the modern philosophy, the part that gets put in peoples minds. I already said not all feminist are this way, but the notion of self proclaiming one as a feminist, especially acting like one gender has it worst but the other has nothing wrong that shows them to be oppressed in anyway like the other is false.

Something that you and the other user seemingly failed to understand in my statement.

I dislike the phrase: Making women equal to men

Whereas: Men and women being equal

Is more sound.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend Yes, if you find rude people in this world, it can make movements look worse. After all, Rush Limbaugh makes men look awful, but he's not a good example to bring up when it comes to how to treat men.

No, that is not the same. Comparing a movement to a gender one is born with is not the same. You can say Rush makes republican conservative Christians, but you can not compare Rush making men look bad to a women being used as an example of feminism, especially when nothing of this analogy I have even used. And Rush doesn't make men look bad, that is asininity in comparison. That is not a good analogy and not comparable to the point you are trying too make.

In fact I did not say feminism is bad because Anita Sarkeesin, or any other women, so if I never lumped, I am at a loss of what you are even struggling to imply here in such statements if I never said such things. If you are just rambling on what some people can do and misconceptions, just know I do not care. It is a minute issue in my view and I could careless because to lump a group over said number is also irrational.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend I understand the data on some things has been disputed (whether rightly or not), but your anecdotal experience isn't actually proof one way or another toward any particular trend.

There is no personal experience other than that women are just as bad when it becomes to treatment of the opposite sex as men and saying "Men rape women, woe is us women" is irrational. My experience is evidence as much as any other evidence you would use to support feminism.

Your issue is that I am not saying I have been sexually assaulted by women at my work multiple times, therefor I am right. I could give as much of a care what you thought on such a statement as there is oxygen in the cosmos in the darkest of the dark. I am simply stating what I have gone through, not proving anything. I put my statement in, people ask, I explain. That simply. Was I trying to say feminism is wrong because X, Y and Z therefor this and therefor I am right? No. But any statement on women being raped by men, the number, of that and domestic abuse, what have you, comes from personal experiencing, much of which is not actually gone in and proved for the most part. Many of it is indeed a personal experience used as a testimonial and my experience is as valid as that. Not was it to prove any trend. If I wanted too prove something in here too you in particular, I would with out hesitation. It isn't a difficult thing. But that isn't what I came too do. I answered because I was asked a question.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend You'll always find someone that has experiences that either go with the majority of data or people that go against it. Experiences do matter, so I'd never say that your experiences don't matter. That'd be wrong and I'm sorry if anyone has ever told you they don't.

You could with the rest of the world say it doesn't matter or is false, I wouldn't honestly care. I know it was real and that is all I care to know. You and others denying is is one thing, but that doesn't make it true nor false, only I know the truth on the subject and I only shared as a testimony that it can happen to others. And me telling people I have been stalked by co-workers isn't exactly something I normally would choose to come out with, but if I do and people do not believe me, fine, don't. It wouldn't change the fact of it that I know. But I never came here to prove something too anyone.

So in short, no one has said that, it wouldn't bother me. don't apologize because you are not sorry. You can not be sorry someone said it about me if you have nothing too do with it, only feel bad if anything. And that is fine, I only want people to apologize if they actually are affecting it or are the cause. Otherwise it doesn't matter.

My entire point was that there is no such valid fact women need to be equal to men, just men and women need to both equally be equal. Because they both have oppressions. But a feminist in today's world would be much smarter to focus on places where women need them more then the women here. This is why I have a lot of respect for people like Mala.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend However, I'm not sure what reports you're watching where a rape allegation is brought up and men are immediately told they shouldn't rape.

I said people like Anita, no news anchor/journalist would be brave enough to stoop that low. Their bodies would hang in the street if they did. For one to say something so casually or even just bringing it up would be silly and a death wish, not for their lives, but also jobs. I would be the first to fight that because no intelligent journalist needs to be saying such asinine remarks.

It comes from people who have and are head figures in the movement and 'women study majors'.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend I've seen news stories where it's talked about how a woman was brutally raped, beaten and left in a ditch and the news mentioned her casually before immediately moving onto the weather. There was never mention of how men shouldn't rape or how this is the sort of thing that should never happen. It was 'well, this happened' and then 'gosh, the weather is so good for the boy scouts to have a picnic here today'.

I have also seen stories where shootings happen and are talked just as casually. It's not a rape thing, it is "We have seen this bull crap so much, it isn't shocking'. I will personally tell you,when that high school shooting in Portland, Oregon happened down the road from me, I didn't flinch, I didn't care. Not because I have no heart, but because nothing is left too do, this is a common thing happening in America now. I am so used to these shootings I have nothing more too say other than 'Well... Time to pack up and leave.'

While it is a sad thing, there is nothing left I can do but vote and hope the American public become competent enough to handle this issue. Because Congress and the President and the Supreme Cort have failed us too many times. Hell, Congress and Obama can never get much done together because Obama might veto their ideas or they will simply not vote, not vote it no, but not vote on issues he wants. Not that I would ever trust a complete republican conservative house that is coming with people like Mitch McConnell.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend I'm also intrigued by your example of mentally ill men shooting up schools. I've never heard of someone blaming patriarchy for it.

I again point too where I spoke of this, feminist, mainly the extremist that poise the world with such toxic views. I normally have no issues with feminist as I would with American Atheist or Gay Pride or whatever. The feminist attack on Gamergate, leave the games and gamers alone. for the 'threats' well, that is all they are. Threats. Not something to truly get worked up about. Which I will explain later in a blog/article. So if you question that, I'll point you too that when it is published. So I can kill two birds with one stone.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend If anything, it becomes an example of stigma toward the mentally ill instead of a gender issue. Like with Aileen Wuornos where people didn't care about her illness or even really want to discuss on how the mental health system failed her. When it comes to the mentally ill, gender and race definitely play parts into it, but it's also not a good example of how men are put upon. Especially considering the history of the mental health system.

It is a good enough example on how the extreme side of feminism attacks men, yes it is. It is not saying "This happens to men therefor this!" No, if I wanted to show you how man are oppresses just as women are oppressed in some areas, that would not even be close too it. It is just the radical militant notion one has as would with religious extremist declaring soldiers and gays die because God hates them. That would be me using to show religions poison everything I would use something that can be related outside the militant extremist view.

As for the rest, yea, it is pretty crazy.. I'd actually link you the messages if I could, but most of her post drive from Twitter. And as you might guess... Yea, it's long gone in the mass of new tweets.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend I'm also tired, so I probably missed several of your points, but I'll make my big one now: none of your examples actually show that women shouldn't be made equal to men. Even if you think that men aren't equal to women in some aspects, then you come to an area where you can then go 'women need to be made equal to men and in some cases men need to be made equal to women'. It doesn't in any way invalidate the statement that women need to be made equal to men or the statement that there needs to be equality between the genders.

Also, at the insane risk of coming across as offensive, for someone that spouts about science and the scientific field, you seem to be very interested in assuming things and anecdotal evidence. Neither of those things are very scientific.

Evidence to show feminism is wrong isn't science, this isn't a science related issue nor am I trying to prove something. You ask me why planets form as the way they do and not flat disk, I can explain that, I can explain traces of Dark Matter outside simple gravitational observations, etc. But to 'prove' men (which I have not even begun because that isn't my mission) to be oppressed in areas like women is not a scientific thing. Just like philosophy and politics are not science.

You can not say "I noticed this" and then tell me I did not of the things in correlation to my post when it would than be obvious I wasn't trying to prove anything, merely explaining because someone asked me a question, just as I answered you when you asked about the equality thing above. Does this make sense?

Also, I haven't assumed anything in this thread regarding anything. What I did (this isn't a science related area....) was explain I do not like said thing. When asked I explain because A, B and C and this is the type pf philosophy it holds. Nothing I said was based on assumptions because I never lumped, only explained what I have seen and researched. This isn't science.

I want to say you have done the assuming, but I will rather think you missed my points or misread them because you said you are tired. Like with the lumping, not even sure where you got that from nor the notion of comparing gender with Rush as some analogy to explaining how feminism has extreme militants who act in said way. Those are not the reasons I do not like feminism, why I do not like feminism was explained already. It has nothing to do with the way people present themselves, but a mind set I came too myself.

@ Collin Berend

Collin Berend:

You are not fairly sure? Well I didn't do it so you do not need to be sure, as it was never once brought up to say feminism is bad because said women. In fact I used multiple women that are involved to display the irrationality of the modern philosophy, the part that gets put in peoples minds. I already said not all feminist are this way, but the notion of self proclaiming one as a feminist, especially acting like one gender has it worst but the other has nothing wrong that shows them to be oppressed in anyway like the other is false.

The only name I see listed in your entire post is Anita S. Maybe I missed the other women you didn't actually specifically name, and I apologize if that happened. Although I will say there is no 'not fairly sure', and it's just that the last sentence in this part I quoted just makes no sense. It's incredibly odd wording. Are you trying to say that anyone trying to self-proclaim as a feminist and saying one gender has it worse than the other is always false?

Collin Berend:

No, that is not the same. Comparing a movement to a gender one is born with is not the same. You can say Rush makes republican conservative Christians, but you can not compare Rush making men look bad to a women being used as an example of feminism, especially when nothing of this analogy I have even used. And Rush doesn't make men look bad, that is asininity in comparison. That is not a good analogy and not comparable to the point you are trying too make.

Really? You posted specifically the opinions of one feminist as if it reflects all feminists, yet my bringing up Rush Limbaugh is out of line? I never said he was an example of feminism. I said he was showing that you can always take the worst of any group and make them look bad. It is an appropriate analogy. If Rush Limbaugh doesn't make men look bad then Anita Sarkeesin doesn't make feminists look bad just because of her views since it's not representative. I mean, as a man, do you honestly believe that women want to be sexually harassed? Because Rush Limbaugh thinks they do.

Collin Berend:

n fact I did not say feminism is bad because Anita Sarkeesin, or any other women, so if I never lumped, I am at a loss of what you are even struggling to imply here in such statements if I never said such things. If you are just rambling on what some people can do and misconceptions, just know I do not care. It is a minute issue in my view and I could careless because to lump a group over said number is also irrational.

Then why use her quotes to define an entire movement? Also, please never identify anything I say as 'rambling on'. Also, if it's a minute issue then why write 1000+ word responses to every single person that posts in a feminism thread in a forum? This is literally a feminism forum. And you could care less to lump a group over said number is also irrational? What are you talking about?

Collin Berend:

There is no personal experience other than that women are just as bad when it becomes to treatment of the opposite sex as men and saying "Men rape women, woe is us women" is irrational. My experience is evidence as much as any other evidence you would use to support feminism.

I am talking about actual data. My personal experience is not actually evidence. Anecdotal evidence helps give things context, but it's not evidence, scientifically speaking. Women talking about rape is not why it's an issue. Also, please, if you're going to have an actual discussion? Refrain from belittling rape victims by calling it 'woe is us women'. There is actual data to show that females are more likely to be sexually assaulted then men and they are almost always sexually assaulted by men. Those numbers are what make it a gender issue.

Collin Berend:

Your issue is that I am not saying I have been sexually assaulted by women at my work multiple times, therefor I am right. I could give as much of a care what you thought on such a statement as there is oxygen in the cosmos in the darkest of the dark. I am simply stating what I have gone through, not proving anything. I put my statement in, people ask, I explain. That simply. Was I trying to say feminism is wrong because X, Y and Z therefor this and therefor I am right? No. But any statement on women being raped by men, the number, of that and domestic abuse, what have you, comes from personal experiencing, much of which is not actually gone in and proved for the most part. Many of it is indeed a personal experience used as a testimonial and my experience is as valid as that. Not was it to prove any trend. If I wanted too prove something in here too you in particular, I would with out hesitation. It isn't a difficult thing. But that isn't what I came too do. I answered because I was asked a question.

That first sentence makes no sense. What does that sentence even mean? The numbers we're talking about aren't just self-identified data. I am talking about convictions as well. That's not just 'personal experience'. That's beyond a reasonable doubt standard. You are talking in circles and belittling people in this conversation. What do you exactly qualify as data and evidence if multiple proven instances collected into an area isn't actually enough for you? I mean, I just want to know what exactly you're expecting when it comes to documentation of crime. I'm asking this as someone with a degree in criminology. I am not some random citizen that has no idea what they're talking about. I have looked at the data and the laws.

Collin Berend:

Evidence to show feminism is wrong isn't science, this isn't a science related issue nor am I trying to prove something. You ask me why planets form as the way they do and not flat disk, I can explain that, I can explain traces of Dark Matter outside simple gravitational observations, etc. But to 'prove' men (which I have not even begun because that isn't my mission) to be oppressed in areas like women is not a scientific thing. Just like philosophy and politics are not science.

You're the one that specifically stated that you could show how men are oppressed like women. The burden of proof is therefore on you. I wasn't the one to introduce it to the conversation. You were.

Collin Berend:

You can not say "I noticed this" and then tell me I did not of the things in correlation to my post when it would than be obvious I wasn't trying to prove anything, merely explaining because someone asked me a question, just as I answered you when you asked about the equality thing above.

Where did I say 'I noticed this'?

Collin Berend:

Also, I haven't assumed anything in this thread regarding anything. What I did (this isn't a science related area....) was explain I do not like said thing. When asked I explain because A, B and C and this is the type pf philosophy it holds. Nothing I said was based on assumptions because I never lumped, only explained what I have seen and researched. This isn't science.

You responded with A, B, and C and then I disagreed with those things, because it's a discussion. I honestly have no idea if you've researched and I can't possibly know if you did or not. However, I do know that you didn't really talk about research. In fact, your most frequent argument is that this isn't science. That none of this is science.

Collin Berend:

Those are not the reasons I do not like feminism, why I do not like feminism was explained already. It has nothing to do with the way people present themselves, but a mind set I came too myself.

I am going to say this one more time and then no other. The analogy does work. Every single group has extreme people in it where you can take them and apply their views to the entire group. I am talking about the use of one person to generalize their values onto an entire group. Fred Phelps isn't representative of Christianity. Rush Limbaugh isn't representative of men. Okay, fair enough, you came to the conclusion that you don't agree with feminism on your own. However, if it really has nothing to do with the way people present themselves? Then why bring up 'militant' feminists at all? I mean, the way they present themselves has nothing to do with how you chose to believe feminism is bad, so why bring them up? Do you see the contradiction in that argument?

@ Collin Berend
I am a woman falsely accused of rape. I still do not believe that means that 2% of allegations being false is more important than 96% of rapists never spending a day in court. Being raped ruins your life, too. And it happens way more fucking often.

Women do not have the power to oppress men. Men have oppressed themselves successfully, however.

@ CallusedSilk

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend

The only name I see listed in your entire post is Anita S. Maybe I missed the other women you didn't actually specifically name, and I apologize if that happened. Although I will say there is no 'not fairly sure', and it's just that the last sentence in this part I quoted just makes no sense. It's incredibly odd wording. Are you trying to say that anyone trying to self-proclaim as a feminist and saying one gender has it worse than the other is always false?

Then you didn't actually read all of my post. I brought up Jaclyn (No idea if I am spelling her name right) , the one who accused the college frat house of gang rapping her. But even if you see one name, if you correctly read, you will see I am not aligning everything in ym post under Anita's name, rather an example, because well, she is a well known name.

The last sentences makes sense in my eyes. I am saying that using such a banner name and acting like only women are oppressed and men are not is irrational. I hope that makes more sense.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
Really? You posted specifically the opinions of one feminist as if it reflects all feminists, yet my bringing up Rush Limbaugh is out of line? I never said he was an example of feminism. I said he was showing that you can always take the worst of any group and make them look bad. It is an appropriate analogy. If Rush Limbaugh doesn't make men look bad then Anita Sarkeesin doesn't make feminists look bad just because of her views since it's not representative. I mean, as a man, do you honestly believe that women want to be sexually harassed? Because Rush Limbaugh thinks they do.

Me using Anita is not me at all using "Anita is a militant, therefor I hate feminist and all feminist are this way!"

But not only is that why your analogy is such a fallacy, but because a movement brand name is not the same of a gender one can not help being. Feminism is a distinct movement, comparing Rush to all men are bad is like saying Joseph Stalin proves atheist are bad when anyone rationally thinking will know why that does not work. As for feminism, unlike Atheism and Gender classification (or use race if you want) people band together under a philosophy they have in their mind, like "Let us work to make the equity for all genders". That is more lump-able than men. As I said, you can us Rush as an example of lumping Republican Conservatives, and that would be a good analogy, because it's an ideology/philosophy people use the name to show their view side.

I know what you are saying, and I agree, but I am saying the analogy doesn't work. that is why I said it would make more sense if you used Rush this way: "Using Anita to say feminism is bad is like saying Rush is why Republicans are bad".

You can choose to be a republican or a feminist, it's a branch name and that is all it is. It is a battle horn and a banner flag. People are not called feminist because they say they believe in equality, they say you are a feminist if you meet the definition or you bellow "I am a feminist".

The issue with people like Anita is she is, in a sense, brainwashing and ruining many male lives, namely with her pseudo march on games and gamers. Trying to even ban games like GTA V because the game allows you to kill a hooker for you money. It is actually representative, only for the extremist side though. Like I already said, not all women or feminist are this way. I am dating a feminist. I have been fairly clear on this, and to be frank you have missed quite a few points like that to which I have stated. It's not a big deal though.

But no, I never specifically said anything remotely connected that there is Anita and therefor this and that. I used her to explain some of the outlandish ideologies the philosophy of feminism brings. It can stem one notion and it still follows to the philosophy. I said people LIKE Anita. Meaning that the banner to which this thread is about allows nut cased to grow. Just as you have Muslims who are perfectly fine, the philosophy allows people like ISIS, or the Middle Age version of the Catholic Church for Christianity. Not ones, nor will you be successful in finding me lumping feminist or feminism being bad because Anita, rather that it spores such views, and worst of all people like that have audiences who do not think and see how irrational their views are.

AS I stated, I find making women equal to men irrational, not men and women being equal, to which how and what I mean by this was already explained. Anita is an example and was used as such of how the banner name allows things too happen, but this does not mean all, as I said and nothing I said even remotely supports your claiming me doing what you think I was.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
Then why use her quotes to define an entire movement? Also, please never identify anything I say as 'rambling on'. Also, if it's a minute issue then why write 1000+ word responses to every single person that posts in a feminism thread in a forum? This is literally a feminism forum. And you could care less to lump a group over said number is also irrational? What are you talking about?

I didn't. You used my post to think I did. I never ones said feminism is bad, here is why. Before I even went into feminism in regards to people like Anita, I explained a small bit why I do not like the name. Not once did I use her quotes to justify an entire movement, not once.

I can and I will, because rambling on isn't a bad thing. You are not even reading my post, you are just cherry picking words or statements. Because you did, in the begging, bring things up that had no coloration to what I said,m be it misread or whatever the case, I said that if you ARE. Meaning, if you are just bringing that stuff up that is completely irrelevant to what I said. Which, in short is and would be you rambling on. I am not goign to not use an idiom like that because someone doesn't like that. If the phrase fits than I will use it. I didn't say you did, I do not know if you did because you can tell I was confused by what you were even bringing up, it had no relation to what I was saying. If what you do is 'rambling on', than tagging it as so is justifiable.

What are you talking about? I wrote one +1000 word reply to a person who asked, because I was going into detail, something I do, when I write, as a bad habit and rather... Curse if you will. I never did it too you when you first asked me nor did I even do it to ever other person. In fact that was my first response. Where are you pulling that notion from? That is false on ever level. I am noticing you are not completely comprehending what I have typed out, like the whole "I notice you bring up science and scientific field yet what you do is not scientific." On things, that first off all are not even science to begin with, but not actually understanding what I even said. You just saw the word science and replied too it without comprehending what the entire statement was.

For example, on your last part on the second to last post, you brought up science. If you go back you will see I am saying that I care not about events like "Oh I need to sign up for the draft, that is sexist!" (I wouldn't anyways) but I wouldn't care about fighting something as small as that because I find the advancement of my self and my intellect and knowledge and science more important in my life THAN complaining about something so stupid. People who find an issue will do that, the Men's Right will do that as the feminist do their thing. People will handle the issues, I could not care about signing up for the draft. THAT is where I brought up science. Just as I would or anyone else, say that college is more important to me than fighting abortion laws. So your whole statement on even bringing up what I said was false and misunderstood. You didn't even understand why it was brought up. I only brought it up to say that I have other things in my life more important than protesting on the street. I wont protest against cops or with cops as some are doing because of the things in my life I find far more important.

To the number lumping you seem to not understand.

"It is a minute issue in my view and I could careless because to lump a group over said number is also irrational."

That makes plenty of sense, not hard to understand. I am saying that I could careless about one or five people that I would even attempt to say it equals all. I was addressing you assuming I assumed and or lumped when I didn't.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend

I am talking about actual data. My personal experience is not actually evidence. Anecdotal evidence helps give things context, but it's not evidence, scientifically speaking. Women talking about rape is not why it's an issue. Also, please, if you're going to have an actual discussion? Refrain from belittling rape victims by calling it 'woe is us women'. There is actual data to show that females are more likely to be sexually assaulted then men and they are almost always sexually assaulted by men. Those numbers are what make it a gender issue.

Well this isn't really science anyways. So bringing up personal experience in here in regards to being rapes or assaulted is not the same as bringing up personal experience in a scientific discussion on why Ghost are real or likely false. Saying it is would be like saying mathematics is English. This is more of a political, civil rights and equality, philosophical issue, not a scientific one.

I know personal experience is not evidence to say something is real, I know when I said something I have the burden of proof. But I was explaining, I was not trying too prove, I had no need too. Someone asked me a question and I explained. Nothing in here and no one as of yet asked me to prove something. You can not come up to someone when they are explaining their few when asked and say "That isn't evidence you need to prove it with evidence scientifically!" When I have to first be asked. If I said you guys are wrong because of this and that, then that is one thing. But I said I find said ting irrational, like you, it came off confusing until I explained it in a reply. Nothing here was stated to say I am right and you are wrong, I only explained my view.

As I said, I CAN provide examples. This is a discussion and I was asked a question, I am not debating to prove you or anyone wrong. At least not yet, but likely I wouldn't do it because I do not think it is worth my time to argue on such a minute issue in my life. And by minute I mean it is not a huge priority for me to debate such a topic vs "IS GMO bad or Good?" I'll leave that too you and anyone else wanting to have such a talk.

Belittling? I didn't belittle any rape victim. If you read my post I am saying and talking about the one where you get women (again, the irrational and or extremist) who get raped or claim they are or have or use the argument when get raped and not bring men up and say and use that as an excuse why women are so oppressed. And honestly, I will not take statistical numbers on rape and who gets raped because you get women and men who never come forward and it becomes an assumption from what we can get. There are plenty of men who get rapped by both genders as there are women and both genders do not all come forward. This is a common knowledge we should all know and accept. This is why when someone presents said statistics on who gets rapped in numbers, I do not take it because I question it as I explained, you have people who do not all come out. I take it as information, but I also give little credit to it.

I am not belittle rape victims, if anything, which I am not, I would belittling or showing the irrational view of people who argue "We get raped, women have and get raped, you should feel bad for us because women are lower than men!" It the extremest who use anything they can to try to topple things without doing it rationally. This is not too the victims, it is to people who will hear women get rapped more and march out yelling at men, men who want equality, and yell how they are wrong and they should feel bad for women. NOT all victims, not even close.

So to recap, it is too the extremist. People who use the "Women are paid less" based off only a few people who actually got that and use it to say ALL women are paid less and men are money hogs. Those type of people.

A study also shows when men are assaulted sexually, it is mostly by women. You know what I take of that? "It's a number to go by, I take it with a grain of salt." And let us be frank, rape and sexual abuse in any of the sense is bad and it happens to all genders by all genders and is something that needs to be looked at equally, not one sided. The article will be below.

To your statement, "Women are more likely to be assaulted than men" that does not mean it is like women 98% and men the remaining 2%. That could be 42 men and 58% women, showing that it is, regardless if women have it more, men are just as in need. Does it even matter who gets it more if both genders get it? Thinking about this I would personally say no. I rather help both men and women rather than just men or just women.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend

That first sentence makes no sense. What does that sentence even mean? The numbers we're talking about aren't just self-identified data. I am talking about convictions as well. That's not just 'personal experience'. That's beyond a reasonable doubt standard. You are talking in circles and belittling people in this conversation. What do you exactly qualify as data and evidence if multiple proven instances collected into an area isn't actually enough for you? I mean, I just want to know what exactly you're expecting when it comes to documentation of crime. I'm asking this as someone with a degree in criminology. I am not some random citizen that has no idea what they're talking about. I have looked at the data and the laws.

Oh, I do apologize. I thought it came out more clear. What I was saying is: I am not saying "Blah blah blah, therefor I am right" I am saying, blah blah blah.

I am not belittling anyone, that is a false accusation. I have not ones made something or someone seem unimportant except when it came to how I live my life. As in I would not do said thing because I have more important things. I am also not running circles around, I am explaining my view and defending and explaining when confronted. I do not appreciate being told I am doing something when I have not. Multiple times you have done this and multiple times you have been wrong.

What do I classify as evidence? Evidence is never something that is true, it is something to support your view. You have have evidence, but that does not mean you are right. Ken Ham has evidence he is right at the Creationist Museum, but that isn't a fact, it is simple evidence. A statistic is evidence, but not sound. I take it with a grain of salt because ti can be misleading and false based when it was done, the definition of it at that time and how ti was conducted. I wont take in a statistic about how many pigs learn to fly and say "Yep, that must mean it is true." That isn't me, sorry.

I do not take much of any document of crime in rape very much because it is normally a twp person issue. A she said he said problem that it becomes difficult to deal with. Some that is. Unless there are DNA test and recordings, you know, things that basically seal the deal, I leave it open to scrutiny. And even than I do not take what is sound proof and say this is it and this is so, because some things can not completely be proven true or false and something are never even reported.

Take for example, if a study showed Black people do more crime than white people by 50% more, I would look at it and say "OK, we have something to go by, but maybe it is something else? Living conditions, area of raise, type of parents, education, unreported crimes, money involved (to get the crime to be more successful) and so on. So in short I will take something as "We got something to go by" but I still question it. Criminal science isn't my field and something I do not know much about, you will so I will ask you, if I gave you a report that showed statistics based on available and applicable cases solved 100%, would you say, if it showed "Men raped by both genders, 20% women 80%" that is true and use it against people or would you want to conduct a study to make sure it is sound and would you question it? With your field and knowledge, what would you do? I truly want to know this.

Maybe you would or would not, but I can not, my brain does not allow that, to see that and not question it. Hell, I question the Big Bang and if time was created at the blast (as Dr. Hawkins will tell you), not because I lack knowledge, but because I think it is sufficient enough to be questioned. I find questioning fun and enlightening.It's not what you know but the questions you ask. I hope that makes sense because likely I am rambling on about nothing at this point. If so I do apologize.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
You're the one that specifically stated that you could show how men are oppressed like women. The burden of proof is therefore on you.

I know, I am fully aware I said it, I in fact also said it to remind you or someone else that I would and or could. Difference is, as I stated, I have not been asked. I will ask you, do you want me to show you where men can and have been oppressed just as women can and have in some areas?

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
Where did I say 'I noticed this'?

It's a paraphrase.

You pointed out, basically noticing, I brought up the word science. And to show you, let me show you what I said when I said it.

Collin Berend:

And there are things men are not equal to women on and we have it worse in I could complain about like some extreme feminist, but I do not because it is a minute thing for me that I am more focused on my scientific field than if I can be equal in said part, because it hardly matters too me.

Here is where you got it. What I am saying is that there are issues men have it bad in compared to women in said area. I then proceed to state that I could indeed complain like some feminist, but I do not. Why is that? Well as you read on you will see that it is minute too me. Why? Because I rather focus on my life, my love life, my schooling (I will in my life have more than 10 years worth of schooling, so it's important too me), science and studying (outside of college also) reading my books to increase my knowledge and to broaden my horizon. So, as you can see where you choose to almost cherry pick, but I want to think it was misread due to being tired, because you said you were, that I did not simply brag "Oh I am in science!", I was saying that I rather focus on science vs civil rights unless it becomes a HUGE issue. Like Texans are murdering homosexuals because their legion allows it. Then I might do something about it. Think of my as Isaac Newton. Newton was a very reclusive person, focusing on studying the world around him, inventing and discovering things that helped shape the world we now live in. He didn't quarrel in affairs that was less important too him in his mind. Not because he didn't care, but he found science and alchemy and theology much more important. This here is what I was saying.

When you chose to tell me how I was not acting scientific because I assumed and used personal experience, it was harsh and you do not want too know what my initial thought was. Maybe I took it wrong, but it was a very odd thing to say when non of this is science related. I would not expect you to tell a Mathematical person that they, in talking about History or English, that for someone who works in math, they sure like to not use numbers and calculations. That is how it came off too me and I was dumbfounded by your statement. But I know you are not a rude person or an idiot (I do not think there really are any on this site anyways), so I was not fully sure what you meant, but I will say it made no sense too me personally. Hopefully here you now know what I meant when I stated science.

And no, I do not consider criminal study a science nor feminism, hence why I was not sure what you meant. I see it more as a philosophical and political issue. If this came to why someone rapes or abuses or whatever, that is one thing. Just like when it came to homosexuality studies explaining that it was natural and it can be explained biological and so on, that is one thing.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
You responded with A, B, and C and then I disagreed with those things, because it's a discussion. I honestly have no idea if you've researched and I can't possibly know if you did or not. However, I do know that you didn't really talk about research. In fact, your most frequent argument is that this isn't science. That none of this is science.

Yea, it is a discussion.

As for talking about it, I did a bit. I brought up a study was done on gender abuse in the UK.

Most of my argument? Because you brought it up. You brought the whole notion up because, as above, I said I prefer this over worrying too much about that.

Remember?

You said: "Also, at the insane risk of coming across as offensive, for someone that spouts about science and the scientific field, you seem to be very interested in assuming things and anecdotal evidence. Neither of those things are very scientific. "

You brought this up, my reply to that was because this discussion is not a scientific discussion. Nothing I stated was related too science. You want me to just sit there and take that or something? Not sure what you are even doing at this point.

CallusedSilk:

@ Collin Berend
I am going to say this one more time and then no other. The analogy does work. Every single group has extreme people in it where you can take them and apply their views to the entire group. I am talking about the use of one person to generalize their values onto an entire group. Fred Phelps isn't representative of Christianity. Rush Limbaugh isn't representative of men. Okay, fair enough, you came to the conclusion that you don't agree with feminism on your own. However, if it really has nothing to do with the way people present themselves? Then why bring up 'militant' feminists at all? I mean, the way they present themselves has nothing to do with how you chose to believe feminism is bad, so why bring them up? Do you see the contradiction there?

No it doesn't. And you can say it "one more time", as if I said it didn't since you last said it was. Genders =/= philosophy and movements.

Actually Phelps is a representation of Christianity, he is indeed a representation of the religion, not the followers.

Rush is not equal to men being lumped because what he does it about politics and philosophy. What you said is like comparing Rush to all male scientist. Comparing an entire gender to a movement does not work. I said it would with the political party though.

I explained why I do not agree with it in a short amount, I than went on to list what it allows. I already stated a while ago it does not relate to all feminist or women.

No, there is no contradiction there, I disagree there being one.

@ dru is beautiful.

dru is beautiful.:

@ Collin Berend
I am a woman falsely accused of rape. I still do not believe that means that 2% of allegations being false is more important than 96% of rapists never spending a day in court. Being raped ruins your life, too. And it happens way more fucking often.

Women do not have the power to oppress men. Men have oppressed themselves successfully, however.

Where are you drawing numbers of 2% being false and that 96% is because it becomes a he said she said. When you have just one voice over the other, what do you expect? f you threw them in jail and all, that would apply to ever single falsely accused. Which I do not agree with that number.

Yea, I know being raped ruins you life. So because rape ruins lives we should automatically throw everyone accused in jail? No, that is crazy.

What, rape happens more then being accused? What numbers are you drawing on? We do not have anything showing the reality because we never really will.

What? Women do not have the power to oppress men? I would have to respectfully disagree say so implies women have no power. Let us say you are a girl, IDK, and you want to. Go into politics. Bam, from there you can start changing things. Women can change because your gender does not mean you can not change laws or how things work in America.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html

I refuse to keep talking to someone who's belittling and condescending. You also need to stop attacking feminists and I still don't see why you choose to be so abusive and hateful in a feminism thread.

That being said, I wish you all the luck in the world. Have a nice day.

I'm not being condescending nor am I belittling anyone. I already explained that. All you are doing is pulling false notions out of a vacuum.

I am not goign to stop doing anything because I am not even attacking feminist. You come too me about lumping and grouping when I already explained what I said. All you are doing is attacking me with lumps, I haven't attacked feminist only using extremist to explain how things can be, i didn't attack anyone and you need to stop lying.

Abusive and hateful? I am not even being that, again you are lying out of your mouth to put it politely. What, because I say I disagree with the notion of feminist therefor I must be abusive and attacking?