(January 31, 2014 at 9:41 pm)futilethewinds Wrote:

(January 31, 2014 at 9:33 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: Do not get me wrong, do not support the oppression of any group because of their physicality be it men, women, blacks, whites, Latinos etc. However I am skeptical when I hear people say feminism is campaigning for equality, as they don't seem to ever campaign for issues that face men such ad birth control. However I'm perfectly okay with the fact that feminists fight for the rights of women, but fighting for the rights of women is not always fighting for equality. And I'm not just referring to the misandry in radical feminism, but also the rampant conspiracy theories and the common belief that women that disagree with them are brainwashed.

The patriarchy is real, and society does train women and men to think in certain way about gender roles and such. I wouldn't call it brainwashing per se, though. The patriarchy isn't really even about sex/gender but about class. Men are the privileged class, and women are the oppressed. This is why women tend to have lower SES (socioeconomic status) than men all over the world. And the quickest way to combat poverty is to focus on the education of women and give them reproductive options (namely, birth control) and MAKE SURE THEY USE IT.

Now this is where I get skeptical, is it not misandrist to make a baseless claim that a group of men are seeking to put down women becausevthey are, also how can you claim femonsm is about equality and then say that innorder to improve society women needs rights that no men have

(January 31, 2014 at 10:10 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: Now this is where I get skeptical, is it not misandrist to make a baseless claim that a group of men are seeking to put down women becausevthey are, also how can you claim femonsm is about equality and then say that innorder to improve society women needs rights that no men have

What are you talking about? Men have birth control options as well as women. The most affordable being condoms. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-...-22600.htm

(January 31, 2014 at 10:10 pm)futilethewinds Wrote:

(January 31, 2014 at 10:01 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Well, it really doesn't matter what I think of communism, that's not the issue. I merely point out to the similarities in terms of mentality.
As you see, both ideologies start out by proclaiming a side as the victim, and the other as the oppressor. If you're not the victim, you must be the oppressor.

Yup. What Freud identified as the master/slave dynamic and Marx called the bourgeoisie and the proletariat is plenty much the nature of classism, which is prevalent in our kind of culture, which inherently is less egalitarian than say, a hunter-gatherer culture.

Deductive reasoning, I'd say. Holds no relation to reality, nor anything relating to evolved social mechanics. Especially in the case for feminism.
Throughout the ages, both men and women have made their respective sacrifices. Claiming women to be the all out victims and the men as the oppressors is only befitting the mentality of the victim-minded feminists.

(January 31, 2014 at 10:17 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Deductive reasoning, I'd say. Holds no relation to reality, nor anything relating to evolved social mechanics. Especially in the case for feminism.
Throughout the ages, both men and women have made their respective sacrifices. Claiming women to be the all out victims and the men as the oppressors is only befitting the mentality of the victim-minded feminists.

Actually, everything I said was academic fact which you would know if you ever took a cultural anthropology class, a gender studies class, a philosophy class, or something similar. If you can't deal with that, whatever, fuck you very much.

(January 31, 2014 at 10:12 pm)futilethewinds Wrote:

(January 31, 2014 at 10:10 pm)Lemonvariable72 Wrote: Now this is where I get skeptical, is it not misandrist to make a baseless claim that a group of men are seeking to put down women becausevthey are, also how can you claim femonsm is about equality and then say that innorder to improve society women needs rights that no men have

What are you talking about? Men have birth control options as well as women. The most affordable being condoms. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-...-22600.htm

Women still get more choices. There are more birth control options for women than there are for men, most of those options for women involve something you do long before the sex act so you don't have to worry about getting caught unprepared and the options can certainly be less expensive than condoms (although, if you get a gay friend or two, I'm sure they can go into a gay district and find condoms all over the place there for free).

Then, after sex happens, if she gets pregnant, the woman still has choices; and she should. She can keep the baby, she can put it up for adoption or she can get an abortion. What choices does the man have? He can generally choose whether he's going to see the baby, but if she wants child support, there's no out for him, whether he can afford it or not. And there hasn't been a whole lot of push for men to have a right to choose, especially not from the feminist front.

And, it seems to me, if we're going to fight for a womans right to choose, and we should, then isn't it only fair for us to fight for a mans right to choose as well?

(January 31, 2014 at 10:23 pm)futilethewinds Wrote:

(January 31, 2014 at 10:17 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: Deductive reasoning, I'd say. Holds no relation to reality, nor anything relating to evolved social mechanics. Especially in the case for feminism.
Throughout the ages, both men and women have made their respective sacrifices. Claiming women to be the all out victims and the men as the oppressors is only befitting the mentality of the victim-minded feminists.

Actually, everything I said was academic fact which you would know if you ever took a cultural anthropology class, a gender studies class, a philosophy class, or something similar. If you can't deal with that, whatever, fuck you very much.

Academic facts do not determine victims.

(January 31, 2014 at 10:28 pm)TaraJo Wrote: Women still get more choices. There are more birth control options for women than there are for men, most of those options for women involve something you do long before the sex act so you don't have to worry about getting caught unprepared and the options can certainly be less expensive than condoms (although, if you get a gay friend or two, I'm sure they can go into a gay district and find condoms all over the place there for free).

Then, after sex happens, if she gets pregnant, the woman still has choices; and she should. She can keep the baby, she can put it up for adoption or she can get an abortion. What choices does the man have? He can generally choose whether he's going to see the baby, but if she wants child support, there's no out for him, whether he can afford it or not. And there hasn't been a whole lot of push for men to have a right to choose, especially not from the feminist front.

And, it seems to me, if we're going to fight for a womans right to choose, and we should, then isn't it only fair for us to fight for a mans right to choose as well?

Men do choose what to do with their bodies. They choose whether to have sex and whether to use a condom. If a woman gets pregnant, why the hell should a man have anything to say about it? His only contribution was his sperm meeting an egg, which takes seconds. The woman is the one who is burdened with a parasite for nine months. That's why the question of whether or not to have an abortion is ultimately up to her.

Quote:Then, after sex happens, if she gets pregnant, the woman still has choices; and she should. She can keep the baby, she can put it up for adoption or she can get an abortion. What choices does the man have? He can generally choose whether he's going to see the baby, but if she wants child support, there's no out for him, whether he can afford it or not. And there hasn't been a whole lot of push for men to have a right to choose, especially not from the feminist front.

These are all ills that the modern world has produced. The old world had already a good solution to all of these. Sex would happen in marriage, and the child that is born would be born into a family, where both parties had accepted the responsibility of having a child beforehand, no one would have to face such dilemmas.

The normalization of out-of wedlock relations have resulted in these things. They made life for both sexes much more complex than it was before.

(January 31, 2014 at 10:33 pm)futilethewinds Wrote: Men do choose what to do with their bodies. They choose whether to have sex and whether to use a condom.

What if the same claim were made about women? That women can choose wheter to have sex and whether to use birth control and, therefore, don't need abortion rights? Would you agree with that assessment? Why or why not?

Quote: If a woman gets pregnant, why the hell should a man have anything to say about it? His only contribution was his sperm meeting an egg, which takes seconds. The woman is the one who is burdened with a parasite for nine months. That's why the question of whether or not to have an abortion is ultimately up to her.

Have you ever dealt with family courts? I have. He shouldn't be able to tell her she has to have an abortion, but he should be able to decide whether or not he wants to be involved in the childs life. Instead, family courts find him and force him to pay child support for the next 18 years, whther he wants to or not.

(January 31, 2014 at 10:39 pm)kılıç_mehmet Wrote: These are all ills that the modern world has produced. The old world had already a good solution to all of these. Sex would happen in marriage, and the child that is born would be born into a family, where both parties had accepted the responsibility of having a child beforehand, no one would have to face such dilemmas.

The normalization of out-of wedlock relations have resulted in these things. They made life for both sexes much more complex than it was before.

Thank Gaia for sex out of wedlock, no one should have to buy the cow without tasting its milk.