Why so many "anti-feminists" in the atheist community?

[Esquilax]

"If someone has it worse, your problems cease to exist." That is not what i said at all. I am not denying  that women are not raped or treated badly in first world countries, I am was just making the point that these feminists (or at least the once i have been exposed to) are more interested in a war on language and being polictically correct than talking about ACTUAL opression of women. And for the record, men are actually raped far more than women. Why isn't anyone talking about that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender http://www.amren.com/news/2013/10/more-m...ts-reveal/

For one, I don't see anybody, feminist or not, asserting that rape of anybody, or oppression of foreign women, is a good thing, so it's an irrelevant quibble you're making here. It's like... do you see an organization attempting to cure skin cancer, and then get mad at them because they're not trying to cure colon cancer? Or are you able to recognize, in every other part of your life, that groups of people are able to care about more than one thing at a time, and that a focus on one issue does not indicate a lack of care about others, nor must we only focus on the worst problems first?

We're all able to recognize the value of specialization and focus, why the fuck do we always have people scrabbling to dismiss the importance of that when it comes to feminism?

[The Valkyrie]

I'm all for necromancy but wtf is the point in quoting the OP and not saying anything?

Certain things rising when people see you is NOT necromancy, Losty.

It's a natural bodily reaction in people to your presence...

[IanHulett]

If you are for equal rights and equality, you're a feminist. That's all it really takes to be one. There are extremist in all stances.

Yeah... maybe by definition, but it's not what definition I fall under that is what I am, it's what I identify as. If I don't identify as a feminist, I'm not a feminist, regardless of whether or not I'm for gender equality.

I am for gender equality, but I don't identify as a feminist, so I'm not a feminist.

[Losty]

I'm all for necromancy but wtf is the point in quoting the OP and not saying anything?

Certain things rising when people see you is NOT necromancy, Losty.

It's a natural bodily reaction in people to your presence...

D:
I've been calling myself a necromancer all these years. My life is a lie.

[The Valkyrie]

Even I can't raise people from the dead, once they're truly dead.

[Tiberius]

I'd be a lot more supportive of feminist movements if they stopped misrepresenting facts to push their agenda.

It's like... do you see an organization attempting to cure skin cancer, and then get mad at them because they're not trying to cure colon cancer?

I think your analogy is misplaced. People by and large aren't mad that feminist movements don't focus on non-female gender equality issues, but rather than they often refuse to acknowledge their existence. Placed in the context of your analogy, it would be like an organization attempting to cure skin cancer coming out and saying "breast cancer doesn't exist". People would get rightfully mad / upset if they did that.

[Esquilax]

I'd be a lot more supportive of feminist movements if they stopped misrepresenting facts to push their agenda.

It's like... do you see an organization attempting to cure skin cancer, and then get mad at them because they're not trying to cure colon cancer?

I think your analogy is misplaced. People by and large aren't mad that feminist movements don't focus on non-female gender equality issues, but rather than they often refuse to acknowledge their existence. Placed in the context of your analogy, it would be like an organization attempting to cure skin cancer coming out and saying "breast cancer doesn't exist". People would get rightfully mad / upset if they did that.

If there's a group that would actually come out and say that those things don't exist, then I'm not a part of that group. At the same time, I've also never been exposed to such rhetoric, and I can see why a movement facing such an eagerness to sidetrack from its opposition would want to downplay irrelevancies; I'd imagine a skin cancer organization wouldn't want to talk about breast cancer either, if they had to deal with so many people desperate to dismiss their primary concern simply because other concerns exist.

[Qwest]

I find myself distrustful of fanatics, in general.

Are feminists fanatics? What would you do with all inequality of woman in the world...just have no one stand up for the rights of women?

Hold on... Deciding that it isn't fair that I make 77 cents to ever dollar a man makes, that if I get pregnant a man can haul ass and run but other men have control of my vagina so I have to raise a child I may not be able to afford OR that pharmaceutical companies spend millions making medicines so men can have sex until they are in their 70's and maybe 20 cents on the dollar of that for ovarian cancer research which is deadly, doesn't make anyone a fanatic.

I don't like the fanatics. I will, however, fight to be considered equal and the original poster is right. If we ever want to have any political power we have to join together on issues that may not personally involve us but that will make our world better. We don't have to be extreme but we have to be loyal

(Damn y'all need to remove this soap box or at least hide it from my view) :)

---

I'd be a lot more supportive of feminist movements if they stopped misrepresenting facts to push their agenda.

It's like... do you see an organization attempting to cure skin cancer, and then get mad at them because they're not trying to cure colon cancer?

I think your analogy is misplaced. People by and large aren't mad that feminist movements don't focus on non-female gender equality issues, but rather than they often refuse to acknowledge their existence. Placed in the context of your analogy, it would be like an organization attempting to cure skin cancer coming out and saying "breast cancer doesn't exist". People would get rightfully mad / upset if they did that.

I'll stand with you on this one! If we quit trying to convert the world to the Western way of thinking and take care of our own we could do that!

[Nine]

Are feminists fanatics? What would you do with all inequality of woman in the world...just have no one stand up for the rights of women?

Hold on... Deciding that it isn't fair that I make 77 cents to ever dollar a man makes, that if I get pregnant a man can haul ass and run but other men have control of my vagina so I have to raise a child I may not be able to afford OR that pharmaceutical companies spend millions making medicines so men can have sex until they are in their 70's and maybe 20 cents on the dollar of that for ovarian cancer research which is deadly,  doesn't make anyone a fanatic.

I don't like the fanatics. I will, however, fight to be considered equal and the original poster is right. If we ever want to have any political power we have to join together on issues that may not personally involve us but that will make our world better. We don't have to be extreme but we have to be loyal

(Damn y'all need to remove this soap box or at least hide it from my view)

77% statistic is completely misrepresented. It takes into account all life choices not actual earnings in the same jobs. It is illegal to pay women differently from men.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact...io-rating/

Also you don't have to raise a child there are legal protections to give up a child after birth into the wardship of the state. Also women exclusively and rightly so have the rights to the morning after pill and abortions. Unfortunately there are people who fight against those last two and that is a serious issue -__- . Once a man has sex, then he has no similar options, and in fact is forced to pay child support. There is no turning away after sex and conception as a man, you have to pay or you go to prison. Also, from the little I've looked into it there is very likely a link between infant male circumcision and erectile dysfunction.. So if people stop mutilation of infant boys maybe the needs for Viagra will decrease  .

Anyway, here's my opinion on feminism. I think feminists who genuinely want equality have lost their movement to a very loud and radical group of feminists that are heads of most feminist platforms and most popular among other feminists. These are the kinds of feminists who things all men are potential rapists and redefine rape in a way that is insulting to rape victims. Who recently went to the UN to ask for help dealing with cyber violence and comparing trolling aggressive comments to real life physical violence and harassment. The people that perpetuate lies, false statistics and even ignore others to push laws that actually do harm. The people who want the burden of proof shifted in rape cases so somebody accused of rape has to prove that they did not rape.. and considering we are on atheist forums I hope I don't have to explain why proving a negative is absurd xD

At the end of it if you call yourself a feminist you are giving those feminists power and a platform to speak and say they do it on your behalf because they speak for feminists and feminism.. often times they even say on behalf of all women despite all the women that disagree with them. I would have once called myself a feminist but the amount of baggage that comes with the feminist movement is awful. Even historically. In my opinion its far better to go under the name of humanist, egalitarian or equalist. Its still 100% possible to focus on the rights of a group or issue you think it important but you are no longer giving those feminists the ability to say they are talking on your behalf. If people still decide feminism is their preferred label.. please at least do the research. You'd really be amazed at the reality behind a lot of the statistics if you dig.. Even just looking into gender and spousal violence, rape statistics, pay gap, college and university drop out rates, general academic achievement and then prison sentencing. From what I've found I think a lot of people would be pretty shocked.

[Nine]

Personally, when it comes to representation and all of those issues I'm a proponent of proportionality and fairness. Since there is no scientific evidence that something like gender, race and so on drastically affects your ability, it would be expected that the number of people in positions of power directly (or closely) correlates with the demographics. If you have 10% of black citizens, you should try to achieve a fair number of representatives for them. If you have 50% women you should do the same - At the least because otherwise women are dependent forever on the protection of men for getting jobs, military, politics + laws, justice, etc. I don't think it is possible to achieve, even for brief moments, completely proportionate representation, but it is possible to pursue the goal - When there is a significant unjustified difference that isn't corroborated by science, there is no reason to think that it's a product of chance or choice - There is no such thing as free will.

But what if people don't want to do those jobs? Do you fire people from their jobs because the statistics aren't close enough to where you want them? Do you force people to work jobs they don't want because you need more of that group in that sector? That only works if people equally choose to do the jobs you want them to for the stats to line up. It totally removes the option of choice.