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

[Losty]

I recognize men and women aren't the same and personally see no issue that I, as a woman, am more talented in some areas and less in others than [most] men. Different anatomy, physiology, hormones levels, ability to get pregnant ect... If we were truly equal, we'd all be genetically identical self reproducing hermaphodities. As in most species, different genders have evolved to be more skilled in certain areas. If a woman, as an individual, can prove herself to be equal to a man in a certain situation than I don't think she should miss out on the opportunity strictly because she's a woman. However, this is often not the case (same goes for men in other areas) and it ends up being an under performer is treated "equally" in the name of 'equality' even though they aren't actually an equal contributor.

The problem is people get confused about equality. If people could just see beyond gender it would be so much easier. If you can't do the job you shouldn't get the job regardless of gender, and if you can do the job your gender should not be a factor on deciding if you get the job or not.

[Whateverist]

I never quite knew what was the point of this thread before it died. Even less idea now.


QUESTION: What do these statements have in common?

1. Black lives matter

2. Women's work counts

[Edwardo Piet]

I get tired of the semantics. I am for equal rights and opportunities for all people. I am against sexism in all directions. Idgaf if you call me a feminist, SJW, egalitarian whatever I honestly do not care at all. Isn't time that all of us who are for equal rights and against social inequalities to stfu about the semantics?

Wow one of the most epic forum posts and things said ever. Careful not to rock so hard though. You might break the forums with your awesomeness.

[MentalGiant]

TheRocketSurgeon
I'm definitely in favor of the concept of affirmative consent, as I think the harm it is designed to prevent is among the most egregious wrongs of our present society; however, I fear how our justice system may immediately interpret it in the most broad and harsh way possible, as they do with most laws, and immediately start doing harm with it.

Just googled "affirmative consent" and my first though is what kind of bullshit is this? Women need to speak up and take some control of their sex life if they aren't into it and TELL HIM NO. Yes, men need to respect it when a woman says no, but she should be clear about her feelings or before long you'll have to sign a contract in front of witnesses to get it on. I think there are few men who'd actually rape a woman once she said "no". My very first boyfriend I never said no to, even though there were things that made me extremely uncomfortable/I would have rather not done. I just accepted it. How was he suppose to know since I never spoke up and said "stop, I'm not ok with this"? It was regrettable I didn't communicate my feelings, but it wasn't his fault to reasonably assume I was ok with it when I acted ok with it. After him, I never had a problem saying "NO" or "get the fuck away from me" if I wasn't into it. Told plenty of other guys in no uncertain terms I definitely did not want to have sex with them. Seems perfectly reasonable if (someone not severely intoxicated) doesn't say "no" or make some other clear indication they don't consent it's ok to proceed. Are you really worried about hurting a guys feeling vs. having unwanted sex with him? And I suppose the same could go for guys too. There are definitely sexually aggressive women out there too, and I think male rape or unwanted sex is underreported/not spoken about because of the stigma it carries. I think the focus should be on speaking up about your feelings.

I guess the one thing that needs to be addressed is not taking home someone who is severely intoxicated and unable to consent. But that can go both ways because a lot of the time the man is ALSO intoxicated past the point of consent too, so who is guilty when neither party could consent? Why is the burden automatically on the man in those cases? I think "no means no" (and actually say "no") paired with some fucking self control (i.e. stop acting like wild animals in heat when your drunk/high when you'd never behave that way sober) would solve a whole lot of problems.

[MentalGiant]

I recognize men and women aren't the same and personally see no issue that I, as a woman, am more talented in some areas and less in others than [most] men. Different anatomy, physiology, hormones levels, ability to get pregnant ect... If we were truly equal, we'd all be genetically identical self reproducing hermaphodities. As in most species, different genders have evolved to be more skilled in certain areas. If a woman, as an individual, can prove herself to be equal to a man in a certain situation than I don't think she should miss out on the opportunity strictly because she's a woman. However, this is often not the case (same goes for men in other areas) and it ends up being an under performer is treated "equally" in the name of 'equality' even though they aren't actually an equal contributor.

The problem is people get confused about equality. If people could just see beyond gender it would be so much easier. If you can't do the job you shouldn't get the job regardless of gender, and if you can do the job your gender should not be a factor on deciding if you get the job or not.

I completely agree. People need to judge based on performance and results, but you'd see a shifting dynamic in many industries where people were hired based on a "diverse work environment" instead of their relevant skills and abilities and the outrage brigade would cry 'discrimination'. The problem exists because 1 woman can actually do the job, now 10 women who can't want the same pay for less work AND will bitch and complain about being 'discriminated against' when they aren't hired/promoted/paid equally because the 1 woman who could has been held up as the example of how women can do the job (even though those 10 individuals couldn't). You can exchange in any other 'group' you'd like there (race, sexual orientation, religious views ect...). Just because one individual is qualified does not automatically make all individuals of that group qualified.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Prime example, I saw one blog write an article about "The lies Christianity tells about sex", and then shortly after try to claim it was a lie that Islam discriminates against the LGBT community.

Well, I suppose that's true. They murder them all equally, without discrimination.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worl...-by-death/

Here are the 10 countries where homosexuality may be punishable by death:

---

Yemen: According to 1994 penal code, married men can be sentenced to death by stoning for homosexual intercourse. Unmarried men face whipping or one year in prison. Women face up to seven years in prison.

Iran: In accordance with sharia law, homosexual intercourse between men can be punished by death, and men can be flogged for lesser acts such as kissing. Women may be flogged.

Iraq: The penal code does not expressly prohibit homosexual acts, but people have been killed by militias and sentenced to death by judges citing sharia law.

Mauritania: Muslim men engaging in homosexual sex can be stoned to death, according to a 1984 law. Women face prison.

Nigeria: Federal law classifies homosexual behavior as a felony punishable by imprisonment, but several states have adopted sharia law and imposed a death penalty for men. A law signed in early January makes it illegal for gay people countrywide to hold a meeting or form clubs.

Qatar: Sharia law in Qatar applies only to Muslims, who can be put to death for extramarital sex, regardless of sexual orientation.

Saudi Arabia: Under the country’s interpretation of sharia law, a married man engaging in sodomy or any non-Muslim who commits sodomy with a Muslim can be stoned to death. All sex outside of marriage is illegal.

Somalia: The penal code stipulates prison, but in some southern regions, Islamic courts have imposed Sharia law and the death penalty.

Sudan: Three-time offenders under the sodomy law can be put to death; first and second convictions result in flogging and imprisonment. Southern parts of the country have adopted more lenient laws.

United Arab Emirates: Lawyers in the country and other experts disagree on whether federal law proscribes the death penalty for consensual homosexual sex or only for rape. In a recent Amnesty International report, the organization said it was not aware of any death sentences for homosexual acts. All sexual acts outside of marriage are banned.

---

Anyone want to guess what all ten of those countries have in common?

[Perkalov]

There might be an correlation between secular societies as feminism, but with that said...

Feminism is the ideology for those who want to fight for women, feminism is a women rights movement, not an equal rights movement.

I'll soon enough accept it as an equal rights movement when they fight all injustices, not only those who affects women or feminist allies (until disposed of, its currently the LGBT movement). Until feminism acknowledge that injustice can happened to both genders and act accordantly, they simply fail to fill the criteria of equal rights.

Me personally... I despise feminism because of their vocal extremism. I am all for equal rights, but you cant get an equal society by focusing on one demographic group.

Anyone can argue all day long that the extremists are a small group, it doesn't matter as long as the large group let them represent them.

When you call your self feminist, you are letting the extremists represent you.

[Mermaid]

There might be an correlation between secular societies as feminism, but with that said...

Feminism is the ideology for those who want to fight for women, feminism is a women rights movement, not an equal rights movement.

I'll soon enough accept it as an equal rights movement when they fight all injustices, not only those who affects women or feminist allies (until disposed of, its currently the LGBT movement). Until feminism acknowledge that injustice can happened to both genders and act accordantly, they simply fail to fill the criteria of equal rights.

Me personally... I despise feminism because of their vocal extremism. I am all for equal rights, but you cant get an equal society by focusing on one demographic group.

Anyone can argue all day long that the extremists are a small group, it doesn't matter as long as the large group let them represent them.

When you call your self feminist, you are letting the extremists represent you.

That is quite a wide net you're casting there, bud.

[Perkalov]

There might be an correlation between secular societies as feminism, but with that said...

...[somewhat shorted it down to save space]...

When you call your self feminist, you are letting the extremists represent you.

That is quite a wide net you're casting there, bud.

Sure, but it was my first post in an 34 pages thread, so I sorta answered towards the op and voiced my general oppinion.

[houseofcantor]

While I occasionally enjoy a TJ (Amazing Atheist) rant, thinking he represents my atheism ain't thinking. I also get a kick out of Anita - cause she's evil.

She got caught and called out for lying and assorted bullshit, but so what? Nobody gets everything right all the time, and having a life in the public spotlight there's always going to be couch warriors with microscopes there to analyse the cilia on every fine point. Feces occurs. They're both in it for the bucks, they both express views that should be expressed and examined, but I ain't gonna let nobody do my speaking for me.

Except for Rocket. Rocket can speak for me sometimes.