Maybe People Should Not Look Up To YouTube Atheist

[Lemonvariable72]

I never said I dislike feminism as a whole, or that I don't approve of women having groups to discuss and address women's issues, that's actually done a lot of good in the past. What irks me is first, when they say feminism is for equality for everyone, and then turn around call anyone that disagrees with them a mysgenistic pig that's a slave to the patriarchy.

I'm sorry you're just making very general claims I cannot determine if those people who disagree are disagreeing because they really are misogynistic pigs or if they really have valid arguments. And I'm not sure when you say disagree you disagree with the fact that feminism is working towards equality or with the methods they employ. So I really don't know how to comment. But it's logically impossible to bring equality to only one group of people, by granting women rights that only men used to have, men and women are now more equal than they were in the past.

Yes I'm being general. That is what happens all the time though, even if you look back at the comments in this thread earlier (not by you obviously) you may see some of it. What I disagree with is the idea feminists are working towards equality, I find that hard to buy and there is no evidence for it that at all. What they work is more rights for women.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

There is already a lot of animosity between men's groups and feminism

There shouldn't be, though, because when you get past the anger and hostility and blame, both sides tend to want the same thing. Which is what makes their hate for each other absurd.

Actually the sexes are set against each other by biology. So it's not that absurd, we're merely trying to conquer our biology with our intellect when striving for equality. Equality doesn't come naturally to us.

but I don't see how forming another group (antifeminists) and reacting to this animosity is going to help

If men want a place to talk about issues of sexism from their perspective, and they want to be able to do it without having to worry about feminists coming in and telling them that they're misogynists or if they want other people who can relate with their experiences, these groups would be kinda perfectly suited for that. At least that's what I think.

But is that what they want to do? Because that's how feminism started, sort of, because women's issues cannot be talked about by women and be taken seriously. (Nowadays it's better but in some cases you still cannot do that without being called a manhater) If we want to achieve equality and escape this "battle of the sexes" model, just seems like the separation won't get us there.

own group that's fine with me, but if they're going to be exclusive and only talk about men's issues, how are they not perpetuating what they first accuse feminism of?

Because the group would be formed by men who feel like feminism doesn't give them the opportunity to talk about mens issues.

And feminism groups are formed by people who feel like they do not have the opportunity to talk about these issues without the backing and resources of the group.

Why not form an inclusive group that instead of talking about men's rights, talks about rights and their relation to gender across the board? That would be a logical response considering the original criticism to feminism's exclusivity (which doesn't exist in all groups).

I've seen some groups try to do that, but they do seem to be on the rare side. I think the best example I can think of, if anyone wants to give the a look, is the good men project. Here's the link to their site.

---

I'll have a look.

---

I'm sorry you're just making very general claims I cannot determine if those people who disagree are disagreeing because they really are misogynistic pigs or if they really have valid arguments. And I'm not sure when you say disagree you disagree with the fact that feminism is working towards equality or with the methods they employ. So I really don't know how to comment. But it's logically impossible to bring equality to only one group of people, by granting women rights that only men used to have, men and women are now more equal than they were in the past.

Yes I'm being general. That is what happens all the time though, even if you look back at the comments in this thread earlier (not by you obviously) you may see some of it. What I disagree with is the idea feminists are working towards equality, I find that hard to buy and there is no evidence for it that at all. What they work is more rights for women.

When women do not enjoy equal rights as men do, then there is no equality. When women enjoy these rights, there's equality for both men and women because they're now more equal in the rights they legally enjoy.

[Esquilax]

The problem (for feminism) is that it IS a problem for feminism. It was an example of something in a time wherein women could take advantage of a case of female priviledge over their male counterparts that was not available the other way 'round.

Is that a case of taking advantage, though? You're talking as though it was a conscious choice that women were making, when in reality the choice was made by men, on behalf of patriarchal ideas that feminism had no part in forming, and actively fight against.

You can't really fault women for taking part in a system they've only relatively recently had the power to change.

[Lemonvariable72]

There shouldn't be, though, because when you get past the anger and hostility and blame, both sides tend to want the same thing. Which is what makes their hate for each other absurd.

Actually the sexes are set against each other by biology. So it's not that absurd, we're merely trying to conquer our biology with our intellect when striving for equality. Equality doesn't come naturally to us.

If men want a place to talk about issues of sexism from their perspective, and they want to be able to do it without having to worry about feminists coming in and telling them that they're misogynists or if they want other people who can relate with their experiences, these groups would be kinda perfectly suited for that. At least that's what I think.

But is that what they want to do? Because that's how feminism started, sort of, because women's issues cannot be talked about by women and be taken seriously. (Nowadays it's better but in some cases you still cannot do that without being called a manhater) If we want to achieve equality and escape this "battle of the sexes" model, just seems like the separation won't get us there.

Because the group would be formed by men who feel like feminism doesn't give them the opportunity to talk about mens issues.

And feminism groups are formed by people who feel like they do not have the opportunity to talk about these issues without the backing and resources of the group.

I've seen some groups try to do that, but they do seem to be on the rare side. I think the best example I can think of, if anyone wants to give the a look, is the good men project. Here's the link to their site.

---

I'll have a look.

---

Yes I'm being general. That is what happens all the time though, even if you look back at the comments in this thread earlier (not by you obviously) you may see some of it. What I disagree with is the idea feminists are working towards equality, I find that hard to buy and there is no evidence for it that at all. What they work is more rights for women.

When women do not enjoy equal rights as men do, then there is no equality. When women enjoy these rights, there's equality for both men and women because they're now more equal in the rights they legally enjoy.

Uh yeah of course. That said these feminists groups are not fighting for equality, many of these people want superiority. If they fighting for equality then why do they freak out over the idea of men meeting to discuss issues from their perspective. Given how they react when men disagree with them, I find it difficult to believe these people want equality. Let me say it like this, women should have groups where they can meet and discuss issues and campaign for rights, just don't try to tell me you want everyone when in most cases you don't. ( I don't use you to refer to you specifically.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Actually the sexes are set against each other by biology. So it's not that absurd, we're merely trying to conquer our biology with our intellect when striving for equality. Equality doesn't come naturally to us.

But is that what they want to do? Because that's how feminism started, sort of, because women's issues cannot be talked about by women and be taken seriously. (Nowadays it's better but in some cases you still cannot do that without being called a manhater) If we want to achieve equality and escape this "battle of the sexes" model, just seems like the separation won't get us there.

And feminism groups are formed by people who feel like they do not have the opportunity to talk about these issues without the backing and resources of the group.


I'll have a look.

---

When women do not enjoy equal rights as men do, then there is no equality. When women enjoy these rights, there's equality for both men and women because they're now more equal in the rights they legally enjoy.

Uh yeah of course. That said these feminists groups are not fighting for equality, many of these people want superiority. If they fighting for equality then why do they freak out over the idea of men meeting to discuss issues from their perspective. Given how they react when men disagree with them, I find it difficult to believe these people want equality. Let me say it like this, women should have groups where they can meet and discuss issues and campaign for rights, just don't try to tell me you want everyone when in most cases you don't. ( I don't use you to refer to you specifically.

Evidence that they're fighting for superiority would examples of things they're fighting for, not how they react to men's groups. In any case, if these men's groups really want equality, then why are they reacting to feminism by calling them feminazis? There is bad behaviour on both sides I'm not sure why you're giving the men a free pass, is it merely because feminism "started it"? Or is it because men's groups are not for equality, they're just for men's rights, so it's in line with their agenda to be the way they are? And I think I said before that feminism is incredibly broad these days and being a feminist doesn't mean you support every movement that is going on that is backed by various feminist groups, and there are also a lot of feminist groups and a lot of men are feminists so clearly they are part of the picture. The thing is rights for women is not an isolated issue, it affects everyone considering women are 50% of the population, it's not solely women's problem, it's everyone's problem. So if a feminist group excludes people on the basis on their gender then obviously they're discriminatory but that isn't the idea of feminism and obviously not the best way to go about getting things done.

[Bad Wolf]

Feminism is really general nowadays, if a girl tells me she is a feminist, I have to ask her a load of questions about it just to figure out what type. Like: does she think the patriarchy systematically oppress women everywhere? Is everything misogynistic and sexist? Am I a misogynist for not agreeing with you? Stuff like that tells me how to talk to her otherwise I might say something that offends her and get shouted at. But that's only the extreme end of the scale.

[Lemonvariable72]

Uh yeah of course. That said these feminists groups are not fighting for equality, many of these people want superiority. If they fighting for equality then why do they freak out over the idea of men meeting to discuss issues from their perspective. Given how they react when men disagree with them, I find it difficult to believe these people want equality. Let me say it like this, women should have groups where they can meet and discuss issues and campaign for rights, just don't try to tell me you want everyone when in most cases you don't. ( I don't use you to refer to you specifically.

Evidence that they're fighting for superiority would examples of things they're fighting for, not how they react to men's groups. In any case, if these men's groups really want equality, then why are they reacting to feminism by calling them feminazis? There is bad behaviour on both sides I'm not sure why you're giving the men a free pass, is it merely because feminism "started it"? Or is it because men's groups are not for equality, they're just for men's rights, so it's in line with their agenda to be the way they are? And I think I said before that feminism is incredibly broad these days and being a feminist doesn't mean you support every movement that is going on that is backed by various feminist groups, and there are also a lot of feminist groups and a lot of men are feminists so clearly they are part of the picture. The thing is rights for women is not an isolated issue, it affects everyone considering women are 50% of the population, it's not solely women's problem, it's everyone's problem. So if a feminist group excludes people on the basis on their gender then obviously they're discriminatory but that isn't the idea of feminism and obviously not the best way to go about getting things done.

I'll say it now, calling people names isn't going to get us anywhere, and there geniune mysgenists in these groups no doubt. However many of these group such as cafe are not calling any body feminazis and if you want examples of women groups fighting for superiority, just look at the court system here in Canada.

[TaraJo]

I'll say it now, calling people names isn't going to get us anywhere, and there geniune mysgenists in these groups no doubt. However many of these group such as cafe are not calling any body feminazis and if you want examples of women groups fighting for superiority, just look at the court system here in Canada.

True, a lot of mens groups have genuine misogynists. There are also a lot of people who are called misogynists, not for being hostile towards women, but for being hostile towards feminism and I think we should understand those are two, distinctly different things. In fact, I know of at least a couple of MRAs who are very hostile towards feminism itself and are also women and don't seem to be self hating. So, if you throw around a word as freely as I often see the word misogynist thrown around, eventually, people are going to question your use of that word. This is especially true if you claim it means something other than what it's widely understood to mean and I've seen that done a lot, too (for example, I have a friend told she was a misogynist because she uses the wrong kind of pesticide for her plants. No joke).

As for advantages overall, I'll be the first to admit, men are generally the political leaders and corporate leaders and just generally in the most positions of power and influence. But if you take a divorced father who's had to deal with the family courts for custody and/or child support, and ask him about his experiences with sexism, you may get a vastly different view of things. If we're going to address the areas where women are at a disadvantage because of plain ol' sexism but routinely dismiss (or accuse of derailing) when people try to talk about areas where men are at a disadvantage because of sexism, the end result isn't going to be the equality many feminists tell me they want; the end result will be closer to a matriarchy. I don't want that, either.

[Zazzy]

This is a weird argument, I think. There are assholes in every group, and they always tend to be the loudest. Judging the validity of a movement's goals by its loudest, most dogmatic people does no one any good. There are certainly asshole feminists (my favorite is Andrea Dworkin), but it's also true that many young women new to feminism get caught up in it in an unhealthy way before they age and mellow a little- they're not assholes, they're just young and learning. The same probably goes for men's issues groups- there are loud angry misogynists who drown out the voices of men who have reasonable things to discuss- like the plight of boys in early education, or the woeful lack of birth control options that men can control.

The sexes are NOT created equal biologically; it's up to us to weigh issues of inequity and determine whether we can bring them closer in line with each other, or not. For instance, men cannot bear children. That is a biological inequity. If a man marries a woman who does not want children, even if he desperately wants them, he can't have them (at least with her). That is a biological inequity. It's not something we can make equal, because the way to solve for men is to enslave women and force them to bear children.

The job of reasonable people, again, is to identify genuine issues that CAN be redressed without treading on others' rights. This will not always be possible.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Could you be more specific? I tried looking it up, didn't find anything relating to what we're discussing.

ETA: I mean Lemon.