~ archived since 2018 ~

Time For Feminist Women To Stop Acting Like Infants

[deleted]

November 17, 2010

7 upvotes

/r/MensRights

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/02/01/time-for-feminist-women-to-stop-acting-like-infants/

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Time For Feminist Women To Stop Acting Like Infants
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	7
Comments	32
Date	November 17, 2010 10:45 PM UTC (15 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/e7rp3/time_for_feminist_women_to_stop_acting_like/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/time-for-feminist-women-to-stop-acting-like.1045912 https://theredarchive.com/post/1045912

Comments

[–]bacontoaster4 points 15 years ago [recovered] (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]bacontoaster2 points 15 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AntiFeministMedia 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheEnlightener -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]AntiFeministMedia -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]LoudmouthedBitch 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]thetrollking 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LoudmouthedBitch 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AntiFeministMedia -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]LoudmouthedBitch 4 points5 points6 points 15 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceIce1 points 15 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]LoudmouthedBitch 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceIce1 points 15 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LoudmouthedBitch -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It seems kind of sensationalist to paint all feminists as evil, especially since there's no singular, discernible "feminist" movement today. Would you argue that things were better before even the earliest forms of feminism (back when women couldn't vote, run for political office, or have careers)? Or do you object to particular sects of feminism?

My opinion is that men and women are indeed equal in terms of value. I also think we are much more similar than we are different, and we shouldn't discourage men from doing "feminine" things (child rearing) or women from doing "masculine" things (running a business). I put these in scare quotes because I think "feminine" and "masculine" are often subjective.

I may not agree with every single feminist today, nor with all the particular movements of feminism, yet I do know that before feminism, women weren't allowed to vote or have careers, and were expected to unconditionally submit to their husbands. In short, they had little autonomy. Thus I disagree that things would be better without feminism.

Does that mean one can't be critical of particular viewpoints within current feminist sects? No, of course you can be critical. But painting an entire, diverse movement as evil means ignoring a lot of information.

For the record, I think that most women are not evil. I also think that most men are not evil. There are many flawed men and flawed women, but in general, most people I believe are decent, regardless of gender.

[–]thetrollking 0 points1 point2 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]LoudmouthedBitch 1 point2 points3 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 15 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]iTroll_irl 2 points3 points4 points 15 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 15 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Facts are not opinions.

Facts >> opinions. I don't think that there is anybody in the year 2010 with any familiarity of the matter whatsoever, beside personal agenda-driven lobbyists (feminists and politicians who cater to them) who thinks that feminist policies enacted in the last 40-50 years in the West were carefully thought out, rational and in the spirit of egalitarianism. They were discriminatory, misandrist and ginocentric. Analyzing such policiies as a result of emotionally-driven short-sighted selfishness makes perfect sense: we all know that women are generally irrational and governed by their emotions, instincts and social conditioning. What the author of above comment is doing on the other hand, is spinning the issue, as if making factually corroborated statement is somehow inherently "misogynist". A familiar analogy would be: it's like saying that criticizing Israel and its FP with some neighboring countries, as being driven by particular religious agenda, is somehow "antisemitic".

To effectively state they are likely demonstrates that you either cannot think rationally about this because of some emotional interference or you have not put in the effort make an argument that is worth respecting.

Typical feminazi ad-hominem. You haven't refuted any of my claims, but dare to comment on the rationality and "emotional interference" as they made impression on the probabilistic quantification of my statements. Is that your "six sense" sista, that you can read minds of a complete stranger thousands of miles away, or classical feminist shaming tactic in action?

I am sure Condoleezza Rice was thinking about women when she pushed to require diplomats to serve in hardship regions, to gain expertise in two or more areas and require fluency in two foreign languages.

What does Condoleezza Rice (obidient executioner of policies written behind the scene by men many times more smarter than her) have to do with this? Does what CR did in some unrelated case invalidate what Clinton stated? Does it invalidate the fact no modern feminazi organization, allegedly egalitarian, unisex and gender-blind, protested against such ridiculous statement? Women who built Titanic Memorial in 1931 (''To The Brave Men Who Perished In The Wreck of The Titanic, April 15, 1912. They Gave Their Lives That Women and Children Might Be Saved.'') sure would have something to say. But alas, we don't want to tread on monetary advantages that feminism has bestowed onto us, for some shitty principles of ancient history! Watch out sista, in the next great war men will not be so white-knightish and chivalrous.

[–]iTroll_irl 3 points4 points5 points 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

feminist policies ... [t]hey were discriminatory, misandrist and ginocentric. Some were, yes. Not all.

Analyzing such policiies as a result of emotionally-driven short-sighted selfishness makes perfect sense: we all know that women are generally irrational and governed by their emotions, instincts and social conditioning.

Would you consider this analogous to saying "We know men are horny pigs that just want to fight and screw every women, so it makes sense to analyze every action in light of this."?

While your Israeli analogy is well known, it does not apply. If people were saying, "Well, because they are Israeli's they are short-sighted, cruel, and miserly and we should treat them as such", that would be anti-Semitic.

You had not made claims based in fact. I would love to see a citation for women being generally incapable of controlling their emotions. I can only base my thoughts on what I have read. If you had read the other clause of that sentence, you would have also noticed the "not put in the effort [to] make an argument that is worth respecting".

Dr. Rice was a counter-example to your "many female politicians only point out ginocentric concerns". There are quite a few women who do not do this, including some women who participate in r/mensrights.

But alas, we don't want to tread on monetary advantages that feminism has bestowed onto us, for some shitty principles of ancient history! Watch out sista, in the next great war men will not be so white-knightish and chivalrous.

I have no idea what this means.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Would you consider this analogous to saying "We know men are horny pigs that just want to fight and screw every women, so it makes sense to analyze every action in light of this."?

Lots of men are like that, I'd say at least 10-20% from my experience, whose sole purpose of life is to find some kind of appealing vagina that they could copulate with. I've personally never understood that pussy-worshiping cult, and the mindless pursuit of some smelly hole between woman's legs. However, there are much, much more men that are able to resist social and biological programming/conditioning, and live a free (free as in "free mind") life, as opposed to women, who are the weaker sex (both physically and mentally), hormonally washed 1/4th of their adult life, and much more prone to social shame. Generalizing any kind of behavior to men is pointless because they exhibit orders of magnitude more internal variability in just about everything.

While your Israeli analogy is well known, it does not apply. If people were saying, "Well, because they are Israeli's they are short-sighted, cruel, and miserly and we should treat them as such", that would be anti-Semitic.

No you're wrong. Read again the original comment by your feminist sister: She claimed that it's "misogynistic", even for the purpose of analysis, assuming that women retain infantile behavior, remaining devoid of personal responsibility and the ability to cogitate long-term prospects of their selfish actions, to state that they should be stripped of e.g. voting rights, or be forbidden to perform in public offices. Which is perfectly good reasoning, especially in the light of the failure of democratic regimes in most of the world's countries, whereby politicians pursue populism and demagoguery while trying to satisfy the wishes of their voters, instead of minimizing the damage done by the very fact of existence of the unnatural, oppressive entity called state/government.

I would love to see a citation for women being generally incapable of controlling their emotions.

It is not a matter of absolute control - nobody can do that - but the degree of susceptibility for genetically induced emotional outbursts through which women seek to elicit sympathy from men who would then voluntarily do various acts on their behalf. Women are such weak creatures, poor mental slaves trapped in a dungeon of social projections and the ephemeral feelings of satisfaction and happiness for fulfilling their expected social roles.

Dr. Rice was a counter-example to your "many female politicians only point out ginocentric concerns". There are quite a few women who do not do this, including some women who participate in r/mensrights.

These are exceptionally rare exceptions, which make absolutely no difference in the grand scheme of things. Feminist movement is rotten to the core, and cannot be reformed from within. It must be violently dismantled, and those responsible for the misery of millions of men made an example of. We know their names and locations, and when the time comes justice will be served, in old-fashioned way.

[–]bacontoaster2 points 15 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]bacontoaster2 points 15 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]bacontoaster1 points 15 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AntiFeministMedia -1 points0 points1 point 15 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link