675,784 posts

Neither gender is oppressed - we have different advantages and disadvantages. Yet from feminists every single issue is "GENDERED" but only towards women. GYNOCENTRISM: The dominant or exclusive focus on women in theory or practice; or to the advocacy of this.

by mellainadiba | April 30, 2020 | antifeminists

823 upvotes

Reddit View

post image

Post Information
Title Neither gender is oppressed - we have different advantages and disadvantages. Yet from feminists every single issue is "GENDERED" but only towards women. GYNOCENTRISM: The dominant or exclusive focus on women in theory or practice; or to the advocacy of this.
Author mellainadiba
Upvotes 823
Comments 90
Date 30 April 2020 06:18 PM UTC (3 months ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/706636
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/gb138y/neither_gender_is_oppressed_we_have_different/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
dark triaddominancefeminist
Comments

[–]Mick_Donalds94 points95 points  (5 children) | Copy

Sewage Workers: 99% male

Coal Miners: 99% male

Plumbers: 99% male

Oilfield workers: 99% male

Truckers: 97% male

Those could be called out as "incorrect" statistics, but guess what? My numbers are probably not that far off.

So no, LinkedIn, we don't need more "women in the boardroom". We need more women taking up physically demanding jobs in the Oilfield, on powerlines, in dangerous confined spaces, working at Steel Mills and at Sawmills and training harder to join the Infantry and Combat Arms branches of the US Military service branches if we want to achieve true equality.

Fuck you and your entire movement if you think you're OWED a white collar job in a high rise building with air conditioning and six figures because you were born with tits and a vagina.

But hey, "women in leadership!!", right western society?

[–]throwaway4237891028 points29 points  (0 children) | Copy

Feminists claim they can do anything men can do, but won’t actually do it if they can avoid it. They use whatever card necessary to protect themselves even if it contradicts their movement.

[–]Jootunn14 points15 points  (3 children) | Copy

Don't forget us UPS guys. Outside management it's 90% male, and all but a handful of the women are drivers or handle the very small and light packages.

[–]Mick_Donalds12 points13 points  (2 children) | Copy

And they're paid the same amount to literally work less (meaning: only work with small packages)?

This is why companies should ALWAYS incentivize and provide pay raises based on merit. Whomever can handle heavier packages gets dollar per hour raises, based on years of service or something. If you can't do it, then you don't get paid extra. Fair is fair.

[–]Jootunn3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Unionized with annual raises, but everyone starts at the same level.

[–]masterdarthrevan0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I mean you're not wrong, but one thing we should try to think about, is strength ratio, especially in regards to the upper body.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (22 children) | Copy

I don't think neither sex is oppressed. There's lots of compelling evidence to suggest that the majority of one sex is oppressed.

[–]nacho-chonky20 points21 points  (20 children) | Copy

I’d say men face more institutionalized issues, (like universities and school having a women bias, courts favouring women, laws favouring women and so on) but women face more social issues (like slut shaming, sexual harassment, not being taken seriously as a leader) but ya if your looking for institutionalized oppression than the evidence points towards male oppression

[–]Deus-Cattus6 points7 points  (18 children) | Copy

Men face many social issues. I don't think it's so black and white. I think we should work to end all the issues rather than arguing over who deals with what. The issue is some groups who pretend to work for equality actively push an incorrect narrative and that causes arguments over who's more oppressed.

[–]VestigialHead2 points3 points  (17 children) | Copy

Many of the "issues" are just part of life and not something we should be wasting time trying to correct. Correcting all the things people see as oppression in the western world will create a nanny state with extremely privileged wimpy people that will fall into a quivering heap at the first sign of adversity.

Instead we should teach people how to be mentally tough and physically tough and ready to face any problems life throws at them.

[–]Deus-Cattus3 points4 points  (16 children) | Copy

I agree but there's definitely things that can be fixed. Like I think fixing workplace deaths, teaching all students about proper consent, and better mental health services would benefit everyone. I mean really these are things no one should be against, and benefit everyone.

We just need to ensure that any plans to fix such issues are plans aimed to help everyone.

[–]VestigialHead2 points3 points  (15 children) | Copy

Yes I agree there are things we can improve. Not sure what "proper consent" is though. Every adult knows what consent is. But these days consent is meaningless - many women who fully gave consent take it back at a later time and press charges.

If you have a way of preventing that then awesome.

[–]Deus-Cattus-2 points-1 points  (14 children) | Copy

I actually see the consent issue as 2 way. There's many people who don't know what consent is or defend statutory rape in many situations.

I personally think people lying about rape with malicious intent should be required to register as sex offenders and should get a sentence similar to that of rape.

The only issue is that creates more pressure on the accuser but we should work to make rape of all kind a more openly discussed issue and that will help remove pressure

[–]VestigialHead4 points5 points  (13 children) | Copy

I agree with your second and third points.

But the first point is nonsensical to me. There are not adults who do not understand what consent is. There are lots of adults who choose to ignore consent or not ask for consent. But they know what it is and that they should seek it before any sexual acts occur.

Rapists know that what they are doing is wrong - they just do not care because their sexual drive is overwhelming their social filter. So they take advantage of situations others would not. But they know they did not ask for consent and should have.

[–]Deus-Cattus-1 points0 points  (12 children) | Copy

I don't think consent is taught properly. Everyone knows the basic yes or no but many people ignore the age of consent or ignore when someone revokes consent during sex. I think most know it, but many don't. Also many people think men are always consenting when that's just false.

I agree rape is a deliberate act, but teaching consent better will also help in getting rape punished. Imagine if people actually understood how messed up it is for a teacher to rape a student and then defend it. They'd be more likely to actually get punished for taking advantage of a student.

[–]VestigialHead-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy

I think we may disagree on the definition of rape. Yes there are some teachers that have raped a student.

But most of the cases are teachers having consensual sex with a student. This is in no way shape or form rape. it is still considered immoral and wrong because the teacher is in a position of power and meant to be mentoring the student. But not rape in the slightest. Rape means sex against someones will and without consent.

If the student is younger than their teen years they are considered by society as unable to give consent - so then it is rape or molestation.

But a teacher having sex with a consenting 15 or 16 year old is not rape. In some countries it would be considered hebephilia and would be illegal.

My other issue is that teaching people consent will not prevent any rapes from occurring. Rape happens because a person has mental issues and their sexual drives over write any moral protection their brain has. You can put this person in a classroom and teach them consent for 500 days straight and they will still go out and rape. It is not a case of they do not realise rape is wrong so teaching them will stop them doing it.

[–]chocolateraiin1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

The sad part is we can't just help eachother i.e EVERYONE. Everything becomes a "us vs them" mentality or a keeping score game which does nothing but divide.

The issue with society is we segregate things into a battle of male and female, blacks and whites etc. we can't just see people as people.

[–]devon_devoff-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yo not even disgreeing with you, but based on what? What compelling evidence? How do you even quantify or define oppression, scientifically speaking? Lmao.

[–]VoteRepublicanAgain8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy

Holy cow this sub seems amazing already, just found it & subscribing now. Can’t believe I never found this until now. Great post, the suicides are the saddest part in my opinion.

[–]TraumaJeans3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy

Women are oppressed in certain countries.

But that's not important to "western" feminists at all - only selective equality of outcome is. Because they cannot benefit from exploiting the fact that women in certain countries weren't allowed to drive until recently. They live in a different world. Revolting.

[–]mellainadiba[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yes women are opressed in those countries, men are opressed there too in different ways. Karen Straughan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD3PqQfwgaY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L254KuLx-4Y

[–]Firearm365 points6 points  (13 children) | Copy

I agree with all of these but the last one, we can't really do anything because til the end of time 100% of the victims of forced circumcision will be men as women do not have foreskin. Of course we can cut down on the amount of forced circumcision but the ratio will always stay like that.

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy

[deleted]

[–]Firearm36-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

FGM is far more common, if it was included it'd be soemthing like 20-30:70-80

[–]mellainadiba[S] 2 points3 points  (10 children) | Copy

Uggghh. Sigh. Google female circumcision. Rightfully banned in USA (only past 20 years might I add) and still goes on around the world with hundreds of millions victims. There will be a few thousand maybe causes in USA... of course illegal though

[–]Firearm36-5 points-4 points  (9 children) | Copy

You mean genital mutilation right? That's not circumcision...

[–]rdomalik9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy

Circumcision IS genital mutilation.

[–]Firearm36-3 points-2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Well yes, but I was referring to female genital mutilation

[–]Tealdragon2043 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Both are circumcision both are genital mutilation

[–]mellainadiba[S] 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy

Both practices of mulitalion have been given the euphemism circumcision. In the west generally FGM is used. MGM is now also widely used for men although not by governemnents or most medical organisations (many do, and many medical organisations have called for MGM to ve made illegal.... they have tried but struggled due to religous objections)

[–]AlarmGG1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Oh boi 1991 in my country isn't very good year...

[–]mbpDeveloper1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

There is a old phrase in my country; “If i had been lucky, i was born as woman.” Which means you dont have to do shit in your life. Get married and stay at home. There is always been care for them work or not work.

[–]BalouCurie0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Great infographic

[–]eldersoulsfive0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

i mean considering women don't have dicks i would assume that they don't get circumsized. in stricter countries some girls do get circumsized, but considering this says "US women" why would you expect the number for women to be higher ?

[–]beniesixx980 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

true feminists actually acknowledge and fight for men as well this , is utter bs because the whole point of it is every one should be equal . I call women like this who think men have it easier , feminazi because they really don't wanna help men . Its so sickening . Like to make us actual feminists look bad all because they have the nerve to say "We ArE mOrE oPprEsSeD , aNd EnTitlEd tO eVeRyThInG" makes me so fucking heated . And those feminazi are always the karen type . Smh

[–]mellainadiba[S] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy

Thanks for your reply. In a nutshell, there are many ways to promote gender equality men and womens rights. Sadly feminism is not one of them, as it has been corrupted too much.. I was a feminist for four years until I work up. Video below by Karen Straughan, excellent Q&A, several feminists ask that exact question too, why cant I be a feminist and....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaO3THnOHhA

As for not all feminists/true feminism, let me copy Karen Straughan (lol Karen), its a bit rant, but sadly its hardcore facts:

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".

You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."

You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.

You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.

You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.

You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.

You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.

You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.

You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.

You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."

You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.

And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.

No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet. LOL

[–]beniesixx980 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

When I say I'm a good feminists , feminists is about being equal down to the law . So we acknowledge and try to help men as well , see we don't like femenazis which is what y'all are posting about "the feminists" as they proclaim they think that they should be entitled to all the rights as men . But without the punishment as well . You wanna know how to tell them from the women who want to fight for equal rights , walk up to them and ask "do you think women should be made to sign the draft " and if they say no then you know they are trying to fight for what the whole feminists movement stands for. And that's being equal. And yes true feminists are trying to help men as well we want everyone to be equal , same paid grade , same to help all victims of abuse , down to the time in prison for rape and murder , to even signing the draft . Because that's what it is to be a feminist because not every oppression is always about women its about men too .

But you said you were a feminist you can be still because not all of us hates men , its the ones who don't understand what it means to be equal . Its the women who want to abuse men and hurt others because they are toxic and they want to destroy what feminists really stand up for . Why should we have leave a movement because the loud ones are the toxic ones . They have ruined our community but why can't we take it back and change it to what it was supposed to be .

[–]mellainadiba[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

I appreciate what your saying, however I think it is problematic, for the reasons in the post above. While you may think that, you are not the feminist who is in power or making legislation. You are not the feminist leaders, who are doing what is listed above. You mention draft. Well to prove my point, read the OFFICIAL statement by multiple feminists organisations below, not random feminists, actual organisations... they lobbied to vote this down, thankfully they still lost. Apologies in advance this is quite rantyy. If you don't want to read it all, go to the feminist statement. So thats why feminism as a concept is just something not worth holding. Its damaged too much. There are many ways you can achieve the exact same thing.

Lets take one issues affecting men and specifcally see what feminism (organisations not just random individuals) had to say about it. I have direct statements and policies from the feminisnt organisations. See below.

So Norway has forced male only conscription:

  1. the ultimate form of slaverly, where men, regardless of their moral background or personality are forced to learn how to kill or face prison. It also has very practical effects. E.g. it is the reason why in Finland its 2:1 females in university.
  2. This is one of the biggest manifestations of gynocynetsicm in society and of course proof that the hypothesis of patriarchy is as robust as modern flat earth theory. Yes men create systems to benefit men by getting men to do all the dangerous and hard things (93% of work deaths, and here the milatry).
  3. Many countries need conscription as voluntary private armies are too expensive for the nation. So it is needed. Of course the feminists know this and only want men to do it. Feminists when questioned often pay lip service, and say "yeah we support no draft, but if there is a draft women should do it too", as they know it won’t happen….. erm until it does. Norway passes both gender conscrtiption. Lets see what feminists flip flopped when shit it did happen:

Firstly one party voted against it in parliment. Many of Noways feminists organisations (NKF, IAW, WILPF) were viciously against it

Here is the feminists OFFICIAL STATEMENT LOL:

“The Norwegian Association for Women’s Rights (NKF) considers female conscription as a misunderstanding of the concept of gender equality and the intentions of the Law on Equality.

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS.

GIVE US PUSSY PASS

“Gender equality implies first and foremost that women and men should have the same human rights and fundamental freedoms. Women should be valued and allocated power and resources on equal terms with men. But women and men do not have to be alike or do the same things to be equal."

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

GIVE US PUSSY PASS

Feminists wait what are you arguing for here with that statement? Are you saying that is why women should be stay at home moms, and not pursue careers in STEM, finance, politics??

“To ensure gender equality it is important in many cases that women and men are treated equally. But they should not necessarily be treated equally in all situations.”

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

GIVE US PUSSY PASS

“In some cases, the underprivileged gender must be favoured to be able obtain similar results.”

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

GIVE US PUSSY PASS

“Actual differences between the lives of women and men must be taken into account. “

What are you saying feminists? Women shouldn’t do STEM? Why would you say that? They should stay at home and rear children?

GIVE US PUSSY PASS

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

“Women make an important contribution to society by becoming pregnant, giving birth and breast-feeding.”

GIVE US PUSSY PASS

WTF? Femniists have literally spent generations shaming motherhood and downgrading its status. I thought this baby stuff is crappy low value work, and women need to get into the work force and be 70% of teh CEOs etc.

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

“Problems related to conscription must be resolved on their own terms, not by bringing in a new, hitherto outsider group.”

HAHAH yeah men need to solve this problem. Yep. Women should stay home feminists??

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

“women are not supposed to change the strictly hierarchical organization of the military, which is characterized by absolute obedience on the grounds, that the soldiers should learn to defend themselves, use violence and, if necessary, kill.“

LOL WTF so men alone are though? How dare you say women should not be in parliment

TRANSLATION: DON’T DISTURB OUR FEMALE PRIVILEGE. WE LIKE GYNOCENTRISCM JUST FINE THANKS

“Female Newcomers are integrated into the system and the prevailing culture…”

Errmm like men are?

and women are particularly exposed in such a male dominated organization.”

Ermm so women should not want to enter STEM etc according to feminisist?

“Over the past decades, women’s roles have changed significantly more than men’s. Thus values and practices that have traditionally characterized men’s roles, have been strengthened, while values and practices that women traditionally have taken care of, have been weakened. In the current situation, however, the challenge is to strengthen women’s power and influence and promote better care practices and values such as equal status.”

LMAO it was aliterally feminists who shamed motherhood, and demonised women who care for children. Now you want it?

So women joined the coscription... but guess what they still arent 50 percent and are favoruably treated!! LMAO

[–]beniesixx980 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

Then like I said we take it back away from those women , and I'm not be well known hell I'm a stranger to most . But I'm also still young and I'll honestly die fighting to get feminism back to hopefully where it once was but those feminazis that are in government shouldn't have that right to speak the word , if its not about being equal. Like yeah it sucks but if we the actual good ones stand up and actually get loud like them I believe we can get it back . Because my great grandma didn't die as a feminist for nothing . Like as a good feminist I'm not going to say all women should be moms because let's face the femnazis would suck at being a mom . But I do think however if someone doesn't want kids and they know it move the age to get tubes tied , hell if it wasn't for me being raped and busting my left tube I wouldn't be able to get an IUD. And I was 20 when it happened. I still want kids but not anytime soon because I can't even afford insurance . But good feminism is like my soon to be step mother in law she loves kids , her and my soon to be father in law adopted their grandchild . I myself wanna adopt as well a lot of foster moms are good feminist. But some just can't be moms like my third foster family . They adopted a beautiful little girl named Tuesday . But feminazis who shame women that are moms are awful.

[–]mellainadiba[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Im sorry to hear what happened to you

You may like Christina Hoff Sommers, a feminist who tries to reclaim th movement. Here 4 or 5 minute video series is excellent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HX1Ae-ZJgs&list=PLytTJqkSQqtr7BqC1Jf4nv3g2yDfu7Xmd

[–]beniesixx980 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Thank you, I'm a lot better but still healing and i have a very caring fiance who helps me through the pain. And that for showing this information because I think its time we get the good feminism train going again. Because everyone should be equal and happy .

[–]hjamesp10 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

Victims of forced circumcision Females:0 Yeah no SHIT they don’t have the thing that can be circumcised! Also, aren’t you a baby when that happens? So you don’t really have a decision do you? This data set is correct but isn’t not gendered. Like bruh. Also, yes, men are dumb shit, get over it.

[–]mellainadiba[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

LOL you need a basic education... you dont know hundreds of millions of women are circumcised a year? Oh dear. Google it... yes a few in America too although it is of course illegal. So no it isn't 0 as a few women in America are...

Since you cant read a graph and dont know what happens to hundreds of millions of girls around the world in FGM, I think we will leave it there.... I suggest just increasing your general intelligence, reading a few books and so on

[–]benny_da_boi11390 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I’ve heard people call a specific work field sexist because the majority of those workers are men

[–]yellowbracelet0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

not to mention 57% of sex trafficking victims are men

[–]CantHaveANormalName0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

i just want to know how women can be victims of forced circumcision i'm genuinely confused i see a little purple bar down there

[–]cowyeti0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy

I’d like to point out that women were only allowed in combat roles after 2013.

[–]mellainadiba[S] 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy

Thanks to female suffragettes who managed to gain the vote while specifically campaigning against joining draft or bucket brigrafde service. Feminist organisations fiercely contested the gender neutralisation of Norways conscription. Men only conscription still exists all around the world.

[–]cowyeti-4 points-3 points  (4 children) | Copy

That’s completely irrelevant. I’m saying that your graph talks about combat deaths since 1991, when women were only allowed to serve in combat roles after 2013. It’s very dishonest

[–]mellainadiba[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy

oh I get what you mean. I disagree even more now. If anything that makes the discrimination against men even more pronounced! Women are protected by law and policy from serving! Even more female advantage.... and male disposability baked in even more to the system. Even in Norway where gender neutral its still not 50:50, still far more men

[–]cowyeti-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy

Why is life a zero sum game for you? Why can’t both genders be oppressed and discriminated against in different ways? You really are no better than the radical feminists

[–]mellainadiba[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

No exactly, these issues should not be gendered thats my point... we shouldn't be men are this percent and women .... that sis excalyt what feminist do even in issues that are 1% female affected. These stats are posted to counter the narrative.

For example feminists are viciously comparing now to turn the UK domestic violence bill gendered. Men, women, victims even abusers are calling them out saying wtf are you doing, and they are still doing it.

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".

You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."

You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.

You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.

You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.

You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.

You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.

You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.

You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.

You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."

You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.

And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.

No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet. LOL

[–]ktmighty140 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

Women take statistics from 3000BC and tell that they are oppressed and have no rights.

[–]SebiTheMedi-1 points0 points  (11 children) | Copy

"Victims of Forced Curcumsisions" Is this a genuine topic that the mens right community focuses on?

[–]mellainadiba[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children) | Copy

Male genital mutilation. Google it. Kills about 100 babies in the USA every year. Foreskin is the most sensitive and pleasurable part of your penis... not just more pleasure but different pleasure, better sensations, thats because it contains recpeptors such as temperature, pressure, vibration that the glans doesn't have so you will never experience that without a foreskin.... obviously circ men won't know what they're missing nothing to compare it too.. like life without finger tips... you can still function (funnily enough finger tip is good analogy as it is those nerve endings meisener corps found in finger tips and foreskin that you will lose, so no foreskin is like no finger tip... still functional just damaged) Also circ makes your penis hairy due to skin stretch cant accommodate an erection, and almost all circ men need lube to masturbate (literally a circumcision created disability) and many need it in sex... again disability sorry if you don't have it... im being so direct as it is better to say the truth that may upset you then you inflict this barbarism onto a little baby on day 1 of life.

I would lose fingers before I lose my foreskin. Don't do it to your kids

[–]jack938855 points6 points  (8 children) | Copy

Yes. Because unnecessary surgery on children babies is kinda fucked up. Doesn't really fit here though because I doubt any female babies are getting circumcised.

[–]Andieleaandie2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy

FGM isn’t particularly common in the US, however there have been reports of it in specific locations here when the demographic is particularly Islamic.

[–]jack938851 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Yeah, I wasn't counting FGM though as I assume the creator of the graph wasn't counting it as "forced circumcision" it is an issue I have heard lots about living in the UK, not sure how the US differs

[–]were_gonna_make_it3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy

Doesn't really fit here though because I doubt any female babies are getting circumcised.

That's exactly the point.

[–]jack93885-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy

I meant what does it matter when it's not physically possible. Unless they're trying to suggest that FGM never happens which, while I don't know the number, I highly doubt is the case

[–]were_gonna_make_it2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy

What are trying to say? "Female circumcision" is often euphemistically used to refer to FGM. And this chart is obviously about the USA, a country where you could probably count the # of female circumcisions per year on your fingers. Because it's illegal and no medical professional will offer it (to a minor). So it's a blatant case of institutional sex based discrimination. That's the point.

[–]jack938850 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

I'm not familiar with thing in the US though I understand that the culture is very different there. However, FGM is illegal in the UK too and it still happens. I get the argument for one being legal as opposed to the other but I'm not sure that's the point that's trying to be made, at least I didn't read it that way. Something being illegal doesn't stop it from happening, is there not an issue with people taking their children abroad for the procedure? I know that that is prosecutable in the UK as it's fairly common. Also, I get it's hyperbole but ,given the size of the US, I would imagine there's a fair few cases of FGM, if not performed in the country then at least being taken abroad for it.

[–]were_gonna_make_it1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy

Sure, there's always going to be people who do evil things no matter what. But how many instances does it take for something to count as "oppression"? The fact is, that if you're a woman living in the developed world, and you're not a Muslim from a first gen immigrant family from the Middle East or Africa, you are at basically 0 risk for FGM. Compare that to about 50% of American men, and up to 90% of men in certain parts of the country, who are victims of MGM.

Even if we talk worldwide, the vast majority of victims of genital mutilation worldwide are men. In the countries where FGM is practiced, MGM is also done on all the men, so it is at least a gender neutral oppression.

[–]jack938850 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I agree completely but I don't think comparing them is necessarily the best way to make the argument. The unfortunate reality is that most people will view circumcision as fairly non invasive, especially when compared to FGM. No-one is oppressed due to cultural practices regarding genital surgery, either way IMO, it's just a really fucked up thing to do.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy

Shouldn’t it be? It’s male genital mutilation for very questionable “benefits”

[–]_Senjogahara_-2 points-1 points  (4 children) | Copy

"forced circumcision"
lol
I am circumcisied and I perfectly like it the way it is.

[–]Stanley99903 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy

But what about those who uh, don’t? Just because you do doesn’t mean that your opinion is representative of the opinions of every single other circumcised male. Dumb fuck

[–]_Senjogahara_-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy

This argument goes both ways buddy.

Just because you do doesn’t mean that your opinion is representative of the opinions of every single other circumcised male. Dumb fuck

[–]Stanley99905 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy

Notice how I never argued for either point? Just pointed out the flaws in your statement. Dumb fuck

[–]Potato_monkey10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I love being circumcised

[–]virginofguadalupe-3 points-2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I see your point, definitely, but you should probably take off the circumcision one for more impact. Obviously women can’t be circumcised and it’s pretty astounding the number of women who voluntarily have labiaplasty because men make fun of “roast beef sandwich.”

[–]egirlsdeserverights-4 points-3 points  (10 children) | Copy

Patriarchy/gender roles explains the difference in suicide rates, combat deaths, and work place deaths. Traditional gender roles dictate that men are supposed to be strong and protect women and children. This expectation leads to jobs in the military and jobs that require lots of physical labour being male dominated fields of work, so it makes sense that the death rates reflect that. Men are also expected to be emotionally resilliant and tough. They're shamed or belittled for feeling emotions, other than lust or anger, this causes an inability to recognise and cope with their own emotions, which can lead to depression, which they then don't feel comfortable seeking help for, which can lead to suicide.

The goal of feminism is to dismantle the patriarchy and stop the rigid enforcement of traditional gender roles, which harm everyone. There's nothing wrong with focusing on women's issues when women have been disproportionately negatively affected by both for centuries.

Also, although I don't agree with circumcision, it shouldn't be compared to female genital mutilation. It's more similar to piercing a childs ear as an infant (a cosmetic change that the child didn't consent to), than a horrific mutilation.

[–]Tealdragon2043 points4 points  (8 children) | Copy

LMAO piercing a childs ear?

Yes, that's why deaths occur from circumcision

That's why children have lost their entire genitalia to circumcision

It's horrific mutilation and the only reason you think it's not is because it's normalized. It's closer to cutting off your ear than PIERCING IT (especially seeing as people DO pierce their dicks)

[–]egirlsdeserverights-3 points-2 points  (7 children) | Copy

Obviously I wasn't talking about the worst case scenario in my analogy.

Also, do you GENUINELY believe circumcision should be compared to FGM? Considering the majority of circumcisions are done during infancy, under anesthesia, and have no long term negative side effects (besides reduced sexual pleasure).

[–]Tealdragon2041 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy

Yes. I do think so. It's mutilation of the penis for no good reason.

It still serves a purpose, the penis gets damaged without the foreskin and desensitized because of the lack of foreskin. It's like the 3rd degree burn I've got on my arm. No long term "negative side effects" other than a fuck ton of dead nerve endings, but why? For what? Because it's aesthetically pleasing? If that's the only reason it should be the child's choice and their choice when they're of age

[–]mellainadiba[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

Noope feminism has directly contributed to mens problems and feminists directly campaign to block mens issues from being addressed:

So what you're saying is that you, a commenter using a username on an internet forum are the true feminist, and the feminists actually responsible for changing the laws, writing the academic theory, teaching the courses, influencing the public policies, and the massive, well-funded feminist organizations with thousands and thousands of members all of whom call themselves feminists... they are not "real feminists".

You're not the director of the Feminist Majority Foundation and editor of Ms. Magazine, Katherine Spillar, who said of domestic violence: "Well, that's just a clean-up word for wife-beating," and went on to add that regarding male victims of dating violence, "we know it's not girls beating up boys, it's boys beating up girls."

You're not Jan Reimer, former mayor of Edmonton and long-time head of Alberta's Network of Women's Shelters, who just a few years ago refused to appear on a TV program discussing male victims of domestic violence, because for her to even show up and discuss it would lend legitimacy to the idea that they exist.

You're not Mary P Koss, who describes male victims of female rapists in her academic papers as being not rape victims because they were "ambivalent about their sexual desires" (if you don't know what that means, it's that they actually wanted it), and then went on to define them out of the definition of rape in the CDC's research because it's inappropriate to consider what happened to them rape.

You're not the National Organization for Women, and its associated legal foundations, who lobbied to replace the gender neutral federal Family Violence Prevention and Services Act of 1984 with the obscenely gendered Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The passing of that law cut male victims out of support services and legal assistance in more than 60 passages, just because they were male.

You're not the Florida chapter of the NOW, who successfully lobbied to have Governor Rick Scott veto not one, but two alimony reform bills in the last ten years, bills that had passed both houses with overwhelming bipartisan support, and were supported by more than 70% of the electorate.

You're not the feminist group in Maryland who convinced every female member of the House on both sides of the aisle to walk off the floor when a shared parenting bill came up for a vote, meaning the quorum could not be met and the bill died then and there.

You're not the feminists in Canada agitating to remove sexual assault from the normal criminal courts, into quasi-criminal courts of equity where the burden of proof would be lowered, the defendant could be compelled to testify, discovery would go both ways, and defendants would not be entitled to a public defender.

You're not Professor Elizabeth Sheehy, who wrote a book advocating that women not only have the right to murder their husbands without fear of prosecution if they make a claim of abuse, but that they have the moral responsibility to murder their husbands.

You're not the feminist legal scholars and advocates who successfully changed rape laws such that a woman's history of making multiple false allegations of rape can be excluded from evidence at trial because it's "part of her sexual history."

You're not the feminists who splattered the media with the false claim that putting your penis in a passed-out woman's mouth is "not a crime" in Oklahoma, because the prosecutor was incompetent and charged the defendant under an inappropriate statute (forcible sodomy) and the higher court refused to expand the definition of that statute beyond its intended scope when there was already a perfectly good one (sexual battery) already there. You're not the idiot feminists lying to the public and potentially putting women in Oklahoma at risk by telling potential offenders there's a "legal" way to rape them.

And you're none of the hundreds or thousands of feminist scholars, writers, thinkers, researchers, teachers and philosophers who constructed and propagate the body of bunkum theories upon which all of these atrocities are based.

No...You're the true feminist. Some random person on the internet. LOL

[–][deleted]  (1 child) | Copy

[deleted]

[–]Tealdragon2042 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy

Circumcision doesn't have many biological advantages, and the "advantages" are dumb

"it stays cleaner" Just clean your dick jfc

"Well it might have to be cut off because of complications" then why would you cut it off now instead of waiting until this problem (which is rare) occurs



You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter