~ archived since 2018 ~

Feminists only know how to divide

Chahal249 · 2021-11-01T08:02:19+00:00

I use to be the guy who would call out hella dudes who use to go against feminists cuz I thought if you did that you were apart of the problem but now… I...

Chahal249

November 1, 2021

89 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Archived from /r/MensRights

r/MensRights is a community advocating for the social and legal equality of men and boys since 2008.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill subreddits and blogs. This page is our copy of the original post.

/r/MensRights archive

Download the post

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

PDF TXT EPUB

Support the archive

Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.

It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.

I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.

Support the archive

Post Information

Title	Feminists only know how to divide
Author	Chahal249
Upvotes	89
Comments	42
Date	November 1, 2021 8:02 AM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/qk9838/feminists_only_know_how_to_divide/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/feminists-only-know-how-to-divide.1080658 https://theredarchive.com/post/1080658

Comments

[–]OneWithItAll8 21 points22 points23 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sr_Nunes 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RandomEqualist -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]auMatech 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Sapstastic 4 points5 points6 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Kindly-Town 8 points9 points10 points 4 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadett 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Correct-Sherbet2399 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadett -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]CraigslistAxeKiller 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadett -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lopsided_Service5824 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But it literally is a feminist stance. You may disagree but it's mainstream enough that the Biden administration uses that term

To understand the contours of the debate, I called Louise Melling, the deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, who leads projects on women’s rights and LGBTQ rights. Although she does not identify as transgender or nonbinary, she is one of the country’s most influential progressive legal thinkers on gender norms and the law. Our conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.

Emma Green: Why do you believe it’s important to shift our language around gender and pregnancy?

Louise Melling: First of all, if we’re talking about “pregnant people,” that language says to people—to transgender men and to nonbinary people—“we see you.” It should do a fair amount of work to help address discrimination. If we talk about “pregnant people,” it’s a reminder to all of us to catch ourselves when we’re sitting in the waiting room at the GYN that we’re not going to stare at the man who’s there. We’re not going to be disconcerted.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/09/pregnant-people-gender-identity/620031/

[–]mikesteane 2 points3 points4 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 5 points6 points7 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadett 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BCRE8TVE 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I was being rather facetious and expressing frustration rather than being entirely truthful. It's also a bit of a joke.

The person I'm replying to said that the misunderstanding of gender from feminists gets in the way of them multiplying, ie being a feminist makes you less likely to have children. Feminism therefore doesn't multiply because feminists have no/less children.

Whether that's true or not feminism actually spreads by people talking about the ideas, not by having more children. In the same way, a disease that infects a species, spreads by infecting other members of that species, not just by infecting the children.

I'm comparing feminism to a parasite or disease, spreading from person to person, and the harm it causes to the people it infects, is reducing their ability to have children. In that sense feminism fits the definition of a parasite, as "An organism that lives and feeds on or in an organism of a different species and causes harm to its host."

I also want to make a clear distinction in that I am in favour of say 80% of what feminism claims to be about, ie equality in the workplace, no gender-based discrimination, not forcing women to be at home, allowing them to work wherever they want to.

Where I disagree with feminism is the notion that women are so critically disadvantaged in every sector of society that they need huge amounts of incentives, scholarships, and quotas to help them make it, as well as lowering standards for the sole purpose of increasing female representation in male-dominated spaces.

I'm opposed to feminism having this view of equality as a one-way street from men towards women, when they have no interest in facilitating men getting into female-dominated spaces. In many cases feminists actively fight back against this, perpetuate stereotypes of men as paedophiles and sexual predators, and also perpetuating this huge victimhood gate-keeping by pretending like only women are oppressed, only women can be victims, only women can have issues, and men are privileged so they need to shut up and help women more.

Feminism has a HUUUUGE blind spot with regards to men's issues, because fundamentally feminism was found by and for women. They have little interest as a movement to actually address men's issues because it would force the movement as a whole to recognize that men as a group are not oppressors, and therefore women as a group are not oppressed. They would lose the oppression olympics, would lose the whole "woe is women give us more sympathy" angle, would lose the support to pass more changes and laws that would favour women, and would lose money since some of it would go to actually helping the men in need, rather than just always having more money for women.

Feminism as a whole therefore has a huge incentive in not fully recognizing men's issues and how men are victims, and instead solely portray it as "men are victims because they are accidentally hurt by the system meant to oppress women". Men's issues are therefore not actually men's issues, it's really women's issues that affect men.

And that's why I compare feminism to a parasite, because it completely warps their view and understanding of reality, to always drain society to demand more money and more sympathy for female victims, while refusing to do anything that would actually help men or actually solve the problem.

After all, if you ignore half of what's causing the problem, you have no hope of ever solving it. It just feeds into a self-perpetuating cycle of solutions that don't solve the problem, demanding more money/effort/sympathy to solve the problem, and pushing more solutions that don't actually solve the problem, over and over again. Meanwhile you're never allowed to question the tenets of feminism, never allowed to disagree with the feminist theory, and if you do you get kicked out.

[–]cascadett 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Where I disagree with feminism is the notion that women are so critically disadvantaged in every sector of society that they need huge amounts of incentives, scholarships, and quotas to help them make it, as well as lowering standards for the sole purpose of increasing female representation in male-dominated spaces.

You see, that is 100% not what feminism is about. 100% sure that any real feminist you meet will 100% agree with me. 100% all the way. That is NOT feminism. A lot of you have a warped view of it, feminism is exactly as you described. Gender equality. "I also want to make a clear distinction in that I am in favour of say 80% of what feminism claims to be about, ie equality in the workplace, no gender-based discrimination, not forcing women to be at home, allowing them to work wherever they want to." This is exactly it, as well as certain equalities for men as well, such as allowing them to wear dresses and makeup, and anything that people are only allowed to do as per their gender, as well as against male violence, though we might not be as vocal about it, we do care. Please understand that in reality you are probably a feminist as well based on what you seem to believe. And what's there to disagree about feminism in all this?

[–]BCRE8TVE 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You see, that is 100% not what feminism is about.

I mean feminism isn't any one single thing, so it's not like there is this one definition that is universally agreed upon, but I understand what you mean.

That's not what feminism is about, but that's still the result of feminist thought and action. It certainly isn't men's rights activists pushing for that.

So it's not the main or major effort from feminists, there's lots of stuff they do that I do agree (equal right to education, marriage and jobs in 3rd world countries, free access to contraceptives, sex ed, etc etc etc), but on the stuff I agree least on, what I mentioned there is near the top of the list and is also one of the most glaringly obvious examples of hypocrisy.

It's not the main aim of feminism, but it absolutely is something they have control over, pushed for, and enacted into law, and it's really gone sideways, but there's not only no recognition of this fact, there's a strong effort to cover up how badly it went and to double down on those mistaken efforts.

That is NOT feminism. A lot of you have a warped view of it, feminism is exactly as you described. Gender equality.

Unfortunately feminism acts as though equality is a one-way street for all women to become equal to the top 10% of men, with very little care or concern about how badly the bottom 25% of men are fairing. Feminism is all about gender equality, so long as it's a conversation that women get to benefit from. The moment it's about getting men equal to the level of women (less suicides, less homeless, less deaths in the workplace, more women in blue-collar or difficult jobs, more men in nursing and teaching), then there's suddenly far less interest and even a level of hostility.

This is exactly it, as well as certain equalities for men as well, such as allowing them to wear dresses and makeup, and anything that people are only allowed to do as per their gender,

Feminism has done a fantastic job emancipating women from their traditional gender roles. However feminism has failed utterly so far in their efforts to liberate men from their gender roles, and in many instances have actually reinforced gender roles for men while simultaneously undercutting men's ability to fulfill those gender roles. Encouraging men to wear dresses means virtually nothing without also understanding the situation of men overall, but feminism as a whole doesn't seem to care to understand what men's lived experiences actually are. Feminism is far more content to imagine what men's plight is, according to women and without taking men's opinions into consideration, then trying to force men to fit the mold they believe men should do in order to be liberated.

If they don't even understand the gendered constraints men are actually under, how could they possibly propose any solution that would actually work? And when things inevitably fail, men are blamed for being too weak, for wanting to cling to toxic masculinity, for their fragile masculinity, for their stubbornness, or for believing that femininity is weak and that they prefer to cling to male superiority. Not all feminists of course, but far too often, and it has poisoned the well.

This can only be resolved if feminism as a whole decides to seriously understand men's lived experiences and listen to men in the first place, but that's going to be hard to do when the movement considers men to be the violent oppressors of women throughout the centuries.

as well as against male violence, though we might not be as vocal about it, we do care.

I mean it's nice that people care, but it's a bit like saying "I really care about you. I won't speak up in your favour, won't do anything to help you, so outwardly you might not know it, but inwardly I really do care".

That's nice, but actions speak louder than words, and the loud actions of feminism as a whole paint a very different picture. It's not like Clementine Ford was kicked out of the feminist movement for #killallmen, or for saying that coronavirus isn't killing men fast enough. This is the kind of public face of feminism that people see, especially when the feminist movement defends her and refuses to kick her out.

The United Nations made a post last year on international men's day celebrating female allies and everyone committing to ending violence against women. Google celbrates international women's day and does nothing for international men's day. There would be outrage if the opposite were true, but there's been virtually nothing in support of men. Feminism can't really be said to care about men if it only gives men's issues a token appearance and whatever crumbs of social justice are left on the table after women have gone and filled their plates.

Please understand that in reality you are probably a feminist as well based on what you seem to believe. And what's there to disagree about feminism in all this?

I disagree with this assessment. It's equating being a feminist with being a good person, and basically saying "see, you're a good person, that means you're a feminist like me". It's like if I said that you were muslim because you shared values with me or something. It's trying to appropriate a moral higher ground and saying that we're all in agreement.

I can't agree to that. Not when feminism has a ton of misandrists in their midst, and that not only are feminists not calling out the misandrists, they're actively defending them and endorsing them.

Not all feminists are misandrists, but when most feminists basically say "well they're not real feminists so it's not our problem" and do nothing about the people who call themselves feminists and lambast men, they're at best condoning those actions, and at worst covertly supporting it.

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing, and feminism as a whole has done a whole lot of nothing about all the misandrists in their midst. That's why I cannot and will not call myself a feminist, because I'm taking a truly gender-neutral approach to equality. I don't treat it like a one-way street in favour of women while only paying lip service to men's issues.

I can't call myself a feminist until this changes. I'll be in support of women's issues, but I'll do that while calling myself an egalitarian or humanist, not as a feminist.

[–]RandomEqualist 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]LuciferSatan6666 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]RandomEqualist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]LuciferSatan6666 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RandomEqualist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadett 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

Feminism is going to attract man haters. And outspoken feminist activists (and the “gender studies” brigade) are saturated with these people. Why else do you think we get all these man hating op eds (and published in left leaning publications who are not just trying to smear feminism by associating it with a radical fringe)?

We have so-called mainstream feminist leaders, such as Katherine Spiller who flat out deny that there are any areas where men suffer discrimination at all (she’ll allow that “minority men” do, but only due to racism). Do you think there’s any chance of “working together” with organisations with that sort of leadership? And, remember, she’s supposedly a mainstream “liberal” feminist. Not a Radfem.

You may well be sincere in your aim. But too many men just see feminist leaders either dismiss men’s issues out of hand, or belittle them, and certainly all of them believe they take a back seat to whatever women’s issue they care to nominate even if they admit the issue is a genuine one.

[–]RandomEqualist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]RandomEqualist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]RandomEqualist 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadett 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Angryasfk1 point 4 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What you mean is that you identify as a feminist and YOU don’t support this.

But acknowledged feminist leaders do. They must have a following or else they wouldn’t be leaders, even in a loose movement like feminism. So clearly a lot of women who identify as feminists actually do identify with this and think it truly does represent real feminism. And that’s the reason why feminism is seen this way.

You cannot really say these women aren’t feminists. Thousands, perhaps millions, see them as the true leaders of the movement: the inspiration and torchbearers! If they’re not “true feminism” then feminists have got to disown them, and make it clear that feminism rejects their stance.

I think the issue is that feminism will disproportionately attract man haters. And “patriarchy theory” is inherently man hatred no matter how it’s dressed up. And with all activism, the most “committed” will be the ones who ultimately define the movement. And man haters are much more likely to be committed to cause of “fighting patriarchy”. If you don’t like how feminism is perceived, you should reflect upon why that it is. It’s because those who pose as the leaders of the movement, and the so-called “experts” in “gender studies” are mostly like this. How you can combat this I can’t really say! Build a movement to repudiate them is the best I can offer. Perhaps a Reddit page “feminists for men” or something like that would be a way to start. But it’s going to be long and hard.

I’ve no doubt the MRM is going to attract guys with problems with women, either out and out misogynists or those dragged through divorce courts and deeply embittered as a result, or some sexually assaulted by women, who’ve had their crime dismissed because “everyone knows” it’s men and not women who do that! You can acknowledge the injustice of the damaged without necessarily demonising women. What’s more, this sub and what it represents it still at the consciousness raising stage, and is vehemently opposed by most feminists. It’s influence cannot be compared to the vast lobbying power and financed institutions of feminism. So who has the greater responsibility to rein in the extremists? Especially given these apparent “extremists” are the leadership of feminism!

I wish you luck in retaking the mantle of feminism from these people. But you have to accept the task you’d be taking on.

[–]cascadett -1 points0 points1 point 4 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]reddut_gang 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, it all goes back to the beginning.

White feminists were extremely vile to both men and black women. They partook in bombings, guilt tripped young men into serving the military, abused laws that favoured women to destroy some men and held extremely derogatory views of black women, excluding them from the movement.

Second wave was responsible for the duluth model and tender years doctrine. The doctrine is why custody cases are so biased towards women and the duluth model is based on the sexist assumption that only men are perpetrators and only women are victims on domestic violence case and somehow it has managed to be very prominent. If a woman abuses a man, the man will probably get arrested for that night. You can thank second wave feminism for that.

Third wave feminism does not even bother to hide its misandry as it just went mask off with their "killallmen" and "all men are rapists" bullshit. This further divides men and women. Not to mention the TERFS (which are honestly just regular feminists. their transphobia is 90% misandry because they hate them for being born male).

Idk much about fourth wave but from what I've heard it is more of the same. I do not expect such a hateful movement to suddenly become tolerant and real equality-focused in a couple of years.

[–]cascadett 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

White feminists were extremely vile to both men and black women. They partook in bombings, guilt tripped young men into serving the military, abused laws that favoured women to destroy some men and held extremely derogatory views of black women, excluding them from the movement.

those are not feminists. You all seem to have a warped view of feminism due to certain people like these calling themselves feminists. They obviously are not. search the definition on google and it will say feminism is about equality. there are soo many of us that want just that and yet people get a tainted view of feminism because of people that call themselves feminists when they aren't really.

I don't really know much about the stuff in the second para so I won't comment on it.

And the third para, again. Where did you find that on twitter? Because again that is NOT feminism. Please realize that. You saying feminism only divides due to such people who are clearly not feminists hurts feminists such as myself who reject such ideas. There are so many places where you can see actual feminists advocating for gender equality and never will they ever hate against a particular race, gender, religion etc. and ESPECIALLY won't partake in bombing. Those are NOT feminists. I beg you please understand the difference.

[–]reddut_gang 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

those are not feminists.

They got you the right to vote. I'm pretty sure they're feminists. Moreso than you'd ever be.

search the definition on google and it will say feminism is about equality.

what kind of equality? because the equality I see is an equality built on lies. I see manipulation of statistics to justify an overcorrection. I see people lied to about the privileges of being a man and it causing them to be filled with anger. I see a constant telling of one half of the story while ignoring or silencing the other half. And I see people buy this bullshit and spread it around like a virus. I can't stand for that, especially not when our position on equality keeps dwindling year after year.

I don't really know much about the stuff in the second para so I won't comment on it.

Look up duluth model and tender years doctrine.

And the third para, again. Where did you find that on twitter? Because again that is NOT feminism.

They're every bit of a feminist as you are. No doubt if you asked them if they were for women's rights, they'd tell you yes. They probably do fight for women's rights. So they are feminists.

There are so many places where you can see actual feminists advocating for gender equality and never will they ever hate against a particular race, gender, religion

And there are equally as many, if not more examples of feminists advocating for hatred. How am I supposed to ignore the large part of the movement that actively hurts men if none of the parts help men? I'm not asking for feminism to help men, but if it's going to hurt men in so many ways, least it should do to reverse the damage is to help them.

[–]Kumarsratan 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Doc_Steelhammer 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Commander_Milkstain 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link