Why feminism is facing a backlash.... [CMV]

Reginleifer · 2014-11-14T04:26:32+00:00

https://archive.today/M448g Feminism gets pretty cultish sometimes with feminists openly proclaiming that opposition to feminism is the reason we need...

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas25 points26 points27 points 11 years ago (82 children) | Copy Link

[–]homo_homini_lupus 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red12 points13 points14 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]homo_homini_lupus 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Actual minorities manage to be better than this.

Feminists do act as a vocal minority group. That's the part that bugs me most. Women are not a minority and they don't lack for privilege. They alienate and dilute voices of those that do need help by constantly whining over the trivial and demanding resources and change from the very "patriarchy" they rail against.

When that spoiled teenage daughter, who has daddy wrapped around her finger, demands more and more, at some point he just wants to kick her ass to the curb and tell her she's on her own.

And I get it that the good daughter is frustrated by her crazy sister's behavior, because the constant bitching spoils it for everyone. The family gets ripped apart by the toxicity.

Edit: At some point daddy's empathy runs dry. His nobility and charitable nature hardens. The leadership and benefit he would have offered is lost. The family turns increasingly dysfunctional. The sons watching this transpire say, "Fuck that noise" and refuse to enlist into a losing game.

You can interpret that on a macro level, but on a micro level I am that dad, my sons are those sons.

[–][deleted] 9 points9 points9 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points6 points6 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ECoast_ManRed Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]tubefox10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (13 children) | Copy Link

I agree that they overreacted it and at a wrong time, but you really don't understand the point. Nobody would give a fuck if some STEM chick wore a shirt with studs all over it because women don't control and dominate STEM. This matters. Overally, the emotional impact of a message always depends on the relative power positons of groups.

Imagine you are a white guy working at a research institute in Japan (one of the few places where anti-white racism is combined with enough power to have a bite), and people would radiate a kind of "white guys are stupid big oafs who are good for being bouncers only" kind of vibe. Get it? It would be uncomfortable. You would feel you are fighting an uphill battle for your opinion to count, to be listened to, to get credit for your work. You can still do it, it is just 2x as hard.

And this is really not rocket science, this can be figured out with minimal amount of empathy. In fact I have learned this logic originally in a sociological context of racism, namely that it means prejudice combined with power, not just prejudice alone. It is the relative power position that turns a stereotype from an entirely harmless fun to something that can have an emotional bite.

But I do agree that this was the wrong kind of reaction at a wrong time. It just comes accross as petty now.

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 12 points12 points12 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I think the other side understands this as well, but there is also a rejoinder :)

Basically, fuck all the radfems who turn this into shaming men and turning it into a zero sum you win or I win power game.

But if you ignore them, there are more modest voices (incl. male voices, like mine) saying that perhaps, working a bit on not even accidentally violating the emotions of others is probably a nice thing to do. That when and if you find yourself - accidentally - in a (group) position of power, going out of your way to make sure the less powerful group feels comfortable is simply a nice thing to do.

To put it differently, being genuinely caring means always accepting the meaning of the weakest side, the side that gets hurt most easily.

To use another parallel, in mixed traffic car drivers should be a lot more careful than cyclists, because they can hurt cyclists much more easily than cyclists can hurt them.

But you are perfectly right that these kind of stuff should not be weaponized into a zero-sum armwrestling match. It is something that works better when you do it voluntarily because you realized that it is how ideally utilitarian behavior works (taking a small cost on ourselves to prevent a potential larger damage to others).

Because, ultimately, you don't have to turn it into a power game either. You don't need to exercise your rights with the utmost amount of insensitivity.

[–][deleted] 8 points8 points8 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

No, you still don't fully get it. The modern world is already very much infantilized. It is simply admitting and adapting to the fact.

The modern world is infantilized because the brutal pressures that caused maturity before are not there anymore. The average 25 year old plays videogames (electronic toys), eats child food (chocolate, pizza) dresses like a child (extremely causally, baggy t-shirts) and more likely to get fat on Mountain Dew than on beer. Welcome to 25 is the new, ugh, 10.

Simply these old, harsh things like obligations or self-responsiblity aren't really there much anymore.

So, like all good kids in kindergarten, we learn to be not a meanie, but a nice one.

I think the folks signalling the goodpersonhood may have a standard deviaton lower IQ than I do and not realize all these things, but I did long ago. However, don't confuse causality. It is adaptation to an infantilized world, not making it so.

The primary reason to support lefty social justice causes is that both sides are infantile but the lefty side is the nice kids and the righty side is the meanies who enjoy saying hurtful things to others. Neither is actually mature. I mean which side was like a grown-up in Gamergate? Neither even close.

Because the pressures to grow up are not there anymore.

Do you think I am not aware that it has huge potential failure modes like Western civ getting conquered by Russia due to a sheer lack of character? Or in the best case a Iain M. Banks type of masturbatory sci-fi utopia? But it is impossible to fix it. Not until people start seeing some kind of existential danger like "holy shit if I don't get my shit together I may have to face stinking poverty" AND somehow certain systems becoming chaotic enough that responsible choices become both possible and necessary.

But until that there are only three kinds of people. The nice kids who are the lefties (except the more radical types) and bluepillers. The meanie kids who enjoy saying hurtful things, or even true things in a way that it hurts so that they can enjoy the effect. Righties and RP. The goal is largely to feel superior than the nice kids. (Their goal is the same, too.) It is not like that whatever is being said even matters anymore, it is all hot air anyway. And there are the grown-ups who occasinally tell the meanie kids to try to be nicer. Because there is no point in fucking with the nice kids, it is not like that they will stop being kids. This is why the grown-up must be leaning towards them and thus being lefty and bluepill. However it is more useful to tell meanie kids to be nice.

Please don't be under the illusion that the mean kids are not infantile. They are. They just mean as well.

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

working a bit on not even accidentally violating the emotions of others is probably a nice thing to do.

By "others" you mean women. The policing of language and behavior is all about not offending the more delicate sensibilities of women. I think that's bullshit because women's sensibilities are not delicate. This is more about demonizing and suppressing all forms of male aggression.

Certainly there's indication for addressing inappropriate behavior of men. But at what point has it gone too far? If I have to concern myself with diminishing myself as I walk down a street so female pedestrians I pass are not intimidated by my presence, that is getting ridiculous. The shirt I wear? This fem-rant is symptomatic of how the profitability of female complaining will promote all the more complaining.

Your viewpoint that women are the weaker side is interesting.

being genuinely caring means always accepting the meaning of the weakest side, the side that gets hurt most easily.

May you wave your white knight banner with honor.

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women who feel they are oppressed in computer science, because a few random guys in computer science(that wouldn't even be in control of anything) are viewed as having a negative attitude towards women(in all likelihood, they really didn't), are simply delusional. Men want women in STEM fields, and have done just about everything to encourage women getting in STEM(including completely tolerating being treated as second-rate human beings, or like "oppressors/lepers" that women need safe spaces from, to try and accommodate those women). Nerdy men are a lot more positively predisposed towards nerdy women than nerdy women have ever been towards nerdy men.

It is really messed up the way these women would even just group all men in STEM together, as one giant negative stereotype, and then use that stereotype to fuel their oppression fantasies. Men can't be bad because men are in power is a pretty fucked up mentality to have. There really isn't any male collective, or brotherhood, all working together to keep women down or out of STEM fields.

If a guy refused to enter a nursing field(a female dominated field), because some famous nurse was wearing a "I like dick" t-shirt, that guy would have some pretty serious fucking mental issues, or never really wanted to get into nursing in the first place.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

[–]meehan6665 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (29 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]meehan6666 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]meehan6662 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]meehan6662 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

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

[–]meehan6663 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]meehan6663 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]-1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The facts and evidence is all around you, you simply choose to ignore them.

Funny thing, if you Google "the evidence is all around you", the top two results are an atheism site and a religious site. Two contradicting views, making the exact same claims... why do you think that is?

You are living in your own little world(a world where men apparently can wear whatever they want

Wow, you know me better than I do. I didn't realize that was one of my opinions, but thanks for letting me know!

despite a man being brought to tears for having a shirt with women on it

And in your world men are oppressed in spite of the fact that women account for 25% of domestic violence victims while men account for 7.6%. In spite of the fact that only about 10% of rape victims are men. In spite of the fact that women are more likely to be the victims of domestic homicide (accounting for 63.7% of victims) and sex-related homicides (accounting for 81.7% of victims).

But hey, a man cried because he wore a distasteful shirt. Poor men.

and women are so damn oppressed, despite literally being able to dress in every which way they want regardless.

You know, I do think that women have greater liberty to dress how they like... but the notion that they can dress any way they like is pretty asinine. I definitely don't think a female scientist wearing a shirt covered in dicks would have gone over well.

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

If a white guy could wore a KKK hood to a Black Panther rally, he probably wouldn't be seen as much of a threat either.

Women are not, nor have they ever been, comparable to the way black people(especially men) were treated by the kkk. You cannot compare women's suffrage to the history of enslavement and bigotry towards blacks in America. You are truly delusional, if you think this is even remotely comparable. White women are, and have always been, the most privileged and protected class.

As a man, you're in a privileged position in a male-dominated field. Duh.

Being a man in STEM is not a "priviledged position", not even by a long shot. Your argument has no legs and really isn't grounded in reality. By your reasoning, there would be no white people(or even black people) in STEM fields because they are a minority compared to asian/indian men. Women are literally given every possible incentive and advantage to enter these fields, and men in STEM will literally bend over backwards to cater to those women.

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

if you think this is even remotely comparable.

I don't; I was trying to illustrate something else altogether. My point was that privilege is contextual, and that you can't really substitute what happened with your hypothetical scenario without accounting for that.

Being a man in STEM is not a "priviledged position", not even by a long shot. Your argument has no legs and really isn't grounded in reality

Other than the fact that men are much more likely to succeed in STEM fields for cultural/social reasons?

By your reasoning, there would be no white people(or even black people) in STEM fields because they are a minority compared to asian/indian men.

Yes, that would be my logic. There is a racial narrative in scientific communities, too.

Women are literally given every possible incentive and advantage to enter these fields, and men in STEM will literally bend over backwards to cater to those women.

You're confusing attempts to resolve differences in privilege with privilege itself. That's like saying that women in the 1920's were privileged because they gained the right to vote, in spite of the fact that men have had that right all along.

[–]Spartacus321 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Women self-assess their mathematics ability as lower than those of men with comparable achievements, while at the same time holding themselves at a higher standard.
Women often cite the belief that they have to be "exceptional" in order to pursue male-dominated fields.
Women who declare STEM degrees are more likely to drop out of programs in relation to men with comparable grades.
The lack of presence women have in STEM fields helps reinforce the idea that women do not have a place in them.
Women are often actively discouraged from pursuing STEM degrees by family members, coworkers, and fellow students. It is seen as "unwomanly".
The fields in which women do have a strong presence in often have some kind of relationship to stereotypical gender roles. The prominence of women in nursing, for example, can be understood in relation to the stereotype of women being caregivers/nurturing. (This is not a jab at women nurses, but it does help explain why women pursue these fields more often more than STEM fields)
Professors are more responsive to the needs of male, white students than those of women or racial minorities.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You wouldn't hear about it because no one gives a shit lol.

Not at all. There's plenty of men who are extremely quick to whine and bitch about supposed double standards (such as yourself) so even if they didn't care about the shirt itself they'd jump at the opportunity to provide proof that the double-standard exists.

In any case, I'm pretty sure that what would actually happen if a woman wore such a shirt is that she'd be dismissed as a slut and she would lose all scientific credibility. Women who dress like that don't make it to those kinds of positions; that's a strictly male privilege.

It's only feminists who make a big deal about this nonsense.

That's because it's only people who have a nuanced understanding of gender dynamics who understand why this is a problem.

Btw the shirt in question was designed by a woman who thinks the controversy is fucking ridiculous.

I was already aware. So what?

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Not at all. There's plenty of men who are extremely quick to whine and bitch about supposed double standards, so even if they didn't care about the shirt itself they'd jump at the opportunity to provide proof that the double-standard exists.

Even if that's true (you've not provided any evidence at all) it'd just be a reaction to the over-sensitive feminists, if they weren't whining about everything that they personally don't like no one would have to point out all the double standards they hold.

In any case, I'm pretty sure that what would actually happen if a woman wore such a shirt is that she'd be dismissed as a slut and all her credibility would be dismissed. Women who dress like that don't make it to those kinds of positions.

Loooooool. If that happened there would be a massive deal made of it, fucking lawsuit and everything if her job was affected.

What would actually happen is a few guys would laugh and then... that's it.

That's because it's only people who have a nuanced understanding of gender dynamics who understand why this is a problem.

"Only people who are looking for reasons to be offended think this is a problem."

I was already aware. So what?

Well you're calling a woman a misogynist. I don't expect you to care because this is the norm for SJWs anyway, obviously any woman who isn't a radical feminist is a gender traitor, but I'm just pointing out how retarded that viewpoint is.

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ExpendableOneNeither4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Snaaak 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]gprime3120 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]gprime3120 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago* (36 children) | Copy Link

LOL that shirt is ridiculous and gross. Yeah, they're making a mountain out of a molehill with that one.

Or should we recall elevatorgate, in which feminist Rebecca Watson made a huge rift in the atheist "community" by making a big deal out of being asked out for coffee in an elevator.

She didn't make a "big deal" out of it. She was at some atheist conference talking about how women feel uncomfortable and sexualised at those events -- only to have a guy preposition her in an elevator afterwards hey, I really liked your talk on women feeling like sex objects at these things; wanna come up to my room?. All she said was that that wasn't cool then major butthurt resulted with our lord and saviour Richard Dawkins even chiming in.

I'm not commenting on whether her concerns re women at atheist conferences were valid or not, but there was no need for the epic butthurt that it elicited. I actually find it disturbing how easily men are outraged by women expressing discomfort at untoward behaviour.

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczar1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]niczar1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla2 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Well, no, there are plenty of known people who have made death threats. There was actually an NPR story about it on Friday (though it focused more on law enforcement response). Anti-harassment policies give conference organizers a way to identify and ban such people from the conferences. They wouldn't stop death threats from other mediums, but they help to make the conferences themselves better places. Plus, the simple act of establishing a code of conduct helps to maintain a certain decorum and lets people know ahead of time what behavior is acceptable and what is frowned upon.

But I still don't see why such a thing would upset you. People wanting an anti-harassment policy is a far cry from a "shit show". Seems like a rather innocuous request. What kind of dickhead would be opposed to one?

[–]niczar1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]nope_nic_tesla1 point 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago* (20 children) | Copy Link

Watsons comment about the elevator incident was pretty innocuous, she didn't name and shame the guy, accuse him of rape or whatever. It was the backlash against the comment that turned it into a "big deal", you're pointing the finger at the feminists exclusively when it was a big bickering match between both sides.

Why? Because she hit a sore point. Many men have an insecurity about asking women out. So when she made the comment there was an immediate influx of guys and MRA types going "oh so I'm NOT ALLOWED to ask women out anymore? IM NOT ALLOWED? Fucking feminists!" And so on, and then it spiralled from there.

You're saying "it's not a big deal why don't you just get over it already" when It's you who just brought up the incident years later. Keeping this dumb thing alive so you can percieve it's everyone ELSE who's unduely hysterical about it.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (18 children) | Copy Link

It's you who just brought up the incident years later.

Yes, I brought it up along with other examples of feminists attacking others for seemingly stupid shit. She wasn't attacked, she was dismissed, waved away..... people saying it was bullshit doesn't make it an attack. The attacks came later with the accusations of privilege and misogyny that comes later.

I'm NOT ALLOWED to ask women out anymore? IM NOT ALLOWED? Fucking feminists

Well say what you want about MRA's, they weren't exactly wrong.... males aren't really allowed to express sexual interests anymore outside of a very narrow scope. Fuck feminists passed that bullshit rape standard in California, and that was unthinkable outside of the Scandinavian countries 5 years ago. Dealing with feminists it is best to shoot not where they are, but where they're going to be apparently.

you're pointing the finger at the feminists exclusively .

Well clearly no other group seems to get in as much conflict as the feminists..... it's a generally safe assumption to make that if one person keeps on getting into fights with others the common factor (or person) is usually the culprit.

And to make things abundantly clear, I don't care for feminism, I don't care for atheism, I'm not a member of the tech community nor do I have any special interest in the European space program. I'm taking this from a purely outsider perspective that if these feminists are allowed to infiltrate something, they usually blow it up. Those "gates" are done, over..... but all I'm saying is that we can learn from those experiences and use them to understand why anti-feminist perspectives evolve in other places.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, I brought it up along with other examples of feminists attacking others for seemingly stupid shit. She wasn't attacked, she was dismissed, waved away..... people saying it was bullshit doesn't make it an attack. The attacks came later with the accusations of privilege and misogyny that comes later.

This is bizarre because in the same paragraph you're trying to justify that the feminist complaints = an attack, while the MRA complaints = totally not an attack.

It highlights the double standard you've got going on. You're blind to the way these things esculate which typically involves two sides, and as such you're blind to your own participation in it.

Well say what you want about MRA's, they weren't exactly wrong.... males aren't really allowed to express sexual interests anymore outside of a very narrow scope.

To put this back in context:

A woman was made uncomfortable in an elevator 2/3 years ago.

You are still bringing this up as evidence of how you are "not allowed" to talk to women anymore.

It is not her who needs to let this one go.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Those catcallers do it because it's low effort and it works on some women no matter how small a chance.

Those catcallers do it because its a mark of territorialism and they see all women walking through said area they occupy as persons to receive attention. Guys driving by shouting "WOOOOOOOOOOO!" at me at 11'oclock at night are not expecting me to break into a sprint after their departing cars crying "wait, wait... I love you!"

If women want to really fix this women simply must ALL stop responding to it.

Right then, we'll put that on our AllWomenEverywhere meeting agenda.

Catcall a 100 chicks daily for a week you are going to score at least one.

Sounds like something that could be easily measured. Why don't you find a nice street corner and shout "Heeeeeeey!" at a hundred women every day for the next week. Maybe we could start a kickstarter! For Science!

[–]yaseedog will hunt-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Those catcallers do it because its a mark of territorialism and they see all women walking through said area they occupy as persons to receive attention. Guys driving by shouting "WOOOOOOOOOOO!" at me at 11'oclock at night are not expecting me to break into a sprint after their departing cars crying "wait, wait... I love you!"

All guys that catcall are simply marking their turf from invading women? Really?

Right then, we'll put that on our AllWomenEverywhere meeting agenda.

Might I suggest you book the same venue with the Annual Patriarchy Meeting of 2015? Greater discounts on drinks and unlimited wifi.

Sounds like something that could be easily measured. Why don't you find a nice street corner and shout "Heeeeeeey!" at a hundred women every day for the next week. Maybe we could start a kickstarter! For Science!

They should totally make a video about that. Then they should make sure there are no white chicks in it ('cause of ambient noise) and then ask for money so they could fix most women not responding to that sort of tactic.

Not to joke anymore but I knew a guy that would approach women and simply say "Wanna make out?". 1 out of 30-50 would say "Sure". The dude made out with a lot of girls.

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

All guys that catcall are simply marking their turf from invading women? Really?

Nope. They see women as part of the scenery. It's about defining their relationship with the environment, kind of like a person visiting their parents and going to raid the fridge for snacks. Or if it's like you visit your buddy and start playing around with his dog. The liberties that you are permitted to take represent your relationship with whomever you are doing them at.

The reason why women don't like it is because it boxes us into a particular kind of social position- and the power relationship is implied when he only does it to women because if he did it to men he's afraid he'd be counting his teeth, just like you can pat your buddy's dog, but if you start patting your buddy the same way he might give you an awkward seal face.

Not to joke anymore but I knew a guy that would approach women and simply say "Wanna make out?". 1 out of 30-50 would say "Sure". The dude made out with a lot of girls

Yeah, but cat calling really isn't a sincere effort to get into my pants. That's a separate category of interaction. Which is my point.

"OMG NIIIIIIIICE!" through to straight up to miming sex or even flashing the target is about the interaction itself and its effect, not a supremely low stakes way to actually get laid.

Might I suggest you book the same venue with the Annual Patriarchy Meeting of 2015? Greater discounts on drinks and unlimited wifi.

We tried that. Then we realized that under the working definition of the patriarchy as used by most feminists it doesn't mean 'all men' it means 'very few persons in a power relationship similar to something biblical, shitting on everyone'.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Yes, I brought it up along with other examples of feminists attacking others for seemingly stupid shit. She wasn't attacked, she was dismissed, waved away..... people saying it was bullshit doesn't make it an attack. The attacks came later with the accusations of privilege and misogyny that comes later.

She got rape threats, death threats after an innocuous comment on her own blog, Dawkins himself chimed into the mess. You don't have to do much as a woman online to drive a contingent of men batshit insane. There's plenty of other examples of women getting harassed online for no reason by angry dudes who just want to take a woman down a notch…but how dare feminists/women complain about this. They're "whining", while the men whining about the "whining" have legit concerns, apparently. Elevatorgate was totes the feminists overreacting. The MRA types were behaving perfectly civilly. Rape threats, death threats and constant online harassment is apparently what "waving" something away looks like.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, the molehill escalation problem is also a squeaky wheel getting the grease problem. A few persons saying "I say, that's a bit off. We should discuss this!" become a pebble that sinks to the bottom of the lake of popular discourse with nary a ripple. On the other hand the bigger the rock you drop in, the bigger the splash you make, and that takes some people taking it to howling escalation.

Then when you do get noticed someone turns around and tells you "You (feminists/lefties/conservatives/whatever) are too whiny and hysterical. Maybe if you acted nice, calm and patient people would listen to you more!"

And this is why every single major election in Canada and the US gets treated like the last step before Armageddon, because simply admitting you're choosing two very similar civil administrators won't fly. :P

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Right, but you'd be shocked at the sort of innocuous shit that leads to rape threats and death threats against women online. I think it's a venue for a lot of men who really loathe women to lash out and try to bring the bitches down a peg.

Oh, I'd be willing to bet on you being right on the money here (and I usually don't bet on things I am not certain of).

However, it's not really surprising - first, you have cyber-bullies of all stripes and colors, and who says misogynists are extempt from that? Second, and this is probably more important, that anti-feminist sort cyber-bullying is just the tip of the iceberg.

Because the less people see their own (political) views and interests represented by public sources or personalities, and since there is no real public opposition to feminism of note or importance (the MRM doesn't really count), that discontent gets its outlet pretty much exclusively over the internet.

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]DocileBanalBovine -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]DocileBanalBovine -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]cascadecombo2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

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

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]DocileBanalBovine -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MakeMoneyNotWar3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]justskatedude1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SquidwardsEuphoriafemale neckbeard1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

why do I

Welcome to my life as a "Chicano". :P Yeah I get shit on for liking American culture, and I get ragged for not automatically supporting their positions (which is not to say I am against them).

Funny thing is, what awakened me to this cynicism was Jesse Jackson, I saw him playing his people for everything and I looked back on my own movements and saw the same. I've changed in that I no longer consider any movement as "sacred" I just view them as organizations lead by people who may or may not be using their base as self-promotion tools.

Jezebel, XOJane, etc...

Right/Left, they all do the same it's mostly done out of profit though, those clickbait sensationalist stories. It's hard to find a reliable source of activist news anymore. I used to subscribe to Alternet, now it's almost 100% shit.

[–]GridReXXit be like that3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]gstvtrp4 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

I think the shirt thing is a bit of a gross over reaction. It's an effort to try to describe a problem (eg some things being structurally represented as a "boys thing") where some hapless bastard got pilloried.

In general when something is plastered with pictures of sexualized lady, it is a clear signal to women " this is not for you". However I don't think this really deserved more than an "eh, that is probably too nuanced a level of irony- the poor guy was probably trying to convey "I am a hip young brain with intentionally gaudy taste".

There's been a backlash as long as feminism has been a thing. We always get called over sensitive, angry and controlling. Also ugly, frigid, over sexed and in need of corrective violence, including rape. Personally I believe someone will always announce "feminism has gone too far!!!"

As a feminist, this guys shirt is not a hill I choose to die on. But I saw this as being basically the naked blonde lady version of three wolf shirt. It's unfortunate, but more a sign of how unthinking we tend to be about Boobz As Decoration rather than some unique to STEM conspiracy. And that's a conversation that's way too nuanced for just "omg STEM!" on twitter

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

We always get called over sensitive, angry and controlling.

That's because you are. Who really looks at this guy they approached for the interview and think "Oh man, I can never join that field"? Just on the basis of his fucking shirt... I will never understand the fucked up mental processes of women who actually feel this way. Nor the women who feel it is his fucking responsibility to care what the cunts think.

I can't read this and not see this outrage as anything but a really desperate plea for attention to a dying and irrelevant movement. The idea that women aren't in science because of the extremely nebulous and insignificant of cases sexism like this AND OTHERWISE speaks very lowly of women.

The idea that women need shit like this to be handled for them before they ever touch the idea of having ambition is ridiculous. If shit like a stupid shirt discourages you then GTFO. Why should all these changes in decoration of shirts, lights, talk, and behaviour occur years in advance of you even entering the room? Fuck that.

IMHO, feminists like these are exceptionally mediocre and bitter individuals who never managed to do anything with their lives and want to blame things for it. Kinda like the newbies flooding redpill.

They are not over-sensitive. They are hyper-sensitive hysterical first-world-problem pushing spoiled white girls with nothing better to do. I absolutely vehemently reject the excuses these over-grown little girls push around that girls are not trying just because somebody neglected to light that one bulb on their fucking runway with landing lights. Because even when it has been provided, in a way unlike to any other group, they still do fuck-all with it.

Any valid excuses that existed have long been eradicated. The only factor playing a role is their own lack of interest. Not lack of $100K degrees. Not affirmative action. Not anything. Just their lack of ambition which they've trained themselves to off-load the responsibility for onto the world and men at large. "MAKE US FEEL WELCOME" before the princesses will come in and grace us with their presence.

The idea that you can be discouraged from something you're good at and want to do just because its a fucking girls club does not occur to me. Even if it was a nursing job, I could not care less if some bitch there did not want to welcome me. I would invade their space and mark my territory jungle style if I had to.

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

The idea that you can be discouraged from something you're good at and want to do just because its a fucking girls club does not occur to me. Even if it was a nursing job, I could not care less if some bitch there did not want to welcome me. I would invade their space and mark my territory jungle style if I had to.

/puts on her best nasaly imitation voice

"You masculinists are so aggressive. You're not really cut out for $ladyfield if castration and sacking jokes hurt your manfeels. Of course we spent the time before the training started discussing why men were hysterical and unfit for nursing or teaching. See, the fact that you told her to shut up really shows how aggressive you are. Control yourself!

And really, if you don't want to join our M/M slash fiction club or come watch Twilight marathons with us, you're simply not going to have a reason to complain if you can't make any contacts to get ahead in your field. But I mean if you go to these of course people are going to think you're totally gay or in love with one of us. Yeah, the boss said she wanted to see you and the other guy in the office make out but come on, she's a woman and you're a hot guy."

(etc... etc...)

Less silly, hey buddy, see you in any number of the girls clubs I occupy. Wanna pin things? Or... We could do makeup or maybe I could critique your fiction! I mean I assume I'm a better writer than you because its a female dominated hobby <snrk, snrk, sorry>

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you have a very good idea of who I am.

Allow me to repeat it if I didn't highlight it properly last time: I would mark my territory with shit and piss... AND theirs... if they became impediments in my way.

I am an Indian working in sales in Japan. I'm speaking from a bit of experience at asserting leadership. In my view, ambition is something that cannot be halted by social exclusion. And if it requires that you be liked, then instead of fighting it, you can win it over. Instead of fighting to be included, you can take the route of acclimatizing to the system and changing it from within; a key principle of democracy. Modern-day first world feminism is the equivalent of thugs refusing to play by the rules of the field they are trying to penetrate, and demanding that the field instead play by theirs.

I think it is a travesty that they are being allowed to do this.

If I could go on an interview and wear this shirt to crush the dreams of these over-grown little girls, I would. These men should find the courage to remain their "boys club" as best they can.

You know what? The stance taken by TRP is best. Do not give a woman an inch. Because she will want that mile. Instead have her earn her inch. Like everyone else.

And as for any feminist reading this: Stop infantalizing yourself and have a bit of dignity for your gender.

[–][deleted] 0 points0 points0 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

it is making me uncomfortable. :/

Good. The message carried through then.

I do not care for people's feelings, values, comfort or excuses. If I have something to contribute and I am being sabotaged, I will crush them. And if that's unfeasible, I will endeavour to any manner of brain-fucking I have to to make them understand these facts.

As well as one thing more: this is my space now. And you do not fucking screw with me.

There is no fucking drivel like "men can be nurses too" that would ever escape my lips. Because fuck your beliefs. I do not care to change them. They are beneath me.

All that is real is that I am a nurse and you are in my way.

Somebody PM'ed me yesterday about how a comment of mine inspired them on this topic. A woman coincidentally. At the risk of seeming immodest, allow me repeat it here to make my point more clear.

I'm even worse than a white guy in Japan. I'm an Indian. I make it work. Because my passion for travel and living here and my career is bigger than any racist fuck's entire reason to live.

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I was presented with a hypothetical play-acted scenario of nurses as if that contradicted my point about women being over-grown little girls for giving up their passions and going home because of tshirts.

What followed was a demonstration of what I was talking about. My personal recommended attitude in reaction to what I've faced. It is not me being militant, it is exactly the attitude of a doer, when in a hostile environment.

The fact that you feel the need to call for nice-talk when a feeling of this sort is put into words, in a conversation on what would stop you. Shows me you've never been in a position of having to fight for something in your life.

(And I am aware saying "hostile environment" is giving these teenagers more credit for their grievances than they deserve. But even still, whatever enemy, however t-shirt like, that you feel threatens you, fight it. Do not whine.)

Or maybe I'm misinterpreting. The reason you feel my tone is over-dramatized when it is in fact, not dramatized is maybe my language is making you uncomfortable and unwelcome in some way... while I admit I'm not the best at putting my tone in english I still want my reply to be: "I don't care" and "good".

[–][deleted] 1 points1 points1 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]M_rafayCrimson Red0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I felt the exact same way as a angsty teenager...

Fair point. For a lot of guys, their growth has been stunted and they're stuck at a teenager level. Many of them never benefited from locker-room talk and that's the starting point for them. Some, like me, enjoy revisiting a place where we got to be loud and somewhat inappropriate.

The perspective at TRP is unquestionably narrow. I've met few rad-fems and don't hang around bar bitches - those seem to be the segments most focused upon.

On the other hand, many young guys are increasingly angry at the second class treatment they are given. Men in general are tired of the pandering of women by media and politics.

Male anger is rising, and not just from redneck Billy-Bob's, but from the highly-educated who had to fight every fucking step of the way to get ahead in an education system skewed to favor women. A system that breeds feminine radicalism and force-feeds its doctrine. A guy has the choice of compliant white knightism or seething silence. When they finally have a chance to speak, their hostility comes pouring out.

[–][deleted] 2 points2 points2 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ayyeih-na_eloheykhem -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man8 points9 points10 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm saying that certain packaging causes something to signal expected roles for women intentional or otherwise. In this particular case, as I also explicitly stated, the explosion in question is too heavy for the circumstance. HOWEVER:

The presence of boobs as wallpaper is a typical sign that if you are a boob haver you may be expected to participate primarily as wallpaper or you are not the intended audience of whatever it is.

The origins of the shirt are entirely a red herring- being a woman does not preclude sexism and claiming "but, but, but a woman made it!" demonstrates a poor understanding of the sort of scenario being alluded to. Similarly the subject of the women's strength is completely and utterly as irrelavent as her hair colour.

For example let's say I am trying to get more men into nursing (a worthy pursuit). If the office environment is decorated in a feminine fashion, all the outwards facing materials and personnel costumed to show "lady thing" and so on, this may present a barrier of entry.

This no way implies a conspiracy, just that the guy accidentally twigged one of the heuristics that persons use for sorting and its turned into a tempest in a teapot.

[–]cuittlerಠ_ಠ-2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (23 children) | Copy Link

I don't know how much of a backlash exists, but here is my take on it:

Because the really big issues have to an extent been conquered (women can vote, women can go to universities, women can have careers and there are some women at the top, birth control is available, abortions are available-ish), the people who are feminist activists today are more likely to be extremists and possibly more likely to be lesbian (or why else is there such a link between the pro-gay stuff and feminism?). These people can take it too far for the mainstream and provoke a backlash.

There are still battles to be fought (for example access to abortion in some parts of the US, sexism in toys, better movies, shows, and games for women, workplace issues in terms of wages/promotions, possible "boys clubs" at the top that don't want to include women, stuff around maternity leave and work/family balance), but maybe they're just not big enough issues to motivate ordinary people.

Plus, lesbians and straight women may have different goals. I'm a feminist, but I'm also a straight woman. I'm attracted to strength and masculinity. I want to be with a guy who is a good provider and who can take care of me. I think being with a man I can depend on in a situation where earning money is optional for me is better than being an "independent woman". I don't know to what extent this is something lesbians identify with. I guess they do have butch and femme.

I'm a feminist in the sense of equal opportunities for women (and this would start in childhood, hence my mention of sexism in toys), in the sense of entertainment being as much for female tastes as for male tastes (in general, individual works could be for a specific gender), in the sense of women not being excluded, in the sense of the workplace being as much tailored to the female nature (i.e. taking account pregnancy, young children, family responsibilities) as the male nature. But I think men and women are different on average. I don't want men to become feminized, either in reality or in entertainment. I don't want dual income families to become the expectation, as it means only the men at the top will be able to fully support their wives.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Well, it says the "feminism" is not just about "whatever women want, whatever".

Feminism is an immensely complicated movement with a lot of room for internal arguments. For example some feminists see banning sex work as being a key cause, others, like myself, will glower unhappily at the former group and call them sexist.

Nuanced conversations about the subject include observing that all this gender stuff is generally wound into all sorts of other issues like religion and class and so on. It's also a discussion that involves ever progressively moving goal posts.

Take the criticism of the Disney Princess shtick. Every time Disney vomits out a new Princess for the entirety of my lifespan, she gets hailed as being 'different'. Ariel was considered progressive for wanting more, Jasmine was written as spunky, Belle as a bookworm straight up to the latest wank about Frozen and how progressive that's supposed to be.

But the truth is that straight up to Princess 1.0, the stories have generally been about whatever the most powerful versions of femaleness are for what they have to work with- often grafting on extra parts to the original fairytale to add considerably more agency in female selection than the story had- for example both Snow White and Sleeping Beauty were established as knowing their princes before magic roofies time. As time passed, you continued to see a deviation from the story version either towards or away from more agency as was in the source material.

But precisely because these movies also seek to inform their audience about what femaleness is as well as prove palatable to persons motivated into producing the outcomes they want with their daughters, they're in the centre of an endless cycle of critical rejection of the last decade's batch of women for our new ideas.

And any discussion on gender is going to be extremely superficial if you try to phrase it in terms of the evil, evil menz denying women what they want, and not the meaning, language and symbols, and the resulting expectations for both genders and its ongoing and evolving impact.

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Because the really big issues have to an extent been conquered (women can vote, women can go to universities, women can have careers and there are some women at the top, birth control is available, abortions are available-ish), the people who are feminist activists today are more likely to be extremists and possibly more likely to be lesbian (or why else is there such a link between the pro-gay stuff and feminism?). These people can take it too far for the mainstream and provoke a backlash.

There are still battles to be fought (for example access to abortion in some parts of the US, sexism in toys, better movies, shows, and games for women, workplace issues in terms of wages/promotions, possible "boys clubs" at the top that don't want to include women, stuff around maternity leave and work/family balance), but maybe they're just not big enough issues to motivate ordinary people.

Exactly this! The basic ideals have already been accepted by the mainstream. Now, feminism seems mostly obsessed with the lack of women in the 1% (not really relevant to most young women who aren't uber-ambitious); and LGBT issues. It also gets into really, super PC territory quite a lot ("there aren't only two sexes, this form excludes trans/intersex people!", "men who identify as women can get pregnant too so don't assume all pregnant people are female!") -- stuff that just makes you "wtf? Are these people for real? Do they live in this dimension?". And of course there's the whining about what looks a lot like the first world problems of privileged white girls.

The perception of feminism as man-hating and lesbian-y doesn't help either. I think that's what drives a lot of young women away -- they don't want to scare away men, or be seen as undesirable, and feminism doesn't really feel relevant to them since women have all the legal and political rights and opportunities that men do, and have for a while now. It just feels like overkill; the war has been won, time to go home!

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I dunno, the feminist stuff I tend to get involved in tends to be for example, an examination of depictions of women in art and cultural tropes, relentlessly telling anti-choice types to go fuck themselves, and trying to work out the whole childcare problem. I also have an interest in the cis/trans stuff. And the whole rape culture slap fight.

As a Canadian I enjoy more opportunities for equality than a woman in the US. I also have a bunch of issues that are technically shading into intersectional feminism (feminism +). For example I have bits of MRA regarding my views on custody. My views on child support laws nudge into socialism (collective responsibility) over a consequences model.

As far as Lesbians being in bed with feminists, that's always been the case, possibly because they are one of the categories most harmed by structurally enforced dependency on men through heterosexual relationships.

My own dog in the fight is a personal interest in improvement of quality of life for both genders and an iconoclastic desire to tackle gender assumptions for both sexes.

[–]RedPillDadRustled Jimmies1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]give_me_shinieshere for the bants0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

There are still battles to be fought (for example access to abortion in some parts of the US,

OK.

sexism in toys,

What? Explain.

better movies, shows, and games for women,

I'm pretty sure my first comment on this account was in regard to exactly this bullshit. If women want better movies for them they need to vote with their money. Business isn't going to cater to them if there is no market there.

workplace issues in terms of wages/promotions,

Like what? The pay gap is mostly bullshit. What little there is is simply still unexplained with current models. Until they account for ~100% I'm not going go calling discrimination on it. Warren Farrell said he was hired by some big corp a while ago to see why they can't get more women in senior management. What he found was that women after $150000 salaries simply start losing interest in higher positions. They simply start focusing more on their personal/family life.

possible "boys clubs" at the top that don't want to include women,

To get to those clubs you need to be connected, highly competent or both.

stuff around maternity leave and work/family balance),

What about it?

but maybe they're just not big enough issues to motivate ordinary people.

Have you considered that perhaps they aren't even issues for ordinary people?

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

What? Explain.

Toys are gendered. If you happen to be a girl who wants to play with guns and cars, your parents might not get those toys for you. Or if you were the kind of girl who would have liked those toys in a gender-neutral environment gendered advertising, peer pressure, and parental pressure might prevent you from forming those interests to begin with. IMO toys shouldn't be gendered so that kids can grow up to choose what they genuinely have the most fun with.

I'm pretty sure my first comment on this account was in regard to exactly this bullshit. If women want better movies for them they need to vote with their money. Business isn't going to cater to them if there is no market there.

You can only vote with your money for something that has been made. Hunger Games and Twilight for example have been very popular, and both are based on books written by female authors. However, the majority of writers, directors, and producers in the film industry are male, and males might be more likely to tell stories that end up being more appealing to males than females. Also, if males are in charge of deciding what gets made, they might have a bias for stories appealing to males.

And there definitely is a market (i.e. see the success of Twilight, Hunger Games).

Like what? The pay gap is mostly bullshit. What little there is is simply still unexplained with current models. Until they account for ~100% I'm not going go calling discrimination on it. Warren Farrell said he was hired by some big corp a while ago to see why they can't get more women in senior management. What he found was that women after $150000 salaries simply start losing interest in higher positions. They simply start focusing more on their personal/family life.

I don't know how they measure the pay gap, but if they compare job by job this would ignore possible discrimination in promotions. If a man and a woman are equal in education and ability, and start in the same entry level position, but the man gets promoted more than the woman does because he's a man, he could end up making much more after say 40 years of working and this would never be picked up in a study that compares by specific job (since due to being promoted more, the man could have a completely different job).

Second there is still the unexplained gap, which could be due to discrimination, and it's not nothing and adds up over a lifetime. And this affects men too. If you're married and your wife works, that's money your whole family is losing out on, or if your mom worked it's less money for you to inherit (or could cause her to need money in her old age).

And even if women are more likely than men to lose interest in higher positions, that's not true for all women. There are clearly women who very much want to be at the top.

Here is an example of sexism at the top (article about Harvard Business School):

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/education/harvard-case-study-gender-equity.html?pagewanted=all

This was the lopsided situation that women in business school were facing: in intellectual prestige, they were pulling even with or outpacing male peers, but they were not “touching the money,” as Nori Gerardo Lietz, a real estate private equity investor and faculty member, put it. A few alumnae had founded promising start-ups like Rent the Runway, an evening wear rental service, but when it came to reaping big financial rewards, most women were barely in the game.

At an extracurricular presentation the year before, a female student asked William Boyce, a co-founder of Highland Capital Partners, a venture capital firm, for advice for women who wanted to go into his field. “Don’t,” he laughed, according to several students present. Male partners did not want them there, he continued, and he was doing them a favor by warning them.

(Putting this text here to break up the quote...)

What about it?

If in order to succeed in a particular career a person has to work very long hours (say 60 hours a week) and if taking a few years off will really hurt their chances of success, it will be unfriendly to women who want to become mothers. This is bad for women who might end up having to choose between their dream career and having children, but also for society if say it causes the more talented women not to have children or to only have one child.

Having maternity (and frankly paternity) leave, more family friendly hours would address that. Making it possible to do those careers part time would as well.

Have you considered that perhaps they aren't even issues for ordinary people?

Oh I think they affect many of us, I mean the toys thing could affect every tomboy or girls who would have been tomboys, entertainment affects women's quality of life, wage/promotion issues affects women but also their families (which might include men and boys), work/life balance stuff affects probably affects most people, even single men as there might be men who would prefer to do their dream careers part time.

But what is an ordinary person going to do about that?

[–][deleted] 4 points4 points4 points 11 years ago | Copy Link

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]niczarRed Pill Man1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

What does it mean for females to prefer X to Y? Does it mean all females love X and hate Y? Or might it mean that as a group females spend 60% of their time with X and 40% of their time with Y (with some females having a strong preference for X, some, but fewer having a strong preference for Y, and many having weak or no preference for either)?

Do tomboys exist? Are there girls who prefer stereotypically male toys to stereotypically female toys? Girls who like stereotypically male toys as much as they like stereotypically female toys? Or how about girls who might prefer stereotypically female toys, but like stereotypically male toys as well?

Boys playing with girls' toys may be more weird than the reverse. I'm going to throw out the speculation that it's because boys' toys are more about having fun. Something like shooting water guns at each other or building roads for cars in a sandbox or playing video games could be generally fun and much more gender neutral than say looking pretty and taking care of babies. Maybe stereotypical girls' toys are at least as much if not more about socializing girls' to be something that's pleasant/useful to men as they are about girls having fun, so a boy finding that interesting might be more weird than a girl wanting to run around with a water gun.

Regarding social construction, consider this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child#Reality

Feral children lack the basic social skills that are normally learned in the process of enculturation. For example, they may be unable to learn to use a toilet, have trouble learning to walk upright after walking on fours all their life, and display a complete lack of interest in the human activity around them. They often seem mentally impaired and have almost insurmountable trouble learning a human language. The impaired ability to learn a natural language after having been isolated for so many years is often attributed to the existence of a critical period for language learning, and taken as evidence in favor of the critical period hypothesis.[2]

There is little scientific knowledge about feral children. One of the best-known examples, the “detailed diaries” of Reverend Singh, who claimed to have discovered Amala and Kamala (two girls who had been “brought up from birth by wolves”) in a forest in India, has been proven a fraud to obtain funds for his orphanage. Child psychologist Bruno Bettelheim states that Amala and Kamala were born mentally and physically disabled.[3]

Assuming source 2 is credible, something as basic as walking upright is not innate but needs to be taught.

Also, there being innate preferences doesn't mean toy stereotypes go along innate preferences. My impression is that the role of women in patriarchal societies is putting her husband and children first, and that the woman's own dreams and happiness weren't seen as important. (It's not surprising women rebelled against this.) Toy stereotypes from such societies might reflect this.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

IMO toys shouldn't be gendered so that kids can grow up to choose what they genuinely have the most fun with.

But you do know how marketing works?

However, the majority of writers, directors, and producers in the movie industry are male, and I would argue males are inclined to tell stories that would be more appealing to males than females. Also, if males are in charge of deciding what gets made, they might have a bias for stories appealing to males.

That's one weird conspiracy theory there. Males who are in charge of deciding what gets made have a bias for stories that make money. So if "women's movies" aren't even seen by women, where's the point in making them? (check out how many of them you know).

If in order to succeed in a particular career a person has to work very long hours (say 60 hours a week) and if taking a few years off will really hurt their chances of success, it will be unfriendly to women who want to become mothers. This is bad for women who might end up having to choose between their dream career and having children, but also for society if say it causes the more talented women not to have children or to only have one child.

Well, sometimes you simply can't have everything. The same way you can't work your ass off and have abundant leisure time, the same it's impossible to work your ass off and be able to be a full-time mother - if the numbers don't add up, it's not because Chronos is a misogynist asshole, but a sign that it's up to you to compromise what you want more in life.

Besides, the whole issue can be seen in reverse, because women who do want become housewives and mothers have the option to completely drop out of the corporate system, an option not open to men (or how many men who would be willing to take care of the domestic scene would find willing career women to marry and carry them?), and you don't see cries of outrage and people shouting "misandry!" over that imbalance.

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

That's one weird conspiracy theory there. Males who are in charge of deciding what gets made have a bias for stories that make money. So if "women's movies" aren't even seen by women, where's the point in making them? (check out how many of them you know).

Yes they want to make money, but how do they decide what will make them money? If they go based off their personal judgment of what is enjoyable, they might end up disproportionately choosing things that are enjoyable to males.

Also do they choose from the available options? Ideas pitched to them by others in the industry?

Take a look at this:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/men-dominate-film-industry-study/story?id=13439590

After decades of gender equality efforts in many parts of American life, an analysis of the 100 top-grossing movies of 2008 found that men still have an advantage over women in film: Only 32.8 percent of the speaking parts were given to women.

The study looked beyond just on-camera roles, also finding that only 8 percent of directors, 13.6 percent of writers and 19.1 percent of producers were female.

"Most male writers, directors or producers will write story lines, create story lines that feature more male characters," said Stacy Smith, who co-led the study by researchers at the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, along with Marc Choueiti.

Not only that, but 13-to-20-year-old girls continue to be "hypersexualized in film," according to the study. A substantially higher percentage of young women are shown wearing revealing attire then are men.

In fact, 39.8 percent of females wore revealing attire in movies, compared to 6.7 percent of males. And females are shown partially naked 30.1 percent of the time, compared to 10.3 percent for males.

,

However, when one or more female screenwriters are involved in penning a script, the percentage of female characters jumps by 14.3 percent.

I can see two questions worth asking: 1) do you need female writers and the like to create better entertainment for women, or can male writers do it just as well, and 2) if male writers can do this, will they, or will they write stories they themselves would enjoy (which might lead to a bias toward stories appealing to males)?

Well, sometimes you simply can't have everything. The same way you can't work your ass off and have abundant leisure time, the same it's impossible to work your ass off and be able to be a full-time mother - if the numbers don't add up, it's not because Chronos is a misogynist asshole, but a sign that it's up to you to compromise what you want more in life.

Yes, but how long people are expected to work is to an extent determined by society.

I think it's possible for society as a whole to regulate what employers can expect. For example having a 30-40 hour workweek and requiring employers to pay 10x for overtime in all professions might greatly reduce situations where a person would need to work 60 hour weeks in order to succeed.

Besides, the whole issue can be seen in reverse, because women who do want become housewives and mothers have the option to completely drop out of the corporate system, an option not open to men (or how many men who would be willing to take care of the domestic scene would find willing career women to marry and carry them?), and you don't see cries of outrage and people shouting "misandry!" over that imbalance.

It's an option for men, but they would need to find a willing female partner and that would probably be harder than the reverse.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

If they go based off their personal judgment of what is enjoyable, they might end up disproportionately choosing things that are enjoyable to males.

Again, they rarely do that. They just have to produce stuff, and let the directors do whatever they like (or think will sell).

Take a look at this: [...] Only 32.8 percent of the speaking parts were given to women.

Consider me totally not surprised. Check your average guy movie vs. your average chick flick. The guy movie will have plenty of male speaking roles (military, police, the male protagonist, most of the working population, the bad guys, the occasional victim because killing women is shied away from etc.) and a few female ones (the female lead and some female eye candy). Most egregious case: 300, with loads of male speaking roles and -> one <- female. Consider your chick flick: a bunch of girls/women for the female speaking roles and at least one (hot) guy for every woman in there, if not more. "Inverse 300"-movies like that may do reasonably well with the critics, but aren't exactly in high demand. In fact, the real 300 is probably more of a chick flick than stuff like "8 women" is considering the sheer amount of abs you're seeing in there. Heck, even a ladyfriend of mine said exactly that.

Again, it's not the fault of the Hollywood patriarchy that women seem to be a lot more fixated on having a notable male presence in their movies than guys are with females (unless we're talking about porn). 40 years after the second wave, young men and women vote with their wallets, and the vote says that men don't really care if women are absent when they have (non-sexual) fun, but women's concept of fun seems to revolve an awful lot around supremely attractive men competing for the female lead.

I can see two questions worth asking: 1) do you need female writers and the like to create better entertainment for women, or can male writers do it just as well, and 2) if male writers can do this, will they, or will they write stories they themselves would enjoy (which might lead to a bias toward stories appealing to males)?

I don't see female writers doing a lot of stuff differently from what they're doing now. Heck, the most successful female author in the world has parity in her cast and a 2:1 male:female ratio when it comes to the main protagonists; but because sausage fests are common and coochie fests are extremely unlikely and this is exactly how the audience demands it, I don't see a higher share for female speaking roles than 35-40% overall because of said phenomenon above. The only real solution would be enforcing parity; which would rob us of lopsided films like Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, Star Wars, 300, Transformers (okay, that wouldn't be that much of a loss) etc. If women want it differently, they should simply abstain from watching these male-lopsided films and watch female-lopsided films instead. But ooooh they don't do that.

Yes, but how long people are expected to work is to an extent determined by society.

I think it's possible for society as a whole to regulate what employers can expect. For example having a 30-40 hour workweek and requiring employers to pay 10x for overtime in all professions might greatly reduce situations where a person would need to work 60 hour weeks in order to succeed.

Are you serious? Because women can't have it all as things are now, the economy should twist around their priorities to remedy that situation and accomodate them? Well, good look getting that.

It's an option for men, but they would need to find a willing female partner and that would probably be harder than the reverse.

"Probably be harder"... try it with "definitely a lot harder". I don't see many women willing to support a SAHD who would be able to do so.

[–]myfatbrokethewallNon-Red Pill0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't see female writers doing a lot of stuff differently from what they're doing now. Heck, the most successful female author in the world has parity in her cast and a 2:1 male:female ratio when it comes to the main protagonists;

It's not just about the gender of the protagonists, but the stories themselves. Can male writers create stories for women as well as female writers, if they can, do they? I could see writers writing what seems cool and fun to them, and in cases where the writers are male might that not mean stories that would be more enjoyable for men than for women?

And regarding voting with one's wallet, if a movie is decent but not great you might still pay to see it, but it doesn't mean you don't wish there were more great movies.

Are you serious? Because women can't have it all as things are now, the economy should twist around their priorities to remedy that situation and accomodate them? Well, good look getting that.

Limiting working hours could be good for males as well, and good for unemployment. If a male who currently must work 60 hours a week to stay competitive suddenly found himself in an environment where people generally didn't work more than 40 hours, would this be bad for him? I would wager that in most cases men would be happier as well. People who really wanted to work more could pick up a second job or start a business on the side or something like that.

[–]steelpuppy0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago* (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I still like my description of feminists:

"Feminism is the radical notion that women are people" is a sarcastic definition that falls short in basically every regard. The strawman "feminism has such wonderful goals, who can someone possible be against it?" works only under the assumption that feminism wants indeed what it professes to work for, which is doubtful - my typical counterpoint to this is usually "the greatest trick feminism ever pulled was to convince the world it's only about equality", and considering how many people (and especially feminists themselves) are still buying into that narrative, I'd say it must have had the most awesome PR of the 20th century.

The problem is that even the moderate, comparably benevolent persons who only adhere to a "minimal standard" of feminism (i.e. those who don't consciously hold misandrist beliefs and genuinely only want equality) tend to fall for typical feminist fallacies and don't question the typical feminist narrative (rigged statistics, the assumption that both genders are for all intents and purposes equal on a cognitive level, the idea that when it doubt, it's the male who is to blame etc.), are oblivious to both natural and social female privilege where it exists and only see the shortcomings; are willing to benefit from female privilege when the opportunity arises and still don't work for equality of conditions, but equality of outcomes unless it works to their advantage.

This doesn't mean that feminist goals are by definition illegitimate or that they've pulled all their objections out of their asses - the glass ceiling is very real, and workplace exclusion, unflattering depictions in the media etc. were very common during my childhood. However, the more of these problems were tackled and even successfully taken care of, the further the goalposts were moved.

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar-1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I sort of remember what video you're talking about. In the same video though, she made a decent point about how one of NOW's messages was misread or misinterpreted. I haven't seen it in a while, and iirc she does make the rape apologist accusation. But what can you expect. No one's a saint, and she's a feminist after all. Certain convenient insults are par for the course.

I'm calling her a contrarian because libertarian feminists are rarer to being with. She's made very unconventional statements and suggestions for others in the movement, like

accepting abortion as homicide. (She does say that it's sometimes an unfortunately necessary homicide though.)
And not that I'm a gun enthusiast or that I care, but she completely 180 flipped on gun control after some research and argumentation.
She's not just libratarian, but very vocally anti-state. She gets accused a lot of being a crazy conspiracy theorist about things like Assange's sexual assault allegations being setup due to political motivations.

I'm not saying that she represents my own views or that of yours or rpers, but she's at odds with most feminists. Just being a libertarian makes it so.

[–]steelpuppy1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]LifterofThingsDelicate Feminine Flower7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

What about the self-proclaimed feminists who do not want equality, but basically regard men as unnecessary and want female supremacy over them? That is why I won't call myself a feminist anymore. Equality of opportunity is awesome. When feminists start trying to point fingers at male scientists' fashion choices, and assign them blame for the lack of women in STEM, they've crossed the line.

I simply don't see the need for feminism as it exists now, anymore. There are no legal or physical barriers to women who wish to pursue opportunities in traditionally male-dominated fields. Women who so lack resilience and conviction that a man's shirt can put them off a lucrative career track are not a problem of "the patriarchy". We're raising girls who feel justified in making demands without being willing to put forth the blood, sweat and tears that are required of men in STEM fields. It's fucking shameful.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LifterofThingsDelicate Feminine Flower9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if this message will even be taken seriously by feminists, coming from someone decided to stick a red label on himself, but here goes:

It's not just that they are too busy working their asses off (though obviously, the successful female engineers are busier), part of the problem is that a lot of them are repulsed by feminist approaches to problems they perceive. And few people dare to honestly provide constructive criticism to the most active feminists, because a lot of them have marketed the movement as a hypersensitive one.

A lot of it is just embarrassing. An obvious example is the gamergate fiasco. Let me make ZERO assumptions about what Zoe Quinn has done in terms of ethics. I won't even bring up the terrible way groups of tightly coupled, unprofessional game journalists have decided to feed into the massive hate towards them (much of it justified). But the movement was initially marketing Zoe as a talented game developer who was being held down by the patriarchy. This was supposed to highlight why women can't get into the game development.

...

What a huge embarrassment. I felt embarrassed. The game she made is literally a "choose your own adventure" that can be written in plain html. A basic website written by 3 people. This is stuff I've given pats on the back to middle school girls and boys of colleagues/coworkers for. "Good job, kiddo! You're pretty smart for your age! Here's some constructive feedback!..." And my pal thanks me for giving his little kid encouragement. This isn't stuff adults in the industry brag about. This isn't meant to be bullying. I am just asking people to imagine the following:

A random redditor woman makes a shitty rage comic, submits it to a semi-classy art market equivalent to the Steam Marketplace. Then customers at the market point out that the quality of this rage comic "art" was subpar to say the least. The customers question why it was allowed in in the first place.

Feminist groups complain, "This is the patriarchy in action. It's misogyny that's keeping out talented artists like her out of the running!"

What do the other female artists currently in the market, who're actually successful in this market think? What do other female artists outside the market but preparing to move in think? Even if there was some sexism (who knows), this situation is still such a joke, no one wants to touch it with a 10-foot pole. They're worried that people will think that this is the type of work representative of them, so they're not going to defend it. Whether that's fair or not to Zoe, it's completely understandable to anyone who actually has experience in this market.

This appears to be a recurring problem, where many feminists rush to criticize or change a culture or industry without any knowledge of it. Some of the most vocal SJW-level feminists I've seen talking about this gamergate do not even know what "Depression Quest" is or what kind of market it's being pushed into. They do not seem to know that many women use this exact same steam market to become wildly successful. They have no idea what's going on aside from the misogyny.

How is that going to look to people in the industry? No one is going to take the complaints seriously.

[–]LifterofThingsDelicate Feminine Flower5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're right, and that's why nobody involved in the Gamergate "scandal" is talking about this anymore. It's hilariously illustrative of Bill Burr's how women argue-- not so much "trying to make you mad" as when they know they're full of shit, they go rogue.

The whole Gamergate issue has become a discussion of interwebs rape threats being indicative of the larger misogynistic overtones in the gaming community (which is fucking horseshit, obviously). The feminists are content to pretend that Zoe Quinn is a blameless victim in the whole affair, and that bad misogynistic mans are just being mean to her, and omg stop the mans!

It's so disingenuous it makes me want to hurl. Any opposition to feminist opinions, no matter how well-structured and legitimate the argument has become misogyny. There is no fucking debating with them. It's a manipulation tactic akin to the fake fucking tears that women use to win arguments with their men.

... sry for the rant. This shit just enrages me. As a female who would like to be able to discuss shit and be respected among my male and female peers as an insightful thinker, the women who debate like that are an absolute embarrassment. You want equal floor time, equal say, and you're going to squander it screeching "misogyny!" every time someone makes a valid point. UGH.

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

marketing Zoe as a talented game developer who was being held down by the patriarchy

As a relative outsider to gamer culture, the quality of her game seemed more or less irrelevant to both sides of the "movement". She made a game, it got greenlit, she treated her partner like crap and then SHITSTORM: game journalism ethics feminism is ruining games death/rape threats anita sarkeesian the gamer is dead etc etc! The question isn't whether Zoe Quinn is a talented developer--it's whether the same situation involving a male developer would have spawned that level of crusading fervor.

If the answer is no, then I'd say there's a fair argument to be made for the gaming industry being shitty towards women...which doesn't mean women can't still operate and be successful within that industry, but it's at least worth talking about

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

As a relative outsider to gamer culture

This may be why you've missed my point. Other than a short comment about how poorly game journalists have handled the situation, I avoided taking sides on that specific facet of this shitstorm.

See the context of the discussion, where Help_Me_No_Sleep brings this up:

I think it's messed up that many Asian/Asian-american women compete in the same fields as men and yet they aren't called feminists.

Given what I know of the demographics, I brought up the tech industry in a separate branch of the discussion. These Asian/AA women distance themselves from the label irl. That's a big reason why they aren't called feminists.

LifterofThings posited that they were too busy or had more important things to do than get involved with this drama.

I added that many of the ones I know aren't just too busy, they just wouldn't want to associate themselves with the champions of sjws. It's an embarrassment, regardless of what's relevant to "both sides of the movement".

...

Now, going into your own separate point, it's a matter of perception. You're half right. To the feminist/offensive side, the quality of the game was indeed irrelevant for reasons already discussed.

From the other end, the defensive side, the quality was in fact relevant, because it was a point of ridicule. The ex-bf launched the conspiracy theories, and the fact that the game was getting positive reviews, as it was, contributed to people's suspicions. The attitude being, "lol, look at that game, she totally blew some guys off to get those reviews, just like her ex-bf said!" Whether or not it is true, you certainly can't deny the quality of the game was relevant.

As to death/rape threats against her, sympathy for the developer does not make her product better in the most objective sense. If moderates in the industry aren't convinced that "patriarchy is keeping talented developers like Zoe Quinn out of the industry!", then all this hubbub and propaganda is only going to make a lot of them resentful of the pressure and accusations. After all, what do THEY have to do with the death/rape threats? For all they know, a bunch of SJWs were just riling up adolescent kids and then cherrypicking emotional responses convenient to their cause.

[–]yasee 0 points0 points0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

This may be why you've missed my point

Maybe, but I called myself a relative outsider specifically because I do play games, have a lot of friends who play games, have attended gaming events, partner is an indie developer...I just don't actively identify as a gamer. I enjoy games, but they don't form a huge part of my identity.

When I said it was irrelevant to both "sides", it was because I haven't observed either group discussing the quality of Zoe's game much (few feminists calling it a work of genius, few outraged gamers calling it shite). Could be selective attention on my part, but this:

"patriarchy is keeping talented developers like Zoe Quinn out of the industry!"

wasn't the message I got from feminists rallying around gamergate. It was more along the lines of "this male-dominated industry harbours some shitty feelings about women, which can be gauged by their reaction to the sexual indiscretions of this particular game-making lady". On the opposing side, we have "game journalism is morally bankrupt and bereft of integrity, which can be gauged by how this woman was able to trade sex for favourable coverage" (a claim which seems kind of dubious, since none of the people she allegedly slept with actually reviewed Depression Quest).

I also think it's important to consider that under the very broad category of all things video game, "quality" is pretty subjective. There are hundreds of what I would probably consider sub-par games on steam. There are also hundreds of instances of gaming journalism being a total shitshow, but none of them seemed to strike the same nerve as the saga of Zoe Quinn. It doesn't seem like such a stretch to me to wonder if the difference might be sexism.

Full disclosure though, I have never played Depression Quest. It seems technically unimpressive, but potentially compelling because of storytelling and characterization

[–]fiat_lux_Red Pillar2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

That might not have been the rallying cry you personally heard, but it was a rallying cry nonetheless especially in the initial stages. It seems to have died down, but that could be because they changed the argument once they realized how ridiculous it looked. Obviously, the situation has spun out of control by the time it caught fire and dragged all sorts of people, including raging kids, into the shitstorm.

Moderates in the know, even ones that support women, are not going to be convinced by that example that misogyny are keeping women out of game development. They do not feel represented by what has occurred in gamer gate or the game developer Zoe.

I recently reviewed the school work of a business partner's daughter. She wrote a pretty decent translator using fancy recursive functions for her AP CS class. She's 12 or maybe 13 by now. I thought she was a smart kid. Her parents are worried she's falling behind the other Asian/AA girls.

These are the type of people becoming engineers. The industry is and will continue to be loaded with them. Neither they nor their parents are worried about the type of barriers faced by Zoe Quinn. As I wrote earlier: "whether that's fair or not to Zoe, it's completely understandable..."

You're making this about raging gamers, but I've consistently been talking about the developers and stuck to that context.

It was more along the lines of "this male-dominated industry harbours some shitty feelings about women, which can be gauged by their reaction to the sexual indiscretions of this particular game-making lady".

That's the shell, what's left once we realize that there's hardly any argument to be made left. Is patriarchy keeping talented female game developers out? Even you seem unsure and unwilling to defend that point now.

The problem that seems to need fixing now is that "a bunch of anonymous gamers--not necessarily people in the development industry who have a lot more to lose--are mean. They get even meaner when provoked or after a shitstorm has started." But that's another problem.

[–]yasee0 points 11 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Moderates in the know, even ones that support women, are not going to be convinced

It's not that I've missed the point; I read your comments above and I know that's what you're arguing. I just don't agree. If you want to trade anecdotes, I know at least two people who fall into that moderate category (one male developer, one female working in CS, both avid gamers) who are on-side with the feminist rabble around gamergate. Whether or not you've encountered it personally, some people are concerned about the barriers faced by women in gaming/tech in general and some of those people are in relevant positions to be making that judgment.

Is patriarchy keeping talented female game developers out? Even you seem unsure and unwilling to defend that point now.

I see you dropped "like Zoe Quinn" :)

That might be because you're kind of pushing that statement on me; I never actually asserted that it was (and I would never use the word patriarchy). At best, I said that the reaction of the gaming community to gamergate is reasonable cause to at least ask the question. If you don't want to discuss "raging gamers", that's fine. It's by no means clear that those problem gamers and people in the development industry are two totally distinct groups, though.

edit: nor are "gamers being mean" and "women facing sexism in tech" necessarily two totally distinct problems

[–]MissPearlEditor of frequent typos.0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]steelpuppy0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]stubingPurple Pillz Here!5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]exit_sandmanstill not the MGTOW sandman FFS1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]pyr6660 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ReginleiferOnly Zombies want female brains[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Why feminism is facing a backlash.... [CMV]
Author	Reginleifer
Upvotes	19
Comments	207
Date	November 14, 2014 4:26 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2m96gd/why_feminism_is_facing_a_backlash_cmv/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/why-feminism-is-facing-a-backlash-cmv.284365 https://theredarchive.com/post/284365

Comments