how many of you here actually subscribe to sjw bullshit? or got

>>8526152
ttiap?

>>8526152
I don't agree with everything feminists say, but I usually see it as being more reasonable than the MRA/anti-feminist perspective (which seems to me to be largely, but not completely a reactionary movement against men losing their superior position in society, and rather ineffective at addressing those issues that do affect men). I disagree with most TERF/GC perspectives though.

Obviously there are some third world countries where women undeniably have less rights than men, but in the west it's mostly equal at least, though there are still various social factors outside the law that prevent women from having an equal chance to succeed.

With gays, I'd say they're facing the same sort of social issues as men, and while gay marriage rights are pretty widespread in the West now, social acceptance does seem to be lagging behind in some places. Equal legal rights was for the most part achieved decades ago, so acceptance has more or less balanced out throughout the western world, while for gays it is more location dependent. And if I'm not mistaken even where gay marriage is legal, gay adoption rights are still an issue.

Trans I'd say are definitely worse off than gays right now, I mean both in having more difficult needs to begin with, expensive medical treatment on top of being discriminated against by society does make things pretty bad for them, so even if stuff like discrimination in terms of housing and employment isn't technically illegal, it still means they're at a pretty huge disadvantage compared to the average person, even compared to gay people.

>>8526152
>>8526342
(cont)

I don't think being trans in the medical sense should be considered "normal", it is pretty much undeniably a disorder that causes suffering (though I dislike calling it a "mental disorder" since it's a loaded term), but it's going to exist whether we consider it "normal" or not. Transition does seem to be the most effective treatment right now, so even though it's not perfect it's not like there's any better option. I do get pretty annoyed with the ignorant bigoted rhetoric like "fix the brain not the body" and "stop enabling mental illness", because honestly if there was an easy way out of dysphoria, I'm sure we'd be using it by now.

In terms of the social kind of trans stuff that's associated with tumblr and so on, for the most part I think it's at worst silly, as far as I'm concerned people should be allowed to call themselves whatever gender they want, I'm hoping in the long term it will encourage people to not make such a big deal about gender and instead be able to separate the social aspects of how someone chooses to present from the whole biological dysphoria side, since they're really two separate things. Generally, as long as they aren't harming anyone or threatening to harm anyone, people should be free to present however they want.

>>8526152

If Feminism was literally just its dictionary definition, I would call myself one.

But it isn't, and Feminists by and large are disingenuous enough to always fall back on that definition even if they know full well that the term is loaded with decades of negative baggage and all sorts of other theories and assertions that a lot of people, who might otherwise believe in equal rights and protections for men and women, want nothing to do with. I think there's still a need for the movement both in the West and abroad, but I just don't feel comfortable throwing my lot in with them as a whole.

On paper, I also have no issues with the MRM (Men's Rights Movement). I think they talk about a lot of important male-centric issues that would otherwise go undiscussed, such as male disposability, wildly disproportionate workplace death rate, child custody laws, under-reporting of sexual assault or abuse of boys and men by women, the continued legal and societal acceptance of male genital mutilation, the widening gap in the education system between boys and girls, etcetera. I think that comparatively speaking the Feminist movement has a lot more political and economic support and clout, while the MRM remain the underdogs and are openly mocked and derided, so it's difficult for me to not root for them on some level even if I don't consider myself one of them.

However, I think they're prone to getting too easily sidetracked by responding to the attacks against them, and a lot of the people who fall under their umbrella are similar to a lot of Feminists in that they've gone through experiences that have jaded and embittered them towards the opposite gender, and that colors their actions and ways of thinking. In that respect, the two groups are sadly very alike.

File: 1485461303676.jpg (181KB, 549x768px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 549x768px

>>8526152
I'm a socialist and so for the most part the feminists I interact with are pretty focused on improving material conditions for women rather than whining about video games or whatever like Tumblr people do. We had to purge a few lingering TERFs from our organization, though.

As for your question about trans being "normal", it's certainly not common but I find it pointless to label trans people as strange or abnormal for wanting to be a different gender from the one they were born as.

>>8526500

Well, by definition it isn't normal, but if you mean that in the sense that it is of no benefit to point that out to their face as, if that's going to do anything other than antagonize, then I agree.

>>8526342
>men losing their superior position
you are ignoring the reality
women been having more institutionalized and legal rights for decades while men rights are outright ignored and further reduced

>>8526342
>men losing their superior position in society
are you high?

>>8526152
You should really ask how many people got into anti-sjw bullshit and anti-feminist or men's rights. If you're regularly posting on 4chan then your exposure is to those things rather than to actual feminism or social justice.

More often than not in certain communities including 4chan the threat of feminists or social justice activists exists only in the minds of the thread participants. There's a lot of focus on social justice when there should be more focus on the serious issue of people brainwashing themselves into sperglords.

This creates a lot of peer pressure to actively denounce erroneous misrepresentations of feminism or social justice as if it was something real. However it's always going to be harder to convince people that they're been fooled than to fool them in the first place.


If you're asking the question of whether I believe in guaranteed rights, human rights, including freedom of speech and the abolishment of a ruling class whether peerage, slavery or serfdom .... then yeah of course. It would be pretty silly if I didn't believe in those things.

>>8526152
I absolutely despise the radical SJW's who try to label everything they disagree with as racist or sexist and use that as a means to shut people up. Mainly because they're actively invading privacy and freedom of speech, and have completely diluted the words such as racism, which in part, has birthed the Alt-right.

Though I also have to concede the fact that minorities still face quite a bit of genuine bigotry, socially anyway. Though the constant demonisation of whites from the left is making it worse.

Basically, both sides are fuelling a big fucking furnace of hatred and not listening to one another. The middle ground is dead, and will be for a while.

>>8529259

>anti-sjw bullshit and anti-feminist or men's rights

One of these things is not like the others.

>>8529123
What rights do women have now that men do not? I'd say legally they are pretty much equal, but even stuff like marital rape (which disproportionately hurts women, even if the law is technically gender-neutral) was only fully outlawed recently in the west.

>>8529171
So you're claiming that women have consistently had more power than men throughout history? Are YOU high?

>>8529342
You know what I mean, this whole reactionary drive from very smell but very loud niche. Like MGTOW and all that other nonsense. Like really guys live how you want but stop being crazy in my vicinity it's annoying.

>>8529389

The Men's Rights Movement has overlap with MGTOW and Anti-Feminism, but they are in fact separate things. It, like Feminism, works to spread awareness of and combat serious legal and gender issues affecting those that comprise it, while also providing support and community for those that need it. It, like Feminism, also has bad seeds that unfortunately warp the underlying message and aims of the movement and wind up becoming used by the opposition it as proof of it being some terrible thing that should be rejected on principle. The two movements have quite a bit in common, both good and bad, even if they're often blind to it.

I agree with radfems on trannies and any other self-propelledhowitzergenders that tumblr invented.
However, I am pro-market and thus do not share their views on views and prostitution. These are victimless crimes and thus such actions should be allowed. FORCING anybody to engage in it is pure evil, though, as any other appliances of force to make a person do something.
Since I am not female, I do not care about women rights. This is not my war.

>>8529351
Women are not conscripted in peace time and cannot be drafted in war time except if they are medical personnel. And they can neither be given lifelong sentence nor placed in a maximum security prison even for the same crimes as men.

At least that's what it is in my country.

>>8529429
I think women are being added to conscription in the US at least. And while there may be some gender bias in sentencing, I don't know of any laws that actually specify different sentences for men and women (except insofar as prisons being sex segregated).

Well, I am a gay person from the middle-east (from Jordan, specifically), where things like inequality between men and women, discrimination against LGBTQ people and non-Muslims is still very real.
I would like to see Islam destroyed, and ultimately, I would like to see religion in general destroyed; however, Islam is the most dangerous.
I don't agree with western SJWs and I have never agreed with them; I think they are having the opposite effect; what they are doing is leading to a reactionary effect where people are becoming more conservative and we are taking a step back.
They are also enabling Islam and raising it on a pedestal, and that is what hurts me the most. They are glorifying the religion that has hurt me so much and has hurt so many people like me; not just LGBT people, but all non-Muslims and women in the middle-east.
I have never told anyone that I'm gay outside of 4chan because revealing this to anyone will really hurt my future career.
I'm currently doing a semester in Germany as an exchange student, and I wish I could stay here forever; I am really envious of the west; you don't know what you have; don't take it for granted; don't allow those SJWs to destroy your culture and civilization, and most importantly; stop Islam.
But also, don't allow right-wing ideals to take over, either.

>>8529480
>don't take it for granted
too late

I'm not into SJW or feminism, I think feminists do more harm than good. But I do think radfems have a point when it comes to some trans issues that the mainstream trans movement absolutely refuses to listen to. And I'm trans myself.

>>8529413
>Feminism, works to spread awareness of and combat serious legal and gender issues
HAHAHA

>>8529455
I live in Russia. Article 57 part 2 of our penal code states that lifelong sentences are not applied to women and to men who are younger than 18 or older than 65.

>>8529497

Parts of it do, at least.

>>8529508
That I'd love to see.

>>8526152
I don't subscribe to it, in fact I gravely dislike all of it even though there's odd common ground between them and me.

Seeing some rich white upperclass straight female celebrity talk about minority issues as if it actually affects herself makes me wanna vomit, for example.

File: Islamic Reform.jpg (141KB, 1024x980px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1024x980px

>>8529480

I feel for you man. I would love it if we in the West could actually work to elevate the voices within the Muslim or Ex-Muslim community and their critique and/or rebuke of the religion, but getting past the now-ingrained instinct for people to cry "Islamophobia!" is extremely troublesome and our media is only exacerbating that problem. We can't solve the problem of Islam alone; the force for change needs to come from within, and we need to do more to help that force thrive instead of allowing it to get strangled in the crib.

>be extremely anti-immigration and race realist
>be anti-democracy
>be tranny
>be generally socially liberal
>think religon is stupid
>think free-market capitalism is stupid

what am I

>>8529529
NatSoc(uck)

>>8526152
It's funny how people use "sjw bullshit" to mean whatever they want.

I mean /pol/ would count gays being alowed to marry and not being imprisoned as "sjw bullshit".

But then of course you probably are a /pol/poster making yet another bait thread to try and manipulate the narrative.

Next tell us how we need to support the extreme political right so they can protect us from evil violent horrible monster muslims who would THROW us off ROOFS before the right even has a chance for their "day of rope", how rude to steal their extermination of degenerates, right?

>>8529529

Confusing.

>>8529535
yeah but Im socially liberal and trans. pretty sure natsocs arent into that. maybe the strasserites but even then...

>>8529529
incredibly naive

>>8529526
I think that non-religious people (be it deists, agnostics, atheists, pantheists, etc) are growing very rapidly in the middle-east.
I am personally agnostic and I have always kept that a secret, but last year I decided to tell my 4 closest friends; to my surprise, I found out that they were all also secretly atheists. One of them told me that there are a lot of people who are secretly non-religious in our college.
The problem is that everyone is afraid of coming out as non-religious because in most Arab countries there are actual laws that punish people who leave Islam or criticize Yahwe/Allah.

Even in Jordan, which is considered one of the more liberal countries in the middle-east, these laws exist. Converting from Islam can land you up to 3 years in prison.
Also criticizing Islam can get you some time in prison. :(

>>8529565
In what specific ways are you socially liberal?

>>8529616
Pro-gay, pro-trans, pro-abortion, pro-womens rights, pro-gun, pro-light drug legalization to name a few

>>8529351
Genital Circumcision.

>>8529621
Not really, from what I've heard FGM is a fundamentally more destructive and damaging operation than male circumcision.

File: fwisbtcoabxy.jpg (87KB, 720x596px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 720x596px

>>8526500
>im a socialist

>>8529596

It's heartening to hear that there is growing anti-religious or at least non-religious sentiment growing over there, even if it's currently underground. Hopefully in the coming decades it will be able to safely come out into the light of day.

>>8529656

Depends on what kind of FGM. That label covers everything from the most destructive surgical procedures, to ones roughly equivalent to male circumcision, to just ritually pricking the clitoris once with a needle. All of them are (rightly) banned. Male Genital Mutilation should be no different.

>>8529656
They are both disgusting and should be banned

>>8529565
True national socialists were actually quite socially liberal.

You're right, though, modern day neo-nazis have very little in common with true Nazism, despising socialized medicine, comprehensive economic reforms, a social safety net, and a well-regulated business environment. Those are all core to Nazism--but of course, the "kill the Jews" thing is more famous, so a bunch of people who are ideological opposites of Nazis on most things have taken the name.

>>8529694
I know a lot of people on 4chan hate reddit, and I'm probably commiting heresy now, but I think a lot of people will find this subreddit interesting:
ex-Muslim subreddit
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/
There are sometimes stories here from closet LGBTQ people who are living in the middle-east.

File: image[2].png (37KB, 620x684px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 620x684px

>>8526342
>men losing their superior position in society

It isn't so much about this as it's about women being given the priveleges that were once only given to men but without giving up any of the societal protections that they were given. Feminists love to talk about equality, but there is a fundamental inequality in the way they do things and it's led to a great deal of hypocrisy on their part when they continue to complain about the most trivial of things in the west while ignoring the fact that they have been given a helping hand by society from day one.

For example, as far as the law goes, there's a big difference between how it's enforced with me and with women in the west. Men regularly get harsher sentences than women for committing the exact same crimes. Then there's the fact that women are overwhelmingly more likely to get custody of the children during divorce proceedings and the fact that this usually leaves the man paying child support but with limited access to the children. It's been mentioned already, but there is a horrifying lack of restrictions for unneccesary male circumcisions at birth compared to the opposite sex.

And then, in general, there's stuff like enforced gender quotas, significantly lower unemployment rates and homelessness amongst women and the widespread idea that violence perpetrated on men by women is a non-issue while the other way around is seen as detestable (even if the woman initates the violence and provokes him). And really, there's a ton of stuff like this. And it's all because western society has given women all the benefits of being men but without as much of the responsibility. Society protects women in a way that would never, ever be done for men. In contrast to all of the priveleges that women have recieved since the birth of feminism, the societal protections haven't changed nearly as much.

There's going to continue to be completely valid backlash against feminists until they have their pussy passes revoked.

>>8529812
>modern day neo-nazis have very little in common with true Nazism, despising socialized medicine, comprehensive economic reforms, a social safety net, and a well-regulated business environment.
Those are really more economic leftist things than socially liberal things though.

>>8529836
Feminists have made an attempt to end the attitude among the general public that women are inherently "more innocent" than men or whatever, it's not really their fault that the public tends not to be receptive to it.

>>8529848
[citation needed]

>>8529656
Clitoral hood clipping is exactly the same procedure as circumcision and is the most common form of FGM in the world.

And you're right, it is fundamentally damaging and destructive--but not any more so than circumcision. It reduces the amount of pleasure a woman can feel permanently, increases the risk of infection permanently, and can leave unpleasant burning, tingling, or aching sensations for life.

Circumcision is exactly the same: the procedure deadens nerve cells in the glans of the penis, the most sensitive and nerve-filled area, and makes it considerably more likely to have infections or other health complications than just leaving it intact. It also semi-frequently causes nerve pain in the area, often permanently, though sometimes only for decades.

It's the exact same procedure. Exactly the same. MGM also has more extreme forms that are practiced rarely, and FGM the same, but the vast, vast majority of both FGM and MGM are the same procedure: the removal of the skin flap protecting and lubricating the sensitive head of the sex organ.

If you are for banning one, it is massively intellectually dishonest to not be for banning the other. Thing is, you won't find many MRAs outside of the rabid few who lurk on /r9k/ and other extremist sites who are opposed to trying to end FGM. Most acknowledge that FGM is a problem, but that MGM is still being practiced and condoned in Western culture, whereas FGM is rightly banned on the grounds that it is torture and permanent body mutilation being performed on children against their will. You can, however, find a number of fairly mainstream feminists who see nothing wrong with MGM, and will defend it on the grounds that it's a religious choice/leads to cleaner habits than not circumcising/should be up to the parents. Ironic, considering that those same arguments do not fly when it comes to FGM.

>>8529836
Do you not get that it is not FEMINISTS who are causing these things, but your fellow men?

Feminists do not write law. MEN do. If things are being 'legally given away', it is not women doing it. Your anger is wholly misplaced via classic misdirection.

>>8529848
Well I could make an attempt to learn Spanish and then give up after a week because, as it turns out, I don't actually give a shit about speaking Spanish as much as I care about making people think I'm cultured.

It's totally disingenous to claim feminists care even a fraction as much about giving up THEIR privileges in the name of true equality as much as they care about continuing to have western society cater to women even more than it already does.

Really weak attempt at apologetics there anon. And even if it wasn't, you failed to tackle half of the other protections women are given regardless of the whole 'innocence' thing.

>>8529883
I never claimed that feminism is causing these things. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of feminism in claiming that they're all about equality between the sexes while they only really give a shit about increasing their own stock.

And I should point out too, that PEOPLE IN POWER make the laws, men or women (and yes I know they tend to be men). And that it's more of a case of the judges and jury who enforce the law than the actual laws themselves. The point is that feminists got themselves the right to vote, the right to work, even changed things from a social perspective as well as a legal one too, but for all their talk about the ultimate goal of equality, they haven't done a thing to pry themselves away from the helping hand of western society. Because they honestly couldn't give a fuck.

Either way, congratulations on failing completely to understand my post while simultaneously giving us all a little taste of that stereotypical misandry you're harbouring.

>>8529885
>you failed to tackle half of the other protections women are given
Could you give some examples of what you're referring to? Because the "innocence" attitude does seem to be the main reason for basically all the stuff you've mentioned.

>>8526152

Nah.
I tried to enter the community once when I was horribly alone and found they're very hierarchical and clique-ish. The people themselves don't even ascribe to it, it's just their weird rules for their popularity contests.

>>8529933
>The point is that feminists got themselves the right to vote, the right to work, even changed things from a social perspective as well as a legal one too, but for all their talk about the ultimate goal of equality, they haven't done a thing to pry themselves away from the helping hand of western society. Because they honestly couldn't give a fuck.
Most of what feminists have achieved involves changing the law so that it now applies equally to all sexes. What you are asking is for them to carry out brainwashing and enforced cultural change - because that's what it will take to stop people from giving women preferential treatment.

>>8529883

Ah, patriarchy theory. Ultimately all problems comes back to men or toxic masculinity. That's the sticky point that got me to reject the feminist label entirely and just go with egalitarian instead.

>>8529529
>race realist
So racist WASP?

>>8530038
So even though men have been the ones writing most of the laws, and the ones deciding what social values are considered acceptable, it's still somehow women's fault?

>>8530021
>What you are asking is for them to carry out brainwashing and enforced cultural change

That's exactly what they've been doing for the past 50 years and it's exactly what they're continuing to do today. They didn't just focus on changing the law (which still remains biased in favour of women because they didn't bother changing that bit), they focused on changing social attitudes too. In fact, that's pretty much all they do today in the west. They're just more focused in constructing imaginary issues like 'representation' in the media. If they truly cared about equality, we'd have feminists out in the streets protesting the fact that society bends over backwards to help them in nearly every facet of life.

But of course, you're not going to see that. Because why would they want to put themselves at the same risks of homlessness and unemployment as men? Or face the same repercussions for their actions that men do? But no, they'd instead prefer to pretend there's a rape culture in the west and that everyone is telling rape victims that they were asking for it. Which nobody is actually doing. Bonus points for pretending that rape is only something that happens to women and brushing the male victims under the rug just to get their ludicrous point across.

>>8530013
Read my post again. I literally gave you a massive list of things. I'm not going to type them all out again because you want to make me chase my tail.

And again. Feminists, by and large, haven't even bothered to tackle the innocence thing because it works in their favour. Arguing that hot chicks in video games are sexist is obviously a more pressing use of their time.

>>8530053

Nope. I just don't view reality in such simplistic terms, nor do I believe that there has been an active effort throughout history to create today's current cultural norms and values. I think that both men and women contribute to perpetuating these norms and values largely passively and sometimes actively and do not see the point in ascribing gendered terms to this phenomenon.

>>8529529
Atheist SJW with a side of racism.

>>8530099
It doesn't have to be an "active effort" to create cultural norms. That's a common misconception by people who don't understand what "patriarchy" means. It doesn't mean a bunch of men got together and decided "let's make life horrible for women." It's just that society developed in a way which resulted in women having less rights and influence.

File: Chanandler_Bong.gif (1MB, 245x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 245x300px

>>8530053
yes.
or the jews.
or the liberuls.

it is called blaming someone else for your own failures because it is easier than taking responsibility for them.

>>8530053
I love how you failed to respond to my post where I point out that you actually strawmanned me. And then you just keep on posting in this thread pretending that your strawman is real. Lol feminists.

I'm going to post it again so you can see it

>I never claimed that feminism is causing these things. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of feminism in claiming that they're all about equality between the sexes while they only really give a shit about increasing their own stock.

And I should point out too, that PEOPLE IN POWER make the laws, men or women (and yes I know they tend to be men). And that it's more of a case of the judges and jury who enforce the law than the actual laws themselves. The point is that feminists got themselves the right to vote, the right to work, even changed things from a social perspective as well as a legal one too, but for all their talk about the ultimate goal of equality, they haven't done a thing to pry themselves away from the helping hand of western society. Because they honestly couldn't give a fuck.

Either way, congratulations on failing completely to understand my post while simultaneously giving us all a little taste of that stereotypical misandry you're harbouring.

>I never claimed that feminism is causing these things. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of feminism in claiming that they're all about equality between the sexes while they only really give a shit about increasing their own stock.

There you go. Fuck you. Learn to logic. There's always going to be resistance against you people and your hypocritical ideology if you keep 'cheating' in arguments.

>>8530130

The fundamental disagreement as I see it is that I disagree with the concept of making it a male issue at all, when it always a minority of men and women that have possessed power over the majority of men and women. I am not denying the historical fact that women have been disadvantaged throughout history, but the majority of men have also been disadvantaged throughout history (and before you go off on me for saying so, I am not saying it was necessarily to the same extent or in the same areas of life).

I feel that the terminology used obfuscates the matter and naturally puts men that might be otherwise receptive to the discussion on the back foot, even if the feminist in question is not making an active attempt to antagonize (though there are unfortunately those who do make active attempts to antagonize with it, muddying the waters). Speaking only for myself, that theory is the point at which I find it difficult to continue to intellectually engage with feminist thought and choose to pursue other more accurate labels for my political stance on human rights.

>>8530130
Why make it a male issue, hwoever, when women contribute equally to enforcing gendered norms?

You think it's just men buying toy soldiers for boys and pink dresses for girls? You think that Phylis Schlafly was a one-off? You think that the stereotypes about it being necessary for men to be strong and women to be pure were perpetuated just by men?

Of course you don't. So why use an explicitly gendered term (patriarchy) when what you are discussing is inherently perpetuated by both genders (society)? Your goal is to get everyone on board with you, right? And clearly, a large part of modern-day feminism is about micro-aggressions and other unperceived, unintentional slights. Hell, you even acknowledge this already. So then how do you not get that constantly using terms like "toxic masculinity" or "patriarchy" unintentionally puts the blame for all of society's gendered problems on the shoulders of men?

If you want an example of how this sounds, let's just do some gender reversal: "men always do worse in society because of toxic femininity. Women expect them to be strong and emotionless at all times, concealing whatever they're feeling. And then women blame men when they snap under the emotional pressure and turn violent. Victim blaming at it's finest. Why can't women just come to understand that being an MRA is good for everyone, because it undoes the problems of the matriarchy, which affect us all."

See how casually sexist that sounds? It's not even a bad point, as feminists often do make reasonable points about gender dynamics, it just does so in an inherently sexist way by looking at only one side of the issue and using purposefully charged language to shift blame from all to only one side, even when the data doesn't support that.

>>8530038
Sorry, I probably don't follow the 'assigned theories' well since I'm an independent thinker. I'm simply pointing out the obvious: men are the ones in Congress and the Lobbyists, and those are the two powers that make laws. I couldn't care less if that's 'Patriarchy Theory' (seems kind of a shitty theory if that's all it is, but I digress), it's simple observation.

As for patriarchy (little p), only a literal idiot would deny we live in one. I trust you're not a literal idiot.

>>8530041
Half wasp, half irish scum

>>8530114
an sjw for white people

>>8526152
>if not, why'd you stop?
I had a huge run-in with some specialized techno-futurist SJWs. Well, I never actually started, but I still had to slam the brakes on the SJW spiral hard.

No. I'm an attractive gay guy and all my life and adolescence I've had annoying straight girls throw themselves on me like whores while complaining to me about nice guys. Then nowadays these same cuntsdelve into Jewish feminist nonsense and want to call me racist and privileged for dating within my race?? Fuck off.

Feminists secretly hate white attractive gays because they all had a crush on one at one point, and we don't need them. I'm cold to you because I'm legitimately not interested in you, but your hot brother now btfo.

you all seem to have some odd reasons for stopping, like you couldn't share an ideology with people who weren't really even part of your ideology but just fell into the same vast vast bracket of feminism.

I'm an sjw feminst, I think the bar to be one is pretty low, just have to want equal rights (whether you think we have them or not) and maybe think we should work out what the causes behind social unrest are rather than insisting everything's fine.

the hack job done on the term sjw and the word feminism has been done well but I think some people are kind of cowardly to abandon it rather than stand behind it.

>>8531966
>Feminists secretly hate white attractive gays
>what are fag hags
if feminists are guilty of anything it's that they love gay men too much
you're not a victim we're not out to get you you're not really on our radar right now

>>8531968
>I'm an sjw feminst,
Hang yourself.

>>8531990
where does this anger come from anon? what have I done to irk you so?

>>8531968

Standing behind the label along with the other crazies is more trouble than it is honestly worth. I would have more faith in it if the Feminist movement was far more aggressive in self-policing, but I have not noticed any significant motions to do so. Considering how few people are actually willing to call themselves a feminist despite nominally believing in legal equality between the sexes, I imagine I'm far from alone in holding this sentiment.

>>8526152
Radical leftists/fems are ironicly some of the most intolerant people and want to police everyone's thoughts. Now a person is racist if they're not into blacks/asians/whatever or they are "transphobic" if they don't want to date a trans girl. It's come to the point that SJWs are telling people who they should be attracted to, which is absurd.

Things like that have changed me from a left leaning feminist into an almost /pol/ tier libertarian.

I'm not normal either, being gay isn't normal, being trans isn't normal. It's not about normalizing people, rather, we should still love people who are outside the norm.

I don't like gay marriage rights either, even though I've had a relationship with a guy going on five years now, but I think that marriage should be a way to raise healthy children and children do better with support from parents of each sex.

>>8535491
>Things like that have changed me from a left leaning feminist into an almost /pol/ tier libertarian.
What were your views before and after?

>I don't like gay marriage rights either,
Have you met other gays who feel that way?

>>8535491
Congratulations on internalizing the tradtalk. I'm mildly curious as to how the presence of a vagina instead of a neovagina (as you indicate 'sex' specifically) suddenly makes a woman a more capable mother, but I'm certain the answer would be enlightening.

Probably as enlightening as learning how you can to determine that 'SJW's are telling people who they should be attracted to' (they're not). 'Almost' /pol/ tier? I've lurked /pol/ for half a decade, there's no 'almost' to it. If I weren't such a trusting person, I'd assume you were just from /pol/ itself and masquerading.

File: j786578578578575.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>8526152
It has killed Germany.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-LhfKKgncg

>>8535491
>i traded in my SJW ideology for libertarian ideology

this isnt progress, you are still cucked by ideology (like we all are), choosing to not regulate markets (or whatever) is still making a consequential choice

>>8537232
>believe uncucked ideology
>"you're cucked by ideology!"

>>8526152
Biological Male, repressed tranny here.
Radical feminist and enlightened self hating male.
Only took hrt long enough to break my penis and make me infertile, stopped then. Because I would make a mockery of the female form if I transitioned.

I'm too sjw for sjws and I've actually gotten into arguments with them about them being too right wing.
Xenofeminism is some top tier shit.
I'm a feminist because I'm an anarchist and they necessarily imply each other.
If you think women have the same rights as men, you think the whole world is your american suburb.
Same for gays.
Same for trans.
Normality is a restrictive construct and a mental prison we place ourselves in that slowly eats away at any shred of individuality until all that's left is a braindead who takes everything they're told by any nutjob for fact and can't think for themselves. Unless you're cucked by your own insecurity and desire to fit in you should be against normality.

>>8543280
>Radical feminist and enlightened self hating male.
C U C K
U
C
K

im trans and i wanna be accepted but not normalized.. cause u gotta admit its not normal, for 1% of the populationor w/e we get too much attention imo

>>8539867
leftists use ideology as an expy for anything that isn't abolish le markets because commissar zizek tells them to

>>8543364
>when you're spooked by the invisible dick of the market

This might be just me, but I always see way more anti-sjw and anti-feminist shit than actual sjw and feminism shit. I think that this stuff is just getting blown out of proportion.

>>8543405
>when you fall for internet memes so hard you become communist

Enjoy getting rammed by the invisible dick till the day you die bitch.

>>8543535
>everyone who recognizes that I'm spooked to hell is a communist

>>8543506
Because shitposts on /pol/ count equal to federal policy.

When did SJW begin to mean radical feminist? Fuck no I'm not a radical feminist, but I consider myself a feminist and commit to social justice.

>>8543360
You'll be normalized eventually in your lifetime. Does that change your opinion?

>>8546106
>I consider myself a feminist
kys

>>8543506
It isn't just you, it has gotten out of hand. If people don't like how a game is made or a movie then they will blame a so called sjw interference. The problem with that is that in most cases there are no real signs of activist involvement to lobby it and the end product isn't representative of gender and race equality. Another problem is that some of these franchises actually had more powerful female roles in the seventies, the eighties, and the nineties. The people that are anti-sjw also don't bother to address media where the role was originally non Caucasian or female, but was changed later.

So you have all these people getting mad about sjw things that don't actually exist, it's just an excuse to get mad and throw a tantrum. There are some critics, bloggers, and vloggers that bring up various topics of racism or equality but it's a small group using freedom of speech to voice their opinions. If you don't like their opinions then just don't tune in. Of course then you have people that say well if you don't like me getting mad about an opinion someone had on the internet then just ignore it. At that point it's just an infinite reduction.

People do have the right to be assholes and throw tantrums but it's probably not going to be in their best interests. It wont change what they're mad about especially if it's not even real in the first place. There is also no legislative conspiracy either where the laws have been changed to the detriment and marginalization of straight white men. If they experience so called white male discrimination it's probably because they're acting like angry idiots all the time.

>>8546241
>It isn't just you, it has gotten out of hand. If people don't like how a game is made or a movie then they will blame a so called sjw interference.
Wow, it's like God is holding up a mirror to feminism and she doesn't like what she sees!

File: 318.jpg (36KB, 600x394px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 600x394px

>>8526500
>socialist

>>8547719
It's all in your head. Like many points in history a lot of angry and irrational people need a boogeyman to blame for anything the mind can dream of. Today that boogeyman is feminism, tomorrow it might be humanism, or vaccines again.

File: 1498866190747.png (56KB, 209x248px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 209x248px

>>8548244
I'll take cognitive dissonance for 500 please.

>what is higher employment rates of women due to mandated gender quotas, founded on postmodernism and not meritocracy
>what is an effeminized education system, populated wholy by women, engineered to best suit the group think and collective gathering of eclectic factoids of the archetypal, biological female neural network
>what is thousands of supports groups for womyn of domestic violence compared to none for men, when men make up 40%+ of all such cases (those reported)
>what is confirmed shorter sentencing for the same crime as man
>what is societal normalization of pedophilia of w on m, but demonization of m on w
>what is the gender pay gap myth when it's a statistical fact women 25yrs+ out earn their male counterparts in full time employment
>what is the welfare system that was established solely to pay for single mothers child support
>what is higher mandated child support payments from divorced male partners when the female out earns them
>what is men have zero reproductive rights, being forced into fathering a child with zero say - even if the women conceived without HIS consent (a form of entrapment)
>what is the outright demonization of natural and healthy expression of masculism in men as being toxic, but lauding feminity as the only desirable sexual expression amongst both genders
>what is lambasting mra's who want to lower the 80% male suicide rate, 30% male unemployment rate and raise the 40% male uni grad rate, as misogny

>>8548318
How do people still believe in feminism?

I believe in the gender spectrum and otherkins. Not so hot on pronoun respecting though, it doesn't bother me what people call me (thanks 4chan).

>>8550682
They don't fall for memes.

>>8550777
You've well and truly BTFO >>8548318

>>8548318
>america being an equal country
top kek, looks like you need more feminism
most of these are feminism issue anyway
mra's are a joke, they are just feminists who are afraid to call themselves so

>>8553055
>claims something is unequal
>doesn't name a single thing as always
>can't name a single legal right women don't have
>advocates for a female supremacy movement anyway

You aren't intelligent, nor are you logical - probably because you are a woman.

You are an undesirable emotional harpie - probably because you are a woman.

Your colleagues will out compete and out earn you - probably because you're a woman.

True equality is being forced to compete for resources against the naturally engineered powerhouse that is the male sex - this is why women earn less

True equity (which isn't equality and is what you want - which makes you a supremacist) is where you castrate a man's natural potential to work harder, and tax heavily the fruit of his labour, just so a biologically inferior woman isn't triggered by being in an environment she doesn't belong in.

Giving women the right to vote was the worst crime against humanity men have ever committed.

File: 61c.jpg (26KB, 308x308px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 308x308px

>>8554839
both of you are stupid cunts regardless of your gender.

File: atheists.png (17KB, 373x330px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 373x330px

>>8555303

>>8526371
>I dislike calling it a "mental disorder" since it's a loaded term
Name one mental illness whose activists/"advocates" don't say this.

Hell, name one handicap, period. Look at the fucking Deaf Culture dingbats.

>>8554839
OH wow, your Anima is going to eat you -alive-.

Do come back and post when it starts happening, yah? It'll probably be a few years, but yours will almost certainly be exemplary.

>>8555492
>OH wow, your Anima is going to eat you -alive-.
???

>>8554839
wtf I love feminism now!

>>8555450
99% of the time when people insist on calling gender dysphoria a mental illness (using those exact words), they just use it as an excuse to spout the "fix the brain not the body" drivel. So I've learned to just stop reading when somebody uses that language. It's like it's part of the inane script that all transphobic bigots use.

>>8555527
Anima. Jungian Psychology (the only one worth reading, just watch out for bigots' interpretations). The feminine self, the Femme Fatale, the Siren. The model of the woman you'll want and the woman who will destroy you if you continue to call her inferior, weak, stupid, and unworthy. That's no joke, either...it's where the Femme Fatale genre convention comes from.

If you're the anon I directed that post at, you'd be well-served to look into with haste and seriousness. Otherwise, you'll be back around 35-40 to tell us how you suddenly figured out you've been a girl all along, and you 'want' to be a girl, and you can only be ((girl name)) at certain times because people suck so bad, and... Actually now that I think about it, you wouldn't be here, you'd be at Susan's. Go ahead, go peek at your present life trajectory.

>>8555711
I'm not that anon but I agree with what she said.

How will my anima destroy me?

>you suddenly figured out you've been a girl all along, and you 'want' to be a girl
I already know that.

Anon of >>8548318 and >>8554839 here.

How triggered would you be if I told you I was:
a) Male
b) Cisgendered
c) Heterosexual
???

>>8555711
The model of the woman you'll want and the woman who will destroy you if you continue to call her inferior, weak, stupid, and unworthy.

I love how niavely and narcissisticly confident your are in your postmodernist abstraction, that you could even accurately psychoanalyze my character by naught more than two posts, that was nothing more than listing commonly known facts. How conceited are you?

Fyi, I dom my gf (brat tamer) by bonding her up in rope, and torturing and choking her, edging indefinitely to an orgasm with my body and toys, that'll never come. We also walk around in public with her wearing a slave collar, tethered by my lead.
I'm also a powerlifter and train at the gym 6 days a weak, I'm one of the strongest guys in a 50km radius from my gym. Definitely getting destroyed by the girl I want, for sure.

>>8555711
>otherwise you'll be back around 35-40 to tell us how you suddenly figured out you've been a girl all along, and you 'want' to be a girl, and can only be ((girl name)) at certain times because people suck so bad

Right, because I'm definitely closeted at what I want to put my dick in.
If anything, I'll have opened up my own sex dungeon, and charge clients to dom them, at $250/hr. You can call myself, Master Chad.

Why do women always attempt to try and undermine masculine virtues of dominance and assertiveness when it's expressed, claiming that it's nothing more than repressed femininity? That's a women's natural mechanism to shit test the alpha characteristics of a male, and see whether he'll stand his ground or not, to subconsciously determine if he's a suitable mate or not.
>inb4 this poster is a cat lady no man wants to date, possibly a lesbian
>inb4 evolutionary biology > gender studies

>>8555959
Why are you on /lgbt/ if you're cishet? :(

>>8555959
>How triggered would you be if I told you I was:
>a) Male
>b) Cisgendered
>c) Heterosexual
>???
Not them, but I think the only one triggered here is you.

File: 1497501020512.webm (873KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

873KB, 500x500px

>>8556007
Educating myself about the kind of things /homos/ like to discuss in their spaces, so I can better understand the *gays*, lol

>>8556160
I wish I was a real girl and had a boyfriend like you.

File: Male_Privileg_is_Fucking_Amazing.jpg (40KB, 500x304px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 500x304px

>>8526342
>their superior position in society,
There's no such thing and you're deluded if you think there is.

>>8556160
>I'm just studying le enemy like sun tzu told me


Yeah yeah whatever you say homo ;)

File: 1464985267158.png (879KB, 1177x876px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 1177x876px

>>8529656
Kellogg recommended to burn the clitoris with acid to achieve the same result in girls. Adults who get circumcised report that they're 50 to 60% less sensitive.

There are also 250 babies dying each year in america due to circumcision going wrong. Lastly, many men get failed circumcisions and some of them are permanenly robbed of any kind of sex life, forever, as surgery simply cannot fix the mess this totally unnecessary procedure did.

Of course no one cares, especially you, since males are disposable slaves, only good to maintain sewers, operate powerplants and maintain the electric grid so you can shitpost on twitter while drinking some milky caffeinated gustative entertainment beverage in a hipster den, repair your car, and fight in wars for you. Who cares if men get mutilated huh, their body, not their choice haha!

>>8546149
die cis straight male

>>8557835
Yes, because being considered too weak to be a effective soldier is "privilege". Let me guess, you think disabled men are "privileged" compared to other men as well?

Besides, while SOME men at SOME times are forced into military slavery, until fairly recently nearly ALL women were essentially forced into sex slavery to survive. Slavery is bad regardless, and I'm certainly not trying to say military slavery is a non-issue, but it's misleading to imply that men are the only victims of slavery, or are disproportionately more likely to be subject to it in the civilized world.

>>8557872
>Kellogg recommended to burn the clitoris with acid to achieve the same result in girls
Why does his opinion matter exactly?

>Adults who get circumcised report that they're 50 to 60% less sensitive.
How exactly is sensitivity being measured here?

>Of course no one cares, especially you, since males are disposable slaves, only good to maintain sewers, operate powerplants and maintain the electric grid so you can shitpost on twitter while drinking some milky caffeinated gustative entertainment beverage in a hipster den, repair your car, and fight in wars for you. Who cares if men get mutilated huh, their body, not their choice haha!
Uh, I actually AM a male and I certainly don't think circumcision is unambiguously good, for the most part I'm indifferent towards it, but I think it's silly to imply that it's equivalent to FGM or to use it to claim that "men are the oppressed gender". And is it really any more of a violation of "their body, their choice" than performing major surgeries on minors in general? In that case it's really the doctor making the decision, not the patient anyway, so how exactly is circumcision any different in that regard? You could say the arguments for circumcision being "medically necessary" are flimsy, but looking it as an issue of bodily autonomy it's not really any different than any other medical operation.

>>8529687
>Implying I am not advocating a society where you're working 4 hour shifts because technology and automation.

Fuck capitalism. State capitalism too. Fuck the entire idea of currency.

>>8548318
>>8554839
>>8555959
You seem really triggered mate.

>>8529656
>>8558442
>I think it's silly to imply that it's equivalent to FGM
Me too, MGM is far worse.

Source:
http://archive.is/NbyX3

i used to be an sjw but grew out of it, and since trans people exist and we can't stop them from existing, yep.

>>8529526
The fact that good, reformist Muslims exist always brings a simile to my face.

>>8558442
>And is it really any more of a violation of "their body, their choice" than performing major surgeries on minors in general?
Yes because circumcision is unnecessary. It's no more acceptable than the doctor deciding to chop off the kid's limbs for no reason, or piercing their ears or nose or whatever.

ask me about academic feminism and critical theory

>>8559842
But does that really have anything to do with "their body, their choice"? It's my understanding that adults are allowed to opt out of "medically necessary" operations, but minors aren't.

>>8526152
I just want people to not be assholes

I love this thread.

>>8557872

I'm a feminist and I think circumcision is wrong. Pretty sure most feminists will agree with minimal explanation. It's an archaic, stupid, harmful practice.

I wonder whether they have lectures about this in Men's Studies.

I did in my earlier days to a small extent, largely because I was indoctrinated by the ultra-left leaning higher education system here.

However even when I was at my most extreme sjw, I was always fighting with it and the rest of my "peers" who were really all my enemies and who were really I came to realized emotionally disturbed individuals.

I was especially exposed to the man-hating lesbo sterotype, and interacted with women who would say things at the end of a conversation such as "Bye now, don't go raping anyone!" (I am shitting you not. That's how in deep I was in this cultish bullshit.)

Instead of going full right wing after this experience (although my appreciation of good conservative mind sets increased tremendously by my experiences with these far left cultist weirdos,) I'm now more of a centrist, who considers both sides of every argument before taking a position.

>>8560777
(cont)

I understand there are many people who underwent a similar experience to me now identify as serious right wing sympathizers, and while in a way I can understand that position, for me personally speaking that would require me to hate and seek to be aggressive towards people, which would require emotional energy I am not willing to give.

This now concludes my blog.

>>8560777
>>8560787
Thanks for sharing. We could use more centrists.

My experience is pretty much the other way: I was pretty right-wing, even dated a former Nazi who was still holding some pretty extreme beliefs. Then realized we are all in this together. Also realized that Nazi's are not roleplaying, they actually want to kill people. Started to see why leftists believe what they believe. Ended up being a progressive centrist.

>>8560740
I wonder when they will have lectures about it in Gender Studies.

I wonder when feminists will start acting like they care about equality instead of paying lipservice or less while carrying on demanding more special treatment for women.

I wonder when feminists will stop demonizing the only people who fight it.

I wonder when feminists will acknowledge their female privilege.

I'm not holding my breath.

>>8562463
Because feminism was never actually about equality. It's in the goddamn name kek

>>8526152
Bad stuff happens in SJW hordes, at every little turn...

>>8513148
. >>8513148
. . >>8513148
. >>8513148
>>8513148

>>8543325
Marry me as my second wife.

>>8564878
The objective of feminism was always equality. But at the time when it started, it was pretty clear that the best way to achieve equality was to work on bringing women up to the level of men, hence the name.

I was always open and accepting to feminist thought, I mean everyone around me was so I never really faced opposition. I wasn't an activist or anything, just held some commonly said beliefs like wage gap, women in STEM, all those mainstream feminist stuff.
I was never too into feminist/sjw stuff though because I have a really dark sense of humor and never accepted political correctness. Offensive jokes were always funny to me.

>>8564981
>bringing women up to the level of men
Dying in coal mines at 40 after a lifetime of working 12 hours a day to support their family? Wew. Such level.

>>8564981
>The objective of feminism was always equality.
:^)

>>8558442
>being a mother and housewife is sex slavery
Remember kids, this is how much respect feminists have for traditional female roles. It is pure batshit crazyness.

>>8564949
I'm far too jealous a person.

>>8566599
It's more like prostitution, when you strip away all the ritual and fluff you're just trading sex for wealth.

>>8565014
>wage gap, women in STEM
those are just memes, ykr?

>>8566606
So who should pay for the kids?
Your answer would probably be society, through taxation.
But that's retarded, I don't want anything to do with other people's children, besides the state cannot replace the role of fathers, we've seen the the terrible outcomes of single mother's children. Marriage was a fair deal for both sexes untill feminists started their vendetta against it.

>>8566630
There's a lot of assumptions being made when you say something like there needs to be two people mutually dependent on each other who need to pay for their kids not dying to some other extremely powerful entity. Those assumptions being everything else about the situation leading up to that is okay somehow.
>taxation meme
My god man, you're so fucked up by ideology that you can't even imagine a solution or a problem that isn't about money.

>>8566630
>besides the state cannot replace the role of fathers,
It can damn well try.

>>8566641
>thinks marriage is sex slavery
>telling others that they are fucked up by ideology
you're funny, I give you that

Anyway, in the nature, refering to cavemen times women would literally die, if they were left alone because they are smaller, weaker and slower than men. Even in modern society someone has to provide for women, if they have children because they can't work with babies.

>>8566937
You can't just pretend like there isn't an inherent trade there. People are definitely trading sex for wealth. Take away the sex and the money from a marriage, see what happens.
It's not caveman times anymore, it's the future, we have automobiles.

>>8566937
>>thinks marriage is sex slavery
>>telling others that they are fucked up by ideology
Welcome to leftist/feminist doublethink.

>>8566950
I called it prostitution. Which isn't necessarily slavery.
>making things up to justify your narrative
Neat

>>8566566
No, more like being able to vote and run for political office. And the "dying in the coal mines" thing was only true of WORKING CLASS men, and honestly, conditions for working class women wasn't much better. It's not like working class women could just stay sitting at home all day back then, basically being working class meant everyone in the family needed to have a job just to bring in enough money to (barely) survive. The exploitation of the working class wasn't really a gender issues in those days, and it was already being addressed (for both genders) by the labor movement.

>>8566599
Why should I have ANY respect for an institution that says women don't deserve to survive unless they have sex with men? That's basically what it is. I'm okay with the form marriage and family life is taking today, where it's more acceptable to be a working mother married to a stay-at-home father, or a woman living independently with her own source of income, but the "traditional" system in which the only way women are allowed to support themselves is through marriage or prostitution, that's a different story. It's not the actions performed (having sex, bearing children, taking care of a house) that makes it slavery, it's the fact that women are coerced into it.

>>8566615
A wage gap does exist, though the 0.77 figure is inaccurate. And STEM is male dominated, though it's debatable to what extent it's caused by discrimination as opposed to different interests between genders.

>>8566630
>Marriage was a fair deal for both sexes untill feminists started their vendetta against it.
Not really, considering that until recently it was legal (even in developed countries) for a husband to have sex with their wife without their consent. And it was really the only option for women; men who didn't want children could just choose not to marry, while women really didn't have that option.

>>8566641
To be against all taxation is retarded

To want to give up half your income to pay for degenerates who have kids they have no means/ interest of providing for just so they can drink themselves to death so I can pay for their stay in a hospital is equally retarded

>>8566959
>I can literally only think in terms of markets
I'd hate to know you in person, you probably think of some forms of social interaction as payment, or creating debt.

>>8566937
>Anyway, in the nature, refering to cavemen times women would literally die, if they were left alone because they are smaller, weaker and slower than men.
That would only be true if they were smaller, weaker, and slower to such an extent that they would be unable to provide for their basic needs. It's not about who's weaker and who's stronger in relative terms, it's about whether one is strong ENOUGH to provide for themselves.

>Even in modern society someone has to provide for women, if they have children because they can't work with babies.
Yes, but only if they have children, otherwise they can support themselves through working just like unmarried men do. So in that sense, marriage as it exists in the modern West isn't sex slavery, but the system where getting married is the only way to support yourself, then it is sex slavery.

>>8566957
>And the "dying in the coal mines" thing was only true of WORKING CLASS men, and honestly, conditions for working class women wasn't much better. It's not like working class women could just stay sitting at home all day back then
[citation needed] on the life expectancy and workplace death rates of working class men and women before a word you say is believable.

>>8526152
test

>>8566982
>[citation needed] on the life expectancy and workplace death rates of working class men and women before a word you say is believable.
Why don't you show your statistics first? You're the one who claimed that men have it worse - and if you need statistics to believe something, then surely you would not have made that claim unless you already had statistics in your favor. Unless you're a biased hypocrite that only demands statistics for claims that go against your preconceived notions?

>>8566641
>>taxation meme
>My god man, you're so fucked up by ideology that you can't even imagine a solution or a problem that isn't about money.
>>8566962
>>I can literally only think in terms of markets

Wait so first you imply solutions don't have to involve money, and then you attack anon for saying taxation is retarded?

Which one is it? Can you sold this supposed issue without money/taxation or can't you?

It sounds to me like you're just trying to shutdown any talk of money so that you don't have to justify policies which come down to "throw other people's money at favored groups"!

But maybe you'll prove me wrong?

>>8567000
>brings up taxation
>blames me for it

>>8567017
I'm not even that anon, just an observer wondering what's going on with your contradictions.

I guess I was right, since your posts is exactly what would be expected from someone who can't explain why they contradicted themselves but wants to change the topic to be about the conversation instead of about the issues.

>>8566945
And women still need men's resources, no matter how futuristic we become.
Women as a group are a net burden on society, look up New Zealand study on that.

If you say all women are whores, I guess I can't argue with that because there's always a flow of resources from man to woman, no matter the type of realtionship they have. But you are a fool if you think marriage is prostitution, it is so much more than that. Marriage is the institution to keep the man and woman together to provide the best possible circumstances for the offsprings. And it is (or it was) an absolutely fair deal as women have an excess capacity for childbirth and a need of working capacity/resources while men have a need for childbirth capacity and an excess of working capacity/resources. marriage proves a fair exchange for each sex.

>>8566957
25+ women who never married earn more than men, you can stuff your wage gap up your ass

>>8567040
I said marriage is prostitution because people are trading sex for wealth. You people for some reason cannot see anything in that statement beyond "more taxes" and I'm not even sure what it has to do with taxes.
I think maybe the two of you are just putting words in my mouth, similar to how I'm being accused of saying marriage is sex slavery when I called it prostitution.

>>8567055
This is demonstrably false though, there are plenty of women who don't need to rely on prostituting themselves to men to survive. It still happens but it's not a necessity for it to happen.

>>8566957
>STEM is male dominated
of course it is, because women - if they are left free to decide - choose proifessions that envolve dealing with people rather than dealing with things
It's not the men's fault women follow their natural biological urges when they choose lover paying jobs and professions.
Look up the Norwagian gender paradox.

>>8567073
I'm pretty sure that when looking at specific professions, women earn slightly less than men on average.

>>8567088
By that logic you can't say men being more likely to die on the job is sexism either though, since it's due to men CHOOSING riskier jobs because that's what they prefer.

>>8566968
Marriage 2.0 as it exists in the modern West is as far as sex slavery as it can get. That would only be true if husbands couldn't legally commit rape against their wives which isn't the case, so your point is invalid. Women have literally 0 obligation in the joke that is modern Western marriage 2.0. This is why the West is dying due to low fertility, there is nothing in marriage for men anymore, it was a pretty bad deal to begin with, but now it's plain suicidal as they have no aothority anyómore while still have all the responsibilty for the family, all this while women can file for divorce for whatever reason and take all the children and half of their shit..

On the other hand you left the basic question unanswered: who should provide for women and their children and why if marriage is sex slavery?

>>8567120
>On the other hand you left the basic question unanswered: who should provide for women and their children and why if marriage is sex slavery?
Children ideally should only occur if both parents want them. Children that occur as a result of rape should be financially supported by the rapist. Women, generally speaking, should be allowed to support themselves by working, if they choose not to become housewives.

>>8567080
What you don't seem to understand is that if you take out men from the picture by empowering the state, taking away from men and giving it to women via social transfers to provide for them, it doesn't change the fact that women are paid for. If not by men directly, then by the state, but the state does that by taxing men. There is no difference, just that in the second case women can something for nothing.

Btw you fail to see also that most women do want to marry. If marraige is so evil and shit, why would they want to still do it? Maybe because they want a father for their children, that's not such a bad thing after all, right? Yet, you are advocating against marriage, and against the interests of women. Really spectacular.

>>8567091
Think again, sunshine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XYe0XGRbWg
>>8567098
Absolutely, and men don't complaint about that. Bringing up the question doesn't mean complaining about sexism, it's just a good point to disprove idiotic feminist claims about muh sexism and le ebul patriarchy.

>>8567147
Marriage isn't what's evil, it's circumstances that FORCE women into marriage that are evil. And honestly, in a society based on that kind of "traditional gender roles" or whatever, women would have an incentive to actively seek out marriage, even if they don't actually WANT it, because those societies make the consequences of NOT being married so severe.

>>8567147
See, there's a lot of assumptions you're making, that by getting rid of prostitution you're "taking men out of the picture" or "empowering the state" or "taking away from men and giving to women", but by your own admission women are "paid" for this role.
You seem weirdly defensive of prostitution too.

>>8567135
Lolwut, no or immensely minimal children are born due to rape in the West, what drugs are you on? Women can support themselves all they want, if they don't want to become housewifes. Problem is, they want to have children too, you again, you haven't answered my question, who should provide for women and children when both partners want them and the women obviously cannot work after childbirth?

>>8567163
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XYe0XGRbWg
I'm not even sure what that's trying to say - that because "societal circumstances" exist, statistics are therefore meaningless? It doesn't actually provide solid evidence at any point that women and men are paid the same for the same work - you know, the evidence that actually would disprove the claims of a wage gap. Also I'm pretty sure whoever posted that doesn't know what "dispenses" means.

>it's just a good point to disprove idiotic feminist claims about muh sexism and le ebul patriarchy.
So you think men and women have it equally as bad?

>>8567175
>Lolwut, no or immensely minimal children are born due to rape in the West, what drugs are you on?
I'm not just talking about the West. Our current system isn't really sex slavery, but its ancestor, the system we had back in the 1800s, and which less developed parts of the world still follow today, is.

>Problem is, they want to have children too, you again, you haven't answered my question, who should provide for women and children when both partners want them and the women obviously cannot work after childbirth?
Here's the thing though, I don't buy your premise that "women obviously cannot work after childbirth". Sure, they can't really work while going through pregnancy, but afterwards there's nothing to stop the woman from going back to work and the man staying home to take care of the kids. Obviously a family needs both income and somebody to take care of the kids, but that doesn't need to be decided along gender lines, it's up to the family to decide. Even having both parents work is possible if they earn enough to hire a third party to take care of the children.

>>8567168
Women are paid for is not an assumption, it's a fact. If you can't see marriage any other way than prostitution, I won't argue against that. just saying that's kind of a similar statement to the proverbal "All women are whores" line, which is considered a mysognistic view by progressives, so seeing you actually advocating for a mysognistic position is kinda weird, that's all I'm saying.
>>8567167
Circmustances that force women into marriage is basicly life, nature, biology or God, call it what you want, because women have the babies. As long as that doesn't change and men can give birth too or we invent artifical wombs (of which I would be terrified of btw - unlike MGTOW that's waiting for that like a Messiah - because that would mean there is no need for women to exist anymore). So is it unfair that only women have the babies, not both of the sexes? Sure, but if both sexes would be able to give birth there were no need for two sexes to begin with. So there is a reason why two sexes exist in most animal species and it probalby has to do with evolution. In the end your point literally makes no sense. Being angry with basic biology and nature is a nonsensical position.
>>8567179
It's nonsensical to compare aggregated earnings because that doesn't take personal chioces of choosing different professions into consideration. hairdressers shouldn't earn as much as CEOs. Maybe this video explains it better:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUpgoayBPJc

>>8567191
Whether you buy it or not, it isn't the case. from an economical stand point it doesn't make sense for the lesser earner - who will most likely be the women in the ralationship - to go back to work. What is more, your whole argument is based on parent roles and gender roles being interchangable which couldn't be more wrong. Men and women are different in every possibly way, therefore the role of mothers and fathers are different too. A mother provides different things for a child that a father can't and vice versa.

>>8567191
>can't really work through pregnancy but afterwards go for it
Women are better equipped to work during pregnancy than they are after childbirth honestly. Unless you work in very dangerous conditions(read:nearly no women) you can work until you are very close to labor. Afterwards, the child needs someone to care for them 24/7 for the next many years, and especially closely through the first few years. If the other parent is at home it is easier, but the child is much harder to care for after birth than before.

>>8567279
>Circmustances that force women into marriage is basicly life, nature, biology or God, call it what you want, because women have the babies. As long as that doesn't change and men can give birth too or we invent artifical wombs (of which I would be terrified of btw - unlike MGTOW that's waiting for that like a Messiah - because that would mean there is no need for women to exist anymore). So is it unfair that only women have the babies, not both of the sexes? Sure, but if both sexes would be able to give birth there were no need for two sexes to begin with. So there is a reason why two sexes exist in most animal species and it probalby has to do with evolution. In the end your point literally makes no sense. Being angry with basic biology and nature is a nonsensical position.
You're asserting that "basic biology" requires that everyone be involved in reproduction, and that the one who physically gives birth must also be the one who does the majority of the work in raising children. I'm not angry at basic biology, I'm angry at people who try to use it to justify depriving people of freedom.

>>8567279
>It's nonsensical to compare aggregated earnings because that doesn't take personal chioces of choosing different professions into consideration. hairdressers shouldn't earn as much as CEOs. Maybe this video explains it better:
But the supposed issue of the wage gap is about being paid equally for the SAME WORK, i.e. WITHIN a single profession. So the best way to debunk the wage gap would be to show evidence that women are NOT paid less than men in the same career with the same level of experience.

>>8567289
>from an economical stand point it doesn't make sense for the lesser earner - who will most likely be the women in the ralationship - to go back to work.
Not everything is about economics, never mind the one-sided form of economics you seem to be thinking in. Perhaps the greater earner really doesn't like his job, and he would rather stay at home - it wouldn't be optimal in terms of maximizing income, but maximizing income might not be the most desirable outcome, some people might rather have a decent but non-maximized income if it means they can avoid working in a career that they don't enjoy.

>What is more, your whole argument is based on parent roles and gender roles being interchangable which couldn't be more wrong. Men and women are different in every possibly way, therefore the role of mothers and fathers are different too. A mother provides different things for a child that a father can't and vice versa.
And this is basically just vague rambling, no specifics, no evidence. One could make an argument for the opposing position that is just as strong, because this style of argument is nothing more than assertions that are not supported by accompanying evidence.

>>8567510
And once again, female anatomy is not required to raise children once they're born. It's only required for the actual bearing of children. So no, even your premise that "women are better equipped to work during pregnancy than they are after childbirth" is pretty much nonsense. Sure, SOMEBODY is needed to take care of the children afterwards, but that somebody could basically be literally anyone, whereas the mother is the ONLY person who can actually physically bear her own children.

>sjw bullshit
If you mean that I recognize that women are still oppressed as a class, and that capitalism is poisonous and cannot persist in the age of automation without a patch like UBI, then yes.

>>8567098
I can agree with that. People should be ideologically consistent: if you get pissy about men dying more often in the workplace, then you shouldn't be using "oh, people just pick different jobs" as a reason for why women aren't in STEM fields. I agree on that.

However, I like people to be ideologically consistent across the board. If the goal of modern feminism is to achieve equality, is it not hypocritical to focus on microaggressions against women but ignore the myriad of microaggressions against men?

Yes, MRAs who bitch about microaggressions against men but not against women are fools. But then again, so are feminists who bitch about microaggressions against women and then just casually add shit like "toxic masculinity" into conversations about equality, without even realizing that too is a microaggression.

And if feminism isn't about dealing with small petty slights like people wearing misogynist shirts or casually using slurs or rude dialogue/questions, and is instead focused on de jure equality under the law, then why are fminist organizations consistently standing in the way of law reform that would make the sexes equal on issues like jailtime and divorce proceedings? the National Organization for Women has repeatedly fought against efforts to make divorce laws fairer to the husband. And I admit those laws were put in place by old white men with a certain view of how the world works revolving around the man as the breadwinner, but in that case, why are the feminist groups on the stuffy old white men's side, trying to enforce traditional ideas of marriage and divorce? Wh have feminist groups repeatedly fought against reforms to make jail terms more equitable between the sexes for the same crimes? This seems like basic de jure equality that everyone who wants gender equality should get behind. Until a majority of feminists do, what can I call the majority of feminists if not hypocrites?

>>8567828
>women are oppressed as a class
Do you mean in America and the West, or the rest of the world? If you mean the rest of the world, I agree, but in the West...no.

women now make more than men(at least the most recent generation does), live longer, have better educations, have better mental health, are treated better by the education system, get lower prison terms, are treated better in marriage and divorce proceedings, and still receive the bulk of government assistance.

Certainly there are things to be improved upon (better representation in government, improvement of job prospects and security in some fields, reduction of harassment in...well, generally those same fields, better represenation in culture, and better health coverage and costs), but you cannot with a straight face argue that when all the pros vs all the cons are weighed, the sexes aren't just about equal in the West. If anything, the scales will be tilted slightly the other way here if current trends about women in the workforce and education continue. By which I mean that if women in newer generations continue to receive better education and pay than men, it will become difficult to argue that women are still disadvantaged.

>that capitalism is poisonous
“democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those others that have been tried.” --Winston Churchill.

Propose a viable alternative (and I swear to God, if you say anarcho-socialism, I am going to post my smuggest anime reaction face), and we can talk. It is a shitty system, I admit--except that nothing else tried in the course of human history has come even remotely close to working as well or being as successful as it.

>>8568184
>Women in the west
The problem, above all, is cultural. Systems are made up of people. Whatever is legal or illegal, people are ultimately those who enforce things. Sexism on the cultural level, rather than on the legal level, is responsible for most of the issues women face. A great deal of independent assholes coalesce into a systematic problem.

>Capitalism
Capitalism was the best system of its era. Technology dictates what is or is not possible. Given what was possible in the past capitalism was the most sensible solution, just as feudalism was sensible when technology was more primitive still. In the age of artificial intelligence, automation and individual merchant kings sequestering absurd, historically unprecedented amounts of wealth outside of the market capitalism cannot survive as is. There is a real need to accept that we're moving to a world where, soon enough, the majority of people won't be able to find any work. In such a world there is no humane conclusion other than accepting that these people *won't* work and providing a baseline level of living for them. The also historically unprecedented reduction in production costs makes this an actual possibility rather than an ideal.

Capitalism+UBI might still be a sort of capitalism, but to me it looks an awful lot like a sort of socialism.

>>8567783
>>8567817
There is nothing vague about mother's indispensable role in the first new years of a baby's life. The fact that you insist on such an foolish opinion only further proves how ignorant you are on the topic. Mother's for one thing breastfeed their babies up to even one and a half year, sometimes even more. Mother's milk provides babies natural resistance against certain diseases, improves their intelligence, these are all proven scientific facts. Father can do none of those, and we are still talking about the biological part. Psychologically the mother-in-law bond is a primal part of the emotional development of the child. Babies recognize the voice of their mothers even before birth. After they are born comes a 2-3-years period when babies are extremely vulnerable and dependant on their mothers. Females are the sex with more empathy for a reason: it is in the best interest of the baby to have someone care for him or her who has unconditional love and empathy for them, something fathers aren't capable of because men are more orderly and conscientious in terms of traits, rather than empathic, and their love is more conditional towards their children as they represent the outer world's expectations, while mother's role is to offer an always safe, unconditional sanctuary and protection. Mother's instinct is to protect the helpless children from any harm, while fathers tend to play more rough with their kids, encouraging them to be more independant, to prepare them for the inevitable hardships of life.

>>8568090
>if you get pissy about men dying more often in the workplace, then you shouldn't be using "oh, people just pick different jobs" as a reason for why women aren't in STEM fields.
But those aren't inconsistent.

>>8526152
I don't believe that trannies should be called women and the term transgirl is an assault on real girls and they know it and are barely tolerate us for good reason because we are basically mocking femininity

>tfw became a terf

>>8568284
Why do you hate yourself?

>>8568291
Because cis women are real humans and im not, at best im a decimal approximation of a female human, just a irl cosplayer and this saddens me

>>8568304
You're human. Nothing you could do would make you no longer human. You did not choose to be born like this, and you are like this because of a birth defect. Getting treatment is not wrong.

>>8568327
I didn't say transition is wrong, and its going great for me, but like i still feel like a creep and like somehow im hurting women by quote un quote pretending to be one

>>8568351
Okay, here's a question: is a woman dressing like woman also pretending to be a woman? That is, there is nothing about a woman's biology that compels her to dress like a woman, right? But she does because she was taught that this is how women dress. Since you identify as a woman isn't it natural that you also fall prey to the same social influences? How are you hurting anyone? How is this creepy?

I'm not one of the people who think transwomen are literally the same as women but the concrete physical evidence we have does show that even on male hormones, with their virilizing effects, transwomen still have brains that look halfway female. Introduce female hormones and the brains are fairly close to those of women (though still distinct in some way). The cultural aspect, gender performance (such as dressing in a certain way) is at least 50% of what people speak of when they speak of gender. Put together there is no reason to not think of you as a woman for just about every practical purpose. No one checks an intersexed woman's karyotype before treating her as a woman, right? and being intersex yourself that's the comparison that should be drawn.

Don't fall prey to hatred masquerading as insight.

>>8568304
>cis women are real humans and im not
Why do you think you aren't?

>>8568419
Thats extremely well put but it doesn't help

>>8568424
Because when i use the ladies room i get borderline panic attacks

>>8568434
I wish I could help. I'm sorry.

>>8568434
>Because when i use the ladies room i get borderline panic attacks
That has nothing to do with being human though.

>>8568264
It's inconsistent because on one hand you're saying that when women suffer negative consequences it's the women's own fault for making poor decisions, but then saying that when men suffer negative consequences it's society's fault.

>>8568446
Not having to hold it all the time would be nice

>>8568262
>The fact that you insist on such an foolish opinion only further proves how ignorant you are on the topic. Mother's for one thing breastfeed their babies up to even one and a half year, sometimes even more. Mother's milk provides babies natural resistance against certain diseases, improves their intelligence, these are all proven scientific facts. Father can do none of those, and we are still talking about the biological part.
That's like the one substantial example you've come up with, and that's only in play for maybe 10% of time spent raising a child, and much less than that in the typical case. The rest of your argument is mostly just sex essentialism and "common knowledge" with no real scientific basis.

>>8568452
Not being in STEM isn't a negative consequence.

Dying at work is.

>>8568493
Getting paid less for taking a non-STEM job is a negative consequence however. It's hypocritical to say the wage gap isn't a problem because women "choose" lower-paying jobs, while at the same time saying that the death-on-the-job gap is a problem even though men "choose" riskier jobs.

>>8568515
Except there are plenty of well-paying non-STEM jobs that are more enjoyable to lots of people, presumably including the women who choose them instead of STEM.

>>8568530
Are those jobs not open to men?

>>8567817
You missed my point there, which is that you're wrong in saying that "women cannot really work through pregnancy." I'm saying that the period after pregnancy is a much greater burden than during when it comes to working. Yes the man can(and usually will not because women are better at it), but it is much harder afterwards if there are not serious perinatal complications.

I never said men cannot, but you are implying that it's easier after the baby pops out when the opposite is typically true. That is when you said " Sure, they can't really work while going through pregnancy, but afterwards there's nothing to stop the woman from going back to work and the man staying home."

>>8568253
>The problem, above all, is cultural. Systems are made up of people. Whatever is legal or illegal, people are ultimately those who enforce things.

Yes. So in that case, let's talk real issues: where are women worse off and where are women better off? What makes you say that women are oppressed as a class? In all the examples I cite, women actually have an advantage in society, from both a cultural and often a legal standpoint. I do also provide some counterpoints of places where women are worse off.

Don't just say "well, it's a cultural problem". No shit it's a cultural problem! Engage and discuss that!

>Sexism on the cultural level, rather than on the legal level, is responsible for most of the issues women face.

OK, so you're saying that the microaggression issue is the key problem? people are assholes and make slights against women. Fair enough, that's true. However, is that not also true for men, and is it not hypocritical that feminist groups, which want cultural equality, are ONLY focusing on microaggressions against women or "feminine" (i.e gay, because we're veeery feminine...stereotyping assholes) men. In fact, many feminists are RESPONSIBLE for many of the microaggressions that target men. Male tears, toxic masculinity, patriarchy, etc all are commonly used terms by feminists and all portray masculinity and being a man as weak/bad/inferior. How is that not a textbook microaggression? It's an unintentional (I should hope!) putdown of an entire group of people that stereotypes them and worse makes the very basis of their existence an insult. I'm sure it would not fly--it does not fly--when dudebros talk about not being weak and crying like a woman, or how that lady was probably just being a bitch because she's on her period. That shit's offensive. So then why isn't it offensive in feminists' eyes when they use similar smears with men?

>Capitalism
Again, I agree capitalism is shitty--but it's less shitty than any alternative we've come up with.

>>8568547
Aren't STEM jobs not open to women?

>>8529656
>Believing that male genital mutilation is acceptable because it is not as bad

>>8543325
Who gives a damn about individuality. There's a reason certain topics are banned in the work place and no one makes a dime being themselves.

>>8569989
>What makes you say that women are oppressed as a class?
People are more likely to think women are less competent, to speak over them, to seriously harass them, to discount their opinions, to see personality traits that are deemed feminine as weak (willingness to seek a compromise, humility, risk-aversion) and personality traits that are deemed masculine (aggression, bravado, risk-taking) as strong. There's also simple, blatant sexism. Put together this largely keeps women out of positions of power and desirable fields because those who already occupy them are largely men who hold to such notions. Someone who does somehow makes it into a key position often faces endless harassment from her own colleagues.

Quite a few feminists are blatantly misandrist but it is not as if they have any significant amount of influence on society. People on the internet often have warped notions of how meatspace operates. A small group of loud twitter memesters can't do all that much to influence the behavior of the general public. This isn't a matter of being offended by a few individuals, but by the prevailing norms.

>it's less shitty than any alternative we've come up with.
It quite literally can't even exist as-is for much longer, unlike UBI socialism.

>>8570084
If you don't mind being grabbed by the pussy and having to suck dick or get fired.

>>8569989
>>8570243
And to add to that: you can be offended or not offended by someone not hiring you because you're a woman and they think you're less competent, but it still happens either way.

>>8568419
>concrete physical evidence we have
Bullshit. [citation needed]There is absolutely zero proof of these physical brain structures causing AGP/Trans/Dysphoria, simply correlating with the condition! Don't trust bitterhons! Correlation does not = causation, and very low evidence studies aren't science!

>>8570467
>Transsexuals being born with half-female brains has nothing to do with transsexuality

You've already been given the evidence, Cureanonette. Go get some rest. Posting the same things all day every day must get tiring.

>>8570243
>People are more likely to think women are less competent
I wonder why!

>>8529480
>I'm currently doing a semester in Germany as an exchange student

VERPISS DICH WIR SIND VOLL

>>8570486
Because people, like you, are sexist idiots.

>>8570484
Rest? Sleep is for the weak, I'm not weak like you, bitterhon. I'm a proud repressor, and always will be because I'm not a hon like you!

Also, I'm not an "anonette". I'm not female, never will be female, so don't try it.

Also, it's my mission in life. We all have to find meaning to the madness, and mine is dispensing the truth, rather than bitterhon lies.

Don't trust them!

>>8570509
Wow, great argument! Are you female?

>>8570523
>reddit spacing

>>8570533
>reddit spacing
Nice meme, bitterhon. Best insult you could come up with?

>>8526152
I don't care about women and I don't care about black people, so sj and feminism don't have anything to interest me.

Those sorts of people always expect you to care about them and their bullshit as if the reason for caring is self-evident and obvious and indisputable.
Just smile and nod and walk away or change the subject.

File: thumbs up kid.gif (1MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x240px

>>8570559
Now that's better.

>>8569808
My point is that "after the baby pops out", it is not neccessary that the biological mother be the one raising the child, whereas actually bearing children is something only the biological mother can do. I'm not saying bearing children is harder than raising them, the difference however is that there's only one person who can bear a child, while there's a near-infinite number of other people who could raise the child instead of the mother.

>>8570084
Maybe in Iran or something. In the West women are allowed to take those jobs, though they're not typically considered "women's jobs" and they do tend to have heavily male communities which some women may find offputting.

>>8570525
Yeah, "women are less competent because I BELIEVE they are" isn't really a good argument either.

>>8570561
So you're basically a sociopath?