Joyless feminism
Discussion
Randy Winkman said:
I'm sure you'll be pleased to know that female suicide rates are increasing while rates for males are falling.
http://www.samaritans.org/about-us/our-research/fa...
Another interestng comment from you, are you saying it tongue in cheek, or do you mean it ? (Sorry trying to interpret a single sentence of written prose without smilies etc means it can really only be taken literally?)http://www.samaritans.org/about-us/our-research/fa...
My own view is that I would like to see suicide rates for both men and women reduce, it's sad that the female rate is apparently increasing.
For me equality isn't a competition, I recognise that women and girls have issues but so do men and boys. Unfortunately thanks to third wave feminism it is much harder for issues of men and boys to be even acknowledged let alone tackled, and that is to the detriment of society as a whole.
steveatesh said:
Randy Winkman said:
I agree. I see some truth behind very one of them.
To what extent do you see some truth behind very (sic) one of them though?Do you think they are more common than not, and if so how much more common?
Or do you think they reflect some bodies opinions based on their own contact with the world?
Or do they reflect your approach to women and that of your peer group?
I'm curious to understand just how you have managed to learn that there is some truth in them.
Moonhawk said:
Men using sex toys however is still very much viewed as sad even amongst women who have their own i.e. "What are you using those for, cant get a girl? You loser" (see third article)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-38649235
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/franchesca-warren/sex...
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/s...
Because I don't have to buy it dinner first or cuddle it after and it never complains when it gets the wet patch.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-38649235
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/franchesca-warren/sex...
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/s...
bga said:
steveatesh said:
Randy Winkman said:
I agree. I see some truth behind very one of them.
To what extent do you see some truth behind very (sic) one of them though?Do you think they are more common than not, and if so how much more common?
Or do you think they reflect some bodies opinions based on their own contact with the world?
Or do they reflect your approach to women and that of your peer group?
I'm curious to understand just how you have managed to learn that there is some truth in them.
Sadly men, especially white men, are the most disliked class of people probably as a result of the relentless painting of them in a bad Light by the media, drama, soaps, adverts, and a lot more beside.
I have no doubt some men behave like the cartoon characters but by no means is it all or even most men in my experience. The cartoons are presented as representing men's attitude, but it is only some men that behave like that, just like it is only some women who are gold diggers or manipulative or whatever.
To what extent do you think the cartoons are accurate in respect of all men?
What proportion of men do you know who fit those Cartoons?
What proportion of men do you know who don't comply with the artists cartoons?
Moonhawk said:
cookie118 said:
The first cartoon is very much written from an anti-male perspective though.The first caption - the female would very much think the guy was a desperate loser - just like the guy thinks in the second one. Why is the caption therefore different?
The caption "He kicked me in the groin"....."Why weren't you wearing a cup" should much more accurately read "She kicked me in the groin"........"why what did you do to her you b
d - you probably deserved it" (as demonstrated in this video)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRCS6GGhIRc
The "when it's usually like this" cartoon......is it really? Are men that aggressive when coming on to women in the majority of cases (i.e. for it to be 'usually' like that)?
For the 'because we think they're decoration' cartoon - it's far more likely that it's the guy being exploited. lied to or taken advantage of in this case. The only time this happens in reality is if the guy is rich and/or famous - and the two women in those instances are likely to be gold digging. If they act as decoration - it's because they choose to for the purposes of material gain. Where is the sexism against women here?
The "we blame women for sexual harassment" one - yes that does happen. But it also happens in reverse.....how many guys have had their bottoms pinched, been kissed or had lewd comments made by woman or group of women (especially when drunk, on hen parties etc)? In these cases it is just seen as 'banter' and a guy protesting against such 'banter' would be seen as a sissy.
"When females are taught to control their sexual urges until marriage" one should more accurately read "When females are taught to control their sexual urges so that they can use sex as currency and as a way of manipulating men into doing what they want" (see first two articles below). Also - given that an entire sex toy industry has grown up specifically to cater for women's sexual urges, i'd say womens 'sexual urges" are well catered for and open. Again - where is the sexism here? Men using sex toys however is still very much viewed as sad even amongst women who have their own i.e. "What are you using those for, cant get a girl? You loser" (see third article)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-38649235
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/franchesca-warren/sex...
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/s...
That's the problem with feminism, it's not a strive for equality, it's a strive for supremacy. This is the liberal left, so objectiveness will never be achieved through their group think methodology.
Edited by Atmospheric on Friday 20th January 08:43
Edited by Atmospheric on Friday 20th January 08:46
xjay1337 said:
Spot on ^^^^
You really are disillusioned if you think those comics are representative of blokes.
I think they may be quite representative of Hollywood and other entertainment media's portrayals of men, women and relationships/interactions.You really are disillusioned if you think those comics are representative of blokes.
If we accept that in general "art imitates life" then we could assume that these were some people's experiences, behaviour or at least their own understanding of their experiences or observations.
I would suggest that the majority of the scenarios portrayed are enforced by the media, and by third wave feminists.
If they wanted to be fair with the cartoons they could show a man walking down a high street with a big bunch of flowers for his wife, and a series of women looking at him try to guess what he's done wrong, with the final one showing him giving the flowers to his wife as a surprise and the caption "just because he loves her"
That is far more representative of women's attitude towards men, then the cartoons in the link.
That is far more representative of women's attitude towards men, then the cartoons in the link.
Edited by KrazyIvan on Friday 20th January 10:15
Edited by KrazyIvan on Friday 20th January 10:15
KrazyIvan said:
If they wanted to be fair with the cartoons they could show a man walking down a high street with a big bunch of flowers for his wife, and a series of women looking at him try to guess what he's done wrong, with the final one showing him giving the flowers to his wife as a surprise and the caption "just because he lovesaid her"
That is far more representative of women's attitude towards men, then the cartoons in the link.
Yup it probably is, and yet again reinforces the stereotype that men = bad or must have done a bad thing reflected in the cartoons. That is far more representative of women's attitude towards men, then the cartoons in the link.
Another BBC fluff piece about how girls and women are being "held back" because apparently gender sterotypes at school make them feel less worthless.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38717926
Funny how the reality doesn't appear to mirror this:
Is that what being 'held back' and feeling 'worthless' looks like these days?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38717926
Funny how the reality doesn't appear to mirror this:
- Girls are 14% more likely to gain a grade C or higher at GCSE level and 43% more likely to attain an A or A*
- Girls are 35% more likely to go to university.
- Girls are 6% more likely attain a 2:1 or higher.
- Girls are 33% less likely to drop out of university.
- Women outnumber men in 2/3rds of all university subjects.
- Women in the age range 22-29 out earn men by around £1100 on average.
Is that what being 'held back' and feeling 'worthless' looks like these days?
Moonhawk said:
Another BBC fluff piece about how girls and women are being "held back" because apparently gender sterotypes at school make them feel less worthless.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38717926
Funny how the reality doesn't appear to mirror this:
Is that what being 'held back' and feeling 'worthless' looks like these days?
Only when it suits the feminist agenda of course.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38717926
Funny how the reality doesn't appear to mirror this:
- Girls are 14% more likely to gain a grade C or higher at GCSE level and 43% more likely to attain an A or A*
- Girls are 35% more likely to go to university.
- Girls are 6% more likely attain a 2:1 or higher.
- Girls are 33% less likely to drop out of university.
- Women outnumber men in 2/3rds of all university subjects.
- Women in the age range 22-29 out earn men by around £1100 on average.
Is that what being 'held back' and feeling 'worthless' looks like these days?
This suggests that the research as quoted by the BBC is not conclusive,:
"Boys as young as 7 already expect to do less well at school than girls, so say Bonnie Hartley and Robbie Sutton (Child Development, Volume 84, Issue 5, pages 1716–1733). At this tender age, girls think that girls are cleverer than boys – and boys agree with them. Moreover, this attitude appears to emanate, not just from schools, but from society more generally. Boys feel they are not expected by their parents or teachers to do as well as girls. They loose their motivation and confidence as a result. Low expectations breed low achievement, a phenomenon which feminists are keen to emphasise when females are under-represented."
Taken from http://mra-uk.co.uk/?page_id=744
There's a lot on that page that should have set alarm bells ringing years ago for the various governments and any interested media, but it's the wrong sex which is being disadvantaged.
Moonhawk said:
Another BBC fluff piece about how girls and women are being "held back" because apparently gender sterotypes at school make them feel less worthless.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38717926
Funny how the reality doesn't appear to mirror this:
Is that what being 'held back' and feeling 'worthless' looks like these days?
It's USA research not UK.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38717926
Funny how the reality doesn't appear to mirror this:
- Girls are 14% more likely to gain a grade C or higher at GCSE level and 43% more likely to attain an A or A*
- Girls are 35% more likely to go to university.
- Girls are 6% more likely attain a 2:1 or higher.
- Girls are 33% less likely to drop out of university.
- Women outnumber men in 2/3rds of all university subjects.
- Women in the age range 22-29 out earn men by around £1100 on average.
Is that what being 'held back' and feeling 'worthless' looks like these days?
Still likely the usual feminist mantra though.
PurpleMoonlight said:
It's USA research not UK.
Still likely the usual feminist mantra though.
It is - but a UK based 'equality' organisation appears to be suggesting that it's holding girls back over here:Still likely the usual feminist mantra though.
"The UK's Fawcett Society campaigns on the gender pay gap and argues early differences - blue and superheroes versus pink and princesses - is part of the problem. Sam Smethers, the organisation's chief executive, said: "This is a massive issue and it is holding us all, but particularly girls, back."
Moonhawk said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
It's USA research not UK.
Still likely the usual feminist mantra though.
It is - but a UK based 'equality' organisation appears to be suggesting that it's holding girls back over here:Still likely the usual feminist mantra though.
"The UK's Fawcett Society campaigns on the gender pay gap and argues early differences - blue and superheroes versus pink and princesses - is part of the problem. Sam Smethers, the organisation's chief executive, said: "This is a massive issue and it is holding us all, but particularly girls, back."
Sam Smethers; Equal pay: Women earn nothing from now until 2017
RSA events bio
Sam Smethers
"Throughout her time there, Sam maintained a gendered approach"
"Author Dawn Foster, Fawcett Society CEO Sam Smethers and ‘Token Man’ founder Daniele Fiandaca debate the values that shape the way we live and work together."
It is never going to be much of a 'debate' when three women that earn their living in promoting women's rights gather in a echo chamber created specifically for them, surrounded by their followers wishing to have their beliefs confirmed.
A bit like attending a Catholic church service and expecting a debate on the merits of atheism.
Mr Snrub said:
MyPasswordIsntSecure said:
A friend of mine is part of the Fawcett Society. Not surprisingly she is a middle class trust-funder.
Militant 50:50 in everything (UK), regardless of merit.
Wonder if that includes oil rigs, fishing boats, building sites, frontline combat roles etc?Militant 50:50 in everything (UK), regardless of merit.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff