|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 13, 2018 11:17:54 GMT
Perhaps you ought to suggest to any women in your life that they apologise for taking issues and to thank you for masculine largesse. Then tell them that, without sex, most likely you wouldn't be bothered with them. See how it goes. You don't appear to be telling me anything about why the feminist movement can't be correlated with the ideal of religious movements, or pinpoint accurately where the inequality lies that you feel endorses the self-important and skewed ideal of the feminist movement today in the west.
One can 'correlate' almost anything, my friend. Feel free.
Meanwhile inequality for women lays in things already mentioned such as reproductive rights, wages, political representation, media treatment, misogyny, and implicit discrimination, and all the rest. If you think women and men are perfectly equal in the west - where one might expect the outlook to be the most promising - then once again I suggest you ask any women in your life. After telling her to stop whining and to be thankful, of course.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 10:30:53 GMT
what are they really whining about? Specifically, the continuing lack of equality (notably in those several areas I have already specified). I hope that helps. I merely said that one can 'correlate' anything and express an opinion thereafter. And so you do. But I am not. See above. If by this you mean my acceptance as a principle that an egalitarian society is one most likely to benefit all and generally be the fairest, as opposed to one where any the population - in this case half or more - can be treated as second class citizens, yes, I 'buy into it'. This statement probably tell me more about you than it does I. You, after all, are the one who earlier suggested that, without sex, women might be dispensed with. I have already suggested the obvious physiological difference between men and women are clear. I also make clear that equality, or the aspirations of feminism, ought to be based on what is both sensible and practicable which few would disagree with. In regards to 'perfect equality' this is a concept which is meaningless in the real world, for various reasons and no one really ever argues for it except in strict instances. But meantime, the statistics about the position and treatment of women in society are often clear enough, whether it be the pay gap (which has forced recent legislation in the UK for instance) or the levels of misogyny. en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/misogyny en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/feminism en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/equality Wrong again. But perhaps you can return the favour and can give a name for a philosophy of denying equality to others? A lot of the most memorable and worthy things in life are exactly that, my friend. Here you are right, there are always some dinosaurs for whom notions of social justice will never impress.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 10:53:20 GMT
What rights do men have that women don't in our current "Western society"? There is a difference between having rights and seeing them respected or enforced. For instance ever since the civil war in the US, blacks technically had 'the right' to vote. In the UK pay discrimination is supposedly illegal, and sex hate crime too. Never the less, attitudes and actions have changed considerably even over the last few decades. Heck, even the Saudis now allow women to drive on their own. And India has woken up to its problem with rape. You have your opinions - and are still welcome to them. en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/social_justice It appears lately that there have been a lot of words which you do not understand, which is unfortunate - especially as we are disputing around such concepts. I note too, that you were unable to give a name for a philosophy of denying equality to others which I asked for. Failing that, perhaps you can list some advantages of keeping women down, discriminated against or otherwise disadvantaged in society? You can get some inspiration from The Handmaid's Tale, no doubt. Others, including myself beg to differ my friend. If sex is irrelevant, then why have you been railing against 'whining women' all the time? This is true, but it would be hard to find a woman who does not welcome equality as a good thing in at least some aspect or would condemn (as you apparently do) egalitarian society. Sorry to disillusion you my friend, but any credence with someone who say, sees women as dispensable when sex is excluded, is not an issue for me.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Jul 16, 2018 11:16:13 GMT
I'd consider myself a feminist but there are a lot of similarities. For one mainstream feminists jump to crazy conclusion based on scarce evidence. They both also like to ignore inconvenient pieces of info.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 16, 2018 11:33:02 GMT
I'd consider myself a feminist but there are a lot of similarities . For one mainstream feminists jump to crazy conclusion based on scarce evidence. They both also like to ignore inconvenient pieces of info.Why the heck would a male want to be a feminist, when he is in glorious masculine form? Perhaps it is wanting the privileges society affords females over males. I wonder where the inequality really lies? Or is it just a way for a male to get into a females knickers. If this is the case, then it is a phony attribute to give to oneself.
I agree though, both feminists and religions fall flat when it comes to solid evidence regarding their ideals and have selective reasoning skills.
Everyone falls flat when it comes to solid evidence on their ideals. You are using selective reasoning skills right now for example.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 12:03:18 GMT
You are basing things on what was once was in the West, not what is now. Are you really suggesting that the treatment and condition of women in the West is, in every regards where possible, equitable to that of men? Or that there is no need for change, when I have already listed several areas in which this is obviously not the case? Maybe you need to ask any whining women in your life again, before suggesting they are thankful for their lot of course. Once again: I think the issue with 'whining women' tells more about the attitudes of those (usually men) who have issues with assertive females, demanding their rights, and who feel their traditional place in a comfortable patriarchy threatened. But, as always, you are welcome to your opinions. It is significant, though, that you have not listed any advantages to be gained from an inequitable society, as requested. I wonder why? "At any rate, take sex out of the equation and I doubt most men would even bother with most of them [women] and vice versa. " Remember that? As you have already been told, taking a supposed 'natural standard', at least by which to form a supposed objective opinion raises a whole host of questions and has been considered a logical fallacy. This might be of assistance:
effectiviology.com/appeal-to-nature-fallacy/
However, it is difficult to see how you can form any meaningful view, especially when you have had to ask recently for the definitions of such words as 'social justice', 'misogyny', 'feminism' and ''equality'.. There is also a difference between sexual attraction, welcomed and reciprocated between the sexes, and such concerns as misogyny, sex discrimination or the continued objectification of women in the media. It is a shame that you need to be reminded of that, too.
All of yours above just sounds like special pleading, for two wrongs don't make a right. I am not sure whether this is an apology for the frequently poor treatment of women in theocracies or not. I will take it in the best possible light. I do love the idea of women having to 'man up' and solve things, though. Perhaps it might be more of case for some guys to 'woman down' instead?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 12:14:37 GMT
Please don't tell me anything. I am a masculinst, you are an absurd feminist. What a joke that is for someone who shares the male form. Pity you won't have any of your own bras to burn. Or perhaps you do.
Don't worry, judging by your postings lately on this subject both here and elsewhere, I don't think anyone could ever tell you much.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 13:44:41 GMT
Don't worry, judging by your postings lately on this subject both here and elsewhere, I don't think anyone could ever tell you much.
That [sic] right! QED. Since I am not a self-depreciating man who subconsciously hates himself and blindly believes women are superior to him, then this is another thing you are wrong about. And, as your tone grows more insulting towards me as your skewed masculist points are disposed of, one by one, let me remind you now that an ad hominem is not an argument.. But I have replied to all your arguments already. Since you admit no one can tell you anything, why make further effort? The argument for feminism and social justice, btw, carries equal logic whether expressed by women or men - especially when no contra-arguments can readily be found when called for (as when you cannot offer any advantages for an inequal society). We are not all so clear-headed and sensible as you big, manly types, it seems.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 15:20:15 GMT
You haven't even watched that video have you? No, because I am unable to do so at my desk. I am surprised though that you would allow a whiney women to argue on your behalf, let alone a person who presumably can be dispensed with, since no sex is involved. A sense for the wider inequalities in society is not usually exclusively about one's self. But I think you really know that. Translation: I won't accept anything you say, have nothing new to add here, so I now going rely henceforth entirely on personal attacks. And, as for replying to posts, I still await any ideas from you as to what advantage an unequal society might bring to us all. Is that a problem? When you get around to tell me exactly why practicable equality in society would not not right and just - and, conversely, what advantages wider inequality can bring to us all, then feel free to make this point again. Surely a case of giving you enough rope then, as this exchange drags on - and your replies get more and more revealingly petulant lol ... As usual, you are welcome to your opinions. But perhaps you need to explain better what is fallacious about the ideal of equality (which is all feminism is, with special attention to the female position), where practicable and reasonable, for all. For, as already noted, you have made no arguments yet in favour of the alternative. Please quote where I have shown excessive pride in myself, let alone been deceitful, in this thread. In fact presently, you seem now more concerned with me personally than I ever am. I am afraid since the definition of the word does not apply to me, you appear to be just using it as an swear word. And, as previously noted, increased personal attacks and insults do not constitute an argument. It just suggests defensiveness on your part when all your points are politely countered, leading to frustration venting through verbal aggression. But go on. The notion that a concern for social justice is inherently 'unmanly' is an odd one, and might even be a Scotsman fallacy when used in argument. Well I would probably agree that equality needs to be meaningful, if that is what you mean.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 7:06:33 GMT
Feminism has turned into feminists demanding that women deserve rights but then neglect men's rights in the process. Probably because in almost every society, men's rights are already established through culture and tradition as well as law (even if neglected, along with everyone elses' in dictatorships). I cannot think of any declaration of human rights which discriminates against men. But if you mean neglecting men's right to be superior or to be treated differently for the same, then I would agree: feminism has other things in mind. Never the less, that is the standard definition of the word. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women. That is not at all the same as suggesting men ought to be 'less equal' - a trope of the males who gripe at losing ground. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism As a feminist (and a man) I am fine with it; so feel free to use it whenever, if needs be. Meantime I will always call for a more egalitarian society for all, feminism just being a part of it. This, slightly ranting, paragraph probably says more about you, and your attitude to those pesky proactive and resurgent women seeking equality within society, than it does about feminism per se. But, naturally you are welcome to your opinions. The idea that we are all disadvantaged and so women should not pay particular attention to their own situation is, however, an odd one. But at least you admit that women can be disadvantaged. Science has shown that men and women are naturally better at different things, with their respective mental skills, because of the way their brains work; this is really not controversial or surprising. I love the research of yours btw which shows that most men agree they should never hit a women. Very reassuring. Can the rest be told to stand down too?
And just who overwhelmingly formed the power structures, and wrote the books, of religion? It is also hard to make out a case out for women repressing women in society more widely throughout the decades more generally. Btw you seem to be using 'oppression' very cavalierly. For the most part oppression is what happens in dictatorship and illiberal theocracies. Women in the west tend to have most issue - these days at least - with legacy discrimination, both implicit and explicit, battles over reproductive choice, as well as misogyny EG
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-44740362
I hope that helps.
Thank you for making this one feminist argument in favour of equality, at least. Add in the notion that people should receive equal pay no matter what their gender for the same work and you should go far. I obviously am in favor of equality but my issue with feminism is that it only focuses on where women are disadvantaged and ignores where men can be disadvantaged too. How can there be an egalitarian society if you only focus on one gender?
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Jul 17, 2018 10:22:29 GMT
I obviously am in favor of equality but my issue with feminism is that it only focuses on where women are disadvantaged and ignores where men can be disadvantaged too. How can there be an egalitarian society if you only focus on one gender? What a ridiculous argument. Feminism is concerned with restoring a power balance for a traditionally oppressed and marginalized group. Those who have been enjoying the privileges of their gender have had all the time they need to work out any issues on their end if those issues were of any genuine concern. Feminism of course welcomes those efforts, but its focus has always been on the situations faced by women.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 10:56:32 GMT
I obviously am in favor of equality but my issue with feminism is that it only focuses on where women are disadvantaged and ignores where men can be disadvantaged too. How can there be an egalitarian society if you only focus on one gender? This worry assumes that the only group campaigning for social justice is women, or that feminists would not care about equality in society more generally, either explicitly or implicitly, by their arguments. There might be uncomfortably strident feminists around, perhaps with extreme ideas, but then one remembers how the 60's Civil Rights movement was big enough to accommodate both Malcom X and Dr. Martin Luther King.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 11:01:07 GMT
Until you watch that whiney woman - interesting that she is whiney, since you haven't seen it - and give me a reasonable summation, I won't be responding to anymore of your desperate responses on this thread, that see you arrogantly floundering to remain feminist relevant. Whatever. But I am guessing that she is a strong, opinionated female and one who takes a wider interest in society in relation to women, so your point is ironic, really. Thank you for playing.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 11:20:00 GMT
Whatever. But I am guessing that she is a strong, opinionated female and one who takes a wider interest in society in relation to women, so your point is ironic, really. Thank you for playing. You're welcome! Enjoy! Let me know when you find some advantages for all in an inequitable society. I have asked three times now.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 11:27:13 GMT
Let me know when you find some advantages to an inequitable society. I have asked three times now. We already live in an inequitable society. Feminism IS NOT the answer to moving towards equality, which like I have already mentioned, is just a pipe dream. There will always be others that want more. It is human nature. That still wasn't stating any advantages for all of us, of living in a inequitable society (one where not every one is treated equally where practicable and reasonable), as requested. I wonder why?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 11:34:06 GMT
We already live in an inequitable society. Feminism IS NOT the answer to moving towards equality, which like I have already mentioned, is just a pipe dream. There will always be others that want more. It is human nature. That still wasn't stating any advantages for all of us, of living in a inequitable society (one where not every one is treated equally where practicable and reasonable), as requested. I wonder why? Going by this showing, I can see why you need a strong woman to argue on your behalf LOL
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 11:47:14 GMT
That still wasn't stating any advantages for all of us, of living in a inequitable society (one where not every one is treated equally where practicable and reasonable), as requested. I wonder why? In order to live in an equitable society, we would have to have no differences between anyone or anything and that would be world wide things. One currency, one government and the same equal share for everyone. Equal distribution of goods and services.
How do you compare equality between one job and the next, one region and the next, one country and the next? A person who does a job in say the UK, may get paid less for the same\similar job that someone does in say Australia who gets paid more. This is then compared to the standard of living, CPI and inflation. Some countries have higher wages and inflated prices, some countries may have lower wages and lower prices and NZ say, has lower wages and inflated prices. A couple may both have the same qualifications, do similar roles for different companies, but may have a difference in earnings. How can this be possibly be gauged accurately?
That is still not answering the question, Cheese.
And I did specify a society which is fair in a practical and reasonable way, which includes the measurement of equality itself, so the wriggling won't work. Neither will a spurious appeal, by way of distraction, to internationalism, when our discussion as you know, has been almost entirely about the West. A woman does not usually complain about inequitable rates of pay, say, compared to another country, but to her direct contemporaries. But if you want to provide the advantages for all when labouring under a repressive theocracy instead, feel free.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 11:57:30 GMT
That is still not answering the question, Cheese.
And I did specify a society which is fair in a practical and reasonable way, so the wriggling won't work. Neither will a spurious appeal, by way of distraction, to internationalism, when our discussion as you know, has been almost entirely about the West. But if you want to provide the advantages for all when labouring under a repressive theocracy instead, feel free.
The West is not one country with one currency. Well there is the Euro for Europe, but this region is not equitable either. There are too many differences. What society are you referring to anyway? Your question is a fallacy, like your deluded belief in feminism. Now have you watched that video? That is still not answering the question, Cheese. And it is not a fallacy merely asking you to describe the benefits of inequality to us all. I felt you might have some in mind since you have such strong views on some of those who push for social justice.
Since I cannot watch videos at work, and was too busy last night out watching Vertigo on the big screen, suppose you give me a summation of what the strong-minded and assertive female you brought in to help you out said? I am sure it must be compelling.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 12:04:24 GMT
That is still not answering the question, Cheese. And it is not a fallacy merely asking you to describe the benefits of inequality to us all. I felt you might have some in mind since you have such strong views on some of those who push for social justice. What is your definition of benefits? en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/benefit
Is this another of those words you have problems with, lol? Its beginning to like evasion on your part, all this not answering a simple question.
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/evasion
Also see my late edit, last message. I'm looking forward to my executive summary of what your strong woman asserts about social justice and the place of women. Is she just grateful to be allowed to speak up and to be kept on with no chance of sex from the viewer?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 17, 2018 13:54:08 GMT
Your conceit and smugness is duly noted. .. As are your lack of answer as to what advantages inequality can bring to a society - and lack of an executive summary for a video by a strong female commentator you have pushed onto me by way of recommendation ... Interesting opinions, but all rather a non-sequitur given that I can't see an answer there either and we have not even been talking about whether equality is attainable or not. Is there a problem?
|
|