Has third wave feminism gone too far?

[Skip Reming]

If you think all Muslims are jihadis and that its all because of a book then your more.....*edit* -just as stupid as I thought.

Where did I say all muslims are jihadis? Go ahead and quote that. Waiting.

Are all rectangles squares?

PS - I know 3 muslims on a pretty close basis and I don't think they are Jihadis.

 

[spin]

Feminism will be unbearable and unstoppable once Hillary is elected

Unstoppable?

Maybe you should join them, because you're obviously growing a vagina.

 

[Rod1]

Oh OK. So I guess maybe these people are outliers but also I know that these people have had family in their countries forever. So maybe it is an old family Latin tradition type. Because I asked if they knew their ancestry because I knew some people who had grandparents or parents from Spain but the one girl told me she doesnt know because her family was in Venezuela "forever" and the Nicaraguan was basically the same.

I dont think they were outliers, its just that the hispanic world is too big, and my experience may not be the experience of others.

Also i would assume Nicaragua and Venezuela have a more complicated history of social stratification and poverty.

 

[Bald1]

Egalitarianism is where it's at.

When you advocate for only one segment of society there are bound to be people who are left behind. If you want the same rights and opportunities granted to you as everyone else you should fight for equality across the board, and not try to put the spotlight on your cause only, while ignoring what doesn't further your agenda.

At the end of the day, and considering the true definition of the word I'm very much a feminist. Not because I think feminism is a cause worthy of special attention, but, perhaps despite of it. We should all stand on equal footing. However that doesn't mean we're all the same. Different but equal sounds good to me, because I think everyone brings something valuable to the table in their own way.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

What do you think about what Sam Harris has to say on this topic?

Thats a pretty broad question seeing as all Harris does is whine about Muslims.
What specific comment or comments are you eluding to? FTR, I also disagree with Hitchens on Muslims.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Where did I say all muslims are jihadis? Go ahead and quote that. Waiting.

Are all rectangles squares?

PS - I know 3 muslims on a pretty close basis and I don't think they are Jihadis.

Then what was your point of your argument?

 

[Greoric]

Thats a pretty broad question seeing as all Harris does is whine about Muslims.
What specific comment or comments are you eluding to? FTR, I also disagree with Hitchens on Muslims.

I've heard less of Hitchens than Harris. Though I suppose I'm referring to what he says concerning the pew polls on muslims, wherein allegedly large swaths of the populations in islamic based countries will support the use of suicide bombings, executing apostates, stoning adulterous women etc...

 

[Anung Un Rama]

You're just trying to deflect from the point I'm making here.

Not I wasn't. Your argument was that radical Islam is a neocon fiction, thats absurd. What the right wing is trying to do it fear monger that all Muslims are jihdis.

Would you really say that Islamic extremism is a neocon fiction and accept my extensive experience with Muslims and no encounters with jihadis as evidence of that? That right wingers are just exaggerating the threat of ISIS in Iraq and Syria and the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan and Al Qaeda in Yemen?

No.

Support for gun control has only diminished along with violent crime since the crime wave of the early 90s. Gun rights are only getting stronger, not weaker, as time goes on. Its clearly a major victory for the conservatives

Spoiler

I think your confusing the will of the people with the will of the establishment.

 

[Skip Reming]

Then what was your point of your argument?

exactly what I stated in my response and the square example. Not all muslims are jihadis, but all jihadis are muslim. Now, why is this? It is because a book tells them to be.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

I've heard less of Hitchens than Harris. Though I suppose I'm referring to what he says concerning the pew polls on muslims, wherein allegedly large swaths of the populations in islamic based countries will support the use of suicide bombings, executing apostates, stoning adulterous women etc...

Yeah, I have problems with that study.
Here is an article that touches on a lot of the issues I have with it:
http://www.salon.com/2014/10/13/bil...r_argument_is_based_on_an_untrustworthy_poll/

 

[Greoric]

Yeah, I have problems with that study.
Here is an article that touches on a lot of the issues I have with it:
http://www.salon.com/2014/10/13/bil...r_argument_is_based_on_an_untrustworthy_poll/

Ok. thanks for the source.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

exactly what I stated in my response and the square example. Not all muslims are jihadis, but all jihadis are muslim. Now, why is this? It is because a book tells them to be.

Maybe you misread my post, but I was saying that it was a fiction that being a Muslim = being a jihadi. I never said jihadi's aren't Muslim.

If you're right about this book being the cause of all this terrorism then we should have our drones targeting printing presses and books.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Ok. thanks for the source.

That article doesn't destroy the study, but it sheds some light on why its, imo, very misleading.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

Milo Yiannopolous made an excellent observation regarding feminists and their hatred towards working class males when he said:

"Women don't want [working class] jobs and they do not care about the men who do them."


"Men do all of the difficult, deadly and dangerous jobs. Workplace fatalities are 97 percent male. Men do all the jobs women do not want to do. You never hear women complain that there are not enough people who drive oil trucks or people who engineer oil rigs in the North Sea. We never hear about that stuff because it represents a male-underclass that feminism does not want to talk about.

It is the male-underclass that keeps our society ticking. It is the people who build buildings, it is the people who make sure electricity reaches your home, it is the people who build the roads under our feet. Women do not want to do those jobs and they do not care about the men who do them."

Great post. And this is probably the best example of selective nonsense.

Women love to harp about how such a small percentage of fortune 500 CEOs are female.

These companies tend to have tens of thousands of employees. For sake of argument, it's 100,000 employees, 50,000 male, 50,000 female. The CEOs are typcially male. That means 50,000 women don't have the job, and 49,999 men don't have the job. You probably have 100 women at that firm thinking they could be CEO if they were a man. Even though basic logic would dictate only 1 of the 100 could be a CEO.

But, let's just ignore that of the hundreds of thousands of men in jail, if they were female, it's estimate 5/6 men in UK jails would not be in jail.

Orrrrr, the thousands of men who die in war. Yet Hillary Clinton says women are the victims of war.

Or what about the workplace death divide, where 90+ percent of people who die on the job are male.

And of course, the odds of a woman up the corporate ladder being willing to date - let alone marry a person below her on the corporate ladder are minuscule.

I often say is there any surprise that men are more successful or outperform women on jobs? It is central to their identity. Without financial success they are disposable. Marriages break up way more because a man losses his job than a woman losing hers or getting fat combined. Of course men will go the extra mile at work.
And much like a bogus, income statistic is what women love to float around (women make 77 cents of what a man does!), women don't like to say that A) that statistic is bullshit when you add some basic variable of comparablitly such as field of work, time at the company etc, and more important B) women consume / spend way more of man's wealth than vice versa. What a man makes is "theirs" and what a woman makes is "hers".

Don't even get me started on alimony.

And of course, people pander to this fantasy of the disadvantaged woman instead of just telling the truth.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Feminists will think she is working for 'team womyn' rather than 'team CFR'

Spoiler

WELL isn't that a good thing? That shows that Hillary is smarter than radical feminists and hangs out with true intellectuals.

Violence against a man is funny until they douse you on fire while you sleep.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...tioch-man-on-fire-st-0217-20160216-story.html

I used to receive death threats from my wife when she got mad back when we were younger, but they dont count because she is a woman and im a man.

Yeah its bad. They need to be taught it's not okay.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Not I wasn't. Your argument was that radical Islam is a neocon fiction, thats absurd.

No it wasn't and I find it hard to believe your reading comprehension is so poor so as to actually believe that. I responded to this post

I run with a pretty diverse crowd and yet I basically never run into radical feminists. If the WR was any indication I'd be tripping over them all day, every day.

with

I grew up Muslim and still associate with many Muslims and yet I never run into radical Islamists and jihadists. I guess they're not there, just a neocon fiction.

With the point being that not running into some political faction in your daily life is poor evidence that its not influential.

What the right wing is trying to do it fear monger that all Muslims are jihdis.

That's irrelevant to the point I was making.

No.

So would you admit that one need not run into a political faction personally for them to have influence or be important in some way?

I think your confusing the will of the people with the will of the establishment.

I know its fashionable to pretend the two have no relationship in the US but we are a democracy and the two are related. There's a reason Obama hasn't been able to pass meaningful gun control and its because there are plenty of Democrats for whom supporting such a thing is political poison. The will of the people does make a difference and on gun control that's obvious.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

No it wasn't and I find it hard to believe your reading is so poor so as to actually believe that. I responded to this post

with

With the point being that not running into some political faction in your daily life is poor evidence that its not influential.

That's irrelevant to the point I was making.

I can't tell if you're trying too hard to be upset or just missing whats right in front of you.

You said "I guess they're not there, just a neocon fiction.", being obviously sarcastic that just because you don't run into them doesn't mean they don't exist.

I simply added some nuance with "What the right wing is trying to do it fear monger that all Muslims are jihdis", which I thought was pretty clearly saying that the neocon myth isn't that they exist, thats a fact, but that all Muslims were jihadis, which is a myth that neocons spread.

I really don't give a fuck if it jived with your point, it was my point and it was accurate.

So would you admit that one need not run into a political faction personally for them to have influence or be important in some way?

I never said otherwise.

I know its fashionable to pretend the two have no relationship in the US but we are a democracy and the two are related. There's a reason Obama hasn't been able to pass meaningful gun control and its because there are plenty of Democrats for whom supporting such a thing is political poison. The will of the people does make a difference and on gun control that's obvious.

Is it fashionable?

How about the study conducted by Princeton and Northwestern that support my claim. Were they just being fashionable?

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

If it were so obvious that the debate was over then gun control continue to be a topic of discussion.

And for the record, if I disagree with you, I'll disagree with you.
So when I say thats not what I meant, maybe you should realize that you don't know what I meant and ask for clarification rather than double down on bullshit.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I can't tell if you're trying too hard to be upset or just missing whats right in front of you.

You said "I guess they're not there, just a neocon fiction.", being obviously sarcastic that just because you don't run into them doesn't mean they don't exist.

I simply added some nuance with "What the right wing is trying to do it fear monger that all Muslims are jihdis", which I thought was pretty clearly saying that the neocon myth isn't that they exist, thats a fact, but that all Muslims were jihadis, which is a myth that neocons spread
I really don't give a fuck if it jived with your point, it was my point and it was accurate.

So you decided to inject some vaguely related point for some reason. Doesn't upset me, just seemed like an odd intrusion. Besides, I think that's an exaggeration

You think Jeb Bush is some liberal? I wouldn't think so.

Is it fashionable?

How about the study conducted by Princeton and Northwestern that support my claim. Were they just being fashionable?



If it were so obvious that the debate was over then gun control continue to be a topic of discussion.

I don't deny that there are problems with American democracy but the opinion of the electorate does matter. I don't think the fact that gun control was passed in the 90s, when support for gun control was high. but not in 2013 when Obama pushed for it, when support for gun control was lower despite a temporary small spike, is no accident.

 

[Screwtape]

I hate Whoopi Goldberg's miserable progressive guts, but in the vid in the OP, she's not wrong. Jenny McCarthy is bleating some bullshit about "if the man's life is in danger..." but that's nonsense. Ray Rice was wrong swinging for the fences, but his woman hit him first. Repeatedly. She didn't deserve getting knocked out, but she had it coming.

Feminism today is a sham. They no longer seek equality, but, rather, supremacy.

 

[WebAlchemist]

I know its an overraction to hundreds of years of men dominated society but i think its going a little too far, specially among hispanic upper and middle classes in which it takes a dangerous overtone (since hispanic women are crazy).

Here is a video from Peru, Argentina or southern Spain based on the accent.

Basically a blogger asks if they would agree for a measure in that was put in place in an eastern country where adultery was punished with castration.

60% of the women (college students and other middle and upper class) say they agree with the measure, 0% of the men agree with the measure (castrating opposite sex).

To be honest that just sounds like the stock answer you would get if you asked a girl, What would you do if a guy cheated on you, im willing to bet a large majority say something along the lines of "I'll cut his dick off"
Hell i'm surprised the number wasn't bigger, but to be fair my social circle in Mexico was nowhere near the middle class, so more violent responses are expected.

and i agree Hispanic women are crazy and will cut you.

Well, actually everyones favorite country Sweden, might be an example of a country that has taken it a bit too far.

Of course not in the way of castration or anything like that. But they have implemented a lot of the (what I would call nutty) initiatives often proposed by some third-wave feminists. In particular initiatives desinged to break down so-called stereotypical gender roles (no more boy or girl toys, no gender nouns (replaced by a noun that describes all genders) etc). This has been a spectacular failure. They also got some very "feministic" rape laws, though I don't know the effects of that.

What's interesting is that for some reason this has increased gender discrimination, or at least the feeling of being discriminated, and it has created a wider gap between the genders (each side feeling increasingly more opposed to each other).
I will note that it's not something that I have looked into in any great detail, but I watched an hour long debate (our infamous Denmark vs Sweden debates, where Denmark is usually the more conservative and vice versa) about the subject.
Can be seen with subtitles here (The danes are the ones who speak like they have a potato in their mouth, or so I'm told.):


I will warn everyone that the swedish feminists in this debate are horrible (a lot swedes didn't like their representants in this debate), in particular the one in the violet shirt, it's kinda lost in translation (she keeps making fun of the danish accent) but she is incredibly condescending. It is by far the worst debate I have ever watched. The danish program is usually very good on its own, but this turned into a shitfest.

Interesting parts. 8:30-15 (about uniform gender and nouns), 24-32 (about womens role in society, and statistics showing how feminism is viewed).

Usually i never care about this topic, cause it only seems to exist on the internet, but watching the debate it was easy to see the Danes constructed their argument better, and that chick?(looked kinda like a tranny) in the purple was annoying.
Overall the Danes seem to have similar views to Finnish , they seem to lean more to the left conservative side, which makes me wonder on Norways views on all this, if the stats match those of Denmark and Finland then it would make Sweden the odd one out, and the only one that seems to be trying to re construct their entire society, which apparently according to the stats shown there, is making everyone just feel more out of place as if they are competing against each other.

It is an interesting topic but sadly you never hear it argued in a proper way, eventually everyone just starts throwing stats around with no context, until you just don't give a fuck anymore.

P.S. Danes dont sound like they have a potato in their mouth.

Its more like a spoon of mashed potatoes that you didnt finish swallowing before talking.