Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jezebel)   One thing feminists agree on, when a woman takes a "selfie" it is empowerful, when a man takes one, it is vanity, repulsive and a sure sign of infidelity and neediness   (jezebel.com) divider line 387
    More: Obvious, self-portraits, feminists  
•       •       •

24402 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Mar 2013 at 6:49 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



387 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-11 11:22:10 PM  

PsiChick: BAHAHAHAHAHA. Wow. You two have  no idea what the Republican party's been  saying the past couple of...hell, by now it's the past  decade, do you?

Tell you what, I'll wait for you to catch up. You can get at least the past twenty-four hours on Fark, but I'm sure you can go search CNN or something to get more data. Search 'GOP rape victims', 'GOP domestic violence', 'GOP abortion', to start with. That's where some of the best misogyny is.



I am completely aware of what a few prominent members of the republican party have said, but that does not mean their views are official party doctrine, or even held by the majority of republicans.
 
2013-03-11 11:33:25 PM  

Yogimus: Ah, I see you're one of those folks that  assume party affiliation represents 100% of a person's belief system.  The best thing about this manner of thinking is that you can pick and choose what that party represents to YOU, and then brand everyone accordingly, reality be damned.

/Must be nice


the ha ha guy: I am completely aware of what a few prominent members of the republican party have said, but that does not mean their views are official party doctrine, or even held by the majority of republicans.


When Rush Limbaugh, the de facto voice of the GOP, has a full nine hours total of calling Sandra Fluke a slut for testifying in her capacity as an advocate, that  might be a hint as to what the official party doctrine actually is.

Just maybe.

/And all the  other times they've  openly said that...
//And Yogimus? Do you know what a straw man argument is? Hint: If you claim the GOP doesn't support a position, and I point out that it in fact does, I did not actually comment on anything they do when the R button isn't sitting on their lapel. I'm sure they're all nice, wonderful people who respect women and the gay couple down the road when they aren't acting as Republicans. I'm just commenting on what they do when they're not at home.
 
2013-03-11 11:35:12 PM  

PsiChick: Yogimus: Ah, I see you're one of those folks that  assume party affiliation represents 100% of a person's belief system.  The best thing about this manner of thinking is that you can pick and choose what that party represents to YOU, and then brand everyone accordingly, reality be damned.

/Must be nice

the ha ha guy: I am completely aware of what a few prominent members of the republican party have said, but that does not mean their views are official party doctrine, or even held by the majority of republicans.

When Rush Limbaugh, the de facto voice of the GOP, has a full nine hours total of calling Sandra Fluke a slut for testifying in her capacity as an advocate, that  might be a hint as to what the official party doctrine actually is.

Just maybe.

/And all the  other times they've  openly said that...
//And Yogimus? Do you know what a straw man argument is? Hint: If you claim the GOP doesn't support a position, and I point out that it in fact does, I did not actually comment on anything they do when the R button isn't sitting on their lapel. I'm sure they're all nice, wonderful people who respect women and the gay couple down the road when they aren't acting as Republicans. I'm just commenting on what they do when they're not at home.


He says without a hint of irony...
 
2013-03-11 11:48:20 PM  

Yogimus: //And Yogimus? Do you know what a straw man argument is? Hint: If you claim the GOP doesn't support a position, and I point out that it in fact does, I did not actually comment on anything they do when the R button isn't sitting on their lapel. I'm sure they're all nice, wonderful people who respect women and the gay couple down the road when they aren't acting as Republicans. I'm just commenting on what they do when they're not at home.

He says without a hint of irony...


A) She. My name is PsiChick because I  like being a girl. Stunningly enough, supporting  real men's-rights issues does not actually give me a penis.

B) I have not actually set up a straw man anywhere. You, however, would probably flunk out of basic debate class with a note to the effect of 'you are not a human projector'.
 
2013-03-11 11:50:18 PM  

PsiChick: When Rush Limbaugh, the de facto voice of the GOP, has a full nine hours total of calling Sandra Fluke a slut for testifying in her capacity as an advocate, that  might be a hint as to what the official party doctrine actually is.



So when a prominent member of a movement speaks, their views represent the whole?

Does that also apply to prominent members of the modern feminist movement who say things like "all men are rapists", "women can't commit rape", and other anti-male views?
 
2013-03-11 11:53:13 PM  

PsiChick: Yogimus: //And Yogimus? Do you know what a straw man argument is? Hint: If you claim the GOP doesn't support a position, and I point out that it in fact does, I did not actually comment on anything they do when the R button isn't sitting on their lapel. I'm sure they're all nice, wonderful people who respect women and the gay couple down the road when they aren't acting as Republicans. I'm just commenting on what they do when they're not at home.

He says without a hint of irony...

A) She. My name is PsiChick because I  like being a girl. Stunningly enough, supporting  real men's-rights issues does not actually give me a penis.

B) I have not actually set up a straw man anywhere. You, however, would probably flunk out of basic debate class with a note to the effect of 'you are not a human projector'.


She says without a hint of irony...
 
2013-03-11 11:58:23 PM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: When Rush Limbaugh, the de facto voice of the GOP, has a full nine hours total of calling Sandra Fluke a slut for testifying in her capacity as an advocate, that  might be a hint as to what the official party doctrine actually is.


So when a prominent member of a movement speaks, their views represent the whole?

Does that also apply to prominent members of the modern feminist movement who say things like "all men are rapists", "women can't commit rape", and other anti-male views?


That would imply it's just  one member. Instead of, say, almost all of them. When the Daily Show had a 'Days Without A GOP Rape Mention' because you were trying to attack abortion by going after  pregnant rape victims, it's either misogyny or some sort of well-hidden sociopathy.

Yogimus: PsiChick: Yogimus: //And Yogimus? Do you know what a straw man argument is? Hint: If you claim the GOP doesn't support a position, and I point out that it in fact does, I did not actually comment on anything they do when the R button isn't sitting on their lapel. I'm sure they're all nice, wonderful people who respect women and the gay couple down the road when they aren't acting as Republicans. I'm just commenting on what they do when they're not at home.

He says without a hint of irony...

A) She. My name is PsiChick because I  like being a girl. Stunningly enough, supporting  real men's-rights issues does not actually give me a penis.

B) I have not actually set up a straw man anywhere. You, however, would probably flunk out of basic debate class with a note to the effect of 'you are not a human projector'.

She says without a hint of irony...


Come up with a real argument or STFU. Resorting to repeating yourself is pathetic.
 
2013-03-12 12:01:57 AM  

PsiChick: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: When Rush Limbaugh, the de facto voice of the GOP, has a full nine hours total of calling Sandra Fluke a slut for testifying in her capacity as an advocate, that  might be a hint as to what the official party doctrine actually is.


So when a prominent member of a movement speaks, their views represent the whole?

Does that also apply to prominent members of the modern feminist movement who say things like "all men are rapists", "women can't commit rape", and other anti-male views?

That would imply it's just  one member. Instead of, say, almost all of them. When the Daily Show had a 'Days Without A GOP Rape Mention' because you were trying to attack abortion by going after  pregnant rape victims, it's either misogyny or some sort of well-hidden sociopathy.

Yogimus: PsiChick: Yogimus: //And Yogimus? Do you know what a straw man argument is? Hint: If you claim the GOP doesn't support a position, and I point out that it in fact does, I did not actually comment on anything they do when the R button isn't sitting on their lapel. I'm sure they're all nice, wonderful people who respect women and the gay couple down the road when they aren't acting as Republicans. I'm just commenting on what they do when they're not at home.

He says without a hint of irony...

A) She. My name is PsiChick because I  like being a girl. Stunningly enough, supporting  real men's-rights issues does not actually give me a penis.

B) I have not actually set up a straw man anywhere. You, however, would probably flunk out of basic debate class with a note to the effect of 'you are not a human projector'.

She says without a hint of irony...

Come up with a real argument or STFU. Resorting to repeating yourself is pathetic.


Just trying to see if it would stick.  Apparently not. Either way, I think I made my point.
 
2013-03-12 12:05:02 AM  

PsiChick: That would imply it's just  one member. Instead of, say, almost all of them.


the ha ha guy: Does that also apply to prominent members of the modern feminist movement

I can assure you that there is more than one prominent feminist spewing anti-male hatred under the banner of feminism.
 
2013-03-12 12:06:25 AM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That would imply it's just  one member. Instead of, say, almost all of them.

the ha ha guy: Does that also apply to prominent members of the modern feminist movement
I can assure you that there is more than one prominent feminist spewing anti-male hatred under the banner of feminism.


Shh... you're arguing with a woman.

/Possibly a pretty one
 
2013-03-12 12:08:08 AM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That would imply it's just  one member. Instead of, say, almost all of them.

the ha ha guy: Does that also apply to prominent members of the modern feminist movement
I can assure you that there is more than one prominent feminist spewing anti-male hatred under the banner of feminism.


Almost all of them? Or a rare handful that are, in reality, marginalized? Because I have to say, until I met MRA folks, I never heard of anti-male feminist hate--because I was raised by actual feminists who believed in the mainstream ideal of men and women being equal, and often pointed to sexism as a double-edged sword.

/But seriously, A) It's apples and oranges, and I think you're mistaking kumquats for oranges anyway, and B) The GOP would still be sexist even if feminists were.
 
2013-03-12 12:09:51 AM  

PsiChick: Almost all of them? Or a rare handful that are, in reality, marginalized?


SHE SAYS WITHOUT A HINT OF IRONY.
 
2013-03-12 12:13:44 AM  

johnny queso: heili skrimsli: if_i_really_have_to: Willies look silly. You're right, I think men assume because they get off on out of context shots of female genitalia, that women must feel the same. I think that for the majority of women this is not true. I've never known any woman who admits to being turned on by a cock shot. I'm certain there are some out there, but it's not a sexist lie that most women aren't that kind of visual.

Now you do.

The other parts like chest and ass and legs are nice enough, but I'd rather see some cock.

My question is whether I'm unique in wanting to see cock and being turned on by cock, or just in the fact that I'll say so. Are women actually not turned on by this, or is it that they get all demure and unwilling to admit that they actually really like dick? Are the women who are saying that pictures of cock are 'icky' the same ones who would say 'Eww, I'd never touch myself. That's gross!'?

never understood straight people who are grossed out by the opposing gender's sex organs.  why are women creeped out by hard cocks?  granted they are more than mildly amusing, but at some level it seems there needs to be some sort of attraction.  on the other side, i remember seeing a comedian, i think it was martin lawrence, talk for 20 minutes about how disgusting vaginas are.  struck me as strange considering the other 40 minutes of his show was about trying to get inside as many vaginas as possible.

if i had a favorites list you would be a shade of reddish purple for "likes cock".
please don't point that at my face.


It's a biological impulse that promotes the idea of hiding said salami, I mean organ.
 
2013-03-12 12:14:36 AM  

PsiChick: Stunningly enough, supporting real men's-rights issues does not actually give me a penis.


I'd be curious as to what you consider a 'real' men's rights issue? I'll throw some down and just let me know what you think.

Education - boys and men are systemically discriminated against and college enrollment rolls are frequently around %60 female and growing.
Health - the average age that a man will live is far shorter than what a woman will live.
Injuries - men are far more likely to be injured on the job and face debilitating lifetime consequences.
Travel - men are frequently subject to travel that most women would never tolerate.
Sexual Reproduction Rights - men have no reproductive rights.
Sexual independence - men cannot get male birth control that is available in other countries beyond condoms.
Insurance - it is perfectly legal to discriminate against men and charge them more for insurance regardless of their actual driving records.
Domestic violence - Men as just as likely, if not more likely to be victims of domestic violence.
Domestic violence - Predominant aggressor arrest policies virtually assure (only) men will go to jail regardless of fault.
Will Arrest - Will arrest policies assure that someone goes to jail. Combined with predominant aggressor policies the person going to jail is typically the man regardless of guilt.
False charges - Well known and tolerated by the legal system, a significant portion of the people in jail for certain charges are there by false allegations.
Under-reporting of crimes - police routinely under report crimes against men as a matter of course or policy.
Family Court - men are routinely denied equal access or weight in family court and children are often readily placed with unfit mothers over a perfectly fit father.
Family court - men are far more likely to lose their kids, house, car(s), retirement, household goods and so on.
Child support - men have to pay taxes on the income taken by the women and it can frequently be so ruinous as to be a leading cause of homelessness for men
Alimony - men are frequently ordered to pay alimony, without reason cause or end.
Job market - it is legal to discriminate against men to fulfill a job if that job goes to a women, in fact with quotas it is often legally required.
Taxes - men pay more in taxes and receive less in benefits.
Military service - men have to sign up for the draft.
Media portrayals - men are typically shown in the media as incompetent or dangerous around children.

I could go on and on, but I'm curious to see how long it will take you to portray all of these issues as 'not real' and what think a 'real' issue is.
 
2013-03-12 12:24:10 AM  

Yogimus: PsiChick: Almost all of them? Or a rare handful that are, in reality, marginalized?

SHE SAYS WITHOUT A HINT OF IRONY.


Yogimus, if you would like to claim feminist misandrists are hero-worshipped, could you provide a single farking citation instead of just going 'NU-UNH!' at me?

onyxruby: PsiChick: Stunningly enough, supporting real men's-rights issues does not actually give me a penis.

I'd be curious as to what you consider a 'real' men's rights issue? I'll throw some down and just let me know what you think.

Education - boys and men are systemically discriminated against and college enrollment rolls are frequently around %60 female and growing.
Health - the average age that a man will live is far shorter than what a woman will live.
Injuries - men are far more likely to be injured on the job and face debilitating lifetime consequences.
Travel - men are frequently subject to travel that most women would never tolerate.
Sexual Reproduction Rights - men have no reproductive rights.
Sexual independence - men cannot get male birth control that is available in other countries beyond condoms.
Insurance - it is perfectly legal to discriminate against men and charge them more for insurance regardless of their actual driving records.
Domestic violence - Men as just as likely, if not more likely to be victims of domestic violence.
Domestic violence - Predominant aggressor arrest policies virtually assure (only) men will go to jail regardless of fault.
Will Arrest - Will arrest policies assure that someone goes to jail. Combined with predominant aggressor policies the person going to jail is typically the man regardless of guilt.
False charges - Well known and tolerated by the legal system, a significant portion of the people in jail for certain charges are there by false allegations.
Under-reporting of crimes - police routinely under report crimes against men as a matter of course or policy.
Family Court - men are routinely denied equal access or weight in family court and children are often readily placed with unfit mothers over a perfectly fit father.
Family court - men are far more likely to lose their kids, house, car(s), retirement, household goods and so on.
Child support - men have to pay taxes on the income taken by the women and it can frequently b ...


Some of those are very real issues, yes, although you have either seriously misrepresented or just are ignorant about many (for example, the CDC's statistics is that, of the reported rapes, only 4-5% are shown to be false charges; men do in fact have reproductive rights, but they are not allowed to control what happens to another person's body; men paying higher taxes is because men typically have higher-paying  jobs), but overall, yes, you have many very real issues there. I've actually pointed out a good number of them myself (you forgot to mention that teen boys tend to be demonized far more than teen girls).

MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.
 
2013-03-12 12:27:48 AM  

PsiChick: Yogimus, if you would like to claim feminist misandrists are hero-worshipped, could you provide a single farking citation instead of just going 'NU-UNH!' at me?


Why bother doing all that, when you are such a valiant fighter for my point when it applies to your side?   You are absolutely correct in your statements.  You just don't seem to be able to apply them to your perceived opponent.

Again, I agree with your ideas, and thoughts. Hence the irony of you arguing them HARDER at me. And my amusement.

/this is why I don't argue with pretty women.
 
2013-03-12 12:36:44 AM  

Yogimus: PsiChick: Yogimus, if you would like to claim feminist misandrists are hero-worshipped, could you provide a single farking citation instead of just going 'NU-UNH!' at me?

Why bother doing all that, when you are such a valiant fighter for my point when it applies to your side?   You are absolutely correct in your statements.  You just don't seem to be able to apply them to your perceived opponent.

Again, I agree with your ideas, and thoughts. Hence the irony of you arguing them HARDER at me. And my amusement.

/this is why I don't argue with pretty women.


Your argument was that I was wrong because the idea of the GOP being sexist 'fit my preconceptions'. At what point in this conversation were you  agreeing with me? On  anything?
 
2013-03-12 01:22:12 AM  

PsiChick: Almost all of them? Or a rare handful that are, in reality, marginalized?



Susan Brownmiller is a well-known speaker, has written many books and newspaper articles, has won awards, and one of her books has been named one of 100 most important books of the Twentieth Century by the New York Public Library. She said:

"From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear."

Sally Miller Gearhart is a writer and well known feminist activist who started one of the first gender studies programs in the country. She said:

"the proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately ten percent of the human race."

Robin Morgan was a leader of the international feminist movement, served as a magazine editor, and has written many popular books on feminism, and founded or co-founded many feminist organizations. She said:

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism -- the lie that there can be such a thing as "men's liberation groups." Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group specifically because of a "threatening" characteristic shared by the latter group -- skin color or sex or age, etc."

"In the long run, Women's Liberation will of course free men -- but in the short run it's going to COST men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily."

"I feel that "man-hating" is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them."
 
2013-03-12 01:34:43 AM  

PsiChick: MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.



All of them? Or is it only a handful of wingnuts (not unlike the three feminist wingnuts I just quoted) that you've chosen as being representative of the whole?
 
2013-03-12 01:38:24 AM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: Almost all of them? Or a rare handful that are, in reality, marginalized?


Susan Brownmiller is a well-known speaker, has written many books and newspaper articles, has won awards, and one of her books has been named one of 100 most important books of the Twentieth Century by the New York Public Library. She said:

"From prehistoric times to the present, I believe, rape has played a critical function. It is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear."

Sally Miller Gearhart is a writer and well known feminist activist who started one of the first gender studies programs in the country. She said:

"the proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately ten percent of the human race."

Robin Morgan was a leader of the international feminist movement, served as a magazine editor, and has written many popular books on feminism, and founded or co-founded many feminist organizations. She said:

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism -- the lie that there can be such a thing as "men's liberation groups." Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group specifically because of a "threatening" characteristic shared by the latter group -- skin color or sex or age, etc."

"In the long run, Women's Liberation will of course free men -- but in the short run it's going to COST men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily."

"I feel that "man-hating" is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them."


Susan Brownmiller: Even Wikipedia notes that this idea is contested by most of the left wing, who is typically feminist, so no, not mainstream.

Sally Miller Gearhart: As the Wiki article  you cited notes, that's generally considered controversial. That's why it's under 'controversy'.

Robin Morgan: She is considered a radical feminist, not a mainstream feminist.

Part of your problem is that your first two women come from an era when there was  much more severe oppression against women.There were more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things. Mother Theresa did a hell of a lot of good in raising awareness about poverty and the good charity can do, but she was a psychopath who didn't even give her patients pain meds. Doesn't mean everyone involved in charity work is that evil.
 
2013-03-12 01:48:25 AM  

PsiChick: because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.


^
/This is also why I didn't bother posting links.
 
2013-03-12 01:49:31 AM  

PsiChick: There were more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.


You're absolutely right, which is why I wholeheartedly support the pro-equality branch of the modern feminist movement.


PsiChick: The GOP would still be sexist even if feminists were.


There are more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy.


PsiChick: MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.


That doesn't mean the group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.
 
2013-03-12 01:56:48 AM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.


All of them? Or is it only a handful of wingnuts (not unlike the three feminist wingnuts I just quoted) that you've chosen as being representative of the whole?


Well, here's a Top 5 list, here's a list of the top ten  sexist, nine of which are Republican, a nice video with a group of quotes, another Top 5 list...

Now, my quotes span about two years, and the only name repeated out of a good twenty-five to thirty is Rush Limbaugh's, and he's quoted in two different years. I'd say that constitutes a fairly heavy trend, wouldn't you?
 
2013-03-12 01:59:38 AM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: There were more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.

You're absolutely right, which is why I wholeheartedly support the pro-equality branch of the modern feminist movement.


PsiChick: The GOP would still be sexist even if feminists were.

There are more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy.


PsiChick: MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.

That doesn't mean the group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.


A) The 'pro-equality branch' is known as 'mainstream'.

B) I had twenty-five to thirty, conservative estimate, over a two-year span  during an election cycle, when they're on their best behavior. I'd say that's a trend.

C) If the mainstream MRA groups do not support misrepresentation, why can't you provide citation of that?

Yogimus: PsiChick: because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.

^
/This is also why I didn't bother posting links.


You're throwing shiat on a wall to see what sticks. Go do something productive.
 
2013-03-12 02:03:25 AM  

PsiChick: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: There were more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.

You're absolutely right, which is why I wholeheartedly support the pro-equality branch of the modern feminist movement.


PsiChick: The GOP would still be sexist even if feminists were.

There are more radical ideas floating around, because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy.


PsiChick: MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.

That doesn't mean the group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.

A) The 'pro-equality branch' is known as 'mainstream'.

B) I had twenty-five to thirty, conservative estimate, over a two-year span  during an election cycle, when they're on their best behavior. I'd say that's a trend.

C) If the mainstream MRA groups do not support misrepresentation, why can't you provide citation of that?

Yogimus: PsiChick: because when you have a large movement, you attract more crazy. That doesn't mean your group as a whole supports crazy, or that non-crazy people are the only ones doing important things.

^
/This is also why I didn't bother posting links.

You're throwing shiat on a wall to see what sticks. Go do something productive.


I am handing you the bucket, you're the one throwing it.  Shame too, since you painted such a nice fresco earlier.  Are you truly unable to take a step back and observe the situation that you are in? What exactly is the point you are trying to make?
 
2013-03-12 02:07:22 AM  

PsiChick: C) If the mainstream MRA groups do not support misrepresentation, why can't you provide citation of that?


You're the one claiming the radical MRA groups are representative of everyone interested in men's rights, so why don't you provide citation of that?


PsiChick: Now, my quotes span about two years, and the only name repeated out of a good twenty-five to thirty is Rush Limbaugh's, and he's quoted in two different years. I'd say that constitutes a fairly heavy trend, wouldn't you?


Unless you're trying to imply that MRA is a subset of the GOP, I have no idea what you're talking about. I asked you to back up your claim that all MRA groups lie or misrepresent the issues.
 
2013-03-12 03:15:30 AM  

PsiChick: Susan Brownmiller: Even Wikipedia notes that this idea is contested by most of the left wing, who is typically feminist, so no, not mainstream.

Sally Miller Gearhart: As the Wiki article  you cited notes, that's generally considered controversial. That's why it's under 'controversy'.

Robin Morgan: She is considered a radical feminist, not a mainstream feminist.



I understand that you want to defend feminism, but you can't make up one set of rules for yourself and another for everyone else.

When I cite people who spew hatred under the banner of feminism, you distance them from the mainstream movement, yet you refuse others the opportunity to do the same.

When you bring up Republicans and MRAs who spew hatred using their titles as an excuse, you say that both are representative of the entire group, based on the words of fewer than thirty people.

When I reply that larger groups attract more crazies, and that the few crazies don't represent the entire group, even using an exact copy-and-paste of your own words, you dismiss those answers as invalid, dispute the fact that those answers were perfectly valid when you had used them only twenty minutes before to defend your side of the argument.

When having a debate, it's typically bad form to dismiss your own arguments when they're used in a context you don't like. Either the logic is sound, or it is not. You cannot change the rules mid-stream. For someone who claims to be against double standards, you sure are quick to use them against others...

By the way, we're actually on the same side on more issues than you realize. I haven't been arguing against feminism, I've been arguing against your false claims. I.E, "feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women", a statement that you yourself disproved in your last few posts. If you step back and take a look at the thread, you'll see that I've posted in favor of nearly every single issue that you've spoken of, but you were too focused on the "us verses them" mentality to realize that.
 
2013-03-12 04:15:33 AM  

TV's Vinnie: even the EU wants to ban all porn because they say porn=female objectification.


What I never got about that is that, afaict, the women participating in all of these demeaning, objectifying porn shoots seem to be doing so quite voluntarily and, more often than not, having a dandy time. It's almost as if it were one huge hypocrisy
 
2013-03-12 08:17:08 AM  

the ha ha guy: By the way, we're actually on the same side on more issues than you realize. I haven't been arguing against feminism, I've been arguing against your false claims. I.E, "feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women", a statement that you yourself disproved in your last few posts.


Would that be the same feminism under which there is an assertion of male privilege that all men have because they are men? The same feminists who deny that misandry exists and then in the next breath say that they can completely understand why a woman might hate men because of their male privilege under the patriarchy?
 
2013-03-12 11:09:17 AM  

heili skrimsli: the ha ha guy: By the way, we're actually on the same side on more issues than you realize. I haven't been arguing against feminism, I've been arguing against your false claims. I.E, "feminism has always held that sexist beliefs are as damaging to men as women", a statement that you yourself disproved in your last few posts.

Would that be the same feminism under which there is an assertion of male privilege that all men have because they are men? The same feminists who deny that misandry exists and then in the next breath say that they can completely understand why a woman might hate men because of their male privilege under the patriarchy?



According to PsiChick, people who say that aren't really feminists. Sure, they use the title of feminism to spread their beliefs, they're hailed as heroes by many members of the feminist movement, scholarly resources regard them as the leaders of modern feminism, they have shaped laws regarding women's rights, etc. But someone on the internet decided to ignore reality, deny proof, and argue a definition of feminism that excludes virtually everyone who self-identifies as a feminist, so how can I argue otherwise?

In fact, I think I'll follow her example start telling felf-proclaimed feminists that if they want anything but true equality, they're not really feminists. What's the worst that could happen?
 
2013-03-12 01:38:16 PM  

Oh_Enough_Already: Just selfies?

After reading Jezebel, one can come to the conclusion that any and all of the endless number of behaviors which women hate men for engaging in, including, but not limited to:

philandering, watching porn, drinking, cheating, fighting, risky non-committal sex, rape, murder, throwing recyclables in the garbage, driving too fast, farting, eating too much, peeing on things, animal abuse, infanticide, matricide, patricide, smoking, rape, spousal abuse, cruelty to animals, voyeurism, exhibitionism, shyness, gregariousness, hermetic-ism, being a gadfly, homosexuality, bisexuality, asexuality, having sexuality, enjoying sports, reading books, playing video games, going out doors, staying in doors, and looking out the window.

are, when women do them, empowering, fantastic, unique things which should not only be celebrated, but are worthy of their own cable show.


I'm so stealing that for my next "interests" list.
 
2013-03-12 01:55:38 PM  

Yogimus: I am handing you the bucket, you're the one throwing it.  Shame too, since you painted such a nice fresco earlier.  Are you truly unable to take a step back and observe the situation that you are in? What exactly is the point you are trying to make?


'Say what you're trying to say without cute phrases or STFU', actually. As I have been throughout this conversation.

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: C) If the mainstream MRA groups do not support misrepresentation, why can't you provide citation of that?

You're the one claiming the radical MRA groups are representative of everyone interested in men's rights, so why don't you provide citation of that?


PsiChick: Now, my quotes span about two years, and the only name repeated out of a good twenty-five to thirty is Rush Limbaugh's, and he's quoted in two different years. I'd say that constitutes a fairly heavy trend, wouldn't you?

Unless you're trying to imply that MRA is a subset of the GOP, I have no idea what you're talking about. I asked you to back up your claim that all MRA groups lie or misrepresent the issues.


A) I actually originally came on here telling people to RTFA.  You brought up MRAs, so  you need to provide the citation.

B) You have no idea what I'm talking about?

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: BAHAHAHAHAHA. Wow. You two have  no idea what the Republican party's been  saying the past couple of...hell, by now it's the past  decade, do you?

Tell you what, I'll wait for you to catch up. You can get at least the past twenty-four hours on Fark, but I'm sure you can go search CNN or something to get more data. Search 'GOP rape victims', 'GOP domestic violence', 'GOP abortion', to start with. That's where some of the best misogyny is.


I am completely aware of what a few prominent members of the republican party have said, but that does not mean their views are official party doctrine, or even held by the majority of republicans.


Hmm. Now why would I post proof that the GOP is de facto sexist? Gee, I wonder. Not like it was relevant at  any point in our discussion  ever.

the ha ha guy: According to PsiChick, people who say that aren't really feminists. Sure, they use the title of feminism to spread their beliefs, they're hailed as heroes by many members of the feminist movement, scholarly resources regard them as the leaders of modern feminism, they have shaped laws regarding women's rights, etc. But someone on the internet decided to ignore reality, deny proof, and argue a definition of feminism that excludes virtually everyone who self-identifies as a feminist, so how can I argue otherwise?

In fact, I think I'll follow her example start telling felf-proclaimed feminists that if they want anything but true equality, they're not really feminists. What's the worst that could happen?


'Modern' feminism here meaning feminism in 1931, of course. Among the thousand other ways you've completely ignored reality there.

/I would have so much more sympathy for you if you weren't using 'equality' to mean 'MEN MUST BE PROTECTED FROM TEH EBUL WIMMINS!'. But you are, so I don't.
 
2013-03-12 02:28:01 PM  

PsiChick: A) I actually originally came on here telling people to RTFA.  You brought up MRAs, so  you need to provide the citation.



You first said MRA are all liars at 2013-03-10 11:01:52 PM.

My first mention of MRA in any context was at 2013-03-10 11:23:31 PM.

You made the first claim, so it's your responsibility to prove that claim.


PsiChick: /I would have so much more sympathy for you if you weren't using 'equality' to mean 'MEN MUST BE PROTECTED FROM TEH EBUL WIMMINS!'. But you are, so I don't.



You're so focused on "ALL MEN THINK ALL WIMMENZ ARE TEH EBIL" that you're making up lies about me to win the argument.

Please, stop being an idiot and read the thread. When I mention those who spread hate under the label of MRA, I am not supporting them, I am calling them out for the extremists that they are, just as you rightfully call out the "all men are rapists" advocates as the extremists that they are. Both groups are wrong. Both groups are working against equality. Both groups should be treated as the hate groups that they are, not put on a pedestal and worshiped by the lawmakers.

But yet again, you're just going to misread that paragraph as "you acknowledge that inequality exist therefore you're a sexist", not unlike what the extremists on both sides do on a daily basis.
 
2013-03-12 02:36:16 PM  

PsiChick: the ha ha guy:Unless you're trying to imply that MRA is a subset of the GOP, I have no idea what you're talking about. I asked you to back up your claim that all MRA groups lie or misrepresent the issues.

A) I actually originally came on here telling people to RTFA.  You brought up MRAs, so  you need to provide the citation.

B) You have no idea what I'm talking about?



PsiChick: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: MRA groups do not address these. They provide severe misrepresentation and\or outright lies for many of them, and blame the existant problems on feminist conspiracies.


All of them? Or is it only a handful of wingnuts (not unlike the three feminist wingnuts I just quoted) that you've chosen as being representative of the whole?

Well, here's a Top 5 list, here's a list of the top ten  sexist, nine of which are Republican, a nice video with a group of quotes, another Top 5 list...

Now, my quotes span about two years, and the only name repeated out of a good twenty-five to thirty is Rush Limbaugh's, and he's quoted in two different years. I'd say that constitutes a fairly heavy trend, wouldn't you?



Look at the bolded words in that quote. You said that MRA groups lie to promote their goals. I asked if they all do. You replied with quotes from the GOP.

What does the GOP have to do with MRA? Why are their quotes in any way relevant to your claim that MRA groups are liars? Are you implying that one is a branch of the other, or are you just flinging whatever "all men are teh ebil" quotes you can find and hoping that I'm retarded enough to accept the quotes form a completely unaffiliated and opposing group as proof of your claims?
 
2013-03-12 06:19:54 PM  
Dude.. relax.. you're arguing with a woman.
 
2013-03-13 04:07:56 AM  
www.filmbuffonline.com
 
2013-03-13 08:11:24 AM  

Yogimus: Dude.. relax.. you're arguing with a woman.


The problem's not that she's a woman, It's that she's a female chauvanist.
 
Displayed 37 of 387 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report