Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

Made this thread a while back. Since we've had a lot more new users since then i want to know what they think. I also wanna know if anyone's viewpoint has changed since the last thread.

The Thread in Question

Think of it like, a continuation. My view point hasn't changed. And i generally hold a favorable view of feminism, despite the bullshit you see on twitter and tumblr.

You might wanna define feminism so we all know what we're talking about. There are several "flavors". Something tells me the vast majority of us are one or two kinds of feminist, but all agree that another kind (the "women are better" kind, for example) aren't good. Without defining your terms, we could end up debating literally nothing, as we could agree but think we're talking about something else.

I think we should start with the barebones definition. Women need equality by being boosted up to the same level as men.

Before anyone jumps down my throat. I am more than aware that there are problems that men face simply for being men. I also never agreed with the power/privilege requirement.

First wave feminism was overwhelmingly positive. They wanted to vote and hold jobs. Good. Second wave feminism, I have mixed feelings on. The pay gap and general lack of opportunities for women were forth fighting against, but some radical elements of feminism were virulently anti-male. Third wave feminism barely has any relevancy left and has rightly earned its reputation as a hyper-sensitive annoyance. Feminists say that their philosophy is built on the premise that men and women should be treated equally. What matters more than what they say is what they do, and what they do is complain. Constantly. About any and all perceived offences. It makes them look infantile. In reality, the "treated equally" definition is just a way to dismiss criticism. You don't like something feminists are up to? You don't think women and men are equal, you sexist!

Third wave feminists only have a few good points, but even then, they ruin it with their rhetoric. For example, I recently watched an Anita Sarkeesian video and was surprised how little I disagreed with. Maybe it's kind of insulting and tasteless how sexualized female video game characters have become. Kind of a trivial problem in the grand scheme of things, but a worthwhile critique of the industry. Then she wrecked it by treating the issue as an apocalyptic problem that makes men treat women like shit in real life. Any good work she did raising questions about the developers' motives and calling for more tastefulness was crushed by the insulting notion that men can't tell the difference between what is appropriate in a game and in reality. This happens all the time. Until feminists can acknowledge just how much progress has already been made, they aren't going to win over any hearts and minds beyond liberal arts campuses.

I can only speak from an American perspective, so I acknowledge the situation may vary wildly from place to place.

From what I've seen, many people- even some who specifically identify as anti-feminists- hold first-wave feminism as the "ideal" that should be held up, the reality is that even it was far from anything resembling perfect, especially in Great Briton. There was the White-Feather Movement, heavily tied to suffrage organizations, which attempted to shame men into fighting and dying in one of the most brutal and pointless wars in history. Oh yeah, and there were also the bombs. Not to mention that the dichotomy between men and women voting is not nearly as strong as many are lead to believe. (Even in the US, where the property requirement for men was abolished in all the states by the mid-to-late 19th century, the efforts of sneaky lawmakers in the South targeted scores of poor whites and blacks alike.)

It's a very important distinction, and I'd like to chip in the discussion.

Before I started lurking on the US side of the internet, I had a different vision of feminism, more definition-like. In Poland, there are still things that women have to fight for – like opposition of absolute (including rape) ban on abortion which looms over the country. I've seen them as people who believe in gender equality, and wanted to bring women to the same level as men and vice versa. A couple of figures whom I admire for their kindness, activism, and contribution to the young, democratic Poland proudly said that they were feminists.

And you know what? They were right.

What is currently happening in the US and a lot of western countries is incredibly distressing. "Feminists", aka. extremists who use this term incorrectly to describe themselves constantly violate the original idea behind this proud movement – equal rights for both genders. It doesn't mean absolute equality, but equal treatment.
When I first heard about the hate towards "feminists", it was a bit hard to believe. I still had the image of distinguished women, organizing rallies and protesting against unequal treatment. I've never heard the term "patriarchy" or "privilege". To this day, I think that people associated with third-wave "feminism" are unjustly claiming to be feminists.

tl;dr US "feminists" can go screw themselves for wrecking a nice political movement, or at least its name.

First wave accomplished a lot and was a huge success.
Second wave wasn't the best but still actually had some basis.
Anything even slightly good third wave does is swamped by the typical tumblr crap.

I ignore Tumblr "feminism" entirely, because most of the time the bullshit you see there is either stupid teenagers who only skimmed the source material, or trolls acting out how they think feminists act.

There are really only three types of (academic) feminism that I take issue with:

1. Trans-exclusionary radical feminism (TERF): Radical feminism is a branch of feminism that argues that gender is a social construct meant to keep men on top, and that patriarchy is an end in itself. Transpeople frame their lived experiences within the context of gender, which can clash with radfem conclusions about it. For this reason, some radical feminists such as Cathy Brennan are extremely hostile to transpeople. It should be noted, however, that TERFs are a small subsection of radical feminist thought, and there are plenty of trans-friendly radfems.

2. Sex worker exclusionary radical feminism (SWERF): Pretty self-explanatory. SWERFs oppose women's participation in the sex industry, including pornography and prostitution. Although they correctly point out the rampant exploitation and abuse in these professions, they tend to go too far in the opposite direction and attack the sex workers themselves, especially if they chose their career voluntarily.

3. Lesbian separatism: Essentially the closest thing feminists have to MGTOW. These are the ones that use the "all sex is rape" argument, which is often deployed by anti-feminists as a stereotype against feminists in general. The most extreme example of separatism is Valerie Solanas' SCUM Manifesto, in which she envisioned a world devoid of men.

Now, I notice a lot of people like to contend that "First and second-wave feminism were good, but third-wave is horrible!" This is something I take issue with. I think it would be advantageous to define "third wave". Here is Rationalwiki's description:

Third-wave feminism is intellectually informed by postmodernism and post-structuralism, both of which challenge feminism to re-evaluate (and sometimes redefine) societal concepts including the notion of gender itself. They de-emphasize attacking women's second-class status directly in favor of attacking systems of religion, government, education, media, and even the family, all of which they believe are partly responsible for reinforcing women's second-class status.

Third-wave feminism challenges not only the status quo of women's roles within these systems, but the systems themselves, making it largely overlap with and feed into the social justice movement.[11][12] This sometimes makes people who fully support the goals of second-wave feminism uncomfortable with the third-wave variety.

The most important feature of third wave feminism, however, is intersectionality. It first emerged in the 1980s within feminist academia in response to the valid criticism that feminist activism was focusing predominantly on the experiences of upper-class white women. For this reason, third wave feminists are much more likely to incorporate class, orientation, creed, and race among other things into their work.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that "third wave feminism" covers a lot of ideological ground, and it's not right to reduce it to a snarl word to describe idiots on social media who skimmed third wave literature (or got the cliffsnotes from a friend) and think they have it all figured out. It's okay to laugh at Tumblr, but I'm not quite ready to dismiss anyone who says they're a feminist because of that.

I'll post more later; this one has gotten long enough as it is. I have a few more things to say about feminism (and opposition to it).

@Blitz the Dragon
So what you're saying is that we shouldn't criticize an ideology by focusing on people who espouse it unless they've been preapproved for criticism by… you? Someone else? Yeah, I don't buy it. Obviously the large majority of self-identified feminists don't have hours every day to comb through the gargantuan mountain of associated "academic" works, but that doesn't change the fact that these principles heavily color their worldview. They count themselves among the mob, and throughout history, it's the mobs that tend to get shit done, for better or for worse.

I always get confused on the number of waves feminism has, some people say that is on is fifth.

I get the feeling that "First world "feminism is getting a bit side tracked nowadays,going after any kind of media for most of the time,I not saying that it should not call out media when is wrong but focusing on that too much can make look annoying .
While in "third world " it's still fighting for some basic rights either because of cultural reasons or state ruling on women,I can say that I has a long way to go resolve them.

I feel like I shouldn't bother contributing to this thread but I decided to jump right in anyway.

I've never really encountered any actual anti-male rhetoric from any mature adult feminists, even on supposedly-uber-radical-ess-jay-dubya hives like Shit Reddit Says and Tumblr (then again, I may be a bit biased, since I own a Tumblr account), and it seems to be almost entirely the mature rational adults who actually influence the wider 3rd wave feminist movement. The lone exception with any modern relevance I'd say are TERFs, who have the religious right to back them up when it comes to transgender issues, and they're highly ridiculed by even other feminists.

But my experiences may be somewhat colored by selective biases, so could you guys give me some examples of "first world feminism" being unnecessary/irrelevant/whiny/oversensitive/radical as a movement?

Personally, I think the whole issue boils down to two problems:

The first problem has to do with the fact that third-wave feminism has several different definitions, depending on who you ask. Now, that's not necessarily bad or unique to this ideology, but it does enable the possibility of two people essentially arguing two different things. If person X uses definition A to argue their points, and person Y uses definition B, then unless A and B are comparable it will just result in X and Y arguing "in parallel" to one another, i.e. in opposite directions but never really actually hitting the same points. I feel like it's almost necessary for both sides arguing about third-wave feminism to provide their definition of the ideology, in order to ensure that arguments and counter-arguments are actually applicable. That may possibly result leading into a discussion in which definition is more valid, but maybe that's the conversation we really need to be having.

The second problem has to do with how most of these arguments are set up. In any academic philosophical discussion, there are certain standards that require upholding. Preconceived notions should be set aside as much as possible, an argument shouldn't be about attempting to convince a foe but rather a collaboration of interlocutors all attempting to discern the same truth by pointing out flaws in logic and building upon sound conclusions, and the validity of arguments should rest on how valid its propositions are, how logical its format as an argument is, and how it can be used to respond to counter-arguments with counter-counter-arguments; who argues the idea may potentially correlate with the validity of the idea, but it does not determine it.

Unfortunately, most of the time, at least one of these three is missing when strangers debate third-wave feminism (or practically anything for that matter), at least from my subjective experience on the internet. Either objectivity, good faith, or rational thought (and possibly some combination thereof) is missing, and I believe all three are required for any constructive debate to occur. True objectivity is impossible, but it is necessary to strive for it; if one considers the possibility they are wrong to be impossible, then it's not so much of a debate as a comparison of opinions. Good faith may seem superfluous, but if you hold people to higher standards of proof, then your risk gravitating to certain arguments even if they ultimately end up being untrue. And rational thinking matters, because conviction alone doesn't necessarily parse fact from fiction.

I suppose such standards are unrealistic, but I feel they are essential regardless.

In conclusion, I feel the actual way strangers on the internet debate third-wave feminism requires "fixing" before we can make any progress towards determining if the same is required of third-wave feminism. I believe the problem areas lie mainly in usage of different definitions of the term without proper explanation and argument as to why said definition was chosen and a lack of rigor that results in a lack of objectivity, good faith, or rational thought, which in turn leads to arguments that are less likely to serve any sort of point other than strengthening previously held beliefs.

I found this poll from last year finding that only 18% of Americans consider themselves feminists. Of course, the poll was conducted by Vox, an abysmal organization, but they're highly liberal, so I doubt they would skew the results to make feminists look bad. You could argue that feminism's poor numbers are a result of the general public associating all feminists with the radical Tumblr-esque crowd, but I'd argue back that even moderate feminists, while less over-the-top, are grasping for relevancy. Most of the really nasty anti-woman stuff has been stripped away from American society, but feminists still have to find something to complain about, so they pick apart trivial issues and invent false narratives. This doesn't appeal to most Americans, mostly just the over-sensitive, explaining why feminism is losing the PR war so badly.

My opinion is very simple yet very complex. I'm done with gender politics. Just done. They're basically omnipresent. People seem to enjoy putting them into every conversation on both sides. Like one of the worst recent cases that comes to memory were people in the comments to Rogue One saying the feminist illuminati over at Disney were trying to make every main character ever female because there were 2 in a row. TWO. And 50% of the population of the entire Earth is FEMALE.

I take everything on a case by case basis. I will never call myself a feminist but I don't oppose feminism as a whole. I just throw away the word even if it seems like it changes nothing, I just prefer it personally because the word sickens me at this point. Not just because of those claiming to be under it who are stupid but because of those against it who use it like a swear word. Everyone is stupid.

My philosophy while not really political or intelligent or anything is just treat people nicely regardless of what's in their pants and look for equality sparingly. I just do what's in my best judgement and that's all I feel I need because I don't think I'm that stupid even though I don't think I'm very smart either.

---

If everyone did the same thing and just looked at everything case by case the world of gender politics would be a lot less cancerous and wouldn't really need to be as politically charged as it is. Ignore the sides. There are no sides it's the real world.

While some positions are important I honestly don't care about them enough to do anything. After all, to accomplish anything in life politically or otherwise you have to devote yourself to one or a few topics. Gender politics are not really my biome. I can't even force myself anymore being honest because I get enough of it to fill my head from ear to ear 24/7 if I never saw a feminism related debate for the rest of my life it'd be too soon. I've had enough for many lifetimes.

Sorry if I seem too non-confrontational and vague if you're someone who cares about actual equality and stuff just do your thing I won't stop you if you're smart. Just not my thing

---

Now that I got my vent out I guess I will specify some positions I hold (nothing very concrete and nothing I'm willing to do anything about beyond discuss a little):

- I think representation is not where it should be not just for women but for basically all minorities. It's definitely improving though. I can even see representation being close to or where it should be within my lifetime and possibly very soon, especially for women.

- I'm all about sexual openness. Women should be as sexual as they want and create things as sexual as they want. When it comes to sexualized representations, I usually don't see it as objectification I think that's usually just made-up BS as many do. However I do see it as pandering sometimes and pandering doesn't belong in quality entertainment. Pandering is very subjective and situational though it depends on how it is used. I guess there is a pretty common standard of tasteful and not though.

If a character is sexualized it should be for a reason whether that be the character is sexual (like Bayonetta) or just the world itself is "sexy" in general. (like MGS). Also equality is important. If a bunch of female armors or clothing in a game or something are sexy there should be equivalents for males. Hell it'd be cool if males could wear female clothing in games and vice versa in open rpgs and such, more freedom for the player and more gender equality. Like if you let a girl wear a thong and bikini you better let the dudes wear a thong too in my book.

- Wage gap is a myth. All there is to it.

- However, women need to get more high paying management and STEM jobs, but because I disagree with affirmative action and similar functions it should come naturally and from societal encouragement and the free will of women everywhere. It will happen naturally as long as the society women live in is open to it and I feel the West or from my experience the US have a very equal society where that can happen in good time.

- Free the nipple. Stop over-sexualizing the human body, muscular dude tits are pretty hot (or so I've heard) so either ban all of it or free the nip. I'd never go nude in public even if I was paid to because I frrrriggin hate myself but if some women want to, yes even usually not seen as attractive, they should have that right.

- I don't know why I have to say this but in a shit-ton of ant-feminist circles it becomes way more prevalent as time goes on: don't bully people for their appearance please, please. This might be more of a fat-shaming discussion topic but it's 99% of the time directed towards women they see as SJWs and even though some of these women are absolutely stupid I don't see why these dickweeds feel the need to bully based on looks non-stop when actual opinions are there to be judged.

- Men's issues exist I 100% agree… but I won't list specifics in detail, that's for another thread I guess. However, I also agree with the sentiment that most of men's problems come inversely from women's problems. For example, men being expected not to cry and to always be masculine and rough comes inversely from women expected to always be soft and requiring protection. This can be drawn from most problems for men and women as I said and a lot of these issues might take ages to go away. These however don't take any movements to be dealt with. Just being self-aware and a good person helps.

---

Fuck my ass this is like the biggest wall I've ever written and about something I claimed I don't care about. If someone read all this and I could I would legit give them money (key words are if I could so don't send me your paypal if you do)

@z3-IRO

"But my experiences may be somewhat colored by selective biases, so could you guys give me some examples of “first world feminism” being unnecessary/irrelevant/whiny/oversensitive/radical as a movement?"

This is like one of those scenes in a derivative comedy when the hilariously fat character walks into a huge buffet and nearly has an orgasm looking at all the delicious options they have. Where do I even start?

Well, I could obviously point you to any of the million videos currently on Youtube exposing the idiocy of a particular feminist. But you specifically said "as a movement", so I'm guessing that's not what you're looking for. So with that in mind, there's no better place to start than the one-two punch of statistics that continue to make Disraeli's observation true to this day- The Wage Gap and One in Five (or sometimes four… or three).

The former isn't so much outright wrong as it is dishonest. People who push this disparity (most commonly cited as "77-79 cents for every dollar" for the US) as a problem that desperately needs addressing absolutely refuse to take into account any factors other than gender, such as career type, overtime hours etc. Sometimes, this gets firmly pushed into the "lie" category when the phrase "for doing the exact same jobs" gets tacked on. To be clear, these numbers are tabulated only by by brute-force comparing all men and all women working full-time. If any of this gets acknowledged at all, you might see an attempt at brushing it off by saying that it's only "justification after the fact", despite the nature of the explanation- with the relevant analysis of seeing it disappear when those factors are corrected for- being proof that it's in no way an injustice. The only way to "fix" the gap is to mandate a strict 50/50 gender quota for every company and every position in the working world, along with absolute fixed hours and pay for each with no room for bonuses. And if that sounds just a bit draconian to you, then congratulations for being sane. Here are some relevant links.

Now as for the latter, the long and short of it is that this proportion comes from some of the shoddiest studies and analysis that you'll ever see taken so seriously. And as with the vast majority of instances of that, you have a heavy amount of bias through the entire process of obtaining the numbers to thank for it. Whether the specific claim revolves around "rape" or the more general "sexual assault", you can pretty much bet researchers were working with the loosest definition they could get away with. And in case you don't think that would matter, since they're polling individuals for their experiences, consider the repeated case where reports of sexual activity while intoxicated automatically get lumped in with these categories regardless of what the person's view of the event was and without knowledge that this is the standard they're using. And the conclusions that get drawn from this stuff are nearly without bound- if I remember correctly, there was a study conducted at a single small college that had its results stretched to all college campuses throughout the nation. Overall, when you take a look at the actual, legit crime reports, mostly by the government, you get numbers that are, to say the least, much lower. Of course these will not include unreported incidences, but the unfortunate truth is that it's virtually impossible to get a very accurate read on those occurrences by their very nature. Certainly not with the bad sample sizes and response bias you see prevalent throughout the work done on this issue. More links here.

And that's about all I can do for now. Holy shit this took a long time. I might very well do a part two (and three… and four…) at a later point, but at the moment I'm satisfied.

I don't really have a problem with feminism as an ideology, but i have a problem with its followers.

Pretty much every time I see a fact or statistic used by a self-proclaimed feminist, it either is intellectually dishonest or is just flat out wrong. Then there's that infamous incident where the UN report on violence on women had a link to the writer's C: drive…

I feel like most of the younger feminists are not really idiots, but are very misguided. They hear about these things like the wage gap and rape statistics and are very angry that these things exist in the US. I would be too, if I heard that my gender made less money for no good reason. The problem is that they get so fixated on the issue that they fail to do a background check on it or see it in context.

As for some of the more prominent feminists, I think they're actually straight up malicious. Some of the more famous ones (such as Anita Sarkesian) get thousands of dollars in donations with nothing to show but videos that are easily picked apart. People like to hear what they want to hear, as well as being able to blame their faults on something else.

For where I from, Asians ain't got the time to argue about identity politics in general.

We're all too busy paying bills, getting grades and post outdated Rage Comics. We're quite equal, well equally suffering in this case.

First-wave feminism is good enough, pretty much means women can get what men get. The third-wave however is sorta like "we want what men have" but they themselves are just arguing and not doing anything to change it, alongside of "and please add this into the society no expections or you're a sexist bigot".
See how many videos are there on YouTube of them just simply arguing and suggestong bullshit rules. It's slacktivitism at its finest.

My general opinion has yet to change. The core of feminism is a very great thing and should be championed, but most modern feminists are using it as a scapegoat for Special Snowflake Syndrome and to join the Oppression Olympics.

Ultimately 3rd wave feminism tends to segregate, tear down, and is inherently built on a narrow minded hatred for men; when in reality the final goal should be to raise women up to be just as respected as men.

Keep people of the opposite gender involved in your life people, you'll crumble hate and inequality at the roots.

I see a shitload of text so i don't know it is said or not but i'll say it anyway.

Problem is the loudmouths who want attention heavily overshadow the people who actually do something good about feminism. There is also a negative spiral that goes like this:

wannabe-feminist: all men are sexist
wannabe-MRA'r: all women are sexist
wannabe-feminist: MYSOGINIST
wannabe-MRA'r: MISANDRIST
catfight noices

Wich causes the entire thing to fall in ridicule and ends up to be not taken serious anymore.

Plus: we are on the internet, stuff that happens here sometimes becomes so vague that everyone is talking about things that they don't know about.
I don't even know if what i'm saying here is correct. It's just a hypothesis.

>None of you even have girlfriends

Because that's how you want to start your serious discussion post, with blatant Ad Hominem.

Guess what Derpy? If you say you are a feminist, you are one, that is how joining an ideology works. Saying "all tumblr feminists aren't the real deal" doesn't work when 90% of what feminism is saying is coming from them. And if you even bothered to read the thread, everyone here is making the distinction between First Wave feminism and Third Wave feminism.

1. If you are for or against Tumblr Fem, you are giving it power by talking about it. Stop it.

2. The real world doesn't give a shit about your petty ideology.

3. how's being a woman going for you? You'll never know what it's like to be in those shoes and as I'm a man, neither will I.

4. Having a strong, smart woman in my life has changed my views on a lot of things. Having no girlfriend, a dumb girlfriend, a sheepish / weak girlfriend, a vain girlfriend, a gold digger, a thot, etc. etc. etc. won't get you any closer to understanding anything. Also something to note: Same goes for women when choosing a boyfriend, you're only as strong as a couple if you are both strong.

5. How is being pro Feminism going for all of you? Did you get that raise at your job from it? did your teachers in school give you a better grade? Did those golden gates of Feminism open wide the floodgates of special treatment because you posted your thoughts in a meme site thread?

6. Can we all do a "Black Lives Matter discussion" so we can all brag about how we know how it feels to be black while posting Hitler and telling nigger jokes in other threads?

@0.999…=1

I agree with some of the things you're saying; the wage gap is not exactly as simple as outright discrimination by paying less for the exact same job – that would be illegal. And the 1-in-5 statistic is somewhat erroneous and over-simplistic. But those are far from the only issues that feminists are focused on.

The wage gap, for example, is caused not by outright discrimination, which is rare, but by society's expectations for men and women (men are typically pressured to pursue higher-paying and riskier jobs while women are pushed towards "safer" and lower-paying work), and that kind of thing can't be solved with a simple law stating that all occupations must be gender-equal. It pretty much comes down to culture, and that sort of thing changes slowly over time (and thankfully seems to be shifting in the right direction, as the wage gap is slowly shrinking).

As for the prevalence of rape, because rapists usually try to keep their victims from telling about it, "do the deed" in a place where nobody will alert the authorities, and a rapist isn't just going to say "yes I raped this person", so it's very difficult to determine just how many people are raped, but it is generally assumed that many incidents of sexual violence occur unreported. And many rapists don't even know that they have technically committed rape, as many people simply don't understand consent (don't have sex with people who are sleeping without asking them first, don't take a drunk person's consent as real if they are too intoxicated to think, etc.), so a lot of violations of consent are likely preventable, and with a bit of education on consent, hopefully fewer people will be raped.

Some things that feminists in America at least focus on as much if not more than the above issues is stuff like access to contraception, informative sex education, access to abortion (which I have mixed feelings about but begrudgingly support), maternity leave (which also benefits fathers because paternity leave usually comes with it – Happy Fathers' Day, by the way!), and general human rights stuff like poverty, LGBT rights, civil rights, environmentalism and other such things (in fact modern, 3rd wave feminism may be best in the latter regard, what with the doctrine of intersectionality and all). It's just things like student protests, safe spaces, trigger warnings, "manspreading", "Politically Correct" language, "mansplaining" (it's a real thing but the word itself sounds dumb), and other smaller issues get the most attention because they are the ones that cause the most disagreement with non-feminists and MRA types, and they're the issues that make feminists look "oversensitive" because it seems so much like nitpicking.

As for stuff like "otherkin", let's be honest, does it really hurt anyone if some teenager believes themself to be a wolf on the inside? It's more often than not a makeshift coping mechanism for things like disassociative personality disorder, so mocking them doesn't really accomplish anything.

But that's just my two cents, and i can see why people would disagree with almost all of those things.

/end preaching

1. I agree with you on that

2. There are a lot of things i do that the world doesn't care about, doesn't mean i can't talk about those things.

3. None of us have claimed to know what its like to be in another persons shoes. We're just giving our opinion's on the movement and why we hold those opinions

4. I fail to see the relevancy.

5. Again, relevancy, no one is claiming that this makes us better than other people. We're just giving our opinions.

6.?

1. That "ignore it and it will go away" shit doesn't work

2. When did I state an ideology? There is no need to be hostile

3. Are you trolling? This is serious discussion, please don't shitpost

4. This is irrelevant to the discussion

5. Ok, the shit posing needs to stop

6. Before you get banned

1. Except that Third Wave Feminists are organizing demonstrations in real life, they aren't just internet trolls, ignoring them allows them to spread their bullshit rhetoric without challenge.

2. That's an explanation of an ideology, not one itself

3. Are you sure?

4 Well look at Mr. "I'm much smarter than you" here again resorting to Ad Hominem as an argument. No one here is saying anything against women, they are speaking out against the hostile takeover of the Third Wave by women who believe all sex is rape, even when consensual.

5. Again, are you sure?

6. Banned for posting things that have nothing to do with the topic while insulting everyone who has posted in this thread while not contributing to anything? I don't want a reply from you because if you are not trolling, I am worried for you.

Protip: Talking about how you are superior to everyone else and then quitting the thread when you can't come up with a good response to any points doesn't make you a big man. It just makes you a douchebag.

I don't know what personal problems you have, but personal boasts and insults have no place in serious discussion.

So I normally try to stay out of topics such as these, but this video was uploaded just a few hours ago and I think it's a great example of why feminism is important and relevant. If you come out of this video after seeing pages upon pages of email proposals thinking that women don't face any kind of discrimination and have things just as good as men then I seriously question your reasoning.

I have conflicting opinions on feminism. First off, I looked for the definition of the word itself, and here is what I got:

[Feminism is] "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men."

On paper, this definition of feminism is what I feel should be quite a positive impact for women. Throughout the history of humanity, it cannot be denied that men were almost always the dominate gender in political, social, and economical situations. Indifferent to gender, I feel that women should have just as many rights as men do.

There are good and bad examples of feminism. The first wave of feminists, the Suffragette, is what I think of as feminism to the core. The Suffragettes goal of enabling women the rights to vote in elections is advocating women's rights to the grounds of equality to men. Therefore, I believe this to not only be a true example to feminism, but feminism done right.

A bad example of feminism is (and I would guarantee most people would agree with me on this) what people like Anita Sarkeesian advocate. I use her as an example of bad feminism, because I think her supposed views are ridiculous. An example of her ridiculousness is her "Tropes vs. Women in Video Games" series. All she really seems to do in the show is complain about how over-sexualized/under-represented female video game characters are. In my opinion, these characters are just that; characters. In a fictional environment. This should not affect a person in their daily life. (besides, I never hear anyone…including women…complain about the sexualizing or misrepresentation of women in any single game)

To further dismiss Sarkeesian's extreme views, I feel she doesn't follow the principle definition of Feminism; the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. I cannot see how video games are political, but one could argue the social and economic fields. Admittedly, video games can be very social, and while video games are viewed as a male-dominant form of entertainment, This study shows that there are almost always an equal amount of women playing video games. Because economics are a huge discussion within itself, I won't even bother talking about it.

TL;DR: Good feminism is Suffragette. Bad feminism is Anita Sarkeesian

P.S: Sarkeesian isn't the only "bad feminist," just the one I'm picking on as an example.

These days I dont let femenism's crazy granddaughters make me angry, as theres basically little they can actually do.

Important people that believe in/pander to thier bullshit in the other hand cough sadikhan*cough*

If you come out of this video after seeing pages upon pages of email proposals thinking that women don’t face any kind of discrimination and have things just as good as men then I seriously question your reasoning.

I certainly don't believe that women don't face any kind of discrimination, but I certainly will be questioning her reasoning.

Firstly, it's important to note that these emails are automated comment notifications sent from Youtube. What you're seeing is not emails people sent directly to her, but comments on her videos that were forwarded to her by Youtube in email form.

Vihart has 75 million channel views and nearly a million subscribers. While there's no way to tell exactly how many comments have appeared on her videos, it's almost certainly many millions, if not tens of millions. With a sample size that massive, you can find a lot of anything, especially with a community as toxic and chaotic as Youtube's. No doubt she could find dozens or hundreds of comments from users threatening to kill her family, or accusing her of being a reptilian in disguise, or claiming to be Navy Seal snipers with over 300 confirmed kills. These comments are all invariably sent by small-time Youtube trolls who post on popular videos and run.

Not to mention that "marry me" is practically an idiom on the Internet at this point. How many times have you seen the phrase "marry me" used as a synonym for "I really like this" or even "thank you", rather than any serious proposal of marriage? If you went by the most literal interpretation of things, even I would have been proposed to about a dozen times. I can say for certain that the vast majority of people who posted "marry me" didn't actually mean to come on to her.

There is much, much more compelling evidence of sexism out there than this. What we're seeing here really is just the result of Vihart being paranoid – or, at least, more paranoid than she needs to be.