The plight of the Kagatob

[paulgiamatti]

Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism (http://www.salon.com/2015/01/10/the_plight_of_the_bitter_nerd_why_so_many_awkward_ shy_guys_end_up_hating_feminism/)

"He doesn’t talk about anyone targeting or harassing him personally — indeed, how could he be targeted by books written by second-wave feminists when he was a toddler? — but of feeling targeted, of having an accusatory voice inside his mind tormenting him with a pervasive sense of inadequacy, uncleanness, wrongness. It doesn’t seem like anyone in his life was particularly giving him a hard time, but that he was giving himself a hard time and picking up on any critical or negative messages directed at men in general as a way to amplify his negative thoughts."

[Troubled]

+

[katrik]

Feminism sucks.

[loramin]

Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism (http://www.salon.com/2015/01/10/the_plight_of_the_bitter_nerd_why_so_many_awkward_ shy_guys_end_up_hating_feminism/)


Salon has some great articles and some super click-bait-y articles, but this was definitely one of the good ones.

Feminism sucks.

Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.

[Cecily]

Thought I was opening a thread about an endangered species of flightless bird.

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

Almost posted this myself but figured a link to salon would explode heads here.

[katrik]

Thought I was opening a thread about an endangered species of flightless bird.

lold

[Patriam1066]

Thought I was opening a thread about an endangered species of flightless bird.

Hahahahaha

[Rivthis]

Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.

That is true if those in the 50s stayed true to their cause, now the cause has just been hijacked by people that want power and money.

Fuck Feminists..... they need a good dicking over

[paulgiamatti]

Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.

I can agree with this, but at the same time it seems like as feminism as a movement progresses and encroaches upon new frontiers, there becomes less ground to cover and the movement necessarily becomes more radicalized in the process. I think what the author was mainly trying to say is that people like Scott Aaronson are scrutinizing a very niche, very radical and very Dworkinesque take on feminism, when in reality none of the people he associates with would agree with her viewpoints or perhaps even claim to be feminists at all.

In today's internet age, where the writing of Andrea Dworkin can be easily popularized and widely disseminated, it's not difficult to find it being hailed as scripture and reblogged and quoted out of context where a more moderate and pragmatic application of feminism would be more appropriate, and more digestible. It's easy to see why a very large part of the feminist movement has become driven by an in-group/out-group kind of mentality - you're either with them or against them - and why there is such an astounding level of reproach the likes of which we saw in GamerGate and continue to see in various forums such as Reddit's men's rights advocacy.

That's not to say extreme feminism isn't necessary in its own regard; in the face oppression and subjugation and an unquestionably patriarchal society, it is the most appropriate response. Does that mean every woman's experience with these things is the same as Andrea Dworkin's? Absolutely not. Does it mean every man's experience with women is the same? Do I need to answer that question?

[Big_Japan]

"Women's rights" sure was a great excuse for forcing every female to work for ZOG as well as every male. Some of them even think it's progress, lol

[Sidelle]

I came across this random feminist's photo and am now forced to break things off with my Magic Wand forever. I will never be able to pick it up again without seeing this woman's ugly mustachioed face... (Thanks alot, bitch. :mad:)

And wtf. Why do these women always seem to wear the same ugly fucking generic thick black-framed glasses?

These so-called modern militant feminists... They're embarrassingly awful and in no way represent what true feminism is about.

http://i.imgur.com/azU7NxN.jpg

[Pokesan]

great post regarding your social politics vis a vis your choice of dildo sidelle

well done

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism (http://www.salon.com/2015/01/10/the_plight_of_the_bitter_nerd_why_so_many_awkward_ shy_guys_end_up_hating_feminism/)
http://i.imgur.com/A2rG4GJ.png
http://i.imgur.com/LqXhmXw.png

Modern Feminism sucks.
IMO
Second wave feminism is the only feminism that wasn't fascism under another name. The new third wave is absolute garbage.
This is what a real, intelligent, respectable feminist looks like. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIomA2MQNI4)
Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.
No, that's Egalitarinism. Feminism has been co-opted by puritanical fascists that have been changing laws and policies to suit their dogmatic agendas across including but not limited to: Academia, court, and entertainment.

2nd wave feminism achieved its goals. 3rd wave feminism will not be satisfied until everyone with a Y chromosome is exiled from the planet. This is not an exaggeration.
I can agree with this, but at the same time it seems like as feminism as a movement progresses and encroaches upon new frontiers, there becomes less ground to cover and the movement necessarily becomes more radicalized in the process. I think what the author was mainly trying to say is that people like Scott Aaronson are scrutinizing a very niche, very radical and very Dworkinesque take on feminism, when in reality none of the people he associates with would agree with her viewpoints or perhaps even claim to be feminists at all.

In today's internet age, where the writing of Andrea Dworkin can be easily popularized and widely disseminated, it's not difficult to find it being hailed as scripture and reblogged and quoted out of context where a more moderate and pragmatic application of feminism would be more appropriate, and more digestible. It's easy to see why a very large part of the feminist movement has become driven by an in-group/out-group kind of mentality - you're either with them or against them - and why there is such an astounding level of reproach the likes of which we saw in GamerGate and continue to see in various forums such as Reddit's men's rights advocacy.

That's not to say extreme feminism isn't necessary in its own regard; in the face oppression and subjugation and an unquestionably patriarchal society, it is the most appropriate response. Does that mean every woman's experience with these things is the same as Andrea Dworkin's? Absolutely not. Does it mean every man's experience with women is the same? Do I need to answer that question?
Ah "The Patriarchy" the go to when you have no evidence to back up any of your claims.
Yes, tell us how systematically oppressed women are with all of the affirmative action plans that work to get men hired over women who might have superior skillsets, or how the men get custody of their children and get paid alimony over 95% of the time or how women getting raped in prison is seen as a joke. If you can't tell, that is sarcasm because the patriarchy doesn't exist and I'd eat my words if you can give one example of a right that men have in the west that women don't. ;)

[Sidelle]

great post regarding your social politics vis a vis your choice of dildo sidelle

well done
As always, your extra chromosome is glaringly obvious in your post.

P.S. A Magic Wand is not a dildo. Lol

[Pokesan]

As always, your extra chromosome is glaringly obvious in your post.

P.S. A Magic Wand is not a dildo. Lol

ok what's a magic wand and why are you posting about it?

[Sidelle]

ok what's a magic wand and why are you posting about it?
Shit. I forget that sometimes there are actual children that post on the p99 forums. It's probably not a good idea if I explain my Magic Wand joke to you. Run along and ask your mom what it is and she can decide if it's age-appropriate.

[paulgiamatti]

the patriarchy doesn't exist and I'd eat my words if you can give one example of a right that men have in the west that women don't.

There are certainly varying definitions of patriarchy, so it's not surprising yours doesn't line up with that of feminist theory - that's fine. Forget the word patriarchy, what I mean is a society that unquestionably favors men over women. I'd certainly say this is still true of ours, as socially progressive as we've become and aspire to be. We do live in a fair democracy now - it took us until 1920 before women got the vote, but here we are, and nonetheless the disparity between men and women still persists.

The reason for this, as Fran Lebowitz often points out, has more to do with our biology than our societal constraints. Men produce testosterone; a huge biological advantage. Women produce children and innately care for them, and can only put off doing so at the suppression of their own nature; a huge biological disadvantage. Not to mention all the aspects of bearing and giving birth to children that all but dispel everything that makes it such a beautiful thing; the hardships of pregnancy, the countless hospital bills, maternity leave, pharmaceutical costs, various complications, death.

And as any woman would know, that paragraph alone is a pathetic attempt to account for all the things that women have to put up with that men simply do not, whether societal or biological. What I mean to say is that it's not necessarily our fault that it's this way, but as a member of the male species I'd argue that we're not helping the situation enough, and the few of us that are doing anything to help are too few and too timid in confronting and educating our own kind.

So even though I deny the premise under which you assume western society is not patriarchal, I think you can see where I'm going when we're talking about certain rights that men might have that women do not.

[Raev]

Scott from the magazine article is simply spot on IMO. When women are liberated from the iron fist of the patriarchy, they behave like every other female mammal and mate disproportionately with the high status males, and for good evolutionary reasons. The result: the nerds get no pussy. And while Scott does not make this point, this distribution is simply not good for society. A family is a powerful motivator and always has been; without any possibility of reproductive success the nerds go off and play computer games (heh).

An intelligent writer would at this point have turned the article towards the moral correctness or lack thereof of restricting women's sexual choices to boost national productivity, or perhaps whether the patriarchy could be considered a unionization of men. As a nerd I of course lean towards the patriarchy, but then I am mildly attached to Western Civilization and it saddens me to watch it commit suicide like this. Still, I can certainly appreciate the flip side. I think it was Menken who wrote some epigram about how miserable it must be to be married to a low status man.

Instead the author goes off on some idiotic tangent about how the average man is sexually assaulting the average woman daily and Scott is a wimp. Verdict: moron.

[Lune]

Scott from the magazine article is simply spot on IMO. When women are liberated from the iron fist of the patriarchy, they behave like every other female mammal and mate disproportionately with the high status males, and for good evolutionary reasons. The result: the nerds get no pussy. And while Scott does not make this point, this distribution is simply not good for society. A family is a powerful motivator and always has been; without any possibility of reproductive success the nerds go off and play computer games (heh).

An intelligent writer would at this point have turned the article towards the moral correctness or lack thereof of restricting women's sexual choices to boost national productivity, or perhaps whether the patriarchy could be considered a unionization of men. As a nerd I of course lean towards the patriarchy, but then I am mildly attached to Western Civilization and it saddens me to watch it commit suicide like this. Still, I can certainly appreciate the flip side. I think it was Menken who wrote some epigram about how miserable it must be to be married to a low status man.

Instead the author goes off on some idiotic tangent about how the average man is sexually assaulting the average woman daily and Scott is a wimp. Verdict: moron.

This.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

There are certainly varying definitions of patriarchy, so it's not surprising yours doesn't line up with that of feminist theory - that's fine. Forget the word patriarchy, what I mean is a society that unquestionably favors men over women. I'd certainly say this is still true of ours, as socially progressive as we've become and aspire to be. We do live in a fair democracy now - it took us until 1920 before women got the vote, but here we are, and nonetheless the disparity between men and women still persists.

The reason for this, as Fran Lebowitz often points out, has more to do with our biology than our societal constraints. Men produce testosterone; a huge biological advantage. Women produce children and innately care for them, and can only put off doing so at the suppression of their own nature; a huge biological disadvantage. Not to mention all the aspects of bearing and giving birth to children that all but dispel everything that makes it such a beautiful thing; the hardships of pregnancy, the countless hospital bills, maternity leave, pharmaceutical costs, various complications, death.

And as any woman would know, that paragraph alone is a pathetic attempt to account for all the things that women have to put up with that men simply do not, whether societal or biological. What I mean to say is that it's not necessarily our fault that it's this way, but as a member of the male species I'd argue that we're not helping the situation enough, and the few of us that are doing anything to help are too few and too timid in confronting and educating our own kind.

So even though I deny the premise under which you assume western society is not patriarchal, I think you can see where I'm going when we're talking about certain rights that men might have that women do not.

I don't disagree with anything said here, though I'd like to point out that anything involving pregnancy in any natural setting (note natural is not to be confused with "traditional") there would be two parents caring for a child, that is how biology as well as society is set up. I'll admit that there's a fair amount of grey area around the subject, however the fact of the matter remains that any issues a female that was giving birth would face would be shared between both partners with the male picking up the slack from the female who is recovering/taking care of the young.

In that way women are in fact, not equal to men. Regardless that point is largely moot as most women get free birth control as well as access to more specialists than men get via insurance. They have a tangible societal advantage to help them cope with a biological disadvantage.

I say this as a child of a single mother. Her life wasn't hard because of anything rooted in society, her life was hard because she didn't have anyone to share any of life's burdens with her.

[Troubled]

Shit. I forget that sometimes there are actual children that post on the p99 forums. It's probably not a good idea if I explain my Magic Wand joke to you. Run along and ask your mom what it is and she can decide if it's age-appropriate.

http://www.amazon.com/VIBRATEX-HV-260-Magic-Wand-Massager/dp/B00005M1WE

"non phallic appearance" as one of its endorsements, lol.

[katrik]

As always, your extra chromosome is glaringly obvious in your post.

P.S. A Magic Wand is not a dildo. Lol

True. I love mine..! 100$ well spent..!

[harnold]

feminism today is nothing but a bunch of loudmouthed men hating lesbians complaining about any little thing they can think of

[radditsu]

Sidelle PM me abour your vibrator please


http://cdn.gifbay.com/2014/05/oag_fake_orgasm-131477.gif

[Sidelle]

http://www.amazon.com/VIBRATEX-HV-260-Magic-Wand-Massager/dp/B00005M1WE

"non phallic appearance" as one of its endorsements, lol.
LOL

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q0m0ycTS_H8

[Jontheripper]

There are certainly varying definitions of patriarchy, so it's not surprising yours doesn't line up with that of feminist theory - that's fine. Forget the word patriarchy, what I mean is a society that unquestionably favors men over women. I'd certainly say this is still true of ours, as socially progressive as we've become and aspire to be. We do live in a fair democracy now - it took us until 1920 before women got the vote, but here we are, and nonetheless the disparity between men and women still persists.

The reason for this, as Fran Lebowitz often points out, has more to do with our biology than our societal constraints. Men produce testosterone; a huge biological advantage. Women produce children and innately care for them, and can only put off doing so at the suppression of their own nature; a huge biological disadvantage. Not to mention all the aspects of bearing and giving birth to children that all but dispel everything that makes it such a beautiful thing; the hardships of pregnancy, the countless hospital bills, maternity leave, pharmaceutical costs, various complications, death.

And as any woman would know, that paragraph alone is a pathetic attempt to account for all the things that women have to put up with that men simply do not, whether societal or biological. What I mean to say is that it's not necessarily our fault that it's this way, but as a member of the male species I'd argue that we're not helping the situation enough, and the few of us that are doing anything to help are too few and too timid in confronting and educating our own kind.

So even though I deny the premise under which you assume western society is not patriarchal, I think you can see where I'm going when we're talking about certain rights that men might have that women do not.


You're a moron.

[loramin]

This is what a real, intelligent, respectable feminist looks like. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIomA2MQNI4)

No, that's Egalitarinism. Feminism has been co-opted by puritanical fascists that have been changing laws and policies to suit their dogmatic agendas across including but not limited to: Academia, court, and entertainment.

2nd wave feminism achieved its goals. 3rd wave feminism will not be satisfied until everyone with a Y chromosome is exiled from the planet. This is not an exaggeration.

Right Kagato, like I'm going to believe your word on the definition of feminism. That'd be like believing in MarcusD's definition of charm kiting ;)

[Glenzig]

Men produce testosterone; a huge biological advantage.

Women produce testosterone also. Ya dingus!

[Raev]

Men produce testosterone; a huge biological advantage.

whoa, does this make the great paulg a male chauvinist?

[paulgiamatti]

Nah

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Right Kagato, like I'm going to believe your word on the definition of feminism. That'd be like believing in MarcusD's definition of charm kiting ;)

Look at the second definition of "Feminism" in the freaking Mirriam-Webster dictionary.
Actually I'll do it for you. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism)

2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.

Here in the year 2015, women have the same rights as men. There is not a single 'right' that a man has that a woman does not, this is a fact. Therefore you are left with "organized activity on behalf of women's interests".

Is this clear to you yet?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

^
I am of course referring to in western civilization.

Yes I'm aware I misspelled Merriam.

[Ahldagor]

Look at the second definition of "Feminism" in the freaking Mirriam-Webster dictionary.
Actually I'll do it for you. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism)

2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.

Here in the year 2015, women have the same rights as men. There is not a single 'right' that a man has that a woman does not, this is a fact. Therefore you are left with "organized activity on behalf of women's interests".

Is this clear to you yet?

Really? That economic condition of the definition has been equaled? There's social equality? There's also political? You're stubborn, so get over yourself.

[Kimm Bare|y]

https://randomsheettery.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/fuck-this-gay-earth.jpg

[Lune]

Thought experiment.

About 13% of all contributors to Wikipedia are women, even though women constitute over 50% of undergraduate/graduate/PhD level academic professionals.

Why?

[loramin]

Look at the second definition of "Feminism" in the freaking Mirriam-Webster dictionary.
Actually I'll do it for you. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism)

2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests.

You know what, you're completely right, feminism doesn't mean what I thought ... unless ... unless there was some other definition from a trusted source, like say, I dunno, the Merriam Webster dictionary?

Here's the very first definition on the page you linked, which you somehow missed:
the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities

[loramin]

BTW, a few other definitions, just in case you distrust the one you originally quoted:

Google's:
the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

Dictionary.com:
1.
the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.

Wikipedia:

Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies that share a common stated aim: to define, establish, and defend equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women.

[loramin]

Is this clear to you yet?

[Glenzig]

Thought experiment.

About 13% of all contributors to Wikipedia are women, even though women constitute over 50% of undergraduate/graduate/PhD level academic professionals.

Why?

Because women are smart enough not to waste their time with a publicly edited encyclopedia?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

BTW, a few other definitions, just in case you distrust the one you originally quoted:
Actually the first full definition describes it as a theory, not quite splitting hairs there. Close, but not quite.
Wikipedia:
Please tell me you aren't claiming Wikipedia is an unbiased source.
Because women are smart enough not to waste their time with a publicly edited encyclopedia?
It's hardly public edit these days. They've made their agenda clear the past few years, abundantly so over the past several months.

[loramin]

Actually the first full definition describes it as a theory, not quite splitting hairs there. Close, but not quite.
You're referring to the section later on in the page. I'm referring (as I said in my original post) to the "the very first definition on the page you linked".

Please tell me you aren't claiming Wikipedia is an unbiased source.

It's hardly public edit these days. They've made their agenda clear the past few years, abundantly so over the past several months.

Ok, even if I did live in a fantasy conspiracy world where evil people are bent on perverting Wikipedia... and even if I ignored the fact that rabid feminists would edit Wikipedia with a more rabid definition, not less ... I listed a total of four definitions (your's, dictionary.com, google, and wikipedia).

Just admit it: the meaning of "feminist" is a person who believes in equal rights for women. The word has other meanings too, but all four sources agreed that the primary definition of the word is about equality.

[Pokesan]

guys wikipedia is conspiring against gamergate this is super important

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Just admit it: the meaning of "feminist" is a person who believes in equal rights for women. The word has other meanings too, but all four sources agreed that the primary definition of the word is about equality.

That used to be the meaning of the word feminist, until feminism achieved all of its goals, the only remaining feminists are the ones with feminist agendas. It's right in the name feminism

Why are you afraid of the egalitarian label?

[Estolcles]

Wikipedia is against Republican, White, Non-Jewish, people with knowledge!

>_>

[Orruar]

Modern feminism is very different from the mid 20th century feminism. And if Salon wants to start writing about why X group of people hates modern feminism, they'll have Bible-size issues for a decade, since nobody much cares for modern feminism except the insane women who espouse it. The only reason it even got to this point is that nearly all guys will tell a woman anything she wants to hear just to get at the V.

[Orruar]

Thought experiment.

About 13% of all contributors to Wikipedia are women, even though women constitute over 50% of undergraduate/graduate/PhD level academic professionals.

Why?

Patriarchy.

[Orruar]

the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities

If this is the actual definition of feminism, what are modern day feminists doing fighting over video games and other shit in the western world, where women have had equal rights and opportunities for decades now? There's really no work left to be done on the rights front here. Of course, there are 700M+ Muslim women that could probably use some help on the rights front.

On that topic, can anyone explain to me why democrats tend to be very pro-women's rights, but very anti-talking about Islam and it's horrible treatment of women? Of all the contradictions that our political parties hold (and both of them hold many), this is one of the most striking and odd. Is cultural relativism a higher good over the rights of women to read a book without being doused with acid?

[Pokesan]

If this is the actual definition of feminism, what are modern day feminists doing fighting over video games and other shit in the western world, where women have had equal rights and opportunities for decades now? There's really no work left to be done on the rights front here. Of course, there are 700M+ Muslim women that could probably use some help on the rights front.

On that topic, can anyone explain to me why democrats tend to be very pro-women's rights, but very anti-talking about Islam and it's horrible treatment of women? Of all the contradictions that our political parties hold (and both of them hold many), this is one of the most striking and odd. Is cultural relativism a higher good over the rights of women to read a book without being doused with acid?

you're comparing caricatures to ideals and then attributing the failure to the ideals

[loramin]

you're comparing caricatures to ideals and then attributing the failure to the ideals

[Orruar]

you're comparing caricatures to ideals and then attributing the failure to the ideals

Can you rephrase? I made a couple different points and your vague non-response doesn't mean much. ELI5.

[Orruar]

Did you mean to type something before hitting reply? Or are you one of those people?

[Orruar]

^ In response to Loramin. Apparently these boards automatically remove your quoting someone if the quote is empty!

[Raev]

you're comparing caricatures to ideals and then attributing the failure to the ideals

I'm pretty sure you just moved the goal posts and then applied a tautology.

[Jimjam]

Right Kagato, like I'm going to believe your word on the definition of feminism. That'd be like believing in MarcusD's definition of charm kiting ;)

Or Veemo's definition on how to swim up?

[loramin]

Or are you one of those people?

"Those people" as in most people on this forum? Quoting others as a way of agreeing with their point without wasting time rephrasing it is extremely common here, I'd think someone with your post count would know that.

[Orruar]

"Those people" as in most people on this forum? Quoting others as a way of agreeing with their point without wasting time rephrasing it is extremely common here, I'd think someone with your post count would know that.

So you think that your agreement of a post is worthy enough for people to see. As if we all sit around thinking "But does loramin agree with this post?"

[Pokesan]

So you think that your agreement of a post is worthy enough for people to see. As if we all sit around thinking "But does loramin agree with this post?"

[GradnerLives]

until feminism achieved all of its goals

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Average_earnings_of_workers_by_education_and_sex_-_2006.png

Why do you hate women, kagatob?

[Raev]

Yes, clearly we should pay the people with degrees in Women's Studies the same as the engineers.

[Glenzig]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Average_earnings_of_workers_by_education_and_sex_-_2006.png

Why do you hate women, kagatob?

The best part about bar graphs is that they tell the entire story. All the details are right there staring you in the face.

[loramin]

So you think that your agreement of a post is worthy enough for people to see. As if we all sit around thinking "But does loramin agree with this post?"

Brilliant.

And to Orruar, do "we all sit around thinking" what any poster's opinion is on any topic? Of course not, but that doesn't stop anyone from posting on this forum. Don't be dense, a quoted reply is just as valid as an original one.

[Glenzig]

Brilliant.

And to Orruar, do "we all sit around thinking" what any poster's opinion is on any topic? Of course not, but that doesn't stop anyone from posting on this forum. Don't be dense, a quoted reply is just as valid as an original one.

Not true. I have actually lost sleep due to obsessing over what Orruar's opinion on a subject is. He is the most important.

[Mac Drettj]

pillow humper

[GradnerLives]

The best part about bar graphs is that they tell the entire story. All the details are right there staring you in the face.

Why do YOU hate women, Glenzig?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Average_earnings_of_workers_by_education_and_sex_-_2006.png

Why do you hate women, kagatob?

My favorite part of the graph is that it goes into great detail and breaks it all down by the types of degrees individuals have, how long they have been working at their perspective professions, their starting salaries and how many times they've gotten raises/promotions. But no, their general education level before even entering the workforce in the first place is king amirite?

[katrik]

After companies spend money training women, they leave. They get pregnant, and leave. Their health care costs soar, while the company is out a valuable employee they spent money on training. From a sociological perspective, this is a big reason women earn a little less. It kind of sucks, but it is somewhat validated. This will eventually change I think.

[GradnerLives]

My favorite part of the graph is that it goes into great detail and breaks it all down by the types of degrees individuals have

Your point being that, on average, you suspect that women study in programs that are less important or less capable of providing the same level of income?

You feel that the stats are skewed by liberal arts degrees and womens' studies scholars?

Why do you hate women, Kagatob?

how long they have been working at their perspective professions their starting salaries and how many times they've gotten raises/promotions.

So you're suggesting that the grandfathered in, undeniably patriarchal male dominated upper echelons of industry skewing these statistics are NOT a sign of existing gender bias effecting the current female workforce?

Why do you hate women, Kagatob?

But no, their general education level before even entering the workforce in the first place is king amirite?

The statistical flaw you're describing here effects both the Male and Female numbers, and thus - being subject to the same degree of error on each side - properly represents both sides relative to one another. You're correct in saying the numbers may not be saying much themselves, but the difference between the two sexes - given the same potential for error - certainly does.

Why do you hate women, Kagatob?

That's why they take an average.

[Raev]

Well Grader, how about you form a new tech startup and hire all of these women? Logic suggests that if you pay them a male wage, you'll get all of the best female programmers on the planet and destroy your competition. Then you can retire to a tropical island and sit on a beach drinking those fruity unbrella things.

[GradnerLives]

Well Grader, how about you form a new tech startup and hire all of these women? Logic suggests that if you pay them a male wage, you'll get all of the best female programmers on the planet and destroy your competition. Then you can retire to a tropical island and sit on a beach drinking those fruity unbrella things.

Not a bad plan. But if we pay them a male wage, how long until they're growing dongs for themselves and wiping us out for good?

I'll have to think about this.

[Jimjam]

When I went to Iceland I learned that female slaves were only worth 80% the value of male slaves (the good old Viking republic).

Today, wages (the modern way of valuing workers) are still around 80% of that of men for women.

It's weird that 1000 years ago and today the relative financial value of women to men was the same.

[loramin]

After companies spend money training women, they leave. They get pregnant, and leave. Their health care costs soar, while the company is out a valuable employee they spent money on training. From a sociological perspective, this is a big reason women earn a little less. It kind of sucks, but it is somewhat validated. This will eventually change I think.
One big part of this is that women get maternity leave but men don't (or very rarely) get paternity leave. Once it's just as socially acceptable for men to take just as much time off as women, I think it will help level the playing field.


When I went to Iceland I learned that female slaves were only worth 80% the value of male slaves (the good old Viking republic).

Today, wages (the modern way of valuing workers) are still around 80% of that of men for women.

It's weird that 1000 years ago and today the relative financial value of women to men was the same.

In Deuteronomy they lay out rules for how much you have to pay when you accidentally kill your neighbor's _____, and the amount for killing a female is half the amount of killing a male. So evidently there was great feminist progress between three thousand years ago and a thousand years ago, and then progress has flat-lined since ;)

[Orruar]

Well Grader, how about you form a new tech startup and hire all of these women? Logic suggests that if you pay them a male wage, you'll get all of the best female programmers on the planet and destroy your competition. Then you can retire to a tropical island and sit on a beach drinking those fruity unbrella things.

Nobody who defends the significance of the gender gap will ever answer this, because they can't. They'll come up with snarky replies or shift the conversation.

[GradnerLives]

Nobody who defends the significance of the gender gap will ever answer this, because they can't. They'll come up with snarky replies or shift the conversation.

Nobody who defends the significance of the gender gap will ever answer the very serious question about why we don't just start our own company and hire all the girls if we think they're so good?

Did you mean answer the question? or dignify it with a response?

[loramin]

Well Grader, how about you form a new tech startup and hire all of these women? Logic suggests that if you pay them a male wage, you'll get all of the best female programmers on the planet and destroy your competition. Then you can retire to a tropical island and sit on a beach drinking those fruity unbrella things.

I'm not sure that was a very serious argument, but since Orruar took it seriously ...


"how about you form a new tech startup and hire all of these women" - for one thing because hiring competent programmers of ANY gender is incredibly difficult; if you'd ever actually worked at a startup yourself you'd know as much.
"Logic suggests that if you pay them a male wage" - really limited childish logic sure. In the real world, people are motivated by many things other than pay. If it was really as simple as "go work where they pay you more" don't you think women would have done that already, and we wouldn't have this pay gap?
"destroy your competition" - there is SOOO much more to a startup's success than the quality of their programmers; I feel like I shouldn't even need to explain something this obvious


Nobody who defends the significance of the gender gap will ever answer this, because they can't. They'll come up with snarky replies or shift the conversation.
Or maybe they have better things to do than explain obvious life realities to you.

Let me turn it around: men like you will never recognize the very real challenges women face because you personally don't face them and you lack the empathy to sympathize with the women who do.

I'm pretty sure you would care though if you got paid less for reasons that had nothing to do with the quality of your work.

[Orruar]

or dignify it with a response?

It's like I'm some kind of god damned psychic.

[Orruar]

Or maybe they have better things to do than explain obvious life realities to you.

2/2, the streak continues

[GradnerLives]

By Orruar's request:

Well Grader, how about you form a new tech startup and hire all of these women?

It's actually Gradner, not Grader.

I work at a software company, and I'm actually pretty happy with my position here. For that reason alone, I'm not that interested at the moment in starting my own business. If I did, I probably would hire a lot of women and their gender wouldn't be a factor in their wage, their work would be. I probably would do pretty well.

We also have no women in technical positions at my company. Isn't that weird?

Logic suggests

Logic actually suggests that if I pay standard male wage to these women based on their performance, then my company would perform at exactly the same level as my competition. I'm not getting better performance for less money, I'm getting the same performance for the same amount of money as my male dominated peers in the industry.

tech startup

Funny Raev should bring up the tech industry, as I think the article that started this whole crappy thread can actually shed a bit of light on that. I think there's a lot of misplaced anger from the shut-ins that populate the industry. A lot of women have their work scrutinized in a different light by people who maybe aren't the most socially stable managers and co-workers given that the spergy nerd persona is quite common in these environments. I've seen it at game-jams and other programming events far more than in work environments, but if they can act like that in a social situation, it's inevitable that it will pervade their professional life as well. I suspect that women are either pushed out or uninterested in getting involved in a lot of these situations.

That's just my personal experience, might not be indicative of the whole. Even if my assertions are totally baseless, it's ridiculous to say that women don't have the aptitude to be as good at programming as men, and the numbers, both in the wage gap and just sheer employee numbers is staggering in tech.

if you pay them a male wage, you'll get all of the best female programmers on the planet

As Loramin had mentioned, corporate culture goes a long way as well. They have to want the job, so it has to be a good job at a good company for anyone - male or female - to be interested. I can't just hang out my wallet and watch the womens swarm to it. That's actually a pretty sexist notion in and of itself.

Evacuating troll thread.

Why y'all hate women?

[Raev]

Loramin, only someone who went to college could come up with ideas as stupid as "people don't like to be paid more money" and "good people are not important to the success of a startup"

[Sidelle]

Not a bad plan. But if we pay them a male wage, how long until they're growing dongs for themselves and wiping us out for good?

I'll have to think about this.
We don't need to start growing dongs to wipe men out once and for all. So many of you have apparently grown your own vaginas that you're actually doing the work for us.

http://media.tumblr.com/951f07e96f2f16942026f0454987aec5/tumblr_mk5f4iknlw1rs9keio1_500.gif

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

We don't need to start growing dongs to wipe men out once and for all. So many of you have apparently grown your own vaginas that you're actually doing the work for us.

http://media.tumblr.com/951f07e96f2f16942026f0454987aec5/tumblr_mk5f4iknlw1rs9keio1_500.gif

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hcSpSC8T0M

[paulgiamatti]

Loramin, only someone who went to college could come up with ideas as stupid as "people don't like to be paid more money" and "good people are not important to the success of a startup"

I certainly didn't get "people don't like to be paid more money" out of "people are motivated by many things other than pay", and on this point Loramin is absolutely right. This is precisely the reason why startups are appealing in the first place - you don't go work at a startup for a handsome salary, you work at a startup because it provides unique challenges and the opportunity to actually be a part of building something that you take interest in from the ground up instead of just warming a desk from nine until five. If you want a handsome salary, go be a warm body at a megacorporation where the degree that qualified you will be put to better use during the job interview than in any of the things you'll actually do on the job.

However, on his point about the importance of the quality of a startup's programmers, I completely disagree. The quality of the programmers is pretty much the only thing that matters to a startup's success, which is why IT entrepreneurialism has in many cases become a kind of one-man endeavor where a single talented programmer with a good idea and the means to write a piece of software can become an overnight multimillionaire with the right VC invester. Sure, good startup companies include other things; QA, product designers, marketing, team management, etc., but show me a tech startup that doesn't first of all have competent, talented programmers and you'll be showing me a failed tech startup.

Anyway, on the topic at hand I have a few comments but nothing has really gotten underneath my skin. No one has said anything especially stupid yet, I'm disappointed in all of you.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Nobody who defends the significance of the gender gap will ever answer the very serious question about why we don't just start our own company and hire all the girls if we think they're so good?

Did you mean answer the question? or dignify it with a response?

So you are campaigning for STEM fields, good. Would you like to campaign for more women to join manufacturing/construction/utility/trucking jobs while you are at it? Those pay very well and there are hardly any women in them either.
http://dpeaflcio.org/wp-content/uploads/percent-of-women-and-men-employed-by-industry.jpg

[GradnerLives]

So you are campaigning for STEM fields, good. Would you like to campaign for more women to join manufacturing/construction/utility/trucking jobs while you are at it? Those pay very well and there are hardly any women in them either.
http://dpeaflcio.org/wp-content/uploads/percent-of-women-and-men-employed-by-industry.jpg

Absolutely! Why wouldn't i be? Those sectors are all highly stigmatised, i'd suspect, because of an assumption that most women aren't 'tough enough' to handle them. He brought up my theoretical tech startup so that's what we went with.

What's your point though?

[loramin]

Loramin, only someone who went to college could come up with ideas as stupid as "people don't like to be paid more money" and "good people are not important to the success of a startup"

Paul already shot that down, so I'll just leave this (https://hbr.org/2013/04/does-money-really-affect-motiv) here.

This is precisely the reason why startups are appealing in the first place - you don't go work at a startup for a handsome salary, you work at a startup because it provides unique challenges and the opportunity to actually be a part of building something that you take interest in from the ground up instead of just warming a desk from nine until five.
Don't forget the stock options! But yeah, no one with a brain joins a startup for the salary, because established companies can offer much better salaries.

Sure, good startup companies include other things; QA, product designers, marketing, team management, etc., but show me a tech startup that doesn't first of all have competent, talented programmers and you'll be showing me a failed tech startup.
Bad programmers can write terrible code that still works well enough for the company to succeed. That code might not be maintainable/re-usuable/etc. but that doesn't matter because the code doesn't have to be great, it just has to be good enough to realize the business vision.

In contrast, the best coders in the world can't save a bad CEO or a bad product idea. There are thousands of failed Sillicon Valley startups that had great programmers working for them, but that doesn't matter when the CEO is convinced online pet food (advertised by sock puppets) is the wave of the future.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Absolutely! Why wouldn't i be? Those sectors are all highly stigmatised, i'd suspect, because of an assumption that most women aren't 'tough enough' to handle them. He brought up my theoretical tech startup so that's what we went with.

What's your point though?

Women don't apply for those jobs.

Believe it or not there are fields that women simply aren't typically interested in. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

[radditsu]

You are all fucking idiots.

[radditsu]

Sidelle i am especially disappointed in you.

[loramin]

You are all fucking idiots.

What, just because we try to converse with Kagato?

... yeah, I guess you have a point :(

[Ahldagor]

Women don't apply for those jobs.

Believe it or not there are fields that women simply aren't typically interested in. Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

That doesn't change the beating in rationale that you've received from them. You're stubborn, hate women, and need to get over yourself. Clinging to specificity in the face of defeat confirms your idiocy on the matter.

[Raev]

Of course people join startups to make money. If you join an early stage startup that makes it big, you can make 10s of millions of dollars. It's simply not possible to get paid that much in a big company.

And I never said that money was the only factor in hiring decisions. But if you are offering 50% more compensation than your competition, you will get the best people. It's just amazing to me that you guys are trying to avoid this point on some sort of vague 'well salary isn't the only thing' platform. And even if we are comparing intangibles, presumably my all-female company is winning there too: they won't have to put up with all of that uncomfortable atmosphere that you guys keep insisting men emanate, and because the CEO/HR/etc are all presumably above average for the same reasons we can expect a good working environment.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

That doesn't change the beating in rationale that you've received from them. You're stubborn, hate women, and need to get over yourself.

Prove that I "hate women".

[Raev]

It was fun to see a whole issue of Communications (Women in Computing, January 1995) with scarcely an article by a white male oppressor, but I got lost in the statistics, tables, and references. I teach some of the brightest women electrical engineering and computer science undergraduates in the world here at MIT and a two-minute conversation with any of them illuminates the problem more than your 162-page issue. The problem is money.

My third-best student last term said "I don't want to be an engineer. I'm going to medical school." "Laura" won't need to beg an administrator to put her "tenure decision on hold for child care" as described in the CACM issue. (This would be assuming she beats out 1000 other applicants for a university job.) She can work one emergency room shift per week and earn $60,000/year. That will leave Laura the other 6.5 days to care for children, indulge in computer science research, or travel.

In a Saab with the four Swedish girls. Manhattan 1995. One of the top women graduate students in our department (EECS) just quit to work as a management consultant. "Allison" explained "I just didn't think a PhD was worth another three years." Her advisor loved her, she had support, and she knew that she could do the work. Allison also knew that she'll make five to ten times the salary than she would have if she'd stayed in a technical field.

These women are confronting the facts that your article failed to address: Intelligent people with PhDs are working as C programmers; The average engineering career lasts seven years, pays average, and doesn't justify an MIT education that costs $120,000; anyone smart enough to make it as a computer scientist can make it with less work and risk as an MD, MBA, or JD; there has been so little progress in programming environments, systems, and computer languages in the last three decades that programmers in India and other Third World countries are perfectly capable of taking over the majority of American computer science jobs.

Your January issue asks "Why are there so few women in computing?" Maybe you should do another issue asking "Why are there so many men?"

Greenspun nailing this as far back as 1995 IMO.

[Ahldagor]

Prove that I "hate women".

You're willfully ignorant, so what would be the point to? Your consistent tactic is to piecemeal an argument through a rhetorical breakdown that doesn't show that you have any intelligence on the subject.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

You're willfully ignorant, so what would be the point to? Your consistent tactic is to piecemeal an argument through a rhetorical breakdown that doesn't show that you have any intelligence on the subject.

Not that anything you've just said holds any weight. Even if it did, it's still not proof or even evidence that I "hate women". I do hate radical feminism, which you seem to continue to want to defend.

[Cecily]

Radical feminist blogs and comment sections have caused me quite a few crushingly depressed nights after reading their thoughts on transwomen. Hard to deal with that type of hatred towards the thought of your very existence. I hate them right back.

[Pokesan]

Having been hurt by blogs myself, I can say - I feel your pain, Cecily

god bless

[Estolcles]

Radical feminist blogs and comment sections have caused me quite a few crushingly depressed nights after reading their thoughts on transwomen. Hard to deal with that type of hatred towards the thought of your very existence. I hate them right back.

Trans people are the whippng boys/girls of the rest of the LGB movement, and some women. It's sad. :(

[katrik]

Radical feminist blogs and comment sections have caused me quite a few crushingly depressed nights after reading their thoughts on transwomen. Hard to deal with that type of hatred towards the thought of your very existence. I hate them right back.

Well said. They HATE us! Plus they smell. Fuck feminists.

[paulgiamatti]

You guys are really hanging out with the wrong crowd if you think radical feminism is about marginalizing transgenderism. Radically feminist literature pretty much changed my life, and helped immensely to dispel the bigoted, toxic notions I had about non-hetero and transgendered people that were instilled in me by my upbringing.

To me the idea of coming away from radical feminism with the idea that trans people are bad is just completely strange. I've never heard or read or seen anything of the sort from radical feminists.

[Rararboker]

Every time I read something from this Paul character it feels like a troll. Either that or he is just super impressionable and can't do much but parrot what others say.

If troll, probably a 9/10 or 10/10 tho. Either way I will continue to watch with great amusement. It is like a safari but with trolls.

[Cecily]

I had a nice reply written and my power went out so this an example of what I'm talking about from a radical feminist author, Janice Raymond. Other notable, more recent anti-trans radical feminists are Sheila Jeffreys and Julie Bindle.

Wiki:

In 1979, Raymond published a book on transsexualism called The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male. Controversial even today, it looked at the role of transsexualism – particularly psychological and surgical approaches to it – in reinforcing traditional gender stereotypes, the ways in which the medical-psychiatric complex is medicalizing “gender identity” and the social and political context that has helped spawn transsexual treatment and surgery as normal and therapeutic medicine.

Raymond maintains that transsexualism is based on the "patriarchal myths" of "male mothering," and "making of woman according to man's image." She claims this is done in order "to colonize feminist identification, culture, politics and sexuality," adding: "All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves .... Transsexuals merely cut off the most obvious means of invading women, so that they seem non-invasive."

tl;dr

Transwomen are men, tools of the patriarchy, who appropriate female bodies in order to rape them and use male privilege to further the patriarchy's agenda.

That hurts to read from people who I would normally consider an ally. There's some great quotes from the other authors I mentioned too. Let it be clear that I have no problem with feminism in general. It's still needed in our society. But these women...

[Erydan Ouragan]

"All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves .... Transsexuals merely cut off the most obvious means of invading women, so that they seem non-invasive."


Now that's just cult-level, grade A fanaticism.

[Lune]

I've never really seen feminism address this, but what are we supposed to do when men and women are finally equal, but women are still the sole sexual selectors? I don't think women have any fucking clue how hard it is to compete with every other male in any given woman's life for that #1 spot. That competition pervades every man's life. It causes way higher expectations for men. Biologically, a lot of what makes women attractive to men is out of their control. With men it's almost the opposite, the things that make us desirable are almost entirely in our control.

So now we're going to have men and women being given the same opportunities, competing with each other for the same jobs, and fulfilling the same roles, and we're still going to expect men to perform better. And when they do, we're going to vilify them for it. We know this reproductive dynamic plays a role on our evolutionary psychology: (Sex Differences in Everyday Risk-Taking Behavior in Humans (http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/ep062942.pdf)), (Is risk taking used as a cue in mate choice? (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~kruger/Wilke_et_al_risk_taking_as_a_cue_in_mate_choice.pd f))

As long as your economic/status performance is a huge part of your desirability as a man, aren't men going to outperform women, who don't have that motivation? Or am I completely wrong? What can feminism do to address the inherent inequality of human sexual biology?

I mean, look at Duane. Duane's got some sick fucking dancing skills:

http://i.imgur.com/1l55JY4.gif

Duane knows that if he dances better than all the other guys, he's got a much better chance to get his dick wet with that little cocktease there in the red skirt. So Duane practices a bit more and becomes the best dancer in the room. Does that mean Duane is oppressing all the women? Do we need to start offering those girls extra dance classes so they are 'properly represented' among the room's best dancers?

I'm not attributing the totality of gender inequality to this one thing, but I think it plays a role, perhaps a big one, and it's something I've never seen satisfactorily answered by feminist thought. How do you reform human sexuality?

[Lune]

This article (http://www.rolereboot.org/sex-and-relationships/details/2013-02-online-dating-sucks-for-men-because-of-women-like-me) talks a little about ^, and has the kind of thinking I wish I saw more of. Fairness.

Maybe in this environment where we are safely sequestered behind screens, we can get past some of the lingering gender-based “rules” that dominate the “How to Catch a Man” playbooks of yore. Maybe instead we can learn to treat each other as equal players of a very silly game that we all secretly take quite seriously. Wouldn’t that be nice?

But it seems quite clear to me that we’re not there yet. I’m partly to blame, and you probably are too. I’m a feminist, sex-positive 21st century lady whose photos include me posing in a Rosie the Riveter Halloween costume. I write about gender on the Internet for crying out loud! But every day, when I log into the dating site of my choice, I play the passive role, the receiver of attention, the awaiter of messages. I go to my inbox and see who wants to talk to me and then I choose to whom I’ll respond. Sometimes I send a “thanks but no thanks” to particularly sweet messages, but usually I’m so overwhelmed by the new things to read and the new choices in front of me that I ignore those nice guys too. Basically, I act like an entitled jerk who can pull puppet strings and make OkCupid dance for me however I please.

This is not the behavior I would expect of a feminist, sex-positive 21st century lady. It’s not behavior I’m particularly proud of either. Why don’t I write messages first? Why don’t I reach out to the dudes with the funny handles and good taste in books, the ones who post pictures with goofy faces and like tacos almost as much as I like tacos? Why do I not respond politely to every message, even the ones I’m not interested in? Why do I alternate between playing the damsel and the playing the demanding entitled a**hole? Because it’s just so easy.

[paulgiamatti]

Transwomen are men, tools of the patriarchy, who appropriate female bodies in order to rape them and use male privilege to further the patriarchy's agenda.

That hurts to read from people who I would normally consider an ally. There's some great quotes from the other authors I mentioned too. Let it be clear that I have no problem with feminism in general. It's still needed in our society. But these women...

I mean, I have no doubt that there are radical feminists who try to marginalize transgenderism, I'm just saying I don't read them and I don't pay any attention to them. As soon as I encounter, "All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact", I'd close the book and forget about it.

It's like, just because a dude posts a selfie on Instagram holding up a sign that says, "This is what a feminist looks like", that doesn't make him a feminist, you know? So many self-proclaimed "feminists" are probably just abusers or assholes who don't know the first thing about feminist theory or women's issues, or even just being an intellectually honest person in general.

But yeah, I'm not trying to trivialize the fact that it's been a problem. I have the luxury of identifying with the gender I was assigned before birth, so I can't really speak about what it's like to be a transgendered person and how feminism has affected the trans movement with any authority. I'm just saying that even though an author has made significant contributions to feminism, they're still capable of saying horrifyingly discriminatory and indefensible shit that should absolutely be either criticized harshly or outright ignored.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I mean, I have no doubt that there are radical feminists who try to marginalize transgenderism, I'm just saying I don't read them and I don't pay any attention to them. As soon as I encounter, "All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact", I'd close the book and forget about it.

It's like, just because a dude posts a selfie on Instagram holding up a sign that says, "This is what a feminist looks like", that doesn't make him a feminist, you know? So many self-proclaimed "feminists" are probably just abusers or assholes who don't know the first thing about feminist theory or women's issues, or even just being an intellectually honest person in general.

But yeah, I'm not trying to trivialize the fact that it's been a problem. I have the luxury of identifying with the gender I was assigned before birth, so I can't really speak about what it's like to be a transgendered person and how feminism has affected the trans movement with any authority. I'm just saying that even though an author has made significant contributions to feminism, they're still capable of saying horrifyingly discriminatory and indefensible shit that should absolutely be either criticized harshly or outright ignored.

Criticise a feminist? That's very dangerous thinking Paul

http://41.media.tumblr.com/71ee728ddca36cba20b7ec1af0944f29/tumblr_myhupcHjN41s6kev0o1_1280.png

[Ezalor]

having seen what kagatob looks like it does it surprise anyone that he hates women?

[Glenzig]

having seen what kagatob looks like it does it surprise anyone that he hates women?

He doesn't hate them. He hates himself and projects that hatred onto them. Its different. Totally cool and normal.

[Cecily]

That's really easy to say when you haven't posted your own pics here.

[Glenzig]

That's really easy to say when you haven't posted your own pics here.

Nah. Its just really easy to say about Kaga.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Yep, because I refuse to reduce all women to an infantile state in society, I must hate them.

[Kimm Bare|y]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--dk5yFASDSk/ThU-WQpH9aI/AAAAAAAA17o/R5bzwsWphCo/s640/don%2527t_have_a_girlfriend_05.jpg

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

My girlfriend is gonna be pissed when she finds out I'm single.

[Kimm Bare|y]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6hX2FngcmZk/U1VlHs5CfNI/AAAAAAAAQNI/yxSWLiV-z94/s1600/waifu.png

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Fag needs a hair cut.

[Lune]

When I was a kid, my mom used to molest me every day when my dad passed. She would climb on top of my manhood, and bounce up and down with the bed frame smacking against the wall.

It got so bad to the point I ended up molesting my sister, and then all three of us started to have daily threesomes where I did my mom from behind while she ate out my sister.

My mom eventually got pregnant, and I had to take care of the baby.

When my sister and I became of legal age, our minds were warped to the point we had no idea about anything that was going on.

We would have sex every day for no reason, and then cry ourselves to sleep. Her ass would bounce up and down while her cheeks rippled.

My sister eventually got pregnant by me, and then my daughter began to have threesomes with my sister-wife and I.

My daughter ate my sister out frequently, and now she is pregnant as well.

In the end, all four of us have sex sessions.

http://i.imgur.com/j8q2ZUJ.gif

[Raev]

some feminists don't like transgendered people

I don't read those people, therefore they don't matter.

:rolleyes:

[Ahldagor]

Some doesn't mean all. Preach it, boy, to the twisted villages.

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti
I don't read those people, therefore they don't matter.

I don't read them because they don't matter. An important difference.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't read them because they don't matter. An important difference.

If what you say is true then why has the entirety of academia bent over backwards for them for the past decade?

[paulgiamatti]

The entirety of academia does not agree with a few radical feminists that think transgenderism is inherently misogynistic.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

The entirety of academia does not agree with a few radical feminists that think transgenderism is inherently misogynistic.

Not that specific detail no, but they have formatted their entire curriculum around every other aspect of the narrative that those same people have created.
Ergo, those individuals are still not irrelevant.

[paulgiamatti]

If we're still talking about trans issues, then they're irrelevant to me and to the people I actually respect and consider educated on the matter. Like I said earlier; someone can make significant contributions to feminism and still get it entirely wrong on more nuanced issues. This doesn't negate their other contributions, or mean that everything they do and say is wrong.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I mean, I have no doubt that there are radical feminists who try to marginalize transgenderism, I'm just saying I don't read them and I don't pay any attention to them. As soon as I encounter, "All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact", I'd close the book and forget about it.

It's like, just because a dude posts a selfie on Instagram holding up a sign that says, "This is what a feminist looks like", that doesn't make him a feminist, you know? So many self-proclaimed "feminists" are probably just abusers or assholes who don't know the first thing about feminist theory or women's issues, or even just being an intellectually honest person in general.

But yeah, I'm not trying to trivialize the fact that it's been a problem. I have the luxury of identifying with the gender I was assigned before birth, so I can't really speak about what it's like to be a transgendered person and how feminism has affected the trans movement with any authority. I'm just saying that even though an author has made significant contributions to feminism, they're still capable of saying horrifyingly discriminatory and indefensible shit that should absolutely be either criticized harshly or outright ignored.


If we're still talking about trans issues, then they're irrelevant to me and to the people I actually respect and consider educated on the matter. Like I said earlier; someone can make significant contributions to feminism and still get it entirely wrong on more nuanced issues. This doesn't negate their other contributions, or mean that everything they do and say is wrong.

I just want you to recognize your own cognitive dissonance. I'm not making fun of you, I'm asking you to pick one stance because your statements are mutually exclusive.

[Lojik]

you guys fuck already jesus christ the tension is killing my bonr

No that's hypertension. Because you're fat.

[Raev]

Every time Lojik posts, I watch that gif all the way through.

[paulgiamatti]

I just want you to recognize your own cognitive dissonance. I'm not making fun of you, I'm asking you to pick one stance because your statements are mutually exclusive.

I don't think they're as mutually exclusive as you think. I mean, I'd still close the book, but just because I've chosen not to pay any attention to them doesn't mean that everything they do and say is irrelevant. I think this was pretty well implied in my previous posts, though I do tend to make a lot of broad, sweeping statements that can be easily misunderstood. When I said, "I don't pay any attention to them because they don't matter," I'm just talking about their views on trans issues - that post was more for the sake of saying "because" was a better word than "therefore" rather than saying radical feminists that get something wrong are irrelevant.

[Cecily]

I agree with you completely. Hilter got the Jew thing wrong, but he was a good guy with plenty of good ideas otherwise.

[paulgiamatti]

I don't think you can compare antisemitism with being bigoted against trans people, as shitty as it is to be bigoted, much less someone as evil as Hitler with simply misguided radical feminists.

[Cecily]

You're just making sweeping comments. If you look past the antisemitism, I'm sure he had some great contributions to offer radical feminism.

[paulgiamatti]

You can't compare Hitler with radical feminists, I'm sorry. I don't care how much they've pissed you off, and yeah I'm sure it sucks, but mass genocide and the enslavement of an entire people is just simply not in the same ballpark as even the most bigoted version radical feminism.

[Cecily]

Bullshit I can't. If you have someone with a deplorable fucking idea, it discredits anything else they might have contributed to society by association.

[paulgiamatti]

Did you not read the last few pages of the thread?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

You can't compare Hitler with radical feminists, I'm sorry.

You what
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2qi2xWCMAEuOMe.jpg

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't think they're as mutually exclusive as you think. I mean, I'd still close the book, but just because I've chosen not to pay any attention to them doesn't mean that everything they do and say is irrelevant. I think this was pretty well implied in my previous posts, though I do tend to make a lot of broad, sweeping statements that can be easily misunderstood. When I said, "I don't pay any attention to them because they don't matter," I'm just talking about their views on trans issues - that post was more for the sake of saying "because" was a better word than "therefore" rather than saying radical feminists that get something wrong are irrelevant.

Ok I'll accept that. Though I still have a hunch that the cognitive dissonance in your posting is at best a precursor to the direction your thinking methods are heading.

[paulgiamatti]

Well, that settles it then! Feminists = the Nazi army, Dworkin = Hitler, mass extinction of the male species imminent.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Well, that settles it then! Feminists = the Nazi army, Dworkin = Hitler, mass extinction of the male species imminent.

Have you seen hashtag #killallmen ?

[paulgiamatti]

Oh wait, Andrea Dworkin is deceased. I suppose the feminist regime could use her as a martyr though.

[loramin]

Bullshit I can't. If you have someone with a deplorable fucking idea, it discredits anything else they might have contributed to society by association.

Really? Disney was an anti-semite; does that discredit Lady and the Tramp and Bambi by association? Rudyard Kipling was a deplorable racist, but does that make the Jungle Book a bad story?

I could go on and on, but you get the idea. Now don't get me wrong, I have ZERO tolerance for discrimination against transgender people (or the rest of the LGBT community), and I very strongly disagree with any feminist theorist who uses their position to preach bigotry.

But c'mon, people are complicated, and you have to consider their backgrounds. Rudyard Kipling was shaped by imperial England, he wasn't just a racist in a vacuum. Those crazy feminists who hate on transgender people probably had some horrible stuff done to them by men. Even Hitler had his art shat on by some Jewish art school people.

Does that excuse the Holocaust, or transphobia, or Kipling's racism? Of course not. But you can't just categorically deny those people's contributions because they were flawed. EVERYONE is flawed in some way, and there'd be no great works of art or literature if we threw out the ones made by flawed individuals

... well, except maybe Hitler; not sure he really contributed anything in the first place that can be discredited.

[paulgiamatti]

Have you seen hashtag #killallmen ?

Yes - it's just a dumb Twitter hashtag, who cares? Are you really worried about an impending matriarchal, feminist regime sweeping through western society and the killing of all men? Do you really think a Twitter hashtag is indicative of this being even remotely possible in the near or distant future?

[loramin]

Have you seen hashtag #killallmen ?

Kagato, do you see any problems with the practice of taking the most extreme individuals in a group and holding them up as representatives of the entire group?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Yes - it's just a dumb Twitter hashtag, who cares? Are you really worried about an impending matriarchal, feminist regime sweeping through western society and the killing of all men? Do you really think a Twitter hashtag is indicative of this being even remotely possible in the near or distant future?

You must not have been keeping up on recent happenings in Sweden.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

If you have someone with a deplorable fucking idea, it discredits anything else they might have contributed to society by association.

I can't back this. This is just as extreme only in the opposite direction.

I'd settle for never forgetting what they said in the past and hold them at arms length. I mean if not for the Nazis there'd be no space programme.

[Raev]

Yes - it's just a dumb Twitter hashtag, who cares?

why don't you exercise this same tolerance towards traditional or religious views?

[paulgiamatti]

Cecily wasn't actually espousing that line of thought, she was trying to point out how ridiculous it is, which it is.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Kagato, do you see any problems with the practice of taking the most extreme individuals in a group and holding them up as representatives of the entire group?

What's your suggestion then? Ignore them? We tried that, then they fucked comics and tabletop games. They almost fucked the entire Atheism movement and now they are going full Jack Thompson on video games. Lets not forget what they are doing to academia.

Sorry no, gonna call out bullshit where I see it and discredit these cultists at every opportunity.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Cecily wasn't actually espousing that line of thought, she was trying to point out how ridiculous it is, which it is.

Yeah my sarcasm detector sucks.

[Kimm Bare|y]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--dk5yFASDSk/ThU-WQpH9aI/AAAAAAAA17o/R5bzwsWphCo/s640/don%2527t_have_a_girlfriend_05.jpg

[paulgiamatti]

why don't you exercise this same tolerance towards traditional or religious views?

I mean you can't really compare religion with a hashtag, but I do. As I've said quite often in the various threads about religion/atheism, I don't mind what other people do in the privacy of their own homes or in the privacy of religious establishments. I don't care if you believe in one god or twenty gods or zero, so long as it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

[Cecily]

http://i.imgur.com/3wKiG2P.jpg

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I mean you can't really compare religion with a hashtag, but I do. As I've said quite often in the various threads about religion/atheism, I don't mind what other people do in the privacy of their own homes or in the privacy of religious establishments. I don't care if you believe in one god or twenty gods or zero, so long as it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.

Do you mind when groups of people with these ideologies start changing law and education to reflect said ideologies?

[paulgiamatti]

Yes, absolutely. I've already written about this, I can go quote myself and bore everyone if you'd like.

[paulgiamatti]

And I see where this is going by the way, and just ugh.

[paulgiamatti]

picardfacepalm.gif

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Do you mind when groups of people with these ideologies start changing law and education to reflect said ideologies?

Yes, absolutely. I've already written about this, I can go quote myself and bore everyone if you'd like.

I know you see where is going. So why do you refuse to understand why people hate modern feminism?

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

Ok I'll accept that. Though I still have a hunch that the cognitive dissonance in your posting is at best a precursor to the direction your thinking methods are heading.

I'm glad I taught you a new phrase but you are using it incorrectly. Makes you seem even more uneducated, if that is possible.

[paulgiamatti]

Well, because of precisely what loramin just pointed out. You're taking a few radical, extreme, and oftentimes bigoted takes of modern feminism and using them to represent modern feminism as a whole.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Well, because of precisely what loramin just pointed out. You're taking a few radical, extreme, and oftentimes bigoted takes of modern feminism and using them to represent modern feminism as a whole.

What would you define "modern feminism as a whole" as? Do you realize that egalitarian and/or sex-positive feminists are considered anti-feminist by nearly all mainstream feminist outlets? Have you notseenthis puritanical attitude reflected in the media these past 6 years?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I mean shit, the president of the fucking United States just this past year echoed the 1 in 4 rape "statistic" in response to the rolling stone rape case. Not only are women on campus LESS likely to be assaulted on campus. The actual statistic is 0.30%.

Oh and they threw out the case because they found out the gang rape girl made the whole thing up.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

citation (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176)

[paulgiamatti]

What's your suggestion then? Ignore them? We tried that, then they fucked comics and tabletop games. They almost fucked the entire Atheism movement and now they are going full Jack Thompson on video games. Lets not forget what they are doing to academia.

Sorry no, gonna call out bullshit where I see it and discredit these cultists at every opportunity.

I just completely disagree that anything done in the purview of morally sound and ethical feminism is detrimental to any of these things, but that's fine. That's another conversation on which I'm sure we'll violently disagree.

But sure, ignore them. Or don't, and criticize them. It's a free country - do what you like. Calling them cultists is quite a stretch, and will certainly only diminish your arguments, but by all means use the first amendment to your advantage.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Calling them cultists is quite a stretch, and will certainly only diminish your arguments, but by all means use the first amendment to your advantage.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxcuYwVCEAAONMQ.jpg

Theres no ideological narrative, not at all. (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BMWEg-DdUDg)

[paulgiamatti]

I don't have answers to these things. I'm just a guy who happens to think feminism is valuable, but at the same time we're kind of a point where women's issues are becoming much more difficult to illuminate under the thrust of the feminist movement.

I think radical feminism is also important for this reason - to penetrate and expose these issues - but this is where things get messy and you end up with some really extreme, baseless views that call everything and anything misogyny, or the #killallmen hashtag and so forth. I don't agree with this, but at the same time I still think there are important issues that still need to be uncovered, and the whole GamerGate thing was from my point of a view a glaring, undeniable example of this. The fact that we're now dealing with this SJW meme is a glaring, undeniable example of this - not because of the people being called SJWs, but because of the people using that term to discredit people who actually have good reasons to speak out about societal issues.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't have answers to these things. I'm just a guy who happens to think feminism is valuable, but at the same time we're kind of a point where women's issues are becoming much more difficult to illuminate under the thrust of the feminist movement.

I think radical feminism is also important for this reason - to penetrate and expose these issues - but this is where things get messy and you end up with some really extreme, baseless views that call everything and anything misogyny, or the #killallmen hashtag and so forth. I don't agree with this, but at the same time I still think there are important issues that still need to be uncovered, and the whole GamerGate thing was from my point of a view a glaring, undeniable example of this. The fact that we're now dealing with this SJW meme is a glaring, undeniable example of this - not because of the people being called SJWs, but because of the people using that term to discredit people who actually have good reasons to speak out about societal issues.

Name three.

[paulgiamatti]

What would you define "modern feminism as a whole" as? Do you realize that egalitarian and/or sex-positive feminists are considered anti-feminist by nearly all mainstream feminist outlets? Have you notseenthis puritanical attitude reflected in the media these past 6 years?

Modern feminism as a whole is exactly what it should mean: everyone who is a feminist. Just because someone claims to be a feminist doesn't make them a feminist, and someone who doesn't claim to be a feminist could certainly be a feminist, but there's nothing cryptic or hard to understand about feminism. Some feminists can be bigoted. Some feminists can be racist. Some feminists can be psychopaths. They are also a part of the whole, but they do not define it.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Modern feminism as a whole is exactly what it should mean: everyone who is a feminist. Just because someone claims to be a feminist doesn't make them a feminist, and someone who doesn't claim to be a feminist could certainly be a feminist, but there's nothing cryptic or hard to understand about feminism. Some feminists can be bigoted. Some feminists can be racist. Some feminists can be psychopaths. They are also a part of the whole, but they do not define it.

Feminism is a broad term. You need to be more specific. Most reasonable self-proclaimed feminists are actually egalitarian feminists which is a redundant term in that context so they are simply egalitarian.

I feel like we are going in circles again.

Why are you so obsessed with using the feminist label in the egalitarian context?

[paulgiamatti]

Name three.

Rape and sexual consent, racism, gender identification.

I can keep going. Pornography, non-pornographic objectification, sexual orientation, sexual violence, systematic/structural oppression, heteronormativity and how it defines societal standards/class structure, prostitution, language and terminology designed/used to denigrate women and minorities, unrealistic standards of beauty/weight perpetuated by the media.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I meant name three individuals...

...but since you brought it up...

More men get raped than women yet "don't drop the soap" is somehow different from a 'rape joke'. Sexual consent is a joke thanks to modern feminism (see: California law defining consent)
Unbridled hate of white people is accepted and even encouraged.
Gender identification is not a hard science and next to nothing is known about gender dysmorphia so addressing it would be like addressing cold fusion, more info required, until then nothing can be done.

You then went on to say pornography was an 'issue' and I stopped reading.

[paulgiamatti]

Feminism is a broad term. You need to be more specific. Most reasonable self-proclaimed feminists are actually egalitarian feminists which is a redundant term in that context so they are simply egalitarian.

I feel like we are going in circles again.

Why are you so obsessed with using the feminist label in the egalitarian context?

Everyone who is a feminist is as specific as I can get. I kinda feel like you're just trying to change the definition of feminism to exactly what you want it to mean, and it doesn't work like that. I'm sure my specific idea of the truest form of feminism is very different from the reality of feminism, but I'm not gonna go around saying this person isn't or that person is a feminist.

I guess that would have to be defined by a person's actions rather than the things they espouse, so there's no real way to determine to one another who is truly a feminist or who is not. If someone rapes a person, they certainly aren't a feminist, even if they've read and championed the writing of Andrea Dworkin every day of their life. They could certainly change their ways, and become a feminist later in life, but if one day someone is released from jail on a sexual assault charge and then claims to be a feminist the next, I'm going to very dubious of them, to say the least.

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

More men get raped than women yet "don't drop the soap" is somehow different from a 'rape joke'. Sexual consent is a joke thanks to modern feminism (see: California law defining consent)
Unbridled hate of white people is accepted and even encouraged.
Gender identification is not a hard science and next to nothing is known about gender dysmorphia so addressing it would be like addressing cold fusion, more info required, until then nothing can be done.

You then went on to say pornography was an 'issue' and I stopped reading.

False equivalency + hyperbole + bad faith interpretation of research + unhinged delusion

C-C-C-Combo! Stop taking this idiot seriously he has nothing valid or interesting to say.

[Kimm Bare|y]

https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1390/22/1390226583398.jpg

[paulgiamatti]

You then went on to say pornography was an 'issue' and I stopped reading.

Yeah, this is usually where I diverge from most feminists, but if I'm being honest the writing of Dworkin on pornography was probably the most important thing I've ever read in my life. I don't expect anyone else to agree, but I think this is something on which she was decades if not centuries ahead of her time. I think, and I hope that in humanity's future we'll not just see pornography itself evaporate but also the need and the desire for it, the thing that gives us such an appetite for it.

That's probably as radical as I get.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

False equivalency + hyperbole + bad faith interpretation of research + unhinged delusion .

Gonna need to break that down because as it stands you aren't with any effort beyond, sorry you're wrong on all counts. Facts are facts and the facts don't lie. Facts aren't biased, facts don't care about your feelings.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Yeah, this is usually where I diverge from most feminists, but if I'm being honest the writing of Dworkin on pornography was probably the most important thing I've ever read in my life. I don't expect anyone else to agree, but I think this is something on which she was decades if not centuries ahead of her time. I think, and I hope that in humanity's future we'll not just see pornography itself evaporate but also the need and the desire for it, the thing that gives us such an appetite for it.

That's probably as radical as I get.

You keep bringing up the same person. I thought you were one of the ones here who criticized idol worship.

[paulgiamatti]

I meant name three individuals...

I don't know their names, but they're out there. I'd argue anyone who is transsexual has good reason to speak out against shitty societal standards and the gender binary, anyone who has been raped, anyone who has been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, and so forth.

[paulgiamatti]

You keep bringing up the same person. I thought you were one of the ones here who criticized idol worship.

Only when the idol is unworthy of worship.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Only when the idol is unworthy of worship.

I now know why 6 million Jews were able to be systematically exterminated.

[paulgiamatti]

Well, antisemitism is more an affliction or a mental illness than an idol to be worshiped, so I'd disagree with you there.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't know their names, but they're out there. I'd argue anyone who is transsexual has good reason to speak out against shitty societal standards and the gender binary, anyone who has been raped, anyone who has been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, and so forth.

I'm not asking for anecdotes, generalizations, assumptions, or victims of individuals.
I'm asking for specific people who have explicitly suffered due to verified systematicly oppressive systems.

Show me the patriarchy boogeyman, not simply a sexist man. Show me the white man putting down the black man, not anecdotes of racist cops and hillbillies. Show gay people being oppressed because heterosexuals exist not because of religious bigotry.

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

I don't know their names, but they're out there. I'd argue anyone who is transsexual has good reason to speak out against shitty societal standards and the gender binary, anyone who has been raped, anyone who has been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, and so forth.

Most importantly, and this is the part where you lose small-minded sociopaths like our neckbearded friend here, anyone that can sympathize or emapathetically relate to the unfair treatment of people unlike themselves has good reason to speak out.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Well, antisemitism is more an affliction or a mental illness than an idol to be worshiped, so I'd disagree with you there.

You're missing the point. Hitler was the idol. Nazism was the cult. Anti-Semitism was simply a tool to motivate those already indoctrinated.

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

I'm not asking for anecdotes, ... I'm asking for specific people who have explicitly suffered due to verified systematicly oppressive systems.



Mindbendingly idiotic stuff here guys, why does anyone countenance this fool?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Mindbendingly idiotic stuff here guys, why does anyone countenance this fool?

Less ad-hominem, more substance plzkthx.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't know their names, but they're out there. I'd argue anyone who is transsexual has good reason to speak out against shitty societal standards and the gender binary, anyone who has been raped, anyone who has been discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, and so forth.

Everything else aside and more importantly. Why do you define these as feminist issues? These are egalitarian issues.

[paulgiamatti]

Most importantly, and this is the part where you lose small-minded sociopaths like our neckbearded friend here, anyone that can sympathize or emapathetically relate to the unfair treatment of people unlike themselves has good reason to speak out.

Definitely, but there is a point at which being too vigilant or too outspoken as an ally can become problematic. As a dude, my focus should be more on giving intelligent people who actually have to deal with discrimination a platform on which they can speak and articulate themselves, rather than trying to be my own beacon of light or pretending to be some shining arbiter of feminist issues.

And I'm certainly not guiltless in that regard. I'm still figuring shit out, and I'm not ashamed to admit that.

[paulgiamatti]

Why do you define these as feminist issues? These are egalitarian issues.

I suppose you could call them egalitarian issues as well as feminist issues. Or we could just call them issues, plain and simple, which can be approached from a feminist or egalitarian standpoint.

[paulgiamatti]

You're missing the point. Hitler was the idol. Nazism was the cult. Anti-Semitism was simply a tool to motivate those already indoctrinated.

I kinda disagree, but that's nonetheless a fairly interesting synopsis. I see it more as antisemitism being a widely spread neurosis, and someone like Hitler coming in to take advantage of it was simply an inevitable occurrence.

I guess I don't really see antisemitism as motivational, but rather a perversion or a warping of the human psyche. Hitler was motivational.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I suppose you could call them egalitarian issues as well as feminist issues. Or we could just call them issues, plain and simple, which can be approached from a feminist or egalitarian standpoint.

Ok look at it this way... (http://www.buzzfeed.com/danieldalton/boss-witch#.wlX0KGPkz)
There aren't really any radical or extreme I.E. harmful egalitarian standpoints to take, yet there are a plethora of detrimental feminist standpoints. Why would you ever prefer a feminist standpoint over an egalitarian one unless you have some sort of narrative/agenda to push?

[Sidelle]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6dQmOoPVq1A/Tnycch38LcI/AAAAAAAAFvE/h1fRlQZtsVA/s1600/NotThisShitAgain.jpg

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/84/8493aab70af54c5fd1de74a90a150523441a49e30695fae8d4 9d0917fdd62b6c.jpg

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/3786883072/h682F4666/

http://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/871598336/h7AF9102A/

http://sobchak.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/oh-christ-not-this-shit-again.jpg

http://iambrony.steeph.tp-radio.de/mlp/gif/45789___safe_twilight-sparkle_animated_image-macro_japanese_boast-busters.gif

http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/f/e/fe1a0-Not_this_shit_again.jpg

[paulgiamatti]

I'm not asking for anecdotes, generalizations, assumptions, or victims of individuals.
I'm asking for specific people who have explicitly suffered due to verified systematicly oppressive systems.

Show me the patriarchy boogeyman, not simply a sexist man. Show me the white man putting down the black man, not anecdotes of racist cops and hillbillies. Show gay people being oppressed because heterosexuals exist not because of religious bigotry.

I think you've just described quite well why the problem is such a persistent problem in the first place. It's not something that can be easily compartmentalized, isolated and quarantined. These issues are endemic, and systemic, and they're extremely difficult to deal with precisely because the forms they most often take are forms that we're all too familiar with. The rapist is often the friendly boyfriend whom everyone describes as "the nice guy". The racist is often the police officer who is known for being a well-rounded, level-headed family man. The bigot is often just your average, normal heterosexual who signs onto YouTube or the Project 1999 forums and uses "fag" and "gay" in every post as a derogatory remark.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I kinda disagree, but that's nonetheless a fairly interesting synopsis. I see it more as antisemitism being a widely spread neurosis, and someone like Hitler coming in to take advantage of it was simply an inevitable occurrence.

I guess I don't really see antisemitism as motivational, but rather a perversion or a warping of the human psyche. Hitler was motivational.

I see what you mean. Let me make an absurd comparison.
Hitler = handheld multitool
Hitler + Anti-Semitism = power drill with a large assortment of bits.

Hitler himself being motivational does not negate the effectiveness of combining other attributes.

[paulgiamatti]

In other words, the case happens to be that the victims go unaccounted for, and the victims often blame themselves and don't realize they've been victimized in the first place. Therein lies the issue.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I think you've just described quite well why the problem is such a persistent problem in the first place. It's not something that can be easily compartmentalized, isolated and quarantined. These issues are endemic, and systemic, and they're extremely difficult to deal with precisely because the forms they most often take are forms that we're all too familiar with. The rapist is often the friendly boyfriend whom everyone describes as "the nice guy". The racist is often the police officer who is known for being a well-rounded, level-headed family man. The bigot is often just your average, normal heterosexual who signs onto YouTube or the Project 1999 forums and uses "fag" and "gay" in every post as a derogatory remark.

I don't want to be confused with advocating that there isn't anything wrong with society, only a fool would believe that. Part of being near the center is realizing that there is more than left and right, that there are more than two extremes.

Endemic issues need not necessarily be systematic.
Many cops are abusive > most cops are men > patriarchy. Is the type of correlation = causation that the evangelical right used to demonize homosexuals during the big AIDS scare.
Your own example of the nice guy being the rapist is equally disingenuous.
Your bigot example is simply wrong in the context of the internet.

[paulgiamatti]

I see what you mean. Let me make an absurd comparison.
Hitler = handheld multitool
Hitler + Anti-Semitism = power drill with a large assortment of bits.

Hitler himself being motivational does not negate the effectiveness of combining other attributes.

That's one way to look at it, although I'd exchange Hitler for antisemitism as the tool, the thing that is instrumental in convincing and mobilizing a country of people who are already under the mass delusion that Jews should be the subjects of our hatred and contempt.

And in order to make this point relevant to the conversation, you'd have to swap radical feminism with antisemitism and cornerstone radical feminists with Adolf Hitler, and that just doesn't make any sense. For this scenario to be plausible you'd first of all need a group of people who operate under the pretense of misandry, and you'd have to be living in a world where this thing - the hatred of men - can be found everywhere, to the point that there would simply be no escaping it.

I don't really think that's a rationally sound thing to worry about. It reminds me of that other thread I started about new atheists - how certain militant atheists are neurotically, obsessively focusing on these trivial, benign injustices such as allowing people who agree to pray before their meals at a locally-owned breakfast diner to save ten cents on their bill.

[paulgiamatti]

Your own example of the nice guy being the rapist is equally disingenuous.
Your bigot example is simply wrong in the context of the internet.

This is a pretty good stopping point for me, and if anything illustrates how surface-level your understand of the issues being discussed is, this pair of statements certainly will.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

That's one way to look at it, although I'd exchange Hitler for antisemitism as the tool, the thing that is instrumental in convincing and mobilizing a country of people who are already under the mass delusion that Jews should be the subjects of our hatred and contempt.

And in order to make this point relevant to the conversation, you'd have to swap radical feminism with antisemitism and cornerstone radical feminists with Adolf Hitler, and that just doesn't make any sense. For this scenario to be plausible you'd first of all need a group of people who operate under the pretense of misandry, and you'd have to be living in a world where this thing - the hatred of men - can be found everywhere, to the point that there would simply be no escaping it.

I don't really think that's a rationally sound thing to worry about. It reminds me of that other thread I started about new atheists - how certain militant atheists are neurotically, obsessively focusing on these trivial, benign injustices such as allowing people who agree to pray before their meals at a locally-owned breakfast diner to save ten cents on their bill.

That's why I referred to Hitler as a multitool. Anti-Semitism did not fix the German economy, Anti-Semitism did not reunify and rebuild Germany into a world power. Anti-Semitism did not invent the rocket and jet engines. Those events gave the idol its godhood and allowed Anti-Semitism to flourish under a blind following.

Second wave feminism was much the same, they achieved great things and won all of their goals. When they did the respectable ones left because their work was done. The ones who remained were far from respectable though they were respected and idolized for participating in the previous achievements. This allowed radical feminism to flourish.

Same story, just replace the Jews with the patriarchy/white/cis/het/insert buzzword..

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

This is a pretty good stopping point for me, and if anything illustrates how surface-level your understanding of issues being discussed is, this pair of statements certainly will.

You are implying that only men are rapists and that it's only a problem that affects women. If you're expecting not to be called out for such hypocrisy you're gonna have a bad time.

Insults on the internet are no different than insults on a schoolyard. People tailor their insults to the person being insulted. Telling a man that he is fat or that his fashion sense sucks is less effective than calling him a fag or a virgin or a pussy. If you call a woman a pussy it'll have much less effect than if you insult her looks. Telling a man that you plan to rape him makes you gay, telling it to a woman on the other hand, while lazy and more often than not crossing the line, will have instant effectiveness.

Whatever happened to "sticks and stones"?

[Kimm Bare|y]

http://media.giphy.com/media/13r5cLwRjhteQE/giphy.gif

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Kim proves my point about tailor made insults. Grow a spine Paul, you pussy. :p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsOHrd-Punw

[Glenzig]

Hitler.

[katrik]

This thread is dumb.

[Estolcles]

Was hoping for more creativity to this thread. Eh.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Was hoping for more creativity to this thread. Eh.

Posting from my phone all day and for some reason the browser won't let me upload things to imgur. Forgive me.

[loramin]

More men get raped than women yet "don't drop the soap" is somehow different from a 'rape joke'. Sexual consent is a joke thanks to modern feminism (see: California law defining consent)
Unbridled hate of white people is accepted and even encouraged.
Gender identification is not a hard science and next to nothing is known about gender dysmorphia so addressing it would be like addressing cold fusion, more info required, until then nothing can be done.


So much crazy there I don't even know where to begin. "More men get raped than women"?

Dear lord Kagato, you really live in your own separate reality don't you?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

So much crazy there I don't even know where to begin. "More men get raped than women"?

Dear lord Kagato, you really live in your own separate reality don't you?

What's next, gonna dispute the fact that over 90 percent of violent crime happens to men? Or how about male suicide rates?

[paulgiamatti]

That's why I referred to Hitler as a multitool. Anti-Semitism did not fix the German economy, Anti-Semitism did not reunify and rebuild Germany into a world power. Anti-Semitism did not invent the rocket and jet engines. Those events gave the idol its godhood and allowed Anti-Semitism to flourish under a blind following.

Second wave feminism was much the same, they achieved great things and won all of their goals. When they did the respectable ones left because their work was done. The ones who remained were far from respectable though they were respected and idolized for participating in the previous achievements. This allowed radical feminism to flourish.

Same story, just replace the Jews with the patriarchy/white/cis/het/insert buzzword..

Right, I meant Hitler would be the tool, the thing that is instrumental. I agreed with that analogy and there was no contention over that point. However, comparing this to second wave feminism is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Misandry is not a problem. The world in which the hatred of men goes unchecked and allows those cruel, genocidal radical feminists to mobilize an entire country of people to enslave exterminate them simply does not exist, and never will exist. If you think there's even a hint of similarity between feminism and the Nazis, then your line of thought has more in common with the mass delusions of antisemitism and Adolf Hitler than even the most extreme, radical, and even misandrynistic feminists ever did. What a waste of an argument.

You are implying that only men are rapists and that it's only a problem that affects women.

Never implied this.

Insults on the internet are no different than insults on a schoolyard. People tailor their insults to the person being insulted. Telling a man that he is fat or that his fashion sense sucks is less effective than calling him a fag or a virgin or a pussy. If you call a woman a pussy it'll have much less effect than if you insult her looks. Telling a man that you plan to rape him makes you gay, telling it to a woman on the other hand, while lazy and more often than not crossing the line, will have instant effectiveness.

Whatever happened to "sticks and stones"?

How about, I don't know, being a decent human being and not telling anyone that you're going to rape them? How about not calling anyone a pussy or a faggot or gay, or denigrating and degrading people by insulting them? What in fuck's name is wrong with you?

[paulgiamatti]

So much crazy there I don't even know where to begin. "More men get raped than women"?

Dear lord Kagato, you really live in your own separate reality don't you?

Yeah, holy fucking hell. Saying Kagatob has only a bare, surface-level understanding of these issues is a massive, colossal understatement.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

If you think there's even a hint of similarity between feminism and the Nazis, then your line of thought has more in common with the mass delusions of antisemitism and Adolf Hitler than even the most extreme, radical, and even misandrynistic feminists ever did. What a waste of an argument.

I've already showed you several things they have in common with the third Reich, just because you don't like them doesn't mean it's not fact.

Never implied this.
You may not have intended to, but the implication was still made.


How about, I don't know, being a decent human being and not telling anyone that you're going to rape them? How about not calling anyone a pussy or a faggot or gay, or denigrating and degrading people by insulting them? What in fuck's name is wrong with you?
I'm realistic. It almost sounds like you're letting your self-described extreme ideals such as sexual desire = bad (an absolutely laughable stance I'm sorry to say) cloud your perception of reality.
Yeah, holy fucking hell. Saying Kagatob has only a bare, surface-level understanding of these issues is a massive, colossal understatement.
Prison rape.

This is willful ignorance over 9000.

[loramin]

What's next, gonna dispute the fact that
No, let's stay on your crazy rape statistic. Depending on which study you go by, either 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 American women will either be raped or have someone attempt to rape them at some point in their life. Even if 100% of men in prison got raped (which they don't), 25% of all men are not in prison.

So please, show me where you got this crazy idea that more men get raped than women.

[loramin]

P.S. Just to clarify, I in no way mean to diminish or reduce the experience of men who get raped. Rape is horribly damaging when it happens to anyone, male or female, and all rape should be condemned regardless of the gender of the victim.

[Cecily]

Prison rape, and I'm willing to bet that happens ALOT more often and is taken far less seriously.

[loramin]

Right, prison rape is horrible, it's significance is totally under appreciated, and it's almost entirely preventable. It's a black mark on our society that we allow it to continue.

But all that being said, the amount of women who report (report! many women don't even report rapes) is at least 1 in 4. Not that many men are even in prison.

[Cecily]

Well you're talking number of women. If a guy is getting raped in prison, that's probably gonna happen during his whole sentence. So you might be right on people who get raped, but number of rapings... Guys might have the edge. It's not a contest. It's just bad period.

[paulgiamatti]

The prison rape argument holds no water. I mean, I'm no lady's man or anything, but all the women I've known have had to deal with rape. It's either been directly committed upon them, or they've had to deal with it indirectly by seeking ways to avoid it or by having to console someone who was raped.

My sister has been raped multiple times. Most of my ex-girlfriends have been raped. I'm not trying to say that the women I know are the norm or anything, but do you guys even try to get to know women at all on any level? To me it seems like this topic, because it's such a rampant and repeated occurrence, is completely unavoidable if you have known any woman beyond the merest, most shallow emotional level.

Saying that prison rape even begins to compare to the culture of rape that every single woman has to deal with whether they were designated female at birth, or transsexual, or transgender is more than just missing the point. It's patently absurd and offensive, and beyond ignorant.

[Orruar]

But all that being said, the amount of women who report (report! many women don't even report rapes) is at least 1 in 4.

Can you show where you get this number? Certainly that many aren't being reported to the police, and I'm having a hard time finding where this number comes from.

According to this website (https://www.rainn.org/statistics), who gets their data from massive surveys, there are about 300k victims of sexual assaults (victims, not just reports) each year. For the sake of argument, let's assume that all of those are women and all of them are different from year to year. Let's also assume that all rapes happen to women between 10 and 40, which is probably true in 95%+ of cases. There are ~60M women in the US between 10 and 40. So each year, 0.5% of them are raped. 99.5% are not. 0.995^30 = .860. So that means a woman should have a roughly 14% of being assaulted during her prime years. And it's going to be lower than that in reality when you factor in women who are assaulted in multiple years and that some of the victims are men. It's probably closer to single digits, 1 in 10 or 1 in 8 at most. It's still way too many, but using incorrect statistics like 1 in 4 doesn't help things. It's better to be more accurate and honest so that others can't use your fictitious statistics against you.

[Orruar]

The prison rape argument holds no water. I mean, I'm no lady's man or anything, but all the women I've known have had to deal with rape. It's either been directly committed upon them, or they've had to deal with it indirectly by seeking ways to avoid it or by having to console someone who was raped.

My sister has been raped multiple times. Most of my ex-girlfriends have been raped. I'm not trying to say that the women I know are the norm or anything, but do you guys even try to get to know women at all on any level? To me it seems like this topic, because it's such a rampant and repeated occurrence, is completely unavoidable if you have known any woman beyond the merest, most shallow emotional level.

Saying that prison rape even begins to compare to the culture of rape that every single woman has to deal with whether they were designated female at birth, or transsexual, or transgender is more than just missing the point. It's patently absurd and offensive, and beyond ignorant.

Your sample probably has more to do with the kind of girls you hang out with. Of the half dozen or so women currently in my life at any close level, only one has been raped. Also, having to "deal with it indirectly by seeking to avoid it" is not exactly an action unique to sexual assault. We all take actions to minimize risk of crime in our lives. We put locks on our doors, install security systems, don't drive in certain areas of town at night, etc. Just as a woman wouldn't walk home alone from a bar through a bad part of town, neither would a guy who didn't want to get mugged.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

No, let's stay on your crazy rape statistic. Depending on which study you go by, either 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 American women will either be raped or have someone attempt to rape them at some point in their life. Even if 100% of men in prison got raped (which they don't), 25% of all men are not in prison.

So please, show me where you got this crazy idea that more men get raped than women.
0.7% = 1 in 3. (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176)
Thank you for illustrating how divorced from reality you are.
The prison rape argument holds no water. I mean, I'm no lady's man or anything, but all the women I've known have had to deal with rape. It's either been directly committed upon them, or they've had to deal with it indirectly by seeking ways to avoid it or by having to console someone who was raped.

My sister has been raped multiple times. Most of my ex-girlfriends have been raped. I'm not trying to say that the women I know are the norm or anything, but do you guys even try to get to know women at all on any level? To me it seems like this topic, because it's such a rampant and repeated occurrence, is completely unavoidable if you have known any woman beyond the merest, most shallow emotional level.

Saying that prison rape even begins to compare to the culture of rape that every single woman has to deal with whether they were designated female at birth, or transsexual, or transgender is more than just missing the point. It's patently absurd and offensive, and beyond ignorant.
Anecdotes and weasel words.

I'm sorry women have to do things to keep them safer that contributes to this "rape culture" the modern feminists have created. Men do things every day to ensure they aren't killed, where's muh murder culture? Teach people not to murder!

[Raev]

But all that being said, the amount of women who report (report! many women don't even report rapes) is at least 1 in 4.

You actually believe this, don't you.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Don't look both ways when crossing the street, you're contributing to murder culture every time you do. Don't teach your kids not to talk to strangers, it contributes to kidnapping culture.

Your sample probably has more to do with the kind of girls you hang out with. Of the half dozen or so women currently in my life at any close level, only one has been raped. Also, having to "deal with it indirectly by seeking to avoid it" is not exactly an action unique to sexual assault. We all take actions to minimize risk of crime in our lives. We put locks on our doors, install security systems, don't drive in certain areas of town at night, etc. Just as a woman wouldn't walk home alone from a bar through a bad part of town, neither would a guy who didn't want to get mugged.

Careful there, you're stepping on a land mine. It's not ok for a man to speak about or for women unless it's strictly from a feminist perspective.

[paulgiamatti]

Kagatob has known approximately zero women.

[Raev]

Keep in mind, I adhere to the more traditional version of rape, not 'Oh god I was so drunk how could I have had sex with this guy, he must have raped me'

[paulgiamatti]

Any sex that is non-consensual is rape.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Kagatob has known approximately zero women.

In the biblical sense? Three.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Any sex that is non-consensual is rape.

Guy gets drunk and has sex he's a rapist.
Girl gets drunk and has sex she's a victim.

You do realize you are undermining everything that feminists in the sixties and seventies faught for. You do realize this...

[Lune]

Any sex that is non-consensual is rape.

Do you see any use in having a distinction between:

"I got drunk with my boyfriend and we had sex. I couldn't consent because I was drunk/passing in and out of consciousness"

"I was held down and violently beaten and raped by a tri-legged 6'6 black man in a dark alley"

Both these scenarios are described by the same word. Should they have the same punishment? Should they be aggregated under the same statistic?

[paulgiamatti]

Kagatob, there's no rebuttal left for your level of delusion. It's like arguing with a schizophrenic.

[Ahldagor]

Kagafag, do you routinely attend feminist rallies to be a counter rally?

[paulgiamatti]

Do you see any use in having a distinction between:

"I got drunk with my boyfriend and we had sex. I couldn't consent because I was drunk/passing in and out of consciousness"

"I was held down and violently beaten and raped by a tri-legged 6'6 black man in a dark alley"

Both these scenarios are described by the same word. Should they have the same punishment? Should they be aggregated under the same statistic?

I don't have the answer for that, but maybe it shouldn't. Maybe our lexicon needs updating, and maybe we need different terms for the varying degrees in which rape can be committed. I can assure you that won't happen anytime soon, so in the meantime I'm going to keep calling it what it is.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I don't have the answer for that, but maybe it shouldn't. Maybe our lexicon needs updating, and maybe we need different terms for the varying degrees in which rape can be committed. I can assure you that won't happen anytime soon, so in the meantime I'm going to keep calling it what it is.

Lol, he's still pushing "she was raped" when two people got drunk together and fucked.

He has to be trolling at this point.

[Raev]

Here is my question, Paul: if two people get drunk and have sex, why is it the man's fault? Shouldn't they both go to jail for rape?

[Ahldagor]

Lol, he's still pushing "she was raped" when two people got drunk together and fucked.

He has to be trolling at this point.

And you're still ineffective on this topic. Did you find the crux of the scenarios in Lune's post?

[paulgiamatti]

Here is my question, Paul: if two people get drunk and have sex, why is it the man's fault?

Never stated or implied that this would be the case.

[haksum]

If you have someone with a deplorable fucking idea, it discredits anything else they might have contributed to society by association.

Let's just go ahead and unlearn everything that has come from the advancements made in DNA by James Watson and company because he thinks women belong in kitchens and black people aren't as smart as white people. Sounds like a good plan.

[loramin]

We all take actions to minimize risk of crime in our lives. We put locks on our doors, install security systems, don't drive in certain areas of town at night, etc. Just as a woman wouldn't walk home alone from a bar through a bad part of town, neither would a guy who didn't want to get mugged.
The whole idea that rape happens in dark parking lots "in certain areas of town" is a myth. Not a total one (of course some people do get raped by complete strangers in dark alleyways), but the majority of rapes are actually acquaintance rapes. The most common place for a rape to occur is in the home of the victim, and the second most common is in the home of the attacker (who of course the victim didn't realize was a rapist until it was too late).

Try avoiding your own home and the home of anyone you date.

0.7% = 1 in 3. (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176)
Thank you for illustrating how divorced from reality you are.

Anecdotes and weasel words.

You quoted something about college women, I'm talking about women over the course of their lifetime. Fail.

Guy gets drunk and has sex he's a rapist.
Girl gets drunk and has sex she's a victim.
If you drunk drive and hit a drunk pedestrian do you get to say "well they were drunk too"? Of course not. Same deal here: no matter how drunk you are, if you have sex with a man or woman who can't give consent (ie. is passed out or otherwise completely incapacitated) you are raping him/her. If he/she's drunk, but able to move around, talk, etc. he/she is capable of giving consent; it is NOT rape if he/she later withdraws consent after the sex, regardless of alcohol.

This isn't my view of the world, this is how the law works (in California and in most if not all other states, though the details vary by state).

Can you show where you get this number? Certainly that many aren't being reported to the police, and I'm having a hard time finding where this number comes from.

I learned it back in college when I was a Rape Peer Prevention Educator, and it was based on studies that I can't find now. Instead, here's the best I could come up with in five minutes of Googling. These stats are a little lower than the ones I was taught (1 in 5 or 6 instead of 1 in 3 or 4), but keep in mind however that rape is notoriously under-reported (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/21/rape-study-report-america-us_n_4310765.html), both because of misinformation about what actually qualifies as rape and because there is a stigma to being raped, so these studies are likely not showing the full picture.

And of course, regardless of whether it's 1 in 3 or 1 in 6, even 1 in 6 is WAY too much.

Rape prevalence among women in the U.S. (the percentage of women who experienced rape at least once in their lifetime so far) is in the range of 15–20%, with different studies disagreeing with each other. (National Violence against Women survey, 1995, found 17.6% prevalence rate;[8] a 2007 national study for the Department of Justice on rape found 18% prevalence rate.[9])
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States

1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).1
https://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims

Nearly one in five women surveyed said they had been raped or had experienced an attempted rape at some point, and one in four reported having been beaten by an intimate partner. One in six women have been stalked, according to the report.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/health/nearly-1-in-5-women-in-us-survey-report-sexual-assault.html?_r=0

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

You quoted something about*college*women, I'm talking about women over the course of their lifetime. Fail.

It lists more than just that... try actually reading next time.

[loramin]

It lists more than just that... try actually reading next time.

Quoting the entire link:

December 11, 2014 NCJ 248471

Compares the characteristics of rape and sexual assault victimization against females ages 18 to 24 who are enrolled and not enrolled in college. This report examines the relationship between the victim and offender, the involvement of a weapon, location of the victimization, reporting to police, perceived offender characteristics, and victim demographics. Data are from the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which collects information on nonfatal crimes, reported and not reported to the police, against persons from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households. The report also discusses methodological differences between the NCVS and other surveys that measure rape and sexual assault victimization and the impact of these difference on rape and sexual assault estimates.

Highlights:

The rate of rape and sexual assault was 1.2 times higher for nonstudents (7.6 per 1,000) than for students (6.1 per 1,000).
For both college students and nonstudents, the offender was known to the victim in about 80% of rape and sexual assault victimizations.
Most (51%) student rape and sexual assault victimizations occurred while the victim was pursuing leisure activities away from home, compared to nonstudents who were engaged in other activities at home (50%) when the victimization occurred.
The offender had a weapon in about 1 in 10 rape and sexual assault victimizations against both students and nonstudents.
Rape and sexual assault victimizations of students (80%) were more likely than nonstudent victimizations (67%) to go unreported to police.

Everything there is about students. Now if you expect me to read an entire dense 20-page PDF of the study results just because you can't be bothered to provide a proper quote ... no.

[Cecily]

Well, besides the nonstudents part.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Well, besides the nonstudents part.

:D

[loramin]

Well, besides the nonstudents part.

Man, I have to spell out everything (also, stop encouraging Kabuto :p)

against females ages 18 to 24 who are enrolled and not enrolled in college

It doesn't matter whether its including non-students, it's not including women outside the student age range (ie. over 24).

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Man, I have to spell out everything (also, stop encouraging Kabuto :p)



It doesn't matter whether its including non-students, it's not including women outside the student age range (ie. over 24).

God forbid they do a thorough study showing a less than one percent chance during the six year she range it's most likely to happen. Can't forget those hundreds of thousands of reports each year about the 40 year olds getting raped. :rolleyes:

[loramin]

For those keeping score at home, here's the evolution of a Kabuto argument:

Page 18:
More men get raped than women
Seems pretty clear: more men get raped than women.

Page 23:
0.7% = 1 in 3. (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5176)
Thank you for illustrating how divorced from reality you are.
He doubles down!

Page 25 (after I've shot down the one and only data point that supported his argument):
God forbid they do a thorough study showing a less than one percent chance during the six year she range it's most likely to happen. Can't forget those hundreds of thousands of reports each year about the 40 year olds getting raped. :rolleyes:
Time to mock 40-year old women who get raped!

[Cecily]

This thread has kind of a rapey vibe to it.

[paulgiamatti]

Yeah, I'd recommend putting Kaga on ignore for that.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

I've shot down the one and only data point that supported his argument):

Time to mock 40-year old women who get raped!

Ok Sherlock. Your claim is 1 in 3 (33%). In years 18-24 (a six year range) the odds of being raped are less than one percent at 0.7%.

You are saying the age range is "shot down" when math tells us your conclusion is that over 97% of rape happens to women younger than 18 and over 24. Or rather, less than 3% of rapes happen to 18 to 24 year olds.

Yep, blowing me out of the water. :rolleyes:

[paulgiamatti]

The whole idea that rape happens in dark parking lots "in certain areas of town" is a myth. Not a total one (of course some people do get raped by complete strangers in dark alleyways), but the majority of rapes are actually acquaintance rapes. The most common place for a rape to occur is in the home of the victim, and the second most common is in the home of the attacker (who of course the victim didn't realize was a rapist until it was too late).

Just comical and really quite tragic how utterly lost this point is on Kagatob.

[Big_Japan]

when you have something of value, people will try to take it by force. This is the law of nature, which molded you and I into the beautiful machines we (well, some of us) are.

the precepts of Judaic rule have determined that our sexuality can be monetized, so a culture of rape naturally follows. *shrug*

[Big_Japan]

put another way: perhaps you would not be raped (stolen from) if your sex organs served a humanistic and spiritual purpose, rather than as a commodity to be sold for shekels.

[loramin]

Ok Sherlock. Your claim is 1 in 3 (33%). In years 18-24 (a six year range) the odds of being raped are less than one percent at 0.7%.

You are saying the age range is "shot down" when math tells us your conclusion is that over 97% of rape happens to women younger than 18 and over 24. Or rather, less than 3% of rapes happen to 18 to 24 year olds.

Yep, blowing me out of the water. :rolleyes:

Ok, let me make this very, very simple. I'll even walk back my 1 in 3 claim (which actually was 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 with the caveat that it varied by study, but whatever), and I'll admit it might be as low as 1 in 5 or 1 in 6.

Now, having made things easier for you, let's return to your outrageous claim from seven pages ago, which you seem to have great difficulty addressing:
More men get raped than women

After seven pages, I see zero evidence for that claim. The only study you managed to cite fails to include the rate of men being raped OR the rate of women over 24/under 18 being raped, which makes it pretty much worthless for proving the claim that "more men get raped than women."

If I say something like "more chickens get eaten than cows", and someone says "you're crazy", the logical way to support my claim would be to provide some evidence. For instance, if I could provide:


a statistic about the rate of chickens being eaten (or women being raped)
a statistic about the rate of cows being eaten (or men being raped)


and then I could show that one number was bigger than the other.

In other words if I claim "A > B", then I should show some data for what A is, what B is, and then the comparator between them would be obvious right?

So I'm inviting you Kabuto: if you have any evidence whatsoever supporting your claim, by all means please show it. But don't just spend another seven pages avoiding it.

[radditsu]

Men talkin bout rape. Funny


Rape is up there with breast cancer in regards to the amount of cares compared to the statistical probability of dying of boob cancer, or getting your nono touched by some weirdo.