The plight of the Kagatob

[DetroitVelvetSmooth]

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

[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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.])

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.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally Posted by katrik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[Jontheripper]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Men produce testosterone; a huge biological advantage.

Women produce testosterone also. Ya dingus!

[loramin]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is what a real, intelligent, respectable feminist looks like.

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 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Look at the second definition of "Feminism" in the freaking Mirriam-Webster dictionary.
Actually I'll do it for you.

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?