sexism

Women are not allowed to be infantry because body armor and field gear weighs a fuckton, the infantry is the hairiest, most stressful job in the military, and no politician wants to be the one apologizing for somebody's daughter dying to an AK-47 in a close combat situation. Sorry ladies, roids are prohibited in the infantry: you either can or cannot carry 80 lbs on your chest and back, while running, in battle conditions. Men are not encumbered by breasts, periods, or pregnancy.

Feminism as it currently exists is intellectually empty and morally bankrupt. As long as you have a (D) next to your name you can be a chauvinistic pig getting serviced in the Oval Office and they will rush to your defense like dogs. You can repeatedly sire children in your "civil rights" office from different women and they will hush it up for you. Basically as long as you support the cardinal virtue of feminism: abortion on demand, you can treat women like shit and the feminists will be complicit in it every step of the way, bowing to your every whim. That is why feminism has become a dirty word: feminism stinks of a rancid ideological hypocrisy.

Where was feminist akuchi when Mrs. Palin, an intelligent woman who rose to power on her own strength without any external influence from anyone, was being viciously savaged by easily disproven and terrible rumors? Joining right in, of course, buying every moment unquestionably, lavishing in the destruction of a woman who feminists like to say "aren't really women." Because you know, they didn't make it to where they were by being a quick trick to a congressman, like Madame Secretary Rodham.

As far as its goals, feminism "empowers" women by telling them to emulate the worst qualities found in men while encouraging the worst qualities in women. Arrogance, poor hygiene, brashness, overconfidence, sexual irresponsibility, all combined with pursed lips and a snippy, know-it-all attitude that jumps to ferocious defense at even imagined slights.

Oh, and don't get rid of ladies night either. Feminism is about hating men, not equality. I treat feminists how I would treat any uppity self-absorbed man I would run into: Stop whining like a bitch, get over yourself, and grow a pair.

Feminists today are worthless. You want to be treated equal? Stop whining, pull your weight, and stop pretending the entire world is against you. Even if it were, men do not bitch about it: they deal with it. Equal Death Day, the day female occupation-related deaths catch up to male occupation-related deaths of the previous year is in late November. The feminist hol(y)iday Equal Pay Day is in April.

Anybody want to call me sexist? Please, I hate feminists, not women. Susan B. Anthony hated abortion, even that eugenicist and racist monster Margaret Sanger did. It is an insult to the feminism of previous decades that its modern forbears claim their mantle.
 
Deck Knight, I love you.

I would re-list all the points you just made, but that would be redundant. Feminism used to in search of equality, today it is just what you said it is: morally bankrupt.
 
Women are still allowed in parts of the military. There was even a study that showed that women could track more targets then men could so clearly they are more efficent in that aspect. But the matter in the military is not equality but efficency. If a woman cannot preform the task at hand, she is not going to be placed into that position, same for a man that cannot preform the task. Feminists should be focusing more on the women in the other countries right now. We have the right to vote, we are getting better and better treatment in the work field. I am more efficent then some of the men at where I work and my pay shows that and I see more women in some of the other stores then I see men. From what I can see here in the US, women have it pretty good if women like Octo mom can just sit there and pop out kids and she gets everything handed to her including her own tv show.

Yes there are always going to be a few problems here and there but for the most part, things are pretty equil now. And Akuchi, not shaving just makes you look ugly and dirty, just like men who dont shave look homeless. I am a girl, when i broke my ankle and had to have my leg in a cast for 4 months i was appalled at the sight of my leg when I finally got out of the cast. It looked like a mans legs and was discusting. Men with too much hair look disgusting. It has nothing to do with men telling me hair looks bad, I think it looks bad on my own and this is how I can prove that. When I hit puberty and started to grow hair in placeses I didnt know i would grow hair i thought it looked ugly. No one told me it looked ugly because no one refured to it. Body hair on women looks ugly and that is all there is to it. And for equality's sake, huge tits on men look ugly too. If you think hair on a women looks fine then whatever, but I and my mother and my aunt and other female relatives do not shave becaue society tells us to, we shave because hair on women looks ugly. We would prefer to not look like the bearded lady.

And in agrement to what DK said, yes femanists whine and complain far far too much. If you want to be equal then go and become a trash collector or a sewage worker cuz I dont see women running to take those jobs. Why dont they go an focuse their attention on those women in other countries that get stoned if they so much as let their sleeves move too far up and show their skin instead of attacking men.

Syberia wrote this great paper for his femanist teacher one year that said wonderful, respectful and positive things about women and about me but got a fail because he called me his "wife". What a load of bullshit.
 
alright, people should probably stop making blanket statements about "feminists" as if that's a meaningful label. the world has progressed a long ways since the suffragettes, people. "feminism" isn't a united, homogenized movement. there's very little you can say that applies to amazon feminism, anarchist feminism, black feminism, chicana feminism, christian feminism, cultural feminism, difference feminism, eco-feminism, equity feminism, equality feminism, fat feminism, gender feminism, global feminism, individualist feminism, islamic feminism, jewish feminism, lesbian feminism, liberal feminism, marxist feminism, material feminism, new feminism, postcolonial feminism, postmodern feminism, pro-life feminism, radical feminism, separatist feminism, sex-positive feminism, socialist feminism, spiritual feminism, third world feminism, trans feminism, and womanism altogether. all you are doing is betraying your own ignorance of those you are berating
​
 
Doctor Heartbreak said:
alright, people should probably stop making blanket statements about "feminists" as if that's a meaningful label. the world has progressed a long ways since the suffragettes, people. "feminism" isn't a united, homogenized movement. there's very little you can say that applies to amazon feminism, anarchist feminism, black feminism, chicana feminism, christian feminism, cultural feminism, difference feminism, eco-feminism, equity feminism, equality feminism, fat feminism, gender feminism, global feminism, individualist feminism, islamic feminism, jewish feminism, lesbian feminism, liberal feminism, marxist feminism, material feminism, new feminism, postcolonial feminism, postmodern feminism, pro-life feminism, radical feminism, separatist feminism, sex-positive feminism, socialist feminism, spiritual feminism, third world feminism, trans feminism, and womanism altogether. all you are doing is betraying your own ignorance of those you are berating
​
Click to expand...

...which is exactly the problem.

"Feminism" has just become an easy catchall to shove your favorite cultural ideology into; it's become an ideological big-tent. The problem with big tents is that they tend to collapse in spectacular fashion as they lack stability.
 
perhaps deck knight and lexite can lend us some of their surplus strawmen to keep it propped up.

all i mean is any argument against some kind of imaginary feminist enemy is meaningless unless you define what you mean by feminist. of course, when you do that, most of the people you're attacking end up falling outside of your definition - far easier to just keep on bashing some weird stereotype of feminist that barely existed even in the eighties, when they were last relevant
 
Doctor Heartbreak said:
the biggest reason your statement is sexist is because it needlessly differentiates between men and women.

it's true that men are stronger than women as a general rule. however, weak men and strong women exist, so it's not an absolute division. to say "women shouldn't be allowed into the military because they're too weak" is sexist because of the possibility (it doesn't even need to be an actuality, though it is) that a women who meets fitness and strength standards could exist.

people who cannot meet the standards of physical fitness and strength should not be allowed into the military, regardless of their gender. people who can and do meet those standards should be allowed into the military, again, regardless of gender.

gender is a generally successful but occasionally flawed indicator of strength, which is the important factor. therefore, making decisions based on gender rather than strength tests is sexist

hope that clears things up for you.
Click to expand...

You do realize if you take a man and a woman and make them eat and work the exact same amount until theyre thirty the man will be stronger, right?
 
Probably not the best way to open up with my first post on this site...but pure equality is unattainable. The only way people could be completely equal is if we were all exactly the same, down to every personality flaw and leg hair.

It's a lousy analogy, but one I'd imagine people here could relate to. Pokemon has a tier system because certain pokemon are downright better than others. The only way one pokemon would not be inherently superior to another was if they had the exact same stats, moves, ability, typing and items. Otherwise, one would always have an advantage. Does that mean the disadvantaged one is incapable of sucess? No, but it means he's less likely to succeed.

To apply this to the current argument regarding the military, men currently are at the advantage. In the military, more men are suited for bashing a terrorist's skull in than a woman. The women are at a disadvantage, does this mean a woman cannot excel? No, but it does mean they are less likely to. I'm relatively sure people would agree that if we were to go out into the street and pull aside a random male and random female and have them repeatedly punch one another in the face until one is rendered unconscious, the male would be the one still standing.

To sum up that verbal diarhea, humans are inherently incapable of being equal as we are different. Anything short of homogenizing the human race will always result in inequity.
 
uh, you do realize that doesn't actually run contrary to anything i'm saying, right?

it doesn't change the fact that a woman who is strong and fit enough to meet military standards can potentially exist

edit: this was meant to be addressed to zero, but hey, it works just as well with kobita
 
I wasn't attempting to refute you in anyway...just felt like expressing my views on the subject. I get particularly annoyed when people talk about equality between the sexes or races or sexual orientations or species or whatever.

Your argument involving the different forms of feminism is somewhat lame though and doesn't really do anything to provide a counter point to his argument.

I could see a blanket statement such as "Fish swim" and then retort by listing 200 species of fish and saying you can't just assume all fish swim. In his opinion Femists, whether they be chicana or chupacabra femists, all fell into the category of "Feminists today are worthless."
 
To the OP:

I find it rather hilarious when the exact same woman will tell me that women can do all the same shit as men physically (generally speaking) but then is left without legitimate or reasonable recourse when a man points out that university enrollment, at least in Canada, is like 60% female and then claim that the genders are equal anyways. Equality be damned, some people will take a win when they can get it and cry their way into a tie when they lose.
 
I honestly don't understand why everybody is either avoiding or forgetting (or hasn't thought of?) the point that females cause sexual tension in the army (which I mention in my first post). That's a good reason, generally speaking, to not have many females in the army. It is also, by conventional societal standards, probably sexist. Of course, we could have an all-women army but that wouldn't be nearly as effective as having an all-male army, now would it?
 
Deck Knight said:
Where was feminist akuchi when Mrs. Palin, an intelligent woman who rose to power on her own strength without any external influence from anyone, was being viciously savaged by easily disproven and terrible rumors? Joining right in, of course, buying every moment unquestionably, lavishing in the destruction of a woman who feminists like to say "aren't really women." Because you know, they didn't make it to where they were by being a quick trick to a congressman, like Madame Secretary Rodham.
Click to expand...

Where was I? I was building a nuclear bomb shelter, quietly convinced that if that psychotic terror of a woman won any power we were all going to die.
Does this mean I condone the misogynist slurs (of which you just made a pretty fucking large one, you fucking hypocrite - how dare we slur Ms Palin because we disagree with her politics yet because you find Hilary distasteful she's little more than a 'quick trick' with no merits of her own?).. no, I didn't. A great deal of my feminist friends and sisters were a lot more vocal about the slurs on her on virtue of her gender, though. I wasn't particularly keen on the issue at all - somewhat to my discredit. This doesn't mean that there weren't a lot of feminists who though they were revolted by her politics stuck up for her when it was her gender she was being slated for.

Doctor Heartbreak is entirely right. There are so many different strains of feminism it's mental, and quite rightly too. Feminism is as diverse as women -one sort of feminism may not appeal to another group, i.e. traditional white middle-class feminism may not reach out to some of the groups it should do.

And Lexite, you might want to read Feminism 101: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress...rating-on-x-when-y-is-so-much-more-important/
 
I am all in favour of women in the army.

In all seriousness though, the idea of total equality is probably a fallacy, but that doesn't mean it isn't a noble aim worth pursuing. It's important to be pragmatic about these things though: society has been male-dominated for millenia, and so despite the progress that's been made in the last century or so, and incremental gains are better than none at all.
 
Deck Knight said:
Mrs. Palin, an intelligent woman who rose to power on her own strength without any external influence from anyone, was being viciously savaged by easily disproven and terrible rumors?
Click to expand...
Hahahahahahaha.

Sorry.

On topic, most modern feminists are whiners, almost nobody actually wants the genders to be treated identically in every aspect.

If I rallied with my manly brothers and we all shattered our societal expectations by shaving our body hair... we would be laughed at and proclaimed gay =(

If I said that feminists who didn't shave were lesbians I would take a lot of heat. This parallels so many other mostly fabricated prejudices these days. It bothers me a tiny bit.
 
Phizzlax said:
Hahahahahahaha.

Sorry.

On topic, most modern feminists are whiners, almost nobody actually wants the genders to be treated identically in every aspect.

If I rallied with my manly brothers and we all shattered our societal expectations by shaving our body hair... we would be laughed at and proclaimed gay =(

If I said that feminists who didn't shave were lesbians I would take a lot of heat. This parallels so many other mostly fabricated prejudices these days. It bothers me a tiny bit.
Click to expand...

And.. isn't that patriarchal in itself? Why should a man taking on feminine characteristics mean that he's laughed at?
 
Living in Canada, I'm just going to say that we have plenty of women in combat, and they do just fine. I didn't know that it isn't allowed in the States, nor do I see why they won't allow it.
 
sexism is overrated. why cant i talk about inherent differences between the genders, both biological and social?
 
Deck Knight said:
Women are not allowed to be infantry because body armor and field gear weighs a fuckton, the infantry is the hairiest, most stressful job in the military, and no politician wants to be the one apologizing for somebody's daughter dying to an AK-47 in a close combat situation. Sorry ladies, roids are prohibited in the infantry: you either can or cannot carry 80 lbs on your chest and back, while running, in battle conditions. Men are not encumbered by breasts, periods, or pregnancy.
Click to expand...

Yeah but women also work better together in teams, and situations where infantry are even required to be used are becoming more and more obsolete every day. If a woman can do everything that is required of men, there is no justification for banning them from the infantry.

This "sexual tension" that people assume will happen is caused by the men, not by the women who want to make a sacrifice for their country.

Deck Knight said:
Where was feminist akuchi when Mrs. Palin, an intelligent woman who rose to power on her own strength without any external influence from anyone, was being viciously savaged by easily disproven and terrible rumors? Joining right in, of course, buying every moment unquestionably, lavishing in the destruction of a woman who feminists like to say "aren't really women." Because you know, they didn't make it to where they were by being a quick trick to a congressman, like Madame Secretary Rodham.
Click to expand...

As akuchi pointed out, this is a blatantly hypocritical paragraph. Sarah Palin was an idiot, an embarrassment to women and conservatives everywhere. "I can see Russia, so I'm more qualified in foreign policy than Obama and Clinton!" "Africa is a country" "there is a special place in hell for women who dont help other women" etc etc etc. I don't know why you think akuchi would support Palin when they obviously have huge disagreements on nearly every political issue, is it because they are both women? Then yes, that is sexist.

Are you seriously suggesting that Hilary Clinton got to where she is because she was a "quick trick to a congressman"? (apparently bolding "man" makes us more superior)

Deck Knight said:
Feminists today are worthless. You want to be treated equal? Stop whining, pull your weight, and stop pretending the entire world is against you. Even if it were, men do not bitch about it: they deal with it. Equal Death Day, the day female occupation-related deaths catch up to male occupation-related deaths of the previous year is in late November. The feminist hol(y)iday Equal Pay Day is in April.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is the solution. Stop whining! You'll get equal pay for equal work if you just shut your female mouth! Look, men get everything they want and they arent bitching! Look at how the frail, disadvantaged, weak men are just dealing with all of the injustice brought upon them! You really know how to inspire people.

Deck Knight said:
Anybody want to call me sexist? Please, I hate feminists, not women. Susan B. Anthony hated abortion, even that eugenicist and racist monster Margaret Sanger did. It is an insult to the feminism of previous decades that its modern forbears claim their mantle.
Click to expand...

You might not hate women, but your post would suggest that you sure do hate women's rights.

"Feminism" isn't about not wearing a bra and letting your body hair grow. It's about stupid shit like "why do women not make the same amount of money for equal work?", "why are rape victims portrayed as 'asking for it'?", "why is the Prime Minister of Italy seriously suggesting that people hire sexy young women as political candidates for their party?" and "why is female promiscuity irresponsible but male promiscuity is dominance and to be encouraged?"
 
jrrrrrrr said:
Yeah but women also work better together in teams
Click to expand...
Jrrrrrr, that is not not always true. Women can be completely dysfunctional in some groups. I have seen many many cases where that is completely untrue. The grooming salon at my work is made up of all girls and there are problems and the grooming manager is trying to find a guy to hire to try to fix the situation. My other store had huge problems with the girls in their salon and drove the only guy in grooming crazy to the point that he asked to move to the floor with and out of grooming. I would never want to work with only girls, that is a recipy for disaster. Men are needed to keep things simple. Men are often very simple and that is a very good thing at times.

And promiscuity from men and women are equally as bad.
 
ITT: People are people with many varied and different skills, they are not genders.

Some women may be suitable for military, some may not.
Some males may be suitable for military, some may not.

It doesn't help that society is run by rich white alpha males but that's the way things are and although it seems like it's slowly changing (women leaders, women getting paid more etc) it's going to take a while.

Feminism is not needed in the US or any of the commonwealth countries and feminists should really focus their efforts on Africa, some parts of Asia, Ex soviet bloc countries and the Middle East.

Although I think that their efforts may be in vain because the first testament of so many Abrahamic religions is a misogynistic text and often the subsequent sequels or second and/or third testaments are as equally misogynistic.

Personally I like women because of their tits and often nice asses
 
jjfun said:
ITT: People are people with many varied and different skills, they are not genders.

Some women may be suitable for military, some may not.
Some males may be suitable for military, some may not.

It doesn't help that society is run by rich white alpha males but that's the way things are and although it seems like it's slowly changing (women leaders, women getting paid more etc) it's going to take a while.

Feminism is not needed in the US or any of the commonwealth countries and feminists should really focus their efforts on Africa, some parts of Asia, Ex soviet bloc countries and the Middle East.

Although I think that their efforts may be in vain because the first testament of so many Abrahamic religions is a misogynistic text and often the subsequent sequels or second and/or third testaments are as equally misogynistic.

Personally I like women because of their tits and often nice asses
Click to expand...

Started well, ended with a poor troll. I believe I've already linked to 'why are you concentrating on X when Y is so much more important', and there is most certainly a need for feminism in 'civilised' Western society. Your post has more than a smack of the xenophobic about it.
 
Sorry Akuchi, I couldn't help that last line. Personally I think that this debate is silly. I think that sexism is slowly dying and the only people who enforce it are getting old, withering and dying.

I know my post seems culturally insensitive but it's true. I'm sorry if the truth isn't politically correct. In virtual theocracies women often have fewer rights and are kept on a tight leash so to speak.

I believe that genders do not inhibit the mind or body. However, in other countries I believe that being a female is a severe disability, which is why I think that feminism is necessary in those nations.

Also, I didn't use the word "civilized" anywhere. In many western nations ie: lots of europe women have fewer rights than men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top