Busting feminist myths

[slimreaper]

Oh...its you again

Meaning what?

What does it being me have to do with the substance of the thread? Do you have any actual argument?

 

[Apêx1]

Feminism is stupid in terms of "everything should be equal but guys shouldn't hit girls" type of thing. Feminism is not stupid in terms of advocating for equality. Although the term 'feminist' has differing connotations. Regarding this thread, I will at the very least agree that the gender pay gap myths is ridiculous and most women make less in general just because they work part time as they take care of babies, etc. It is stupid for some women to think that they should make as much as a man but for less hours of work, that's not equality, that's inequality. Society has this fallacious notion of 'equality' where everyone is supposed to be the exact same thing'. Equality in our society is if someone is 180cm, the person who is 150 gets a 30cm stool to be equal to the 180cm person, but the 180cm, person gets nothing. It almost attempts to throw out any genetic superiority which exists, and that's generally a really ignorant way of thinking.

 

[slimreaper]

Feminism is stupid in terms of "everything should be equal but guys shouldn't hit girls" type of thing. Feminism is not stupid in terms of advocating for equality. Although the term 'feminist' has differing connotations. Regarding this thread, I will at the very least agree that the gender pay gap myths is ridiculous and most women make less in general just because they work part time as they take care of babies, etc. It is stupid for some women to think that they should make as much as a man but for less hours of work, that's not equality, that's inequality. Society has this fallacious notion of 'equality' where everyone is supposed to be the exact same thing'. Equality in our society is if someone is 180cm, the person who is 150 gets a 30cm stool to be equal to the 180cm person, but the 180cm, person gets nothing. It almost attempts to throw out any genetic superiority which exists, and that's generally a really ignorant way of thinking.

The idea of pushing for equality (while a myth) is ok.

What gripes me is saying you want equality, then using myths to be blatantly sexist. At what point do we say "this isn't true, it's you trying to take power"?

 

[XRS]

Meaning what?

What does it being me have to do with the substance of the thread? Do you have any actual argument?

Yeah,I have an argument for ya
You have 90% of the base bored with the same thread or similar threads

 

[slimreaper]

Yeah,I have an argument for ya
You have 90% of the base bored with the same thread or similar threads

Yet they still come and comment though.

Can't argue the point so question the presenter. Typical need to silence those you don't agree with.

 

[The Great Second Hokage]

You must be registered for see links

Any answer for Christina hoff sommers? if this information was coming from a straight white male, it would be disregarded as myth

I'm confused why we allow these myths to permeate our society when they have no basis in fact.

Keep telling me feminists are for equality. The evidence is totally against you.

Feminism is about equality for all there is no denying that. Modern day feminists are where the problem lies....they lie, cheat and steal. Whats more is they don't think twice about destroying a mra member rally (Mens Rights Activists). The original feminists fought for both sides but won more for women because there was more to win. They are the heros and they deserve to be recognized. Fakes like Anita kasparian or whatever the hell her name is are nothing more than angry women jumping on generalizations and contorting quotes and stats to serve their own selfish needs.

But besides the point....feminism is supposed to be about equality.

 

[Punk Hazard]

It doen't pertain to this thread and frankly it's not realistic.

You are so far buried in the left that you think it's impossible for me to have these thoughts and not be trolling or attention seeking. I'm not embodying a need to be different im from an area and can remember a time when these were the thoughts, niw liberalism has taken control of american youth and it provides excellent intellectual stimulation for me.

There you go with the stereotypical i'm closed minded argument. You are just as closed minded but in leftist beliefs. I post a thread showing un deniable evils of modern feminism, yet you come here and praise it for something fake and trivial.

Concede the point as lost if you're so enlightened and open minded

It does pertain to this thread, as this thread is about feminism. You're attempting to dismiss it, I'm just showing the most recent effect of it that I have encountered.

The movie is about a man driving through a desert planet as he is pursued by tricked out monster trucks and cancerous war boys with a woman with a robot arm and mutated creatures, but that's unrealistic? The portrayal of the women is very realistic.

In one scene, after one of the wives have died during a chase from Immortan Joe(their capture), one of them breaks down and pleads with the others to just return to Joe to save their lives. This is a classic representation of how a person, when threatened with abuse, can end up going back to that source of abuse, such as when they're too scared of what their abusive partner will do if they left, so they stay out of fear. I'm not too brushed up on Stockholm Syndrome, but it makes sense to me that is one form; someone held captive ends up feeling a sense of dependence on their captor, especially when being away has become associated with threat and violence towards them. In this scene, and others before and after, the women find the resolve to escape and continuing fighting for their freedom with the mantra "We are not property." This ties into real-world movements for freedom, such as slavery in America and countries where *** slave trades are an issue. The women realize they have as much worth as any other human being, and fight for that worth to be recognized, which has happened countless times throughout the history of mankind. It is realistic in portraying not only the fight women have made throughout the years for their freedom, but the relentless fight every oppressed person has in the world, through these escaping women.

During scenes where they fight Immortan Joe's crusade, the women aren't idle stand-bys just waiting for the action to stop. It's not them relying on Max to save them. They regularly kill the men attacking them and defend themselves. Furiosa kills as many people as Max does, and is portrayed as a better shot with a sniper than he is. They are portrayed equally as drivers, and Max beats her in a fight because she got handicapped. When Max fell off the rig, she saved him by grabbing his leg, getting stabbed in the process. The women sharpshooted other men, and fend off men that tried to kidnap them. One of them was even clever enough to feign surrender, allowing herself to be taken to another section of vehicle by the would-be captors so that when he turned his back from her to get the others, she could help the wounded Furiosa back up to where she needed to go, outsmarting the man. They were vastly inferior to the men in strength, mechanical and fighting skill, but when armed properly and using their brains, able to go done what they needed(Didn't always work, one died and other was kidnapped during a crusade). The movie gave the women importance, which is, well, highly important as the world today doesn't work by men doing everything. In police stations, hospitals, law firms, accounting agencies, insurance agencies, armies, construction, it is men and women working TOGETHER, being valuable parts of the unit, which this movie represents VERY well. And it's all possible because of feminism, whereas without it, the women would just be damsels in distress who need Max to save them at every point of danger. THAT would be unrealistic.

That's what you say, but it's very clear that you just need attention. That's why you make threads that are garnered to reap in attention and replies, and when you don't get it, you either attack the people posting for not posting how you want or you spam more threads.

 

[XRS]

Yet they still come and comment though.

Can't argue the point so question the presenter. Typical need to silence those you don't agree with.

Uuhh yeah,i understand your frustration hamid

 

[slimreaper]

Feminism is about equality for all there is no denying that. Modern day feminists are where the problem lies....they lie, cheat and steal. Whats more is they don't think twice about destroying a mra member rally (Mens Rights Activists). The original feminists fought for both sides but won more for women because there was more to win. They are the heros and they deserve to be recognized. Fakes like Anita kasparian or whatever the hell her name is are nothing more than angry women jumping on generalizations and contorting quotes and stats to serve their own selfish needs.

But besides the point....feminism is supposed to be about equality.

The war is over they won. Feminism should just die

 

[Punk Hazard]

Feminism is stupid in terms of "everything should be equal but guys shouldn't hit girls" type of thing. Feminism is not stupid in terms of advocating for equality. Although the term 'feminist' has differing connotations. Regarding this thread, I will at the very least agree that the gender pay gap myths is ridiculous and most women make less in general just because they work part time as they take care of babies, etc. It is stupid for some women to think that they should make as much as a man but for less hours of work, that's not equality, that's inequality. Society has this fallacious notion of 'equality' where everyone is supposed to be the exact same thing'. Equality in our society is if someone is 180cm, the person who is 150 gets a 30cm stool to be equal to the 180cm person, but the 180cm, person gets nothing. It almost attempts to throw out any genetic superiority which exists, and that's generally a really ignorant way of thinking.

Equality isn't about everything having the same thing, it's about everyone having enough to survive on equal terms. If a fence is 200 cm tall, and a 180 cm and a 130 CM want to see over it, you give the 180 cm person a 30 cm stool and the 130 cm person an 80 meter stool. That is equality. There are some differences you just can't atone for, but there are some you can and those are the ones you should do. If you can already get the goal because you are 180 CM, you don't receive a stool while the 130 cm person does because you do not need it.

 

[Apêx1]

The idea of pushing for equality (while a myth) is ok.

What gripes me is saying you want equality, then using myths to be blatantly sexist. At what point do we say "this isn't true, it's you trying to take power"?

It's not a myth, some people do push for 'privilege' rather then equality but then there are others who do push for equality. Arab women who 'push for equality' are not a myth, they actually do want to be equals rather then inferiors. Even in Western society, there are some things which women have that men don't, and there are also things that men have that women don't. Women merely advocate it more actively, and then when they get what they want the go for privilege since they always want more.

I agree with you on that though, although the only thing that bothers me is women who always cry for equality and then resort to chivalrous principles.

Equality isn't about everything having the same thing, it's about everyone having enough to survive on equal terms. If a fence is 200 cm tall, and a 180 cm and a 130 CM want to see over it, you give the 180 cm person a 30 cm stool and the 130 cm person an 80 meter stool. That is equality. There are some differences you just can't atone for, but there are some you can and those are the ones you should do. If you can already get the goal because you are 180 CM, you don't receive a stool while the 130 cm person does because you do not need it.

That's besides the point. I was giving an example of what modern day 'equality' tends to be viewed as. The short guy gets a stool so that everyone can look like they are equal height wise. People don't want 'equality' in a sense of everyone being treated equally, it's more of a ""insert inferior genetics"" should get privilege for its shortcomings. The same women who go on protests for equality end up telling men "how dare you hit a women." It's actually really ironic. Women will never, ever be as strong as men. Ronda's grand daughter can carry a Silverback's genetics and regardless of what she does, regardless of who she calls out, any MMA fighter any number of divisions beneath her will knock her to the ground senseless. Female soccer always suggesting it is underpaid compared to men, even though female soccer is uninteresting and relatively unsupported in comparison to men's soccer. It will always, always, will be like this, regardless of how many women try to give themselves the privilege of being equally paid for providing less.

 

[Troyg39]

They still exist because most of them are still true to a very large degree, though it is also true that the "evidence" used grossly exaggerates the truth even further to fit political agendas. The biggest issues is the constant mixing and blurring of data meant from a broader perspective to try and explain a more specific context.

A good example of what I'm talking about is the very first myth.

Spoiler

Women are half the world’s population, working two-thirds of the world’s working hours, receiving 10% of the world’s income, owning less than 1% of the world’s property.

As the article pointed out, no global data exists to support this claim. The idea that women only own less than 1% land and make 10% of the world's income world-wide simply can't be concluded. But what's also troubling is that even the article too, is attempting to smear the truth by not acknowledging it's own inconsistencies.

Notice I bolded "world-wide", because this is meant to be a global statistic, yet you can find these statistics and others like it being used in US politics to explain US trends. US, being a vastly different nation compared to others, so you can't use US trends to explain Global trends and vise versa. So when the article uses a report on US men and women comparisons and concludes that "US women women alone earn 5.4% of the world's income today", it doesn't do anything to explain Global comparisons, since US women share far more economic liberties than women of other countries.

Even the other source they use to "bust" this myth done by Cheryl Doss, she notes clearly that while her data disproves the specific numbers of the myth, they still point to a disparity in land ownership among men and women. She provided data from several parts of Africa, and the percentage of women who solely own land in those areas is about 12% compared to men who solely own land at 31%.

The data for men is likely understated as well, as reviewing the data reveals that the percentage of men in who solely own land was not recorded for two countries, but it would likely be higher than women in those countries as it was in the others that were surveyed. Even if the data isn't adjusted to take out those two countries where the data for men wasn't recorded, men still come on top at 25%

Ofcorse you wouldn't know this without actually taking a look at the data the article provided. What's interesting is that the article used data that included joint ownership of land to try and debunk the myth when it stated "Yale economist Cheryl Doss found female land ownership ranged from 11% in Senegal to 54% in Rwanda and Burundi." Those numbers include joint ownership. It would've been a more accurate comparison to use the solely-owned data for a better comparison, yet the article chose not do do so, because it doesn't disprove the overall point, only the numbers.

There were inconsistencies with a few of the other myths as well, I won't get into them. The main lesson here is that while these problems are real, they vary depending on region, and we must be wary of those who use the problems elsewhere to explain domestic issues and those who skew and misuse evidence to unfairly distract us from these problems

 

[slimreaper]

They still exist because most of them are still true to a very large degree, though it is also true that the "evidence" used grossly exaggerates the truth even further to fit political agendas. The biggest issues is the constant mixing and blurring of data meant from a broader perspective to try and explain a more specific context.

A good example of what I'm talking about is the very first myth.

As the article pointed out, no global data exists to support this claim. The idea that women only own less than 1% land and make 10% of the world's income world-wide simply can't be concluded. But what's also troubling is that even the article too, is attempting to smear the truth by not acknowledging it's own inconsistencies.

Notice I bolded "world-wide", because this is meant to be a global statistic, yet you can find these statistics and others like it being used in US politics to explain US trends. US, being a vastly different nation compared to others, so you can't use US trends to explain Global trends and vise versa. So when the article uses a report on US men and women comparisons and concludes that "US women women alone earn 5.4% of the world's income today", it doesn't do anything to explain Global comparisons, since US women share far more economic liberties than women of other countries.

Even the other source they use to "bust" this myth done by Cheryl Doss, she notes clearly that while her data disproves the specific numbers of the myth, they still point to a disparity in land ownership among men and women. She provided data from several parts of Africa, and the percentage of women who solely own land in those areas is about 12% compared to men who solely own land at 31%.

The data for men is likely understated as well, as reviewing the data reveals that the percentage of men in who solely own land was not recorded for two countries, but it would likely be higher than women in those countries as it was in the others that were surveyed. Even if the data isn't adjusted to take out those two countries where the data for men wasn't recorded, men still come on top at 25%

Ofcorse you wouldn't know this without actually taking a look at the data the article provided. What's interesting is that the article used data that included joint ownership of land to try and debunk the myth when it stated "Yale economist Cheryl Doss found female land ownership ranged from 11% in Senegal to 54% in Rwanda and Burundi." Those numbers include joint ownership. It would've been a more accurate comparison to use the solely-owned data for a better comparison, yet the article chose not do do so, because it doesn't disprove the overall point, only the numbers.

There were inconsistencies with a few of the other myths as well, I won't get into them. The main lesson here is that while these problems are real, they vary depending on region, and we must be wary of those who use the problems elsewhere to explain domestic issues and those who skew and misuse evidence to unfairly distract us from these problems

I never said feminism wasn't needed on a global scale.


Monitary figures can translate to a global scsle though. If American women own 5% of the worlds total estimated wealth, the rest of the worlds females would only need to own 10% of their countries wealth (just a rough guess) to make it above the oft quoted 10%.

Find me any people in the world who are evenly represented across any spectrum when it comes to wealth/land accumulation. If the world largest feminist grievance is that all land is split 50/50 between the sexes, then we'll be alright.

The first quote is the most generalized. I would love to hear your grievances with the others

 

[Punk Hazard]

It's not a myth, some people do push for 'privilege' rather then equality but then there are others who do push for equality. Arab women who 'push for equality' are not a myth, they actually do want to be equals rather then inferiors. Even in Western society, there are some things which women have that men don't, and there are also things that men have that women don't. Women merely advocate it more actively, and then when they get what they want the go for privilege since they always want more.

I agree with you on that though, although the only thing that bothers me is women who always cry for equality and then resort to chivalrous principles.



That's besides the point. I was giving an example of what modern day 'equality' tends to be viewed as. The short guy gets a stool so that everyone can look like they are equal height wise. People don't want 'equality' in a sense of everyone being treated equally, it's more of a ""insert inferior genetics"" should get privilege for its shortcomings. The same women who go on protests for equality end up telling men "how dare you hit a women." It's actually really ironic. Women will never, ever be as strong as men. Ronda's grand daughter can carry a Silverback's genetics and regardless of what she does, regardless of who she calls out, any MMA fighter any number of divisions beneath her will knock her to the ground senseless. Female soccer always suggesting it is underpaid compared to men, even though female soccer is uninteresting and relatively unsupported in comparison to men's soccer. It will always, always, will be like this, regardless of how many women try to give themselves the privilege of being equally paid for providing less.

That's because there are multiple forms of equality. There is equality in the sense that people are treated equally, and equality like the shorter guy getting a stool. Like I said, there are some advantages you can account for, and some you can't. On the train to University, I always wondered they constantly called out every stop when people there are this time are people who frequent the train route, and it hit me because of blind people. They can't see the stop names or read the signs, so they call it out and the train color and route so blind people can use the train just as much as people who can see. Then there are seats on trains and buses that are reserved for old, disabled or pregnant people. That's another form of disadvantage being lessened because it's needed. There was a time when human beings said "Well, you have that disadvantage, sucks for you, you'll fall behind." We have passed that. We don't live as "survival of the fittest" and that's not a bad thing because that view is highly antiquated. People have genetic, physical and mental disadvantages, and it's a good thing that we try our best to ensure these people get the same out of life and the same opportunities as people who don't have these disadvantages as much as possible.

You're also intensely generalizing. Are there people who smudge the name of feminism? Yes, but these people aren't actually feminists. Anyone who only points that men shouldn't hit women without pointing out that no one should be hitting anyone isn't actually a feminist, they are mislabeling themselves. You have a responsibility, when you start discussing the topic, to see that this person isn't actually a part of the group they claim to be in, and to know that they do not represent the group.

Soccer, or any professional sport, is a horrible example to debunk wage gap arguments. Sports are a revenue based income system; you get paid for what you bring in. Are the people who complain about female soccer players getting paid less wrong? Yeah, that's not how their income worked. But you're insinuating that women always provide less, which just isn't the case.

 

[Avani]

OK we got it.The only valid analysis, statements and facts and their analyses are the ones Slimreaper posts. Be it about race problems society- the American way of life from 60s, feminists and rapes.

From what you have been advocating for days I get the idea that-

Women need to have no voting or property rights and no option for divorce. University education is already a waste and there you go doubling employment chances for men in one sweep.

Also women should work since working is basic human right but they should not get paid for it and shouldn't be allowed to abort even if her own life is danger since her life doesn't matter anyway. She signed it off the moment she had ***. Female rapists shouldn't be allowed to ask for child maintenance but a rapist having rights of parental visitation for his child born out of rape which is legal in many states is just fine. She needs to suck it up.

( No I don't think it's fair that a rapist gets paid but it's hard to guess why the court ordered it since no body gives that detail and I found rapists do have visitation rights in US in 31 states and somehow this never comes up)

And yeah- consent factor from the law of rape should be abolished since rapist gave his consent and that's enough. See no rapes anywhere anymore. Another problem vanished.

Black- I forgot what ere the details about them according to you- I'm sure other may make a list.

What's next?

 

[Punk Hazard]

OK we got it.The only valid analysis, statements and facts and their analyses are the ones Slimreaper posts. Be it about race problems society- the American way of life from 60s, feminists and rapes.

From what you have been advocating for days I get the idea that-

So women need to have no voting or property rights and no option for divorce. University education is already a waste and there you go doubling employment chances for me in one sweep. They should work but not expect to be paid and shouldn't be allowed to abort- Female rapists shouldn't be allowed to ask for child maintenance but a rapist having rights of parental visitation for his child born out of rape which is legal in many states is just fine. She needs to suck it up.


And yeah- consent factor from the law of rape should be abolished since rapist gave his consent and that's enough. See no rapes anywhere anymore. Another problem vanished.


Black- I forgot what ere the details about them according to you- I'm sure other may make a list.
What's next?

Don't forget you can lock yourself in your car with your kid and smoke till the sun sets. Also, give everyone a gun. No waiting period, no restraints, because the dentist at the end of your street just needs a machine gun.

 

[slimreaper]

That's because there are multiple forms of equality. There is equality in the sense that people are treated equally, and equality like the shorter guy getting a stool. Like I said, there are some advantages you can account for, and some you can't. On the train to University, I always wondered they constantly called out every stop when people there are this time are people who frequent the train route, and it hit me because of blind people. They can't see the stop names or read the signs, so they call it out and the train color and route so blind people can use the train just as much as people who can see. Then there are seats on trains and buses that are reserved for old, disabled or pregnant people. That's another form of disadvantage being lessened because it's needed. There was a time when human beings said "Well, you have that disadvantage, sucks for you, you'll fall behind." We have passed that. We don't live as "survival of the fittest" and that's not a bad thing because that view is highly antiquated. People have genetic, physical and mental disadvantages, and it's a good thing that we try our best to ensure these people get the same out of life and the same opportunities as people who don't have these disadvantages as much as possible.

You're also intensely generalizing. Are there people who smudge the name of feminism? Yes, but these people aren't actually feminists. Anyone who only points that men shouldn't hit women without pointing out that no one should be hitting anyone isn't actually a feminist, they are mislabeling themselves. You have a responsibility, when you start discussing the topic, to see that this person isn't actually a part of the group they claim to be in, and to know that they do not represent the group.

Soccer, or any professional sport, is a horrible example to debunk wage gap arguments. Sports are a revenue based income system; you get paid for what you bring in. Are the people who complain about female soccer players getting paid less wrong? Yeah, that's not how their income worked. But you're insinuating that women always provide less, which just isn't the case.

I'll start with the old "they aren't real feminists" myth. It has deeply permeated society now that feminists say and do these things. The definition has clearly changed, so maybe you aren't the real feminist.

There is a difference between helping the inferiir, and intentionally hindering the success of others. Providing special advantages to certain people in the name of equality of results does nothing but weaken society. Men have proven time and again that they are superior in the fields of math and science than women. Trying to see equal representation only takes a spot from the gender with the better track record. Earn what you get.


And for gods sake stop treating equality like a zero sum game. It's not, it never will be

 

[Avani]

Don't forget you can lock yourself in your car with your kid and smoke till the sun sets. Also, give everyone a gun. No waiting period, no restraints, because the dentist at the end of your street just needs a machine gun.

I will but let me buy those anti rape pants first. Someone might claim "lack of it" meant consent.

 

[slimreaper]

OK we got it.The only valid analysis, statements and facts and their analyses are the ones Slimreaper posts. Be it about race problems society- the American way of life from 60s, feminists and rapes.

From what you have been advocating for days I get the idea that-

Women need to have no voting or property rights and no option for divorce. University education is already a waste and there you go doubling employment chances for men in one sweep.

Also women should work since working is basic human right but they should not get paid for it and shouldn't be allowed to abort even if her own life is danger since her life doesn't matter anyway. She signed it off the moment she had ***. Female rapists shouldn't be allowed to ask for child maintenance but a rapist having rights of parental visitation for his child born out of rape which is legal in many states is just fine. She needs to suck it up.

( No I don't think it's fair that a rapist gets paid but it's hard to guess why the court ordered it since no body gives that detail and I found rapists do have visitation rights in US in 31 states and somehow this never comes up)

And yeah- consent factor from the law of rape should be abolished since rapist gave his consent and that's enough. See no rapes anywhere anymore. Another problem vanished.

Black- I forgot what ere the details about them according to you- I'm sure other may make a list.

What's next?

Great way to take the things I say and generalize them. Go ahead disprove the actual points i've made on these topics and not an oversimplified caricature. I get the point you are trying to make, but instead of arguing with facts and figures, you got all allegorical. That's the wrong way to go about it.

 

[Troyg39]

I never said feminism wasn't needed on a global scale.

I never said you did. Nothing in my comment referred to anything about you specifically. Chill

Monitary figures can translate to a global scsle though. If American women own 5% of the worlds total estimated wealth, the rest of the worlds females would only need to own 10% of their countries wealth (just a rough guess) to make it above the oft quoted 10%.

No. You have to remember this is a comparison of men to women globally. For starters, the majority of global wealth is owned by a very small number of countries, US being among the wealthiest, which inflates the income of US women compared to the majority of the world, and not just the majority of women in other countries.

In addition to a vastly disproportionate income in other countries compared to the US, with income level of women in these countries is not only lower in comparison due to their country's income level, but there are culture differences that keep women from being able to earn nearly as much as women in the US, let alone men in their own countries. And again, this is still a comparison to men who do in fact outnumber women globally almost 2 to 1, which lowers that number even further. I'm curious as to what you based your rough guess on.

The first quote is the most generalized. I would love to hear your grievances with the others

I don't have any grievances. I'm simply intelligent enough to access statistical data due to our country's wonderful education system, something I feel you're intelligent enough to do as well. So I do not wish to do the footwork for you if you don't mind, but if present something specific about the link (something I haven't seen you do yet) I will be more than happy to respond to it from as best of an unbiased standpoint as I can