Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine #votebluenomatterwhat are you having fun al? are you having van al? gaolang>jurota i refuse to pay my taxes imagine thinking trump is the good guy is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? it's over for trump life goal sister harem loli mfw kamala harris can actually win tax is the best thing ever happened to us they tried to kill trump because he's the good guy trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you worst thread ever
Are we back on the lie train again ? You guy didn't had enough this morning ?
You are the only one here sayin that mate.
Women know what they want. It doesn't mean that women can't promote the standards favored by patriarchy. You might be surprised the day you discover that women can be sexist against women.
It's 95% of the critics, I'm not the one putting weight on them, it's simply what they are.
Nah, the guy has only some good traits of positive masculinity you are right. The rest seems to be a shared very toxic relationship.
Welp.. you guys are the one who are hyperfocusing on the moments where men show their abs...
That's because you don't understand the context of pro fems. Pro fems often fall in the biases that women are all wonderfull at first. Believing in a fallacious version of feminism. But at the end this biased actually turned to serve their own interest.
They adopt a fallacious pro feminist version of the struggle, but they will tend to exclude themselve from the problem or individualize the problem.
I was like that at the beginning of feminist. I indeed thought that women were had better inherant qualities than men. But this was a fallacious way of seeing feminism and this only served my interest.
Since then, I learned how to include myself in the problem both individually and structurally.
Yes it does. The negative vision of men on men is deeply linked to their experience of masculinity under patriarchy.
Again. it's a myth :
- [STUDY] - The myth of misandry of feminist debunked - Six studies explain that feminists DON'T hate men
(once against, all the answers are in The Leftist Library)
Again, do a poll. I'm opened to be proven wrong.
I thought you were ignoring me
You are the only one here sayin that mate.
Women know what they want. It doesn't mean that women can't promote the standards favored by patriarchy. You might be surprised the day you discover that women can be sexist against women.
It's 95% of the critics, I'm not the one putting weight on them, it's simply what they are.
Nah, the guy has only some good traits of positive masculinity you are right. The rest seems to be a shared very toxic relationship.
Welp.. you guys are the one who are hyperfocusing on the moments where men show their abs...
That's because you don't understand the context of pro fems. Pro fems often fall in the biases that women are all wonderfull at first. Believing in a fallacious version of feminism. But at the end this biased actually turned to serve their own interest.
They adopt a fallacious pro feminist version of the struggle, but they will tend to exclude themselve from the problem or individualize the problem.
I was like that at the beginning of feminist. I indeed thought that women were had better inherant qualities than men. But this was a fallacious way of seeing feminism and this only served my interest.
Since then, I learned how to include myself in the problem both individually and structurally.
Yes it does. The negative vision of men on men is deeply linked to their experience of masculinity under patriarchy.
Again. it's a myth :
- [STUDY] - The myth of misandry of feminist debunked - Six studies explain that feminists DON'T hate men
(once against, all the answers are in The Leftist Library)
Lmao Logiko is so fucking clueless when it comes to women I think he's just so far up his bubble. I read a couple of those books with my GF and let me tell you, the author makes sure you understand how well built the guy is, and how tight his clothes hug his body 
I thought you were ignoring me
They promote those standards because they like them as well...
I'm not hyperfocusing on it. I said women like it and you disagreed. If you go back to my original comment I even gave some validity to the female gaze argument, I just though the whole "women don't enjoy muscular men" is stupid and so contrary to what normal women like.
Thanks for clarifying what you meant, but overall the effect is not limited to these "profem" men, it is a societal wide effect.
1. I did not say feminism as a whole so you keep trying to pigeon hole me.
2. Your own study agrees there's holes in the studies when it comes to radfems who are unabashedly anti men at times, to the point where they hate transwomen because "they are men"
I'm not hyperfocusing on it. I said women like it and you disagreed. If you go back to my original comment I even gave some validity to the female gaze argument, I just though the whole "women don't enjoy muscular men" is stupid and so contrary to what normal women like.
Thanks for clarifying what you meant, but overall the effect is not limited to these "profem" men, it is a societal wide effect.
1. I did not say feminism as a whole so you keep trying to pigeon hole me.
2. Your own study agrees there's holes in the studies when it comes to radfems who are unabashedly anti men at times, to the point where they hate transwomen because "they are men"
Is tit for tat really the way we should be approaching this? This is about now - not then. Besides, there were plenty of women who also believed in the same values back then. It was a product of it's time.
Heck, even Queen Victoria; lauded as the ruler of the Empire, said this on Feminism:
I'd say the above shows it was somewhat a product of it's time (as I said above); rather than a concerted effort to re-educate. You could try to argue the same for the present, but the fact that we have agencies who try to make things "more inclusive" in modern day society is proof of a minor attempt to re-educate.
I am -not- saying there was never an attempt to keep women down, but values change in time. Many believed in them, both men and women. Nowadays, it would be facetious to claim there aren't dogmatic "educators" who try to "re-educate" men/whites/"Cis" people/etc, which was my point. I was not saying it never happened in the past.
Heck, even Queen Victoria; lauded as the ruler of the Empire, said this on Feminism:
I'd say the above shows it was somewhat a product of it's time (as I said above); rather than a concerted effort to re-educate. You could try to argue the same for the present, but the fact that we have agencies who try to make things "more inclusive" in modern day society is proof of a minor attempt to re-educate.
I am -not- saying there was never an attempt to keep women down, but values change in time. Many believed in them, both men and women. Nowadays, it would be facetious to claim there aren't dogmatic "educators" who try to "re-educate" men/whites/"Cis" people/etc, which was my point. I was not saying it never happened in the past.
Post automatically merged:
you believe in cryptids?
“A world where everyone is equal and receives the same treatment. No such place exists. If there was a world of equality, where talent and aptitude didn’t matter, we would all be equally snubbed there.”
Or As I'd like to put it, If this world was truly Equal, then everyone should receive a cold reception from it.
"I'm not insulting people, how dare you accuse me of insulting people."
*Insults People*
Or As I'd like to put it, If this world was truly Equal, then everyone should receive a cold reception from it.
Post automatically merged:
"I'm not insulting people, how dare you accuse me of insulting people."
*Insults People*
Last edited:
Though 100% equality in everything is impossible and never succeeded, the equality that we mainly strive for is equality in speech, expression, opportunity and rights. Those can be achieved at any time.
To be more accurate, it's "It's not an insult. It's a fact/logical conclusion based on objective observation."
To be more accurate, it's "It's not an insult. It's a fact/logical conclusion based on objective observation."
Sure, I'm waiting for the poll to be wrong.
That's not what the female gaze is. I didn't say that women don't enjoy muscular men. I said that it is not what women like to seek in fiction to get the same form of excitement toward men protagonist as men do for women.
Like I said, a lot of women like muscular men and it's ok.
Yes indeed. You need to understand that pro-fem do not become pro-fem because there is a bunch of bad thinking feminist men. Profem are a reality because of a structural and political reason. I actually learned that quite late myself (just a few years ago).
Let's say that you have a very bad vision of feminism and you think feminists hate men. Well if you have this ideology it's usually because you are also agreeing with a lot of other various political values and beliefs that relates to that vision of activists and "wokes" or "SJW". Usually, when that's the case, you are a rightist and therefore have quite a few liberal values.
Now, let's say that you start to be curious about those movement and start to understand that those women are not really "crazy", but simply angry in front of a structural problem that is patriarchy.. Well, you start to adopt a more progressive approach, you lean toward the left BUT the problem is that at this moment you didn't get rid of your other rightist beliefs about meritocratie and liberalism.. so, you will adopt a individualist approach.
When that's the case, men will think that to stop patriarchy, they have to "deconstruct" themselves. This mindset is pushed by all the values of self-development that are linked to liberal and meritocratic beliefs. The problem is that.. since those men (and I was like that too at a time) consider that they must deconstruct themselve, they also consider that once the job done, they will not be a problem for women and therefore they will not participate in patriarchy no longer.µ
And that's a fundamental problem. Because when we are leftist, we are also materialist, and we understand the powers of structure and domination. We understand the social reality of systemic problems such as patriarchy and we understand that just removing a few bad behavior or adopting a more positive masculinity will not stop men from participating in patriarchy. Patriarchy is a system of domination that is everywhere and is integrated inside the smallest bits of our education. So it's impossible for someone who was educated under patriarchy to magically stop having sexist bias. Patriarchy is by essence a system of domination of men over women where men are benefiting from it. So by nature, men will be in a position of domination as long as we will not get rid of the system in its every forms.
And that's the problem with pro-fems. Since they believe they are deconstructed, they use their deconstruction as a way to appear better than other men but they don't realize that a lot of their sexist biases remains and you will have therefore a lot of cases where pro-fems teaches to feminists how to militates or invisibilize the words of women. It's very common.
I'm not either, the concept of rad feminist hating men is a myth. Trust me, I've talked to the most radical feminist you can see on the planets (only the violent ones would be more radical) and I've never see those women hate men.
They hate problematic men, sure. But never men in general EVEN when they call themselve "misandric". The hate of the opposite gender is an incel thing reserved to men.
Of course, you will always have 1 or 2 person that are lunatics. But they are not enough for it to be pertinent to talk about them.
Those are not rad fem, but rather trans exclusionnist radical feminist. Those people do not hate men per say, they are rather conservatist, they hate trans people. As they think some men are hidding themselve to rape women.
But as I said, they do exist. They are just not numerous enough for it to be pertinent to talk about in a discussion about feminism. (those persons are not feminists in any ways)
As I said, some women like that. It's just not a majority. Sadly I can't find back the study I shared about that subject last year.
Hm.. no? if you are afraid of accusation, the problem is you, not women.
Once again: Leftist Liberary >>
WHY WE NEED TO BELIEVE ALL VICTIMS :
- [ARTICLE] - Why its VITAL to believe ALL victims - IMPORTANT
- [WIKIPEDIA] - An overview of false accusations of rape
- [STUDY] - False accusation of rape are between 4 to 9 %
- [VIDEO] - The big problem of the blaming of victims of rape in India (you can extend the problem to the entire world)
- [VIDEO] - We need to believe victims !
- [ARTICLE] - Believing Survivors Of Sexual Assault Does Not Equal A "Guilty" Verdict
That's a caricature of an real equal world.
Welcome mate, you are on a forum where people will reply to you.
That's the words of someone who gave up trying.
That's not what the female gaze is. I didn't say that women don't enjoy muscular men. I said that it is not what women like to seek in fiction to get the same form of excitement toward men protagonist as men do for women.
Like I said, a lot of women like muscular men and it's ok.
Yes indeed. You need to understand that pro-fem do not become pro-fem because there is a bunch of bad thinking feminist men. Profem are a reality because of a structural and political reason. I actually learned that quite late myself (just a few years ago).
Let's say that you have a very bad vision of feminism and you think feminists hate men. Well if you have this ideology it's usually because you are also agreeing with a lot of other various political values and beliefs that relates to that vision of activists and "wokes" or "SJW". Usually, when that's the case, you are a rightist and therefore have quite a few liberal values.
Now, let's say that you start to be curious about those movement and start to understand that those women are not really "crazy", but simply angry in front of a structural problem that is patriarchy.. Well, you start to adopt a more progressive approach, you lean toward the left BUT the problem is that at this moment you didn't get rid of your other rightist beliefs about meritocratie and liberalism.. so, you will adopt a individualist approach.
When that's the case, men will think that to stop patriarchy, they have to "deconstruct" themselves. This mindset is pushed by all the values of self-development that are linked to liberal and meritocratic beliefs. The problem is that.. since those men (and I was like that too at a time) consider that they must deconstruct themselve, they also consider that once the job done, they will not be a problem for women and therefore they will not participate in patriarchy no longer.µ
And that's a fundamental problem. Because when we are leftist, we are also materialist, and we understand the powers of structure and domination. We understand the social reality of systemic problems such as patriarchy and we understand that just removing a few bad behavior or adopting a more positive masculinity will not stop men from participating in patriarchy. Patriarchy is a system of domination that is everywhere and is integrated inside the smallest bits of our education. So it's impossible for someone who was educated under patriarchy to magically stop having sexist bias. Patriarchy is by essence a system of domination of men over women where men are benefiting from it. So by nature, men will be in a position of domination as long as we will not get rid of the system in its every forms.
And that's the problem with pro-fems. Since they believe they are deconstructed, they use their deconstruction as a way to appear better than other men but they don't realize that a lot of their sexist biases remains and you will have therefore a lot of cases where pro-fems teaches to feminists how to militates or invisibilize the words of women. It's very common.
I'm not either, the concept of rad feminist hating men is a myth. Trust me, I've talked to the most radical feminist you can see on the planets (only the violent ones would be more radical) and I've never see those women hate men.
They hate problematic men, sure. But never men in general EVEN when they call themselve "misandric". The hate of the opposite gender is an incel thing reserved to men.
Of course, you will always have 1 or 2 person that are lunatics. But they are not enough for it to be pertinent to talk about them.
Those are not rad fem, but rather trans exclusionnist radical feminist. Those people do not hate men per say, they are rather conservatist, they hate trans people. As they think some men are hidding themselve to rape women.
But as I said, they do exist. They are just not numerous enough for it to be pertinent to talk about in a discussion about feminism. (those persons are not feminists in any ways)
As I said, some women like that. It's just not a majority. Sadly I can't find back the study I shared about that subject last year.
Hm.. no? if you are afraid of accusation, the problem is you, not women.
Once again: Leftist Liberary >>
WHY WE NEED TO BELIEVE ALL VICTIMS :
- [ARTICLE] - Why its VITAL to believe ALL victims - IMPORTANT
- [WIKIPEDIA] - An overview of false accusations of rape
- [STUDY] - False accusation of rape are between 4 to 9 %
- [VIDEO] - The big problem of the blaming of victims of rape in India (you can extend the problem to the entire world)
- [VIDEO] - We need to believe victims !
- [ARTICLE] - Believing Survivors Of Sexual Assault Does Not Equal A "Guilty" Verdict
That's a caricature of an real equal world.
Welcome mate, you are on a forum where people will reply to you.
That's the words of someone who gave up trying.
Lol What a vomit of reasoning.
No C4N the gymnastics stretching that could make even Luffy jealous is you.
There simply isn't enough money in the world to make everybody rich, that's an impossibility, especially when we already have upwards to 8ish Billion people on this Planet https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/. This Utopia you think can happen is a fantasy pipe dream.
You'd be stepping on people's toes regardless.
People will always try to cling to whatever power they can get.
Whether it's Equalibrium, Fahrenheit 451 1984 whatever structure used to create some sort of society will always end in oppression or an unequalness.
You are a tiny amoeba in vast ocean, whatever you do will not move anything, Literal Insignifance.
No C4N the gymnastics stretching that could make even Luffy jealous is you.
There simply isn't enough money in the world to make everybody rich, that's an impossibility, especially when we already have upwards to 8ish Billion people on this Planet https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/. This Utopia you think can happen is a fantasy pipe dream.
You'd be stepping on people's toes regardless.
People will always try to cling to whatever power they can get.
Whether it's Equalibrium, Fahrenheit 451 1984 whatever structure used to create some sort of society will always end in oppression or an unequalness.
You are a tiny amoeba in vast ocean, whatever you do will not move anything, Literal Insignifance.
Last edited: