what is feminism?

quote:

---

There was a time when only women needed a voice as they gained equal footing. But that time has passed, feminism has overstayed its welcome, and most people I talk with agree.

---

Can we be sure that the people you talk with all reasonable people?

quote:

---

I've yet to have a teacher (aside from my two feminist professors) who didn't think that "fair sex" language use was just utter crap (which it is).

---

This is a pointless revelation, since a teacher who thinks that fair sex language ISN'T utter crap is naturally a feminist (or at least a feminist sympathiser, but maybe that counts as being a feminist).

quote:

---

Others I meet think feminists are just whiny no-gooders.

---

Who are these people? Another pointless revelation. You have commited the famous informal fallacy of an appeal to some divs that you know.

quote:

---

I can't figure it out either... and I am somewhat left to believe that it could be the reason Nems posted in his reply to my original message in the other thread: penis envy.

---

There we have it, the definitive refutation of the feminist agenda: they hate men because they wish they had penises. Fallacy - being crazy.

Wouldn't that be phallusy? I'd be interested in hearing how many AREN'T boys under the age of 21.

Okay, time for me to weigh in on this feminism issue. At one time I was all for equal rights and all. I used to think that women should be able to do everything men do, like not wear shirts and think about sex constantly, but that was before they took this equal rights thing too far. I mean, there are limits, you know? I can put up with a token woman here and a quota woman there, so Carolyn Porco of Cassini fame (Nasa mission to Saturn) is okay because she shows great astronomy pictures, plus she's really cute, and Rebecca Watson of Skepchick (Skepchick) is really great because she puts out the annual calendar of sexy scientists (some are men, but I skip those months), but now smart women are starting to turn up everywhere, like as my boss, my governor, and even my wife! Enough's enough, I say. This is starting to get intimidating. Men's egos are in danger. Rally round, men, and stop this nascent movement before it destroys us all!--Percy

No need to buy the cow when the milk is free.No need to own a penis when you can borrow one.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Nearly all my friends and people I associate with (95% of them) are females.

quote:

---

jon's "hypocrites" claim may be related to the common claim that while women want to be paid and respected like men, they still want allowances to be made for their femininity

You mean the way men have allowances made for their masculinity?

---

So men and women aren't really equal?

I'm talking to you as someone who's rebutting the arguments you've offered in support of academic feminism.You, on the other hand, have always seem to insisted on talking to me like I'm someone who doesn't know shit from Shinola. That's great. You're joined in that by everybody else here - since nobody said that. Oddly enough, she's even more contemptuous of ivory-tower academic feminists who do more to retard women's progress than to accelerate it than I am, if that's even possible.

Well, they're certainly not identical. The vast, vast majority of violent crime is committed by men, for instance.Yet, we just allow for that. We don't make any particular effort to deal with the fact that the single greatest predictor for your participation in a violent act is your gender. Hell, if you're a rapist, even though 95%+ of rapes are committed by men, and 1 in 4 women will be raped in their lifetime, the courts will make the allowance for your gender and assume that your testimony about the woman's consent for sex is on an equal evidentiary basis as her own.It's called "he said she said", but what it really means is "we're privileging male testimony, even though it's clearly of little probative value since it's offered in self-interest." I mean, no shit the rapist is going to say "oh, yeah, it was totally consensual; she just liked it rough." Amazing how there's all these women who like "rough sex" with strangers, yet no woman I know would even entertain the idea.

Jon, are you planning to actually address any of the rebuttals to your statements, answer any of the questions people have asked you, or in any way engage in an exchange of ideas in this thread?

depends on your meaning of the word support. if including in the argument at all means support, then sure. but clearly your contempt for academia doesn't stop at academic feminists, since i'm neither an academic feminist nor really a feminist.

he wasn't interested in a discussion. and with good reason. those who are interested in discussion you berate for being on the wrong side of right.he was venting. he already said that. move on.

quote:

---

since i'm neither an academic feminist nor really a feminist.

---

You don't think that women should have full access and be able to fully participate in all aspects of society?

quote:

---

he wasn't interested in a discussion. and with good reason. those who are interested in discussion you berate for being on the wrong side of right.

---

If you aren't prepared to defend your views, and your feelings are easily hurt when people disagree with you, then perhaps you might consider not presenting said views on an internet debate board.

quote:

---

he was venting. he already said that. move on.

---

He was venting on that other thread.This thread isn't for venting, it is for discussion of his notions of feminism. He can participate or not if he so chooses.Also, you don't get to tell me what to do.If you don't want to participate, you move on.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

i think i've decided people should have to earn their access to society. most women i've met are complete morons and thus would be unable to earn such access. not that men are any better.so i guess, sure. they should be equally disadvantaged in their positions.but no, i'm not a feminist. personally, i'm a misanthrope. professionally, i'm interested in ensuring legal access. it makes more sense than you think. since so many people are complete twats, it should follow that they would be terribly poor at ensuring the best rulers of whatever variety. as such, the most reasonable argument is to ensure the most choice in governmentand the most protections from it because, while the government will still be incompetent as it is run by people, it will be less unmanagable than an incompetent government run by one person who cannot be selected or removed.but then i'm also much more compassionate than all that. it's really a very difficult spot i find myself in, to think that people must be protected and cared for and yet to know that for so many it's a complete waste.

they aren't my views. my only contention is that it's dishonest, unfeminist, and fundamentalist to say that all these people simply don't matter just because you don't like what they say. then stop goading him. mehmehmehmehmehEdited by brennakimi, : No reason given.