AAAAAAANYWAAAAAAY!!

MA PATRIARCHA!!

You guys failed to meet the internet quota of insults and profanation, I’m sending this to the international consul of internet discussions were they will fine you all accordingly to your politeness.
 
I’m back, their official response was “Yer a poop face lol”.

@Joseph Raszagal  
I can explain my antipathy against this 3d wave of feminism quite well.  
When you teach classes of students that being white and being male conveys levels privilege without any evidence(Gender-studies class), when they are told not to question it but to listen and believe, when they are given extra grades in class for showing to rallies decrying people who are talking about male-suicide as woman-haters and their conversation to be about hatespeech(University of Toronto protest), When you sing “cry me a river” to a man who watched his best friend commit suicide(lookin’ at big red here), that’s when I hate what these people do.
 
This might be a semantic thing, but I don’t hate people. I hate what they do, I hate what they represent, or what they say, but I don’t hate the person himself.  
I don’t just focus on the negative aspect when I ask “what do you stand for, and why?” I want to know their motivations, their thought-process. I want to understand their position as completely as possible before even levelling even a minute judgement.
 
But where do you draw the line between extremism, mentally unwell and indoctrinated?  
The thing I worry about most with regard to this wave of feminism is that these people have entire classes lined up to explain why white men are all racist, all sexist, all homophobic, you name it. They controll large swathes of the media, academia and hold considerable social standing. These are teachers that are indoctrinating classrooms full of impressionable students, and who will not even accept the possibility that there might be desenting voices.  
Any different opinions are immidiately branded as hatespeech to be stamped out.
 
That is not to say that there are no feminists that I agree with. Cathy Young and Christina Sommers are two feminists that I do not always agree with, but that I have deep deep respect for. So my hatred to towards the ideology that is called “feminism” is not a blind hate. It’s not all-encompassing. It’s just the current frankfurt-school of feminism that is so toxic that it actively endangers men and boys in the western world. the UVA rape-case is a prime example of this. Or the Rolling Stone article about College Rape-culture.

@Joseph Raszagal  
You also should ask who is calling who sexists, racists, homophobic, ect. and why?
 
what I’ve seen the most is a lot of these people just call people these things to discredit them, and gain some moral high ground while spouting incredibly sexist and racist ideas and views. Such as women are too weak to think for themselves without ideology of feminism. Men can only be abusers unless they convert to feminism and be “allies” while they’re undermined and treated like garbage at every turn and when asked what about their feelings they’re told “ Suck it up. Get used to it.”

@Raithial
 
Um…
 
Because I don’t know how to form a proper reply here, I’ll instead remind that I did mention extremest views in my first post. This is important. Because extremism often overlaps with insane.
 
Anyone that has… well… that many ideological followings probably doesn’t have a sane mind to begin with. I just wanted to mention that, even though I know that’s not where you were going with it. Of course nobody has that many maladies.
 
But in the aspect of any of them, I still hear where you’re coming from. “Where do you come from?”
 
The only question that I myself always ask is, “Where does your hate come from?”
 
This is one of the most difficult questions to ask someone whom clings onto ideas like sexism, racism, homophobia, or nationalism. Why the hate, yo?

@Joseph Raszagal  
As much as I appreciate being polite about things, there does come a point where honesty has to come about.  
I’m not going to start anything in particular, but I am also not a fan of sugarcoating things.  
I won’t go in depth about this subject, because doing so would keep me typing a post so long that the Derpibooru-website couldn’t handle to upload it, so I’ll leave it at this statement.  
When someone comes to me, and tells me that they are an MRA, Feminist, Scientologist, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Egalitarian, Anarchist, Neo-nazi or affiliates with any other large group, I ask two things: “What do you stand for personally, and why.”  
Reason being that such labels are kind of meaningless untill you know the interpretation that the specific person you’re talking to has of the subject he is talking about.  
If you must call me anything call me a person, and then we can talk about what I truly believe.

@angrybrony
 
I appreciate it. Staying cool is paramount, after all. If we devolve into another silly argument, it pretty much destroys that which we’re actually arguing about.

@Joseph Raszagal  
fine i’m not going to start anything

I see something possibly starting. Possibly.
 
Let’s not let it start, bros.
 
We’ve been perfectly polite for the past few posts. Let’s stay that way. You know, just in cast it could eventually start.

@angrybrony  
John Oliver’s anecdote about a women going back to work after giving birth. Since I didn’t see any proof this is real, and I doubt Oliver provided any I’m ignoring it.
 
Which a lot of progressive use anecdotal evidence to make push their narrative.

@Cyborg_pony  
>What is presented without evidence, and be refuted without evidence. Which a lot of these progressives like John loath because they’d rather people “listen and believe”
 
the fuck are you talking about?

@Joseph Raszagal  
It’s not a great concept that shouldn’t work at all. It’s a dogmatic principal to indoctrinate people and keep them from using thought in a cult. If someone said to you
 
“Hey, don’t eat/watch/play that. It’ll make you a rapist/schoolshoooter/misogynist. Don’t think about, just listen and believe me.”
 
Would you? I wouldn’t. Even in science, if we had just “Listen and Believed” Galileo when he said the sun was the center of the universe, we wouldn’t know that that isn’t the case. We just sit there and say “Nope. Galileo told us the sun being the center, not that we just be one system in an entire galaxy of billions. Don’t you listen and believe?”

@Joseph Raszagal  
“listen and believe” is never a good concept though…  
I’ve never liked this idea from the start, it’s the sort of thing cult-leaders would say. It’s the sort of thing Scientologists would say.

@Cyborg_pony
 
Such is the way of the world, yo. Listen and believe. A great concept that doesn’t always work out well.
 
I may not agree with what you said, but I’m not about to start an argument here =D .

@Joseph Raszagal  
They usually always make it out to be “Not her choice” It’s the best way to make them a victim. There were plenty of way to prevent pregnancy, Condom, spermicide, pill, abortion. These women just feel too lazy to do these things and would rather make them feel victimized for carrying a child for nine months. Since I don’t know this story, I’m just going to go with a saying that should be used by everyone:
 
What is presented without evidence, and be refuted without evidence. Which a lot of these progressives like John loath because they’d rather people “listen and believe”

@Cyborg_pony
 
To be fair, yes, it is often a choice to have a child. But there are all sorts of ways in which something like that doesn’t go quite as planned. Or planned at all!
 
Girl: “What, you came inside?! Really?!”
 
Guy: “Surprise!”
 
To even things out, and I hate to use this example, some of the standards set in place involving maternity leave revolve around unexpected pregnancies, such as (and here’s the example that I hate) rape offspring. The reason I hate this example has nothing to do with rape itself (which is still awful!), but more that it’s usually the go-to example whenever discussing anything negative involving pregnancy. Much like anything evil is always and inevitably compared to Hitler =P .
 
And another yes, John’s quite progressive. To be honest though, I actually like that aspect. If we disagree, that’s cool =) .
 
As for the woman going to work the next day, if I remember correctly I believe the context was that she had to go to work the next day, the choice not being her’s. I could be wrong though. Heh, I might just rewatch the episode; it’s a good one.

@Joseph Raszagal  
it was her choice to have a child. If women could go to managers and say “I’m having a baby. Give me time off, with pay.” companies would either fire them or go under, because then that system would be abused by people wanting to essentially dodge work, and still be paid.
 
What’s hard for these women to save money for a year or two, so they can fall back on that if they want a child?
 
And how do we know John Oliver (I assume that’s who you’re talking about as he’s gone super progressive) isn’t lying about the women that went right to work the next day? That kind of makes her sound incredibly greedy to go back to work in stead of taking care or her newborn.

@Cyborg_pony
 
The fact that a lot of major companies and work-providers disregard the importance of maternity leave for expecting mothers, mandating that they be back to work as absolutely soon as possible.
 
It isn’t as ridiculous as one might expect, but still, one of the examples that John used involved a woman going back to work the day after she had her child because her company refused to give her any additional time off.
 
Now just imagine pushing a human being out of your body, then being expected to return to the daily bump-and-grind the next day.
 
Messed-up, yo.

@Joseph Raszagal  
And what were the issues and implications raised?

@Raithial
 
This reminds me of the Mother’s Day episode of “Last Week Tonight” where John covers the topic of how difficult it is for women in America to get maternity leave from work.
 
Was the episode hilarious? Yes.
 
Were the implications horrifying? Oh God, yes.

@Joseph Raszagal  
Okay, I’m gonna step in here real quick, because the wage-gap has been debunked so many times, that I feel I should put my cents into this bag, so to speak.
 
First off: 77 cents to every dollar.  
While this is true in agregate, it does not take into account which jobs are occupied by which people, and how well they do their jobs, OR how many hours.  
When taking into account the hours worked, the hazard-pays, etcetera, the number equals out roughly.
 
So how come there is a wage-gap of sorts?  
Men (in general) tend to work longer hours, spend less time with their family, take more dangerous jobs and are more agressive in salary negociations.  
Women (in general) tend to balance out work and family more, take more secure, less dangerous jobs, work less overhours, and seem to trend towards less paying jobs, like nursing, teachers and the likes.
 
The main issue I have with modernday feminism, or 3d wave feminism as it is called occasionally, is that it is built upon indoctrination, fearmongering, false statisics, outright lies and deceptions and has a totalitarianism to it that would put George Orwell’s fictions to shame.  
This sickly strand of feminism is incapable of honest debate, shuts down events surrounding issues that pertain to men’s health and wellbeing(shutting down a debate on men’s mental health at the university of toronto), actively harasses, doxes, and threatens their ideological opponents(The whole Erin Pizzey debackle) ánd in no uncertain terms revile men and masculinity(#KillallMen, anyone?).
 
At this point, the difference between Radical and casual feminists has become so minute that it is almost a meaningless difference. It’s the same as saying you’re a moderate or an extremist racist.  
And if you don’t believe me, replace their use of “white men” with “Black men” or “Jews”, and find out exactly how racist they are.

@Joseph Raszagal  
You’d be surprise that many “Real feminists” or in the case of McIntosh’s words “Trained Feminists” wont answer that.

@Cyborg_pony  
All of that is because of the extreme narcissism that every bloody millennial, including me, has thanks to the way they were raised “You are all special” and now that they are at the age where they go from special to not so special they are bitching about life not bending over backwards for them.  
And because the men want to get laid but are pretty pathetic so they have to nod their head along with whatever the women say for a chance of getting some and with all of what they say is just complaining about trivial crap that is an inconvenience to them and is somehow a worldwide conspiracy to oppress them we get to the point were we are now.

@Cyborg_pony
 
“Can Feminism harm women?”
 
I believe we’ve already answered that question.
 
Yes. Yes it can. But not because of Feminism itself. More over, it’s the proponents that are currently damaging the name of Feminism. Because DUH.
 
Extremest Feminism can harm women. In the same way that extremist views can harm literally anything.
 
Extremest Feminism harms women by virtue of making Feminism seem as self-indulgent and simplistic as the other side of the spectrum: a male dominated world.
 
Should men rule the world? No.
 
Should women rule the world? No.
 
So why is this “equality” concept so hard for people to understand? Part of it, of course, comes from the fact that females still (in America, at least) are often paid by cents off the dollar that men are paid. In an intelligent world, this could be rectified through legitimate debate (as well as economic retooling, but that’s a discussion for a later day, yo). This process would be drawn-out and difficult, but within intelligent means it could still be achieved.
 
My issue is that with the concept of Feminism as it currently is (or, worse, as it is now evolving), no one wants to actually back it. Again… people need to be EQUAL, not screaming at each other about how one is wrong and the other is right. Screaming solves nothing. It never did and it never will.