MISANDRYWhy you shouldn't support feminism at all

submitted by meisthebigdumbTransracial BlackX Rockgender Bispecies from self.TumblrInAction

While there has been a lot of pushback against modern feminism by moderates and conservatives, a lot of them support first wave feminism without realizing how firstly, it led to second, and then third wave feminism, and secondly, first wave feminism is an anti male movement.

This can be shown by the thoughts of influential feminists like Lois Waisbrooker who openly advocated the genocide of 90% of men, along with Emmeline Pankhurst who was a part of the White Feather movement which advocated for men to die in wars.

Additionally, we can see in the book "A Sex Revolution", written by Waisbrooker that many of the original feminists believed that women were superior to men (check page 6).

So stop being a neoconservative cuck and learn to acknowledge that first wave feminism inevitably led to the issues we face today, such as misandry, transgenderism and social justice.

top 100 commentsshow all 107
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Adventurous_Ad6212 4 insightful - 11 fun4 insightful - 10 fun5 insightful - 11 fun -  (0 children)

We need to end feminism it is a plague on all myn kind. We need to force the feminists to fuck our she shanks under threat of imprisonment in a male correctional facility. They need to have the terfism fucked out of them stupid cis bioessnetialistic lesbians denying me my right to fuck them.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (85 children)

I'll agree that the feminist movement is a deeply flawed movement filled with very hateful people on the fringes of society and that has always been the case be it 1st wave feminism, the suffragette movement, etc.

But to your average schmuck first wave feminism suffragette movement and the rest basically just represents the idea that "women should have equal legal rights to men" in the sense that women should be able to own property, take public office, vote, and not be restricted from the public life. Is that feminism? I'd argue it's not really but many people think that's what 1st wave feminism entails.

So far as conservatives saying they support 1st wave feminism that's more a defensive response to progressive accusations that conservatives want to enforce some semblance of handmaidens tale, while you'll see extreme religious conservatives such as Muslims and more extreme Mennonite aligned factions take positions similar to this it's far from a common or mainstream viewpoint.

The main issue with hardline feminists is that they hate themselves, they hate men, they hate other women, they aren't content with their lives for whatever reason and constantly feel the need to upend the status quo and drag the rest of society into their misery. The only thing that keeps them from being absolute pariahs on the fringes of society is the underlying feminist organizational structure and ideological drive but you'll even see within feminist groups the petty infighting and general stupidity and lack of strong leadership eventually renders them all ineffectual. It's really a fascinating development and the hilarity of some of the things they come up with truly should not be forgotten. Political lesbianism being one of my absolute favorites. You see echos of it now with the new "I refuse to have sex at all because Roe got overturned" online activism trends. But sure, the conservatives want to stop you from having sex ostensibly to control you so you're going to not have sex to show them? Genius move. You're going to get your boyfriend out to campaign for women's rights by refusing to sleep with him? Sure honey, or will it be that he decides to date a woman with no such hangups instead?

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (82 children)

women should be able to own property, take public office, vote

Women voting has led to nothing good.

[–]QueenBread 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (72 children)

I'm a woman. Are you telling me I should not be allowed to vote? Am I inferior to a man then?

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (70 children)

Am I inferior to a man then?

Women are absolutely not inferior, they're different. The genders simply aren't interchangeable, much to the chagrin of troons. Directly comparing them doesn't work. Nobody wants men watching kids, and nobody wants women responsible for pulling their asses out of a burning building. Equality is lie used to manipulate women.

Are you telling me I should not be allowed to vote?

I believe women should voluntarily give up the vote. Their last vote should be not to vote again.

I'm a woman

Hey bby

[–]QueenBread 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (63 children)

You find me in complete agreement with your first take, about women and men being different and not interchangeable, and about how some roles are just more fitting for men and other roles are more fitting for women. I appreciate someone who has the courage to say nobody wants men watching kids or women saving people from burning buildings, because IT IS true, and I for one hate that as a society we're trying to deny this.

Then, after this, you suddenly say something pretty crazy, such as that women should voluntarily give up the right to vote? I don't get it.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (54 children)

One of the biggest failures of democracy is that the voters are not generally knowledgeable about what they're voting for, and usually ill suited to matters of governance. Reducing the quantity will increase the quality of the vote, men are better suited for it.

[–]QueenBread 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (52 children)

Excuse me but why would men be better suited to vote?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (51 children)

Women are less logical and rational, more emotional.

Why does a male lion lead a pride when his lazy ass doesn't do anything. Because he's big and strong, loud and aggressive. If another male takes over, he kills the cubs and has his way with the women.

It's biology, a survival strategy. Men are built to war and lead, women to nurture. We each have advantages and disadvantages that suit us to our roles. Testosterone is a white blinding light of rage, which lends itself to action, but also unnecessary violence, estrogen gives women empathy but can also leave them weeping and indecisive.

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (47 children)

Women are less logical and rational, more emotional.

Uhu. Odd, because as you yourself know and admitted, by nature it's always men doing the dumb stuff like dares, and drunken brawls, and dangerous activities just for the eff of it. Hey, it's biological, y'all are made to take risks and not assess danger - which in turn also gets you to do dumb retarded risky stuff and find it fun while you risk breaking your neck.

But it's women being the less rational, eh? Women, you know, the ones who are less aggressive and more empathic.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (39 children)

I keep thinking about this one incident that happened decades ago. I was in a high biology class, and the teacher pulled me aside. Apparently I'd just unseated one of my classmates as the top ranked student in the class and the student, a girl, was upset about it. I just looked blankly at the teacher, I didn't understand why the hell she was telling me. I was like "cool, so?"

I get it now. The girl had built her identity on being "the smart girl," and she worked really hard at it. But the thing was, I wasn't trying. It was almost effortless on my part beyond paying attention. I guess the teacher wanted me to console her as a fellow academic acheiver, maybe work together, idk. Instead I barely noticed the girl, besides she liked to wear dresses and she didn't always keep her legs closed. I think she might have given up on grades and focused on boys instead.

There was a lot of competition for the top spots academically, and there were a few women. But they all had to work really hard at it. Although in college one of the top 3 ranked students in my assembly class was a hot, tall, leggy blonde. 🤤

it's always men doing the dumb stuff like dares, and drunken brawls, and dangerous activities just for the eff of it.

That reminds of when we did a Chinese fire drill in moving cars. We pulled them up side to side, doing about 40-45 on a back road and everyone crawled through the windows and swapped the car they were in, even the drivers. Oh fuck, I don't know how we survived all that dumb shit lol.

But that stuff is a lot of fun. And if you don't try something you don't know if you can do it.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

He's in denial. The male life sucks, at least for someone like me.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It sounds like that would make women more rational. You're in denial about getting the short end of the stick here. The only thing you can do is point it out and look away from this world.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're in denial about getting the short end of the stick here.

I mean, I am really glad I'm a guy, but I don't know one is objectively better than the other, they're just different.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No one is suited for it, democracy is just tyranny of the majority.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Tying a perspn's worth to how needed they are to make babies for society is sick. It's a pointless, evil game. Men are people too, not just flesh robots.

[–]QueenBread 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

This phrase is easy to say NOW, that we're so overpopulated. You wouldn't have even thought about this if you were born just a couple hundred years ago.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

If I wouldn't have said this a couple hundred years ago, it's because I didn't have access to the information needed to learn this explanation. And/or because my family would beat me beyond recognition and the state would have me burned alive at the stake if I dared express dissent. The game of life is one of the worst, most brutal ideas ever. I pray for all our sakes that it ends soon.

[–]QueenBread 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

Oh no, buddy, no. No. That's not how it works. Trust me, the whole "pppfft babies aren't that important" thing is a VERY recent thought that you would never have come up with if you lived in an era where everybody around you kept dying left and right.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well good, the less poor souls who have to come into this world the better.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Also if it were inconceivable (no pun intended) before overpopulation, how did the early Christians and all the gnostic sects think of it?

[–]cephyrious 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

One of the biggest psychological differences between women and men is interest in people vs interest in thing. Interest in people lends itself to politics. In societies that have opened up rights to women the most, female representation in politics is close to 50%. It will most likely exceed 50% eventually, given the interest divide (much like it has done among physicians, psychologists and other occupations that are considered high tier where interest in people is important). And that's fine. It is usually the most competent that reach the top. So, given this, having a take that women shouldn't be allowed to vote is absolutely ridiculous. Having a qualification to vote based on merit is another thing.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

much like it has done among physicians, psychologists and other occupations that are considered high tier where interest in people is important). And that's fine

Those professions suck these days.

[–]cephyrious 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Is that because women has entered them or because other, new occupations have surprassed them?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think it's because education became a big money maker. It's more about selling diplomas than teaching people.

[–]cephyrious 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fair point. There's definitely been an inflation in diplomas, but why does this make the profession suck? Too many people in it who "chased the diploma" rather than had genuine interest and ability?

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Troons don't want genders to be interchangeable, otherwise they can't be troons.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think sex is a good criteria for which to judge competency to vote or not. I also don't think we can really have such a judgement take place through the legal system as naturally it will be abused. So the only real solution is to allow for everyone to vote who is a citizen.

That said I do think it's important to look at the topic of women's suffrage in history and analyze some questions we'd rather not say for fear of knee jerk reaction through the lense of both our modern understanding and the lens of those in history. There are some fairly compelling arguments against women's suffrage not the least of which is that it along with most other movements towards widening the voter pool are part of a power game and those who advocated for it didn't entirely do so out of merely a desire to further women's rights, but rather as a desire to obtain power through women's votes. It's also worth pointing out that women at the time were split on this issue just as women today are split on most so called feminist issues.

I'd argue however that in general we should not as a society be encouraging people to vote in mass via public campaigns and the like. I for instance will never tell women they need to vote because frankly, while I think it's good if you want to get involved in civics and exercise your voting power, it's also a very important responsibility that isn't to he taken lightly as we do with the "I voted" stickers and rallies that treat it like entertainment, a modern arena if you will" rather than the very somber and serious business of deciding the course of society. As such I will say many women I've met should not vote, just as many men should not vote, but in my own experience the stupid men who shouldn't vote by and large don't care enough to go and do it and would prefer instead to go to the bar or play sports or games or whatever. But the stupid women tend to be much more politically active and engaged in voting and frankly I think a lot of that is the reason why social issues dominate the public discourse of politics rather than economic issues, merely because as a whole women tend to be more extreme and prone to fringes as a consequence of generally being more social than men.

Naturally this is a broad generalization and shouldn't be taken as any comment on your own individual situation. But I've met a number of women who have based their vote on such banal issues like simply liking the way someone's name sounds or thinking someone's attitude is bad on television or some equally idiotic reason irrelevant to any sort of policy. I think there's also a strong tendency for women to become activists towards single issues like abortion, or LGBTQ+, or animal rights, or what have you. And that gives corrupt individuals an in to power and an ability to ravage the treasury if they can campaign on something like ending cruelty in slaughter houses and rally a bunch of idiots to their cause who will scream down at anyone who questions the person's motives or calls for looking at the bigger picture and interplay between many complex systems and ideas with simple moral criticisms.

None of this is purely a women's issue as there are certainly plenty of women who understand well just as there are plenty of men who do not. But I think in terms of generalizations it's safe to say that activism tends to be a very feminine sphere and I think it's fair to criticize this. I won't do anything to stop women or anyone else from voting and I don't think we should, but I do kinda feel like telling women that they shouldn't vote because they are women is helpful overall. If a woman hears that and believes it she is too stupid to vote anyway and nothing of value is lost. She'll believe anything at that point. If she doesn't care and votes anyway that shows at the very least she isn't a total idiot.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

I'll happily entertain the argument that women's suffrage has not led to improvements in society. But let's also entertain the argument that men's suffrage is also deeply problematic.

Universal suffrage and democracy itself on the large scale multi millions if not billions of people societies we find ourselves in today do little to prepare the average citizen to have the ability to understand and make informed decisions on matters of governance and seed a good portion of the power into the hands of propagandists instead. It's not merely a men or women problem.

Clearly the best solution is simply to coronate yours truly as Supreme God-Emperor since I can't trust anyone else to make the right decisions. Alas most people lack the proper vision to understand that for a safe and secure society one must embrace a larger view of the world and not the narrow dogmatic view of the democraticists. Use my knowledge I beg you, and save your loved ones from certain doom.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

do little to prepare the average citizen to have the ability to understand and make informed decisions on matters of governance and seed a good portion of the power into the hands of propagandists instead

Indeed, which is why diluting the vote by allowing women to vote didn't give women equality, it benefited the propagandists. Same deal with allowing women to work. They earned the right to have to work to earn a living when before they didn't have to. That was a win for industry and not women.

Clearly the best solution is simply to coronate yours truly as Supreme God-Emperor since I can't trust anyone else to make the right decisions

Almost, except obviously I should be King. There is no better system of governance really as long as you have a capable ruler. The issues crop up when inevitably lesser heirs take the thrown however.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The question I'd ask is since when have women been "allowed" to work?

Women have always worked but the work has been largely domestic. I think the biggest issue with the feminist movement has been pushing the industrialist mantra that a woman who does not labor in the factories or otherwise take a position outside the domestic sphere is somehow not doing her sex any favors and is instead engaging in regressive behaviors.

When I've always considered domestic work to be important work in its own right and it seems baffling to me why women would want to demonize others for choosing that when it seems that by and large it is what makes the majority of women happy and it's what they want from life.

It's not that women should be forced to be a housewife if they choose otherwise with their lives, women who don't wish to have children or otherwise don't have domestic obligations should be welcome in the labor force should they be capable. I think the clear problem only comes around when there is no one around to handle the domestic affairs and both parents are working to the detriment of child rearing.

But have women ever been barred from the workforce? I think not. I also don't see being a woman or a man in and of itself anywhere a compelling argument for voting rights. We could argue that if voting rights are limited to landholders or otherwise then it should be irrelevant who the landowner is.

Personally I think a lot of societal issues would be resolved if we merely required mandatory military service for everyone as a prerequisite for full citizenship like is done in other countries such as Taiwan Singapore South Korea etc. Mandatory only in the sense that should you wish to be a full voting citizen then you must go through two years of military service in order to do so. Women would be welcome to serve as well should they wish. And anyone who doesn't wish to serve for whatever reason may choose not to but they do not obtain the right to vote until their service is completed.

You would have to have the military service open to everyone and make some concessions for disabilities and handicaps that normally would be a disqualification for military service, but the goal is to instill a sense of civil responsibility, a sense of comradery with ones fellow citizens regardless of class or racial divisions. And ultimately to weed out the mentally incapable and easily offended via boot camp from the voting pool.

I should think most women would likely choose not to vote rather than deal with military service. And while it saddens me to think they care more about their own comfort than the lofty ideals of civil responsibility, that's the entire point of the system to weed those out. Those who choose to serve are far more likely to bring competence and honor to the society.

[–]LyingSpirit472 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Indeed, which is why diluting the vote by allowing women to vote didn't give women equality, it benefited the propagandists.

The problem is that as history marched on and repealed the 18th Amendment, it ignored that the 18th and 19th Amendment were both connected. Women's suffrage was combined with banning alcohol because together, they did give some semblance of equality for the time [beforehand, the man of the house would frequently drink himself into the poorhouse and leave his wife and children helpless with nothing and no hope of a better tomorrow. Ban alcohol, the man couldn't legally drink himself into the poorhouse, and give women some semblance of equality, you could start to give them the chance to have a life of their own in the event the man decided to drink himself into oblivion.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't really follow this logic. This is largely the progressive idea of ban the bad thing fix the problem which rarely works as prohibition showed.

Ban alcohol and the man can't legally drink himself into the poorhouse, so he'll illegally drink himself into the jailhouse first and then the poorhouse and leave the wife and children helpless anyway. A problem I'll add is not really mitigated in any way by allowing the woman to vote or work since now she'll be saddled with both the responsibility of the children and the responsibility of a job which is not a good position to be in for the full realization of either prospect. You can't eat the right to vote.

It makes no sense to be. A responsible husband who follows the law and does not drink himself into the poorhouse is unlikely to do so if alcohol is legal or not. An irresponsible alcoholic husband will do so regardless of the legality of alcohol.

[–]LyingSpirit472 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It makes very little sense, but this was the argument given in the 1900s when both laws were put on the books. It sounds absurd now, but we're in an era that realized "prohibition of drugs or alcohol doesn't stop people from using them, you just make people who choose to use them criminals"- and alcohol would double it because it would go past "well, it's still very expensive to be a drug user and most people can't afford it" to "alcohol's still inexpensive to get and a relatively simple science experiment to make it; anyone can get it cheap, you can't arrest literally every adult in the world."

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Men voting has also led to nothing good.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There's nothing like a good king.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's almost impossible and never worth the risk.

[–]meisthebigdumbTransracial BlackX Rockgender Bispecies[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

When many influential members of a movement are actual extremists who genuinely want men to die, along with a large amount of the movement's supporters believing the superiority of women, yes, I am against feminism and it's retarded. Even if I agree that women should be treated with equal dignity, because feminism fundamentally rejects reality, which is that men and women are not equal due to biological differences (does not mean that one of the sexes is inferior), feminism is a delusional ideology full of retards which does not make me support it at all.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree but I think it's important to point out that your average schmuck doesn't get into the weeds of feminist theory and will think feminism = women's legal equality (in the sense that the law should be blind to whether someone is a woman or not in most situations as it's irrelevant to whether or not someone is fit to vote, own property, etc.) I don't think this argument entails that there are no differences between men and women. Rather the law should merely treat both the same for most practical purposes with very few exceptions.

Feminism I don't believe promotes an idea of equality though many claim that. Most feminist theory I've read very much likes to point out the inherent differences and lack of equality between men and women and may be better described as female supremacist theory. Which is essentially just the opposite of male chauvinist attitudes. You see this in attitudes like "wouldn't things be better if women ran the world there would be less wars etc" which is a laughably naive and extremely sexist take on the world.

Of course it's definitely right to point out the rediculousness of hardline feminist arguments and the double standards as well as sexist stawman archetypes it is based on. But most discussions I've had with self described feminists it becomes clear to me they aren't at all aware of the hardline insane side of the feminist sphere and are all just very girl power yeah go girl naive types who believe the narrative arguments, but are not the truly hateful insane misandrists that drive the direction of feminist theory.

A prime example of this is discussions around the so called wage gap. Almost everyone agrees that all things being equal, a woman and a man working the same job should be paid the same. And all things bring equal this is largely the case. The problem is a mild feminist hears "I don't believe the wage gap is a problem," as "I believe women should be paid less than men" which is a mis-conception which is completely forgivable as the propoganda is designed to induce exactly that response. Rather it's important to point out that the wage gap is a very large scale macroeconomic view of the entire economy and it reflects the long term choices of women throughout their careers rather than the actual take home salaries of women at any specific job. And naturally if we count women who choose to focus on leaving their careers to raise children in the same statistical group as the men who by and large do not then this is the natural and expected state, and there isn't anything else to be done, we could argue that women are unfairly impacted by the rigors of childbirth as they have to carry and birth the child and it's significantly easier for them to nurse the child as well compared to men, and I'd agree with you in that women are uniquely impacted by that. However it's less a societal issue and more an issue you'll need to take up with God. I think it's wholly fair for a woman to forgo starting a family if she wishes, or for the man to be the stay at home parent if he wishes, there is nothing inherently wrong with either of these things. But the problem with the feminist movement comes down to a condemnation of women who choose domestic lifestyles rather than a recognition or that as what is by and large one of the greatest contributions to society and one of the most important jobs imaginable. They choose to belittle those who don't choose a lifestyle the same as theirs rather than merely advocating for the choice. A choice that has existed in our society for a good while now practically eliminating the need for activism. Indeed men and women are by and large on the same page when it comes to not only women's rights but men's rights as well. It's really only the least content in our societies that are active in the radical iterations of activism. If your life is miserable it's far more compelling to listen to the prophet who says the world sucks and should change to better fit you rather than the one who says you suck and should change to better fit the world though both have their issues of extreme conformists vs pariahs. The middle of path of accepting the world as it is and accepting the fact that you don't need to change yourself for the benefit of others but neither do you have a need to he happy as the world and therefore others won't change to benefit you.

[–]QueenBread 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Ok, so, wow. Every now and then this thread pops up and it's disheartening.

Are there some fringe, crazy women using "feminism" as an excuse to hate men? Yes, but if you think that this means most or even all women are like that, then you are absolutely no different at all from the fringe, crazy women thinking all men are evil.

If I can understand most men are actually sane and decent people despite the fact that the fringe nutcases are the loudest and the worst, perhaps you should realize the same thing about women. When I see a big fat dude in a wig and a skirt threatening a small woman with rape or murder unless she accepts his dick, I DO NOT, I repeat, NOT think "ugh men, they are the worst". So I suggest when you see some crazy man-hating psycho gal, you do not make the sexist assumption "ugh women, they are the worst".

Not sure I made myself clear here.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think the issue here largely comes from a fundamental disagreement on what feminism is. I've had this discussion with several women who say exactly as you do, and I have no disagreement. Most women, even most feminists aren't the kind of crazy people you'll see on TikTok or whatever, but the crazy people are a very active and influential part of the general movement and should be openly criticized. I believe the crazy people are attached to feminism because the feminist theories in general are not correct or well formed. But the general social attitude is to dismiss such criticism as sexist outright since initially most all criticism is coming from the right as they dig up the crazy.

This isn't an issue unique to feminism it's prominent in most movements of any kind. LGBT being a prime example now where the initial idea such as decriminalizing their sexual behavior and allowing them civil rights such as joint tax filing and hospital visitation rights via marriage is not in and of itself a bad idea. But the basis for which the movement rotates around is a very vague concept of equality and love is love which eventually the fringes will utilize to justify things like legalizing sexual activity with minors or allowing for the capitalistic medical sector to profit off of life altering cosmetic surgeries in children. The initial goals of the movement when formed were not in and of themselves bad, but the core underlying philosophy which the movement was founded on was and the development towards its modern form was an inevitability because of it.

Feminism is not much different, if we define feminism as merely "women should be able to vote" "women should be able to own property" "women should not be barred from public life" "women have a right to be safe" "women have a right to make their own choices regarding sexual activity" "non consensual sex is a crime" etc. Are all very reasonable and I think correct statements. If this is what we say feminism is then you'll find me and the vast majority of others in the world agree and are then feminists. But the feminist movement in general is based not on merely these statements but on a very vague and nebulous idea of equality and empowerment which is not well defined and is used by the fringes to continually push the social boundaries and allow a vehicle by which clearly unhinged and hateful individuals can enact their own agendas. This is the problem I have with feminist movement in general. I think it's an ultimately unjustifiable movement in the long run and I think all the infighting and purity spiraling you see is a symptom of that. At the end of the day it's pretty stupid to say that men are better than women or women are better than men, but it's also stupid to say that men and women are equal in all aspects as clearly men and women are different. If we clarify this as legal equality, I tend to agree that men and women should be viewed equally under the eyes of the law. But if we erase the distinctions between men and women completely in society as some on the fringe wish or elevate women at the expense of men to get back at them or otherwise, then we have what I see is ostensibly the feminist movement today and I think it needs to be properly criticized.

Perhaps the best way to explain this is I see identifying as a feminist as similar to identifying as a men's rights activist. It's true there are some legitamate issues that men deal with, for example disparity in sentencing and custody rulings. But this isn't entirely unfair as some of these disparities are justified. And most of those who identify as men's rights activists are the kind of fringe women haters (or at least that's the general narrative and they are quite visible) that I see no benefit in identifying as a "men's rights activist" since you are lumping yourself in with the crazies.

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a well-explained and reasonable take.

[–]hugged 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You're forgetting that "people" like OP think women having standards and saying no is misandry. It's a purely salty, inflammatory post that has no real-world basis. Some mentally ill woman got wronged by males and wants them to die, big fucking deal. The handful of psychos are not in any way comparable to what males dare to say and do. They are spoiled babies and get triggered by every little thing a woman does to make life safer and easier for her, so they cherry pick shit like this. The most toxic female-only space ("FDS") was never comparable to the most toxic male-only spaces‌ (of which there were several unlike for women) Nevermind that most women talking shit about men online are doing so ironically to make bottom of the barrel like OP seethe.

Let's not pretend it's not women who are hurt by transgenderism (which is rooted in gender roles feminist women oppose) more than anyone else. MtFs invading female-only spaces cause real-world damge and harm, erasure of tomboy culture is irreversibly ruining the lives and bodies of young girls who don't fit the Cute Feminine Baby stereotype.

Muh women causing trannyism is such a retarded take, lmao. Troons are hardcore misogynists. Feminists do say a lot of dumb shit though.

[–]DirewolfGhost 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Some women only spaces call for the gendercide of 90% of the male population... so... I don't care that you claim it is irony. Men aren't allowed the excuse of "its a joke", so neither should women. Unless they are an inferior and/or privileged class of individual (which they are). Can't have it both ways.

Women naturally hate men. Its ingrained. That's why they have to be controlled or they will bring collective ruin, unless they can sustain an underclass (men) to do things that are beneath them. This is what they've done through history.

Women caused the tranny movement through getting into the workforce. Men and women competing for the same space lead to the blank slate fallacy (there is no difference between sexes) propagation through society which lead to roleplaying as the other sex being seen as valid. MtF Troons are hardcore misogynists, yes, and women deserve everything they get from them and more.

Tomboy culture can only exist if there is a boy culture. Feminists are erasing tomboy culture.

Honestly the only way Feminists can get out of this pickle is to declare there is a distinct difference between men and women and that women have been abusing their powers for generations. Not gonna happen so us neo-trads have to hear this insufferable screeching between whiny bitch women and whiny bitch boys in public spaces. Because that's all feminists and trannies do. Neither group naturally polices their radicals like men do. So men will eat popcorn and watch the circus female hate groups have created.

[–]meisthebigdumbTransracial BlackX Rockgender Bispecies[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah that's plainly false, I don't care about women having preferences. I just strongly dislike feminism because a lot of the influential feminists straight up hating men. It's funny how you assume I can't pull because I don't agree with an ideology that's filled with man-haters. I don't treat women like aliens, but it's important to acknowledge that there are differences, and that men and women in general are suited for different things (something that feminism rejects).

Also using "women" and "males" in the same sentence is laughable and shows how immature you are. I don't go "muh men and females" when I criticize feminism, because it's retarded and I would rather make actual arguments, and because I have dated them before and don't think they deserve hate. Fuck feminism though

If I was actually "misogynist" I would be saying stuff like wanting to take away the woman's vote and would be a deranged porn addict. But I am neither of those two

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you're not treating women as a higher class than men you're misogynist.

Look up male expendability if you're wondering why everyone thinks this way. The primal world is evil.

[–]jacques1102 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah i especially disagree with the people saying"The only reason why were in this situation is because women voted."Seriously,this feels like straight narcissism where men can do no wrong and it some how is 100% women's fault.

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Nah, you are just some bitter incel, sweaty 💅🤏

Men are subhuman, violent, porn sick animals and i don't blame feminist for being misandric at all.💅💅💅💅💅👄

[–]Dragonerne 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Women are not the issue. They are part of the solution.

Jews are the problem. Modern feminism and most of the suffering men and women experience in todays society is caused by jews by design. They want us to hate eachother.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

It's clearly caused by archons, it's laughable to think the Jews are capable of that much. Even if there is a conspiracy among certain very elite Jewry, their only goal is to have Israel dominate the world because they're racists who believe only Jews are human. They're not cartoonish villains thinking up evil plans for no reason. Archons on the other hand think it's funny to torment us, and have complete power here.

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're delusional

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I myself used to think that about people who said these things. But time has told.

[–]jacques1102 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Emmeline Pankhurst and Lois Waisbrooker weren't jewish tho.And you're red herring again.

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Jews conveniently fulfill the roll of Boogeyman for some. Though I find the mental image of a scared child fearing the monsters in the closet sneaking out in the night and doing the Jewish chair dance with the bed while the child cowers under the blanket in sheer terror.

[–]jacques1102 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Like literally think of anything bad in history or today and you'll get these nutjobs that say it's the jews fault.It's getting tiring and does nothing to help our cause.The fucking stupid thing is that these incels blame women for their problems and then say shit like"The jews are dividing us!"

[–]Alienhunter糞大名 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

My god I just realized something earth shatteringly terrifying. I just realized it's so obvious. Where do Jews come from? Not the closet or under the bed that's where they live now, but where did they come from. There's no Jewland or Jewrasian continent on the map you see, so where did they come from.

They came from women! Women made the Jews! My god! What horrendously terrifying power to think that Women are capable of! Women made the Jews! And even worse! There are Jewish women! Aaaaaah

They are coming for you my friend. Hordes of Jewish women are at the gates. They will spin into your life on their flaming dreidel chariots and seize control of the thermostat raising the temperature by three degrees and complain about their restaurant orders not being right. OH MY GOD! WE ARE DOOMED! When I close my eyes I can see them dancing to Fiddler on the Roof songs. If I were a rich man, yabba Dabba Doo. Omg they've infected me! Go save yourself. It's too late for me. To life to life l'chaim.

[–]lunarstrain 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Feels like everything has a fucked up past if you dig deep enough. Seems like I'm always learning about something old and disturbing, but I'd rather that than the sanitized alt-history. If nothing else, I appreciate you adding more depth to our wealth of knowledge on this time period and human nature.

From your other comments, I can see where you're coming from. I think that black people deserve healthy and happy lives like anyone else but I don't like the cultural movement of BLM.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All part of the conspiracy to brainwash you into thinking this world is the best thing ever despite it being hell.