As much as ya'll hate feminists...

[SouthernBelle]

feminist don't want equality they want the same freedoms that men get but the same responsibilities that women had before the feminist movement. Kenya i bet you want a man that is tall and makes more money then you.

Yes I do; however, I am not a feminist so what's your point?

 

[electric_fur]

Again, taking generalizing statements as absolutes...

Wait a second....

:CUDOHH:

I'm done.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Show me my defense. Quote it (don't make up anything). Again, how does that prove that feminism is only about man hating?

Maybe you could use a Xanax. You are the only person emotional talking about how feminist/feminism makes you feel.

Do you think the civil rights movement is only about hating white people since it preaching equality and work to pass laws that help non white people?

I literally just explained why it's about man hating. Begging the question again doesn't mean that I didn't answer it. at you for trying to draw a false equivalency between the civil rights movement and feminism.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

Wait a second....

:CUDOHH:

I'm done.

There's a difference between a news article and an entire political movement after its results have manifested. Go ahead and run with that, though.

 

[SouthernBelle]

I literally just explained why it's about man hating. Begging the question again doesn't mean that I didn't answer it. at you for trying to draw a false equivalency between the civil rights movement and feminism.

That doesn't show how feminism is ONLY about man hating. Where are you sources Daygo? Prove that feminism is only about man hating because you continue to fail.

There are parallels between every single major rights movement (whether it's about race, gender, or sexual freedom). Your thinking is so limited it's funny.

 

[Just like bruddas]

this is just another excuse for these losers to bytch and complain about not getting any puss

 

[Seea]

The fact that people really think feminism is solely about sexual liberty.

 

[electric_fur]

There's a difference between a news article and an entire political movement after its results have manifested. Go ahead and run with that, though.

It was an op-ed in a women's fashion magazine.... Not a news article. Dude.... I'm pretty open-minded about a lot of stuff and willing to listen to every side, but you're just very condescending and close-minded. And that's something that no one likes. Your extreme dislike of feminism and the fact that you had to write a post trying to prove that you didn't hate women was just sad.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

That doesn't show how feminism is ONLY about man hating. Where are you sources Daygo? Prove that feminism is only about man hating because you continue to fail.

There are parallels between every single major rights movement (whether it's about race, gender, or sexual freedom). Your thinking is so limited it's funny.

If you're getting this hung up on usage of the term "only" as opposed to the term mostly (as in 92-99%) in a sociopolitical climate where it wouldn't have made a difference whether which word would apply literally, it's a sign that you've lost the argument. But that's been your MO this whole time: forego the fact that feminism is based around hating men, doesn't help men and actively legislates for things that hurt men, while getting hung up on inconsequential details like not being quoted properly and trying to make equivalencies of movements with drastically different histories and bases for starting.

I cited tons of sources, all of which illustrate that feminism has actively done what I just said: spitefully work against men's interests. I've also pointed out that it's done nothing for men, so saying that it is a give and take isn't really a defense, either. Now these things coupled with the leaders of the feminist movement being quoted as they have with their hateful statements about men, I can only safely conclude that feminism is about hating men.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

It was an op-ed in a women's fashion magazine.... Not a news article. Dude.... I'm pretty open-minded about a lot of stuff and willing to listen to every side, but you're just very condescending and close-minded. And that's something that no one likes. Your extreme dislike of feminism and the fact that you had to write a post trying to prove that you didn't hate women was just sad.

For real? You're mad about my tone, of all things? The fact that I can't disagree with feminism without being called a hateful person, an ignorant person, or a beta male that never gets any p*ssy is just gonna get ignored I guess, right? Because my condescending writing tone bothers you? And despite my sourcing of articles, quoting of leading feminists, and explaining why they supported my opinion, I still get called closed minded? I guess anyone who isn't going to openly embrace your ideas must be closed minded, while anyone who does is very open-minded, right?

Christopher Hitchens made a qualified and well defended generalization op-ed defending his point. He also acknowledged that there were exceptions to the position he was taking and was pretty clear about that. I did the same thing regarding feminism and what it thinks about men, using the quotes and sources listed before. Are there going to be possible exceptions? Probably, there's always exceptions to the rule, but considering the effects that feminism has had on men's interests and what the leaders of the movement generally think of men, it doesn't really make a difference if it's mostly spiteful against men or completely spiteful against men.

 

[SouthernBelle]

If you're getting this hung up on usage of the term "only" as opposed to the term mostly (as in 92-99%) in a sociopolitical climate where it wouldn't have made a difference whether which word would apply literally, it's a sign that you've lost the argument. But that's been your MO this whole time: forego the fact that feminism is based around hating men, doesn't help men and actively legislates for things that hurt men, while getting hung up on inconsequential details like not being quoted properly and trying to make equivalencies of movements with drastically different histories and bases for starting.

I cited tons of sources, all of which illustrate that feminism has actively done what I just said: spitefully work against men's interests. I've also pointed out that it's done nothing for men, so saying that it is a give and take isn't really a defense, either. Now these things coupled with the leaders of the feminist movement being quoted as they have with their hateful statements about men, I can only safely conclude that feminism is about hating men.

How can you quantify that? Give me a source that show me how you could possibly quantify (92 to 99%) the foundation of feminism?

You posted laws Daygo. That does not prove a damn thing about the foundations of feminism and the purpose of it.

 

[Will Ross]

Yes I do; however, I am not a feminist so what's your point?

My point is that somethings are of natural order.

 

[electric_fur]

For real? You're mad about my tone, of all things? The fact that I can't disagree with feminism without being called a hateful person, an ignorant person, or a beta male that never gets any p*ssy is just gonna get ignored I guess, right? Because my condescending writing tone bothers you? And despite my sourcing of articles, quoting of leading feminists, and explaining why they supported my opinion, I still get called closed minded? I guess anyone who isn't going to openly embrace your ideas must be closed minded, while anyone who does is very open-minded, right?

Christopher Hitchens made a qualified and well defended generalization op-ed defending his point. He also acknowledged that there were exceptions to the position he was taking and was pretty clear about that. I did the same thing regarding feminism and what it thinks about men, using the quotes and sources listed before. Are there going to be possible exceptions? Probably, there's always exceptions to the rule, but considering the effects that feminism has had on men's interests and what the leaders of the movement generally think of men, it doesn't really make a difference if it's mostly spiteful against men or completely spiteful against men.

I haven't called you any of those things, although I did say it made you less attractive, based on the conversations you and I have had previously.

I've agreed with some of your points, but most present-day feminists do not hold these values you are, frankly, griping about. I've had to deal with these type of attacks from people before, and this is the same answer I give them: my feminism is about acceptance, equality, and choices. And I believe in giving men the same rights and choices women do. When you paint all feminism with your generalizations, then you have offended me (and obviously other people) personally because it's my political belief. And clearly some of the people here don't even follow feminism and think you're being a bit.... hard headed.

I don't think those things about men, and that's not my feminism. (I've even been mislabled a "men's right's activist" because some misandrist feminist chick assumed that saying males have rights is defending all men.) So when I talk about my feminism, stop putting it down. Sure you're allowed to have opinions. But it's just weird how fervent you are in insisting how wrong feminism is. It strikes me as off.

And I didn't think his opinion was well defended. I know there are men out there who feel the same. I've talked to these dudes.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

How can you quantify that? Give me a source that show me how you could possibly quantify (92 to 99%) the foundation of feminism?

You posted laws Daygo. That does not prove a damn thing about the foundations of feminism and the purpose of it.

So I guess that laws that work intensely against men's interests, the fact that feminists push laws like this, and the fact that outside of a few feminists in the ivory tower making some half-assed noise about it isn't enough to qualify that number in an off-the-cuff internet comment? 'kay.

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

I haven't called you any of those things, although I did say it made you less attractive, based on the conversations you and I have had previously.

I've agreed with some of your points, but most present-day feminists do not hold these values you are, frankly, griping about. I've had to deal with these type of attacks from people before, and this is the same answer I give them: my feminism is about acceptance, equality, and choices. And I believe in giving men the same rights and choices women do. When you paint all feminism with your generalizations, then you have offended me (and obviously other people) personally because it's my political belief. And clearly some of the people here don't even follow feminism and think you're being a bit.... hard headed.

I don't think those things about men, and that's not my feminism. (I've even been mislabled a "men's right's activist" because some misandrist feminist chick assumed that saying males have rights is defending all men.) So when I talk about my feminism, stop putting it down. Sure you're allowed to have opinions. But it's just weird how fervent you are in insisting how wrong feminism is. It strikes me as off.

And I didn't think his opinion was well defended. I know there are men out there who feel the same. I've talked to these dudes.

"I'm not saying that it makes you worthy of ad-hominem attacks, I'm saying that it makes you unattractive."

I don't really care if people on the internet get offended by my opinions. Concerns over whether people think I'm behind hard-headed for not accepting your particular brand of feminism as the most applicable definition of feminism isn't something that really matters to me. It's also a really lame direction to go when you seem to push the idea that I shouldn't disagree with you because you or other people might end up finding me unattractive. If I said that people shouldn't push for women's rights because women who pipe up about being treated equally look hard headed and less attractive, you'd call me a misogynist - and you'd be right. In addition, while you didn't lob all of those insults at me, the other feminists in this thread did. Considering that this eventually formed the basis for the counter points against what I was saying, of course I'm going to think less of the discourse that the people disagreeing with me are offering.

I also find your method of argumentation "off" in that it seems to be based on what's offensive and trying to label me as someone that hates women by bringing up some posts from a really long time ago based on a Christopher Hitchens video, just so you could turn around and say something like, "The fact that you have to say that you don't hate women is just sad." Of course I have to say that. You just accused me of it.

And while it might be your opinion among you and your friends (who you're more thank likely to agree with to begin with) that his opinion wasn't well defended, that doesn't make it true. As of right now all I can see is that it means that you were offended by what he said and therefore you disagreed. You didn't really give reasons why he would actually be wrong. It also doesn't matter that there are men that agree with you. I don't see why I should give their opinions preferential treatment when assessing Christopher Hitchens might be right or wrong.