Feminism yes or not? and which one?

Feminism was a movement to equality between women and men but today well some small part of female population declares themselves as feminist and spreading their views (like changing the pen colour to pink instead of blue traditional, or like obese is good for your health, etc...)I stand for equality but against this things please.
I just want to know your opinions and ALL OPINIONS ARE RESPECTED.

Women can't be stopped if they put their mind in doing something. And this is a slow, almost invisibile process. They slowroll us! Imagine a global Matriachate, that would be a sight. Or let's jus be equals, k?

I hope you realize that all the feminazi you see are a small minority and most people do support equal rights.

I think the internet gone too far bashing feminazies that it created an atmosphere where even regular feminism is brutally condescended upon.
People need to stop being so easily radicalized because both side suck ass. Moderatism is the best way to go.

The amount of stupid alt right shit I see is comparable to the amount of feminism shit I see nowadays.

Quote:

Feminazi is not an innocuous insult. According to Limbaugh a feminazi is "a feminist to whom the important thing in life is ensuring that as many abortions as possible occur". In comparing feminists to the Nazis, Limbaugh is cynically deploying iconography of the most odious kind.

Given Limbaugh's notoriety in labelling people extremists, I was interested to investigate how radical his views actually are. An internet search for Rush Limbaugh brings up a seemingly bottomless diatribe against women, and I came across the following gem: "Feminism was created to force popular culture to accept ugly women." If you thought he couldn't stoop any lower, he has also said of women: "If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it and I'll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch." Labelling feminists as feminazis is an effective mechanism in deflecting attention from the dark extremism of proponents of the term.

The word is a direct assertion of misogyny. Women do not need to be radical to be called a feminazi. They simply have to challenge sex inequality. Advocates of the word contend that the inequalities women face in society are acceptable, even inevitable, and cannot be changed by movements for justice and equality. They define harm inflicted on women as insignificant or fictitious.

The Daily Mail reframes sexist comments in professional spaces as harmless compliments, while Limbaugh defines a woman's control over her reproductive choices as part of a programme of mass murder. The word is wielded as a weapon to control and conquer the feminist movement. It rebukes and intimidates women who challenge vested male power and strive to improve the situation of women.

Words that exploit visceral connections to the Nazis, Stalinists and al-Qaida (so-called gal-Qaida) malign feminists as the enemy because they challenge the patriarchal status quo.

The word feminazi is used by the powerful against the less powerful to silence them. One thing that puzzles many is why women label other women feminazis. In truth, this is likely to be a form of self-protection and self-advancement. Feminism is criticised as a useless movement because it jeopardises the small, incremental gains in power women have made. A woman calling another woman a feminazi is a way of pandering to the men who valorise women who conform.

If the word is used without meeting visible resistance, the woman against whom it is wielded is wounded, and many women who watch this play out in popular discourse are hurt. Women who might have spoken out against gender inequality could now be reluctant to put their head above the parapet due to the consequences. The word can therefore be seen as an effective way to silence women.

Using the label to describe someone is a way of legitimising the onslaught of misogynistic abuse and death threats that follow. You can say these things to a feminazi without recrimination. As the rightwing messaging goes, the feminazi deserves it. The tragic irony is that every time the word is bandied about without retaliation, the power imbalance between men and women is reinforced.

So how can feminists respond? We must recognise that the label is a strategy to put feminists on the defensive by making them feel morally obligated to distinguish feminism from Nazism. And yet the public promulgation of terms such as feminazi emphasises the need for a movement that seeks the advancement of women. Appropriating such a deplorable term definitely is not an option. Women can instead reinforce the potency of feminism by identifying as feminists. But the most important response to obscenity is to expose the misogyny being used against women.

Claiming that those who challenge gender inequality are feminazis is, arguably, libellous. It is a false statement because feminists are not Nazis, and it could be defamatory because being branded some kind of a crypto-Nazi implies extremist and even homicidal ambitions - precisely why Limbaugh referred to "as many abortions as possible". Labelling someone a feminazi publicly castigates and vilifies them and creates public perceptions that are untrue. It renders them at risk of being stigmatised, hated and unemployable. All of this for daring to contest the abuse of women.

Let there be no mistake: a war of words is upon us. It commenced because women spoke out. Now words are being used against women in an attempt to silence them.

Charlotte Proudman
(https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/01/feminazi-feminists-women-rights-feminism-charlotte-proudman)

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 04.03.2017 at 14:02

Quote:

Feminazi is not an innocuous insult. According to Limbaugh a feminazi is "a feminist to whom the important thing in life is ensuring that as many abortions as possible occur". In comparing feminists to the Nazis, Limbaugh is cynically deploying iconography of the most odious kind.

Given Limbaugh's notoriety in labelling people extremists, I was interested to investigate how radical his views actually are. An internet search for Rush Limbaugh brings up a seemingly bottomless diatribe against women, and I came across the following gem: "Feminism was created to force popular culture to accept ugly women." If you thought he couldn't stoop any lower, he has also said of women: "If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it and I'll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch." Labelling feminists as feminazis is an effective mechanism in deflecting attention from the dark extremism of proponents of the term.

The word is a direct assertion of misogyny. Women do not need to be radical to be called a feminazi. They simply have to challenge sex inequality. Advocates of the word contend that the inequalities women face in society are acceptable, even inevitable, and cannot be changed by movements for justice and equality. They define harm inflicted on women as insignificant or fictitious.

The Daily Mail reframes sexist comments in professional spaces as harmless compliments, while Limbaugh defines a woman's control over her reproductive choices as part of a programme of mass murder. The word is wielded as a weapon to control and conquer the feminist movement. It rebukes and intimidates women who challenge vested male power and strive to improve the situation of women.

Words that exploit visceral connections to the Nazis, Stalinists and al-Qaida (so-called gal-Qaida) malign feminists as the enemy because they challenge the patriarchal status quo.

The word feminazi is used by the powerful against the less powerful to silence them. One thing that puzzles many is why women label other women feminazis. In truth, this is likely to be a form of self-protection and self-advancement. Feminism is criticised as a useless movement because it jeopardises the small, incremental gains in power women have made. A woman calling another woman a feminazi is a way of pandering to the men who valorise women who conform.

If the word is used without meeting visible resistance, the woman against whom it is wielded is wounded, and many women who watch this play out in popular discourse are hurt. Women who might have spoken out against gender inequality could now be reluctant to put their head above the parapet due to the consequences. The word can therefore be seen as an effective way to silence women.

Using the label to describe someone is a way of legitimising the onslaught of misogynistic abuse and death threats that follow. You can say these things to a feminazi without recrimination. As the rightwing messaging goes, the feminazi deserves it. The tragic irony is that every time the word is bandied about without retaliation, the power imbalance between men and women is reinforced.

So how can feminists respond? We must recognise that the label is a strategy to put feminists on the defensive by making them feel morally obligated to distinguish feminism from Nazism. And yet the public promulgation of terms such as feminazi emphasises the need for a movement that seeks the advancement of women. Appropriating such a deplorable term definitely is not an option. Women can instead reinforce the potency of feminism by identifying as feminists. But the most important response to obscenity is to expose the misogyny being used against women.

Claiming that those who challenge gender inequality are feminazis is, arguably, libellous. It is a false statement because feminists are not Nazis, and it could be defamatory because being branded some kind of a crypto-Nazi implies extremist and even homicidal ambitions - precisely why Limbaugh referred to "as many abortions as possible". Labelling someone a feminazi publicly castigates and vilifies them and creates public perceptions that are untrue. It renders them at risk of being stigmatised, hated and unemployable. All of this for daring to contest the abuse of women.

Let there be no mistake: a war of words is upon us. It commenced because women spoke out. Now words are being used against women in an attempt to silence them.

Charlotte Proudman
(https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/01/feminazi-feminists-women-rights-feminism-charlotte-proudman)

All that against this:
Real life American feminazi:

Geschreven door Guest, 04.03.2017 at 13:50

Women can't be stopped if they put their mind in doing something. And this is a slow, almost invisibile process. They slowroll us! Imagine a global Matriachate, that would be a sight. Or let's jus be equals, k?

1. Wolves live in matriarchy and are known as well organized and succesfull societies in the animal world
2. In lion's world, all the work is done by the lioness, and lions even kill and eat younglings of ex-lions so his progeny can live, which is retarded, and if lionesses stop working, their whole society will collapse
3. Russia had the Golden Age when a woman was a leader, an Empress (german by the way)
4. England had the golden age when a woman was a leader, the Queen Victoria
5. Ottoman Sultans were advised by their wifes how to lead the Empire (usually european princesses with excellent education which was never used in their homeland because they have vagina instead penis)

Females are by nature better planners, calmer and think more. Because they are physically weak so their brain compensate(males lack the ability to plan, lack calmness and thus tend to conflict). In the Soviet Union, many doctors, soldiers and scientists were woman who contributed alot to human civilization (science and humanity), twice if not thrice more than woman in the West where some of them didn't even had a right to vote until 1960

And even when time comes, females show their strength just as males and dig trenches like in Stalingrad, work 2 shifts in factories producing tanks and planes (100,000 tanks & 100,000 planes in 4 short years) and farming the land like males. And they can even give birth to a new human after only 9 months.

1. smarter
2. weaker but get the job done just like male
3. contain 99% of reproduction material

If nature gives them the last remain 1% piece (sperm/hermaphrodite) they will rule the earth and males will be extinct.

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 04.03.2017 at 14:02

1. Why women have their own colour (pink) and men dont?
2. Why women have their own clothes that men cant wear, whereas women can wear everything? (women can wear pants etc men cant wear skirts, tights, pantyhose, high heels etc)
3. Why women can use all mens care products, whereas men cant do the same? (makeup, lotions, creams etc)
4. Why mens products cant smell good or they will be considered feminine? Fruits, flowers, vanilla scents are not allowed in mens colognes, deodorants and creams, only females can smell good apparently.
5. Why women can lift weights now, practice martial arts and extreme sports and its normal, whereas men who dance or do yoga and gymnastics are frowned upon and considered gay?
6. Why women stick to the idea that the man must be a hunter? We stopped being hunter gatherers 20.000 years ago and even that is based on a falacy and scientific ignorance about the myosceletal properties of the female body.
7. a. Why women stick to the idea that the man should be the protector and provide security. Isnt that sexist? Why cant women protect themselves, why do they crouch to men for protection?
b. As for rape, why the continued victimization and sexism? Women are perfectly capable of defending themselves. If they are very weak that not only they never work out but they cant even lift their own grosseries, is it actually wrong to say that they create the circumstances for them getting attacked?

Isnt it the same for nerd males who are very weak and get constantly bullied and attacked by stronger males? Being weak and sexually provocative and expect to not get attacked just because you are female is actually sexist. We know now that the physiological differences between males and females are not that important, its their choice to be weak. 90% of sexual assaults are not done by martial artists or bodybuilders, women should be able to fend off most attackers just by having a medium physique and a good level of fitness.


I could name 100 more arguments. Women are more sexist than men, trust me. Theres literally nothing a woman cant do at this day and age (in the western world atleast) but a ton of things men arent supposed to do, because they cross over to the female only area. The double standards are ridiculous. Women are the ones who sustain sexism in the 21st century and thats a fact.

Geschreven door Khal.eesi, 09.03.2017 at 06:27

blabla

Most of your "arguments" are just stereotypes.
Think a bit more.

Geschreven door Free_Warrior, 04.03.2017 at 14:19

bla example of a female asshole

... just like taking the FC Barça paylist and arguing that all football players earn millions... bla!

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 09.03.2017 at 20:27

Geschreven door Khal.eesi, 09.03.2017 at 06:27

blabla

Most of your "arguments" are just stereotypes.
Think a bit more.

Stereotypes really?

stereotype : a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.

Most of my arguments were basicly facts. Is it a stereotype that females have their own colour, clothes, care and beauty products and males dont? How is that equality? Is it a stereotype that females have their own sports where men are mocked and frowned upon if they take part?

Is it a stereotype that the difference in muscle mass and bone structure between males and females is minuscule? I deal with the human body for a living, trust me i know. I could even argue that females have it easier than men, because due to their muscles having more type I fibers, they dont have to lift as heavy as men to achieve hypertrophy, they can train in the 20 range reps and gain muscle. Women can be just as strong as men. They just dont want to, period.

Thats not a stereotype thats biology

And by sticking to the notion that females are inherently weak and need tenderness and special attention you are rooting sexism deeper and deeper. Men will always take advantage of that.

You could argue that women who stick to the idea of the man as protector and as the one having to provide security, is a stereotype, although if you actually speak with females in the 30+ range and without piercings and/or doing drugs, you will pretty much hear the same, they want their man to be able to provide them with security, ignoring the downsides that come with it. Women are not only the edgy, obese rebellious teen youtubers.

And my point is that they have only themselves to blame, society has been ready to offer them total equality since the '90s, they just dont want it.

Geschreven door Khal.eesi, 10.03.2017 at 06:56

2 long bla "defending" "facts"

You said:

Quote:

1. Why women have their own colour (pink) and men dont?

Be more serious. Pink is women's color?
It is a color ascribed by society... possibly by the pinky dresses of former Disney princesses. Sexist stereotype.

Quote:

2. Why women have their own clothes that men cant wear, whereas women can wear everything? (women can wear pants etc men cant wear skirts, tights, pantyhose, high heels etc)

Really? This is an ARGUMENT that there is no sexism? Most clothes designed for women are designed by men and DO follow sexist stereotypes. Do you really think that wired bras, high heels, corsets, etc. - which are bad for women's health - are voluntary accessorise? They became mainstream because of a specific ideal image of women's clothes. Again, product of historical male domination.

Quote:

3. Why women can use all mens care products, whereas men cant do the same? (makeup, lotions, creams etc)

OMG, poor you. You are not allowed to use "women's" products. C'mon, be more serious. Get over the mainstream and grow some balls! Hehehehe...

Quote:

4. Why mens products cant smell good or they will be considered feminine? Fruits, flowers, vanilla scents are not allowed in mens colognes, deodorants and creams, only females can smell good apparently.

Same as above; if you care so much about what others say, then you are just another sheep.

Quote:

5. Why women can lift weights now, practice martial arts and extreme sports and its normal, whereas men who dance or do yoga and gymnastics are frowned upon and considered gay?

Again, this is an argument that describes a sexist, patriarchal and hetero-normative society, rather than arguing that there is gender equality. You get the point? Right?

Quote:

6. Why women stick to the idea that the man must be a hunter? We stopped being hunter gatherers 20.000 years ago and even that is based on a falacy and scientific ignorance about the myosceletal properties of the female body.

I dunno what women you are talking about, but if you know women that still think men have to be the provider (not really hunter), then please review deeply the kind of women you know and why you know this kind of women and not others. And remember, sexism and patriarchal dominance is equally shared by many women. Not only men discriminate women, women also do it. It is a phenomenon that is called "lack of sorority" and follows the logic of "divide and rule".

Quote:

7. a. Why women stick to the idea that the man should be the protector and provide security. Isnt that sexist? Why cant women protect themselves, why do they crouch to men for protection?
b. As for rape, why the continued victimization and sexism? Women are perfectly capable of defending themselves. If they are very weak that not only they never work out but they cant even lift their own grosseries, is it actually wrong to say that they create the circumstances for them getting attacked?

Oh geee... now you really hit the fan. Here you are basically saying that women are guilty if they are being raped (even murdered).
Basically, a person does not have to know how to defend him/herself; it is always the aggressors guilt if a person is hit, damaged, raped or murdered. Right? Can you agree on that?

Geschreven door Khal.eesi, 10.03.2017 at 06:56

Stereotypes really?

stereotype : a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing.

Most of my arguments were basicly facts. Is it a stereotype that females have their own colour, clothes, care and beauty products and males dont? How is that equality? Is it a stereotype that females have their own sports where men are mocked and frowned upon if they take part?

Is it a stereotype that the difference in muscle mass and bone structure between males and females is minuscule? I deal with the human body for a living, trust me i know. I could even argue that females have it easier than men, because due to their muscles having more type I fibers, they dont have to lift as heavy as men to achieve hypertrophy, they can train in the 20 range reps and gain muscle. Women can be just as strong as men. They just dont want to, period.

Thats not a stereotype thats biology

And by sticking to the notion that females are inherently weak and need tenderness and special attention you are rooting sexism deeper and deeper. Men will always take advantage of that.

You could argue that women who stick to the idea of the man as protector and as the one having to provide security, is a stereotype, although if you actually speak with females in the 30+ range and without piercings and/or doing drugs, you will pretty much hear the same, they want their man to be able to provide them with security, ignoring the downsides that come with it. Women are not only the edgy, obese rebellious teen youtubers.

And my point is that they have only themselves to blame, society has been ready to offer them total equality since the '90s, they just dont want it.

nice misogyny

I miss the good old days when it was a man's job to objectify women, instead of them doing it there selves xD

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Geschreven door Khal.eesi, 10.03.2017 at 06:56

2 long bla "defending" "facts"

You said:

Quote:

1. Why women have their own colour (pink) and men dont?

Be more serious. Pink is women's color?
It is a color ascribed by society... possibly by the pinky dresses of former Disney princesses. Sexist stereotype.

Yes after ww2 and especially during the '80s and after, pink became the girly colour. Literally every single product marketed for the females is in pink colour, its only recently that some men find it acceptable to wear pink shirts and only shirts, nothing else. The same is not true for females as they can wear all colours.

You can cry "sexist stereotype" like a broken record all you want, it wont make it true. This is blatant evidence of societal sexism against men.

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Quote:

2. Why women have their own clothes that men cant wear, whereas women can wear everything? (women can wear pants etc men cant wear skirts, tights, pantyhose, high heels etc)

Really? This is an ARGUMENT that there is no sexism? Most clothes designed for women are designed by men and DO follow sexist stereotypes. Do you really think that wired bras, high heels, corsets, etc. - which are bad for women's health - are voluntary accessorise? They became mainstream because of a specific ideal image of women's clothes. Again, product of historical male domination.

In case you missed it, i never ever said there is no sexism. I said there is sexism against males and women are equally if not more responsible for the continuation of sexism both ways. I urge you to open your mind, listen more and think more.

Critical thinking will always, always, trump copy pasted rhetoric from armchair philosophers, whether they are anarchocommunist neanderthals or fascistoid cromagnons.

Every single piece of female garment and accessory is voluntarily adopted, yes offcourse. This is not the '50s, women can wear whatever they want. They choose to wear all these things, (possibly?) just so they can be more provocative and lure the males. They objectify themselves by wearing them, if you have a single piece of evidence that males are forcing them to dress a certain way please post it.

My point still stands and you didnt address it, women have their own clothes that men are not allowed to wear, but women can wear everything a man can. Not only that, but on the occasion that designers push for more androgynous clothes, women are the first to mock and humiliate the men that wear them.

You can downplay it or red herring it as much as you want, thats blatant evidence of sexism and double standards against men.

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Quote:

3. Why women can use all mens care products, whereas men cant do the same? (makeup, lotions, creams etc)

OMG, poor you. You are not allowed to use "women's" products. C'mon, be more serious. Get over the mainstream and grow some balls! Hehehehe...

Nice replying with a sexist comment Grow some balls lol...as if courage and fearlessness is a male privilege that is dependent on the size of male testicles? xD

My point still stands, by your reasoning women should get over the mainstream and wear normal clothes and not pornstar ones. Oh wait, they have, only difference is that women who wear modest clothes are not frowned upon by males, but when a man dares to use "female" products and clothes he is called a faggot by women and not a real man.

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Quote:

4. Why mens products cant smell good or they will be considered feminine? Fruits, flowers, vanilla scents are not allowed in mens colognes, deodorants and creams, only females can smell good apparently.

Same as above; if you care so much about what others say, then you are just another sheep.

I dont, but most people do and can you blame them? If what you said is true, then whats the deal with fat shaming, whore shaming and political correctness? Oh thats right, you support concepts that have to do with censoring the harsh "truth" ( that fatties are fat, uglies are ugly and whores are actually whores) but you dont support the right of men to use any product they want without having their dignity and sexuality, "untruthfully" questioned and challenged?

Makes sense.

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Quote:

5. Why women can lift weights now, practice martial arts and extreme sports and its normal, whereas men who dance or do yoga and gymnastics are frowned upon and considered gay?

Again, this is an argument that describes a sexist, patriarchal and hetero-normative society, rather than arguing that there is gender equality. You get the point? Right?

Yes i get the point since it was the point i made, myself. The point that theres sexism against MALES and not the other way around. You get it right? Right?

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Quote:

6. Why women stick to the idea that the man must be a hunter? We stopped being hunter gatherers 20.000 years ago and even that is based on a falacy and scientific ignorance about the myosceletal properties of the female body.

I dunno what women you are talking about, but if you know women that still think men have to be the provider (not really hunter), then please review deeply the kind of women you know and why you know this kind of women and not others. And remember, sexism and patriarchal dominance is equally shared by many women. Not only men discriminate women, women also do it. It is a phenomenon that is called "lack of sorority" and follows the logic of "divide and rule".

The provider is the one side of a multiple facet coin. Other aspects are able to provide security, protection and yes, being the hunter, whatever that entails. Theres even polls that prove women prefer "bad boys". Women are fucked up and they dont know what they want, nor do they even know what they fight for nowdays.

Your classic line " oh i dont know why u know these kind of people" doesnt really hold up. It just shows your supposed moral superiority and closed mindedness and is actually very disrespectful. I guess the "true" females are only the ones that hang out in communistic party headquarters and hippie, pothead rave parties and concerts right? Well women are all around us, from the cashier in the coffee shop, to the party animal tramp, to the respected government official and the suit wearing careerists.

All you have to do is talk to them, listen to them. They are wonderfull human beings, that are in their majority deeply sexist, bigoted and suffer from cognitive dissonance.

Geschreven door Columna Durruti, 11.03.2017 at 09:58

Quote:

7. a. Why women stick to the idea that the man should be the protector and provide security. Isnt that sexist? Why cant women protect themselves, why do they crouch to men for protection?
b. As for rape, why the continued victimization and sexism? Women are perfectly capable of defending themselves. If they are very weak that not only they never work out but they cant even lift their own grosseries, is it actually wrong to say that they create the circumstances for them getting attacked?

Oh geee... now you really hit the fan. Here you are basically saying that women are guilty if they are being raped (even murdered).
Basically, a person does not have to know how to defend him/herself; it is always the aggressors guilt if a person is hit, damaged, raped or murdered. Right? Can you agree on that?

Offcourse its the agressor's fault, but you are responsible for creating the circumstances for everything that happens in life. Its not a persons fault that they got hit by lung cancer, but they could lower the possibilities by stop smoking. Its not a persons fault that they cant get a job in this increasingly vicious capitalism driven job market, but they could increase the possibilities by making sure they studied hard at school and got a good education.


Bottom line is theres nothing indicating that theres sexism against women. In fact they are favoured, at least in the West in pretty much everything. From universities where they can get into Stem easier for eg, to the workplace where the opportunities are equal if not more than males, they just dont put up the hours or the dedication ( some of us in aw actually work for a living and have plenty of anecdotal evidence of womens questionable work ethics, lazyness and poor performance).

But we have a tons of evidence for the opposite, ranging from societal ones, in the form of forced "masculinity", to education and employment (quotas), to actual life and death that no feminist conveniently talks about eg military deaths (97-98% males). I guess male life doesnt matter, all the male has to do is provide the sperm and then go fight the wars and die)


Females are crying about sexism when they are the ones bullying males into conforming to enforced societal guidelines.

Females are crying about equality in education and workforce, when they just dont study hard enough and not working hard enough.

We live in an era of total absurdity, where lies become truths and truth becomes racism and sexism.

This song sums it up.

Female : "I dont want to study. I just want to party"

Feminism will be the cause for human extinction.