Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Question for anti-feminists/MRA's

Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 11, 2012, 03:20:41 PM
Are you fine with the biological double standards untouched by feminism?
women- shamed for slutdom, motherhood, protected, provided for.
men- do all of the important things, free to have sex but are disposable. If a crisis comes a 100 men will die to save one uterus.

basically, are you fine with men dying on the titanic if feminism stays away forever?


Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 11, 2012, 08:35:59 PM
Are you fine with the biological double standards untouched by feminism?
women- shamed for slutdom, motherhood, protected, provided for.
men- do all of the important things, free to have sex but are disposable. If a crisis comes a 100 men will die to save one uterus.

basically, are you fine with men dying on the titanic if feminism stays away forever?



Why should men be obligated to provide for women and lead disposable lives? Women are mentally capable of fulfilling a wide variety of important roles outside of child rearing and 'housewife duties'. Obviously there are physical and mental differences between the genders and a clear cut binary between the two is not only obvious but necessary for the sanity of any nation, but the notion that women aren't intellectually fit and deserving of a productive, stimulating life of creativity and challenge (which also benefits the nation at large) is ass backward and unsupported by history. One of the very foundations of nationalism is understanding that the good of the tribe trumps the whims of the ego, so why should we value our women so little in this way while justifying it with some insane notion that although our women are confined and treated as lesser class citizen, we still value them because we feel financially indebted to them due to our own pride? Men, free yourselves of the unnecessary burden of 'provider role' and allow women to provide for themselves, and the rest of the nation at large. You can still keep a cohesive family unit with proper balance, understanding and communication between both parties. Besides, if someone needs to watch the kids (provided we can put to death the insanity of throwing our parents away into nursing homes when they get old and need help from us), they can spend valuable time with their grandparents. The insane fatalism you just described sounds more like some kind of doomsday LARP fantasy than anything rooted in reality.

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 11, 2012, 10:07:01 PM
For men to be willing to die for women, then women must have the kind of value that would entail.
This is only the case if women are women, and not cheap imitations of men. (When it suits them).
And: There are few things less deserving of respect than male feminists.


Squawk!

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 11, 2012, 10:21:16 PM
For men to be willing to die for women, then women must have the kind of value that would entail.
This is only the case if women are women, and not cheap imitations of men. (When it suits them).
And: There are few things less deserving of respect than male feminists.




Since when is functioning as a fully integrated and worthwhile member of society being a cheap imitation of a man?

In the context of this forum, calling me a feminist is similar to a lefty calling someone a racist. It's easy, but it doesn't mean much.

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 12, 2012, 02:05:16 AM
I wasn't specifically referring to you, although you put me in a mind to reflect upon such things.
I wouldn't label you anything at all, except to note your view is an odd one from where I stand.
Only you would be in any position to know what you were.
And even then, seeing as how so few people know themselves at all, not a very persuasive position.

To see women as women is not to undervalue them in the least.
It is to see clearly.
They are nothing at all like men.
Although many men, as a direct result of feminism, have become disconcertingly like women.
And that can never be a good thing in a larger context.
Squawk!

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 12, 2012, 03:05:49 AM
I wasn't specifically referring to you, although you put me in a mind to reflect upon such things.
I wouldn't label you anything at all, except to note your view is an odd one from where I stand.
Only you would be in any position to know what you were.
And even then, seeing as how so few people know themselves at all, not a very persuasive position.

To see women as women is not to undervalue them in the least.
It is to see clearly.
They are nothing at all like men.
Although many men, as a direct result of feminism, have become disconcertingly like women.
And that can never be a good thing in a larger context.


You keep saying things like 'women are women', and that we must 'see women as women', but of course that's vague and doesn't provide any insight into what these supposed inherent deficiencies are that relegate women to the role of personal maid and baby watcher. Not that you could anyway, because despite physical differences between the genders, women have proven themselves to be wholly competent in fields such as science, medicine, literature, art, the list goes on. Throughout time, in a large majority of cultures around the world women have toiled physically for the betterment of the community as well. This obsession with the role of women as sweet, harmless tools to be kept uneducated and taken care of like pets is a symptom of modernity. Do I think women can fill every role? No, most would not be suited for combat soldiery, and as I've known most women throughout my life to place emotion over logic, I wouldn't trust a woman in a political leadership position. However, whatever IQ differences between men and women may exist, I think at this point in time they've been proven irrelevant in many realms of service to nation and people. Reconsider the benefits of giving the best of our women every opportunity to become educated and excel for the betterment of our people. Maybe the under-120s can be forced into nannydom.

Also, of course men shouldn't act feminine, and women shouldn't act masculine. Those that do are most likely filled with immense cognitive dissonance and psychological trauma which prevents them from being otherwise healthy human beings. I think you're making a bit of a leap by implying that a woman having an education, career, and purpose outside of homemaker is somehow a foray into masculinity. By these foolish assertions, a man who enjoys gardening, cooking, and cleaning his own home is acting feminine. Even rubbing cocks with other men can be masculine, crow. Re-assess your interpretation of gender roles, and try to bring it closer in line with reality.

http://www.heroichomosex.org/

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 12, 2012, 03:20:12 AM
There was a time when sons in particular were prized and the women were of course the only means to get any (yeah that and the sons afterward). Then, there was the importation of a foreign religion with some more eastern social rules. The two combined got us a heavily patriarchal society for a while. Feminism is an extreme counter reaction to the extreme shift caused by the second. Additionally, the first has fallen out of our perspective as homesteader farmer needing loyal help or nobleman needing heirs is no longer the default pursuit.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 12, 2012, 03:33:53 AM
You're someone begging for an argument, Vigor, and you haven't realized yet that I don't argue.
You'll have to find someone else to grind your axe against.
Or whatever it is you feel like grinding.
Squawk!

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 12, 2012, 03:02:38 PM
basically, are you fine with men dying on the titanic if feminism stays away forever?

Sure.  Why not?  Every man has to decide how he will die.  I'd give my left nut to make feminism stay away forever.

I want to know how any feminist explains people like Mary Wollstonecraft or Jane Austen.  It's clear evidence that if you had the chops, even 200+ years ago, being a woman didn't prevent you from anything.  Feminism benefits mediocre women more than anything.  If you have the real chops and real talent, you won't be prevented from jack.  At this point, feminism creates discontent where there is none.
His Majesty at the Swamp / Black Arts Lead to Everlasting Sins / Diabolical Fullmoon Mysticism / Oath of Black Blood / Privilege of Evil / Dawn of Possession / In Battle There is No Law / Thousand Swords / To Mega Therion

Re: Question for anti-feminists/MRA's
May 12, 2012, 09:30:37 PM
You're someone begging for an argument, Vigor, and you haven't realized yet that I don't argue.
You'll have to find someone else to grind your axe against.
Or whatever it is you feel like grinding.


It's a baited line tossed in murky waters. It has been tempting to toss the thread in the trash for this reason but the lack of open explanation would confound a lot of our participants whos eager replies would have vanished. I believe many of our participants deserve better from moderation (guidance) and far better than the contempt for them shown with such a thread and from some of the other recent ones.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793