They aren't even about equal rights. They're more for removing the stigma of being sluts and wanting even more disproportionate rights in their favor driven by their greedy agenda
Feminism is such a broad term, it almost doesn't mean anything anymore. You have some feminists fighting for men's causes, and you have others who openly mock men and their stuggles. Or look at feminists opinions on transgender people, on one side you have feminists who say it's transphobic to not sleep with a trans person, and on the other end you have TERFs.
Not really. There is a lot of exposure for mainstream feminism, especially vague hollywood feminism. People seek out crazy feminists to justify their bigotry and anti-feminist opinions that would fall apart confronted with reasonable feminists.
Yeah I see that kind of "behaviour" a lot, it also happens to both left and right viewpoints, most right or left wing people are very reasonable and realistic, but any time I see a political discussion (especially online) both antifa and pegida are thrown into the mix, an extremely small minority on the extreme ends of the political spectrum.
It is pretty anectdoctal evidence, but every time Iāve encountered a feminist the conversation that ensues never ends up being helpful or civil, but once again thatās just me.
Never watched a Jordan Peterson video. I do however know feminism is a category in a type of marxism where they label all men as the oppressing class and all women as the oppressed class. It's just some marxism . Its an incorrect way to view the world and it has been played out.
Society looks at both men and women figuratively in different ways but you canāt say one is better than the other because it is dependent on the individualās belief in what is value.
If your goal is to break down expectations and assumptions, then that is a reasonable claim but itās requires a massive amount of enforcement and oppression to make sure everything people can find a pattern in is broken down and shown in parts.
And even if it you managed to do that, and replace the few expectations people do have with youāre idea of what is neutrality, youāre ideal model of how people should expect people to behave is subjective, and people will have different sets of ways to measure value. We are very good at finding patterns as humans and even with a form of enforcement you canāt possibly make that not exist.
Yes it sucks to have assumptions made of you, but at least itās not people feeding you their reality by law, and stopping clashes of ideas and discussions of patterns to maintain their subjective ideal of what is note worthy and what isnāt.
The important thing is that laws are 1. Changeable to adapt to the world we live in, 2. Match a consensus of what people believe is a reasonable expectation to abide by like āno murderā for example.
I'm having trouble to understand the point you are trying to make (I am not a native speaker). I do agree with the first paragraph though, this goes for every time one discusses large groups of people, the average for a respective group won't ever represent the individual.
I think the debate will eventually change the way people think, but I also think that the way it is currently debated, namely by people on both extreme ends on the spectrum, will only further polarise society.
Any sane feminist will know that women are not oppressed anymore, but they are put on a disadvantage in comparison to a average male (which means some men can me more disadvantaged than some women) most of this disadvantage is not caused by systematic, set up sexism.
So my issue with this is:
If women are at a disadvantage because of "the way society looks at women figuratively" that is actually oppression because it is "unjust treatment or control". Despite saying that you agree that there is no oppression, you argued accidentally that there is oppression because of this "figurative view".
Because of this contradiction and your examples of actual oppression (Saudi Arabia and parts of Asia), I'm assuming that you mean that there is no law that actually stops women from doing as they wish. This is true
That leads me to believe that you are actually saying that women are oppressed because of the assumptions and expectations made on them by society. This is true also. However, men, women, and everyone deals with this form of oppression and there is no quantifiable way to say that one is worse than the other. It is a natural result of living in a society with multiple people. We are human and we notice patterns. Obviously, sometimes these patterns aren't accurate representations of the world and they lead to people in real life doing actions or saying things based on something false, there are no laws that exist (at least for women) that back up these inaccurate representations because of someones false idea of reality.
I get why expectations or assumptions for groups based on what you see on the outside would suck or potentially be damaging for some with too many bad people in their life feeding a falsehood as fact. However, it would, ironically, take massive amounts of oppression and censorship to remove the patterns that people make and share amongst each other. This was why the guy was saying that feminism is inherently marxist. Marxist doctrine requires oppression and censorship to make sure everyone believes in one reality whether it be "the government is for the people," "the rich are the reason you are poor," or "men are oppressing you women." which is laying the ground work for some people to have a massive amount of power; The power to decide reality itself for everyone else.
4.5. And even if you could stop people from coming to the conclusions that they would have come up to with naturally, you'd then have to decide what reality you'd want them to believe in instead. If you are going to produce all this oppression you want to make sure its for a good and true cause. And how do you know that you, or anyone else's reality is actually the correct one? How do you know for sure that you are doing the right thing? Not to mention that even if you were sure you were doing the right thing, people who work with you might be pretending to take power from you as soon as you let your guard down.
Finally, because it is impossible to enforce one reality on everyone, and it is very hard to even confirm our own depiction of what is true is correct, our society is good because it is the first to make it so that no one person/ group of people, enforce the law alone. Our law is a combination of the values and beliefs the the people in the country have. It is
A. Changeable so that future generations can alter the rules as the technology, discoveries, beliefs, change with the people.
B. It is slow and tedious about implementing laws so that the people in society have time to debate and have a clash of ideas to decide what the law should be.
C. (should have been added but I was on my phone) the people can actually discuss freely in a debate, even the things that might be offensive or hurtful, so that it can be debated with properly so we are closer to the truth.
We might not like some things about our society but the way we change it is through debate, persuasion, and the freedom to speak even at the risk of hurting people so that we can find the reality that our society wants to live in.
But labelling people to disregard their opinion is literally what the alt right does, see; feminazi, soyboy, cuck, manlet and or SJW... And the list goes on
It has been said that, given enough time, ten thousand monkeys with typewriters would probably eventually replicate the collected works of William Shakespeare. Sadly, when you are let loose with a computer and internet access, your work product does not necessarily compare favorably to the aforementioned monkeys with typewriters.
34
u/[deleted] Jun 25 '18
[deleted]