[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Modern feminism? It doesn't have a fixed definition; and that's 90% of the problem.

There’s no such thing as “modern feminism”

Feminism is what Jonathan posted, the issue you have is with SJW who take things to the extreme, label it as feminism and then people begin to resent what feminism actually is

[Ammi]

...it’s just odd really with the F1 grid girl thing atm as well...and we’re defining femism as equal choice which obviously it is...but then when that choice is given, which it is to the grid girls..we’re saying no, we need to ban that, you can’t do it ...and why do we want it banned, well it’s not you actually, it’s those awful men so blame them for banning you and taking away your choice of that unique experience...

[Gstar]

Originally Posted by Firewire

We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller
We say to girls: "You can have ambition, but not too much
You should aim to be successful, but not too successful
Otherwise, you will threaten the man"
Because I am female, I am expected to aspire to marriage
I am expected to make my life choices
Always keeping in mind that marriage is the most important
Now, marriage can be a source of joy and love and mutual support
But why do we teach girls to aspire to marriage
And we don't teach boys the same?
We raise girls to see each other as competitors
Not for jobs or for accomplishments, which I think can be a good thing
But for the attention of men
We teach girls that they cannot be sexual beings in the way that boys are
Feminist: a person who believes in the social, political
And economic equality of the sexes

[Crimson Dynamo]

Im with Donald

[Oliver_W]

I wouldn't call myself a feminist by "today's standards". I mean, of course I believe in equality for both genders, but when Modern Feminism(tm) thinks equally qualified men and women get paid differently for doing the same work+same hours, focus on issues which don't matter like how men sit instead of real issues, and ally themselves with islam, it's hard to take it seriously.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I wouldn't call myself a feminist by "today's standards". I mean, of course I believe in equality for both genders, but when Modern Feminism(tm) thinks equally qualified men and women get paid differently for doing the same work+same hours, focus on issues which don't matter like how men sit instead of real issues, and ally themselves with islam, it's hard to take it seriously.

I agree with this; I have little time for "popular modern-day feminism" because it's reactionary and not evidence-based... it's a lot of people jabbering about things they've heard other people say as if it's hard fact. Which makes it pretty worthless.

"Women get paid 9% less than men for the same job!!"
"How do you know?"
"I read it on Facebook yesterday."
"Do you have a link to ANY actual official stats that back up this claim?"
"NO and you are SEXIST for even asking."


It drives me nuts. Give me a topic that can actually be debated, a problem that can actually be studied and addressed, and I'm all for it. If you've got little more than "Stuff is bad and it's bad that stuff is bad, and it's even worse that you won't join me in complaining about the bad stuff!!" then I just... can't.

Have a real, tangible, evidence based issue and want to find ways to address that issue? Great!

Just feeling peeved and want to rant and everyone to feel angry and / or guilty along with you but with no actual utility or positive end goal? No I'm not really interested I'm afraid.

[Crimson Dynamo]

and they say in Scotland

A man is not a man until he has a daughter

[Vicky.]

'Modern feminism'..can you define what that is to you please? I know you say it has no fixed definition, but can you give an example beyond the gender pay gap (which I am not sure exists in reality)

Modern feminism to me is all this sex positive liberal feminism stuff...and I would agree that thats mainly bull****.

Second wave is where its at, for me. 'Radical feminism' (which does not mean extremist like I thought it did until recently)..actually about womens rights and liberation. None of this ridiculous identity politics post modern bollocks.

[lewis111]

Radical feminism is such a small part of feminism yet does seem to have become the most vocal and a reason why people distance themselves from the word and words like "Feminazi" come about

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by lewis111

Radical feminism is such a small part of feminism yet does seem to have become the most vocal and a reason why people distance themselves from the word and words like "Feminazi" come about

Nah. Thats because of what smithy said. Some people being loudmouths and blaming it on feminism tbh. Nothing wrong with radical feminism as its actually supposed to be.

The radical feminism you seem to have in mind is

SJW who take things to the extreme, label it as feminism and then people begin to resent what feminism actually is

[lewis111]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Nah. Thats because of what smithy said. Some people being loudmouths and blaming it on feminism tbh. Nothing wrong with radical feminism as its actually supposed to be.

The radical feminism you seem to have in mind is

Idk some people are very easily triggered by feminism or even the mention of it, it's sort of like veganism - there is literally nothing wrong with it its people protecting animals yet so many people despise vegans

It's just ignorance a lack of education though surely, if people knew feminism was just purely wanting equality then they'd be awful not to support it

[smudgie]

What is wrong with just being an individualist, if we have to be tagged with any label at all.
I am just me.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by smudgie

What is wrong with just being an individualist, if we have to be tagged with any label at all.
I am just me.

...I’m going to start promoting smudgism as a thing actually...we should all be more smudgie....

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I’m going to start promoting smudgism as a thing actually...we should all be more smudgie....

How is Smudgie supposed to be an individualist if we all turn more Smudgie?

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Withano

How is Smudgie supposed to be an individualist if we all turn more Smudgie?

...we’re going to foil her plans, Withano...shhhhh, I thought that one had slipped by without her noticing...

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...we’re going to foil her plans, Withano...shhhhh, I thought that one had slipped by without her noticing...

I'll distract her

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by smudgie

What is wrong with just being an individualist, if we have to be tagged with any label at all.
I am just me.

Unfortunately individuals and individual thinking are not fashionable - group thinking seems more in keeping with the times. Not for me though!

[Vicky.]

I think thats the first time I have seen that elephant used in over 3 years

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I think thats the first time I have seen that elephant used in over 3 years

My distraction plan is totally working, Ammi

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I think thats the first time I have seen that elephant used in over 3 years

Originally Posted by Withano

My distraction plan is totally working, Ammi

......


...(...you can start that elephant movement now, Withano...I think it’s time..)...

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I’m going to start promoting smudgism as a thing actually...we should all be more smudgie....

Originally Posted by Withano

How is Smudgie supposed to be an individualist if we all turn more Smudgie?

Originally Posted by Ammi

...we’re going to foil her plans, Withano...shhhhh, I thought that one had slipped by without her noticing...

Originally Posted by Withano

I'll distract her

Originally Posted by Withano

My distraction plan is totally working, Ammi

Got my eye on you two.

[Vicky.]

Well explained TS. I agree with most points you just made. I think the frustration is understandable though, we have been fighting to be equal for a hundred years and are still not there. By law, yes, but in reality no. I understand the urge to essentially...force change rather than let it happen naturally. As waiting for it to just happen does not seem to be working and things are already starting to go backwards. If we just wait and see..chances are evertything will just go way back, and then the same work that has already been done, will need to be done again. if that makes sense.

In short, I understand where you are coming from totally...but at the same time I just cannot see how just waiting for change will help anything.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Well explained TS. I agree with most points you just made. I think the frustration is understandable though, we have been fighting to be equal for a hundred years and are still not there. By law, yes, but in reality no. I understand the urge to essentially...force change rather than let it happen naturally. As waiting for it to just happen does not seem to be working and things are already starting to go backwards. If we just wait and see..chances are evertything will just go way back, and then the same work that has already been done, will need to be done again. if that makes sense.

In short, I understand where you are coming from totally...but at the same time I just cannot see how just waiting for change will help anything.

That's my point though; what I would call "real" equality, in terms of generally changing mindsets etc, have been around for a few decades and while that might seem like a long time... It isn't. Measures that are already in place will take entire generations to be fully realised. I fully 100% believe that if you could fast forward to today's 20 year olds being OAP's then you would see the type of equality that's being sought, no further "pushing" required, just simple maintenance to ensure things don't go backwards. Pushing too hard runs the risk of utterly wrecking everything that HAS been achieved. In fact I think that's already happening.

But people don't want to wait generations, people for some reason believe that a decade represents "a long time"... In a human civilization that stretches back thousands of years. Progress is slow, progress takes time, progress might never directly benefit you at all, but benefit your children and grandchildren... failure to accept that and trying to make it "instant" is a massive, massive mistake; but a common feature of modern society.

People are quick to point out the "gaps" as if they can be instantly and permanently closed by "doing some sort of a thing I dunno what but someone has to do it". People want a 9% pay gap to be 0%, tomorrow. When the fact is, it doesn't matter if its 9%, so long as it's 8% in two years time, and so long as it doesn't slide to 10%. So long as the trajectory is right, trying to force it to speed up is a gamble.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

That's my point though; what I would call "real" equality, in terms of generally changing mindsets etc, have been around for a few decades and while that might seem like a long time... It isn't. Measures that are already in place will take entire generations to be fully realised. I fully 100% believe that if you could fast forward to today's 20 year olds being OAP's then you would see the type of equality that's being sought, no further "pushing" required, just simple maintenance to ensure things don't go backwards. Pushing too hard runs the risk of utterly wrecking everything that HAS been achieved. In fact I think that's already happening.

But people don't want to wait generations, people for some reason believe that a decade represents "a long time"... In a human civilization that stretches back thousands of years. Progress is slow, progress takes time, progress might never directly benefit you at all, but benefit your children and grandchildren... failure to accept that and trying to make it "instant" is a massive, massive mistake; but a common feature of modern society.

People are quick to point out the "gaps" as if they can be instantly and permanently closed by "doing some sort of a thing I dunno what but someone has to do it". People want a 9% pay gap to be 0%, tomorrow. When the fact is, it doesn't matter if its 9%, so long as it's 8% in two years time, and so long as it doesn't slide to 10%. So long as the trajectory is right, trying to force it to speed up is a gamble.

I completely disagree with that with how things are going today. I am a bit of a broken record on this subject but whilst activists are fighting to change the meaning of the word woman (whilst refusing to define what the new definition is meant to be) and things such as single sex spaces (men need their privacy from women also) are under attack. Apparently male and female are not real measurable things and people are fighting to change the law so that male people can just say they are female and thats that, and vice versa. Its taken so long to get to where we are, and it could be taken away in a second, and thats ****ing scary to me.

I think if things had remained along the trajectory they were on then this may have happened. Things did seem to be getting better and with time it would probably have continued that way. As more and more people bring up their kids to be respectful of the other sex (an d their own sex) and stuff. yes there would still be bad apples, there always are but it would have got better.

But this identity politics nonsense and pomo queer theory is a huge threat to womens (and mens to a lesser extent) rights. I do believe biology is important in certain areas of life and that we cannot ignore that.

The F1 girls stuff..I understand how that could benefit women in the long term (stopping the objectification of women is surely a good thing) but at the same time , if society just became less sexist then yes, this kind of thing would die out on its own. Issue is, if we are supposed to not 'see sex' (comes across very much like the 'I dont see colour' racists tbh) then we cannot see sexism, or fight it.

Not sure if I am on topic anymore here. But again, I do agree that things will get better in time. But only IF this pomo nonsense disappears. if it keeps being pushed so aggressively, then we will go backwards, and very fast. Hence this is the most important thing to me at the moment, pushing back against the nonsense. It does scare me. I may be a bit obsessed. But the logical conclusion of this 'sex is meaningless and not a real measureable thing that matters sometimes' stuff is that womens rights will disappear completely. Men will be affected by it all too, but to a much lesser extent.

[bots]

The way i see it, there is proactive feminism and reactive feminism. By this point we shouldn't be needing to deal with reactive feminism, it should all be proactive. If people aren't complying with the proactive measures now in place they should be hauled up for it. To me, people still raising points under the reactive banner are the ones doing feminism the greatest disservice.