Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Feminism

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 10:43:50 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Describe your position on feminism in a paragraph or less! I think feminism was once important, but not it just seems absurd and sexist. Also it haz the dumb sometimes: http://feministing.com...
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 10:51:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think that feminism was necessary to establish some basic political rights. However, now, I don't think it's necessary. I think that it is only still a thing because men aren't being masculine enough. Since the aggregate of men aren't being masculine enough, the women need to compensate by becoming more masculine through feminism.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 10:55:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
One of the central tenants of feminism is that males and females are equal in all ways. This is simply not too. The sexes are different. Men on average act more aggressively , logically and have stronger spatial reasoning. Females have stronger verbal reasoning and have greater social and emotional intelligence. Men also have to put much more effort into mating, since women are pickier than men. There's also situations in which it is more beneficial to be a women than a man. Women are more likely that there emotional problems will be taken seriously, don't have to worry about the draft, less likely to go to jail, get more favorable rulings for custodial and divorce circumstances.

There are plenty of ways that women can find examples of "sexism", because people react differently when a man and woman do something, but that's just the way how evolution act. There's no reason we have to view these as negative, because there are benefits and negatives to each sex.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
TheHitchslap
Posts: 1,231
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 11:23:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 10:43:50 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Describe your position on feminism in a paragraph or less! I think feminism was once important, but not it just seems absurd and sexist. Also it haz the dumb sometimes: http://feministing.com...

I'm an anti-feminist.
One thing I have noticed as well, is most women actually have the same stance, one can believe in equal rights and not be a feminist. I think the biggest problem with them is them claiming anyone who essentially assists them is a "feminist" but just because I believe in equality does not mean I'm a de facto feminist.
I remember a recent study done in Canadian schools, showing that Women in them are becoming damaging to little boys because of several problems; they often favor little girls who believe in cooperation more than competition, and this sometimes results in boys doing worse in school because of those stereotypes. Thus, in this area I think it's pretty clear that feminism has done more harm than good. But I do admire them getting equal rights, good on them for that, but when the oppressed become the oppressor, then there is an issue...
Thank you for voting!
The_Chaos_Heart
Posts: 404
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 12:01:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm opposed to it. At best, I find it misguided. At worst, I find it completely evil. There is no reason to focus on the problems of women, or how problems effect women, when instead we could be focusing on the problem itself,. The solution to an equal society is to de-gender our way of thinking and problem solving, not engender it. We must destroy the value of sex, not increase people's value of one sex.

At 6/7/2013 10:55:45 AM, darkkermit wrote:
One of the central tenants of feminism is that males and females are equal in all ways. This is simply not too. The sexes are different. Men on average act more aggressively , logically and have stronger spatial reasoning. Females have stronger verbal reasoning and have greater social and emotional intelligence. Men also have to put much more effort into mating, since women are pickier than men.

All wrong. At least in terms of claiming these as biological reality.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 3:51:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.

Wow. I'm reading this firefly review and boy is it a heaping pile of sh1t. Not only do they blatantly misunderstand comments, scenes, and characters, they do it to an extreme when they take their misunderstanding and make a poor interpretation/review of it. This review should be burned at the stake.

As an example- the author doesn't like that the surly, renegade CAPTAIN tells his underling to "shut up." (because men shouldn't tell women to shut up sometimes? Perhaps they're too fragile? I don't know.) She says she specifically doesn't like it because it's a white man telling it to a black woman (as if her black-womanness is the only reason to tell her to shut up). She also dislikes that this black woman calls this white man, "sir."...... Let me rephrase that, she dislikes that a person refers to their captain, the captain who has had their back and continues to have their back through the darkest times either of them have ever gone through, their oldest friend, "sir" as a sign of respect .... PUH-LEEEZE! Zoe is a very dutiful character. She is first and foremost a soldier and that is made clear through her constant use of "sir" when referring to... *drum roll* HER CAPTAIN! There is even an episode which deals with this where her husband accuses her (as the author does in this review) of blindly following the captains every command. It simply isn't true. She is not assigned to him as a soldier anymore for the entire course of the show. She is a free agent. She follows his orders BECAUSE she finds him respectable- as do all the other people on the ship. Any of them are free to leave his command at any time without a single repercussion.

As another example- the renegade Companion (i.e. highly-educated, independent sex-worker) has her clients referred to by the author as "rapists" and "fvckers" without any explanation as to how or why they are rapists.....

And one last one- the cheerful Kaylee has a comment made about her by the Captain- "Jayne asks Mal [the captain] to get Kaylee to stop being so cheerful. Mal replies, "Sometimes you just wanna duct tape her mouth and dump her in the hold for a month." The author says this is "woman-hating bile." Absolutely absurd! It's a sarcastic comment made in jest by a surly, cynical guy about the cheerfulness and optimism of a woman who he respects and cares about DEEPLY and, on numerous occasions, risks his life to save and protect and does various other annoying things (to him) just to make her happy and contented. Kaylee kisses him on the cheek afterward saying how much she loves him and he smiles cutely. She does this because she knows he didn't really mean it. He was merely poking fun at how cheerful she is. And he can do that because they are so close.

Most of this author's analysis is based on the first episode and the review revolves almost entirely around what a jerk the Captain is. The thing is- THAT'S KIND OF THE POINT! Over the course of the series, Mal grows as a person and characters are supposed to have flaws and Mal is somewhat of a rebel anti-hero, like Han Solo. Mal IS a d1ckbag. He's not great at interpersonal relationships. But when it really, really counts- when Kaylee gets tied up by a bounty hunter and when she really wants something only he can give her, when Inara is insulted by a man who doesn't respect her as a person and when her companion friends are in dire trouble, when Zoe is unconscious and injured, etc. (and male characters as well!) Mal is the FIRST one to go to extreme to right wrongs. And THAT is why they all respect him and follow his orders even when he's a prick sometimes. He earned it. They don't respect him and follow him just because he's a white man.

/nerdrant
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 4:17:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.

Whoa... I just noticed this.. Are you saying that this Firefly review was not an example of a "feminazi" type nit-picking, patriarchy-blaming, blowing-up-every-tiny-thing sort of example of feminist cultural critique?

I'd have to say, reading that review made my blood boil. This person seems determined to be insulted by sexism and brings up any perceived mistreatment of women or flaw in women characters in the show as evidence that firefly is "misogynist, racist trash."

She also says in the comments: "If you are pro-prostitution then you are not a feminist and pro-prostitution/women-hating opionions are not welcome on my journal. All prostitution is rape." What a load of sh1t.

Pro-prostitution=hating women?!

All prostitution=rape?!

What?!

"Oh, and any more pro-prostituion comments will be deleted."

You can't even challenge her opinions here. Only a few comments in moderate disagreement were allowed. Here is a good example:

"Howdy!

I'm a fan of counter-intuitive thinking, so I was intrigued by your post when I was directed to it by someone who disagrees with your conclusion. What you've presented is obviously well-researched - I was particularly amused by the verbal analysis, which appears to have revealed some subconscious archetyping on the part of the script-writers. You got me thinking: what sort of plot would you find to not be anti-feminist? Every plot of which I can conceive can be construed as hateful to women from the perspective of your blog post:

"Pretty girls fight evil and save the day." -> "Why do female heroes have to be reduced to eye candy?"

"Ugly lesbians fight evil and save the day." -> "Whedon has created his female heroes as carictures of everything men find hateful, and through that correlates the image of strong, heroic women with what men find hateful."

"Neutral-looking women of no apparent sexual orientation fight evil and save the day." -> "The female leads are all stripped of their female characteristics and fade into the scenery, essentially putting them into the kabuki role of female servitude in which they should be neither seen nor heard."

"No women are in the show at all." -> "Buffy presents a world in which women have been wiped out, and the guys run around wisecracking and fighting evil and having a grand old time. They are winking at genocide."

. . . do you see where I'm coming from? As much as I love counter-intuitive thinking, I wonder if your admitted biases have put you in a position where everything is anti-feminist, nothing is pro-feminist, and anti-women subplots can be found lurking behind every bush. If there's a plot that would pass your scrutiny, I'm curious what it would be.

Thank you for your time."

She responds:

"Ugly lesbians fight evil and save the day.

Hey, I'd love to see this show. Especially if the ugly lesbians are 'fighting' rapists and wife-bashers."

.....right................ This is the only show that openly passes her test.... Women who only love and make love to women who fight men that abuse women..... For fvck's sake, kill me now.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 4:17:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I like some of it, and despise other parts. And some parts, I'm indifferent.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 4:36:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If humanity could abolish males and then artificially reproduce, I think it would be highly beneficial.

I think women are still highly oppressed, especially in third world countries. And feminism is crucial.

I think the masculine mindset of dominance is fundamentally destructive and inferior to the delicate nature of femininity.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 4:48:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 10:51:30 AM, ClassicRobert wrote:
I think that feminism was necessary to establish some basic political rights. However, now, I don't think it's necessary in America. I think that it is only still a thing because men aren't being masculine enough. Since the aggregate of men aren't being masculine enough, the women need to compensate by becoming more masculine through feminism.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 5:22:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 3:51:33 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.

Wow. I'm reading this firefly review and boy is it a heaping pile of sh1t. Not only do they blatantly misunderstand comments, scenes, and characters, they do it to an extreme when they take their misunderstanding and make a poor interpretation/review of it. This review should be burned at the stake.

As an example- the author doesn't like that the surly, renegade CAPTAIN tells his underling to "shut up." (because men shouldn't tell women to shut up sometimes? Perhaps they're too fragile? I don't know.) She says she specifically doesn't like it because it's a white man telling it to a black woman (as if her black-womanness is the only reason to tell her to shut up). She also dislikes that this black woman calls this white man, "sir."...... Let me rephrase that, she dislikes that a person refers to their captain, the captain who has had their back and continues to have their back through the darkest times either of them have ever gone through, their oldest friend, "sir" as a sign of respect .... PUH-LEEEZE! Zoe is a very dutiful character. She is first and foremost a soldier and that is made clear through her constant use of "sir" when referring to... *drum roll* HER CAPTAIN! There is even an episode which deals with this where her husband accuses her (as the author does in this review) of blindly following the captains every command. It simply isn't true. She is not assigned to him as a soldier anymore for the entire course of the show. She is a free agent. She follows his orders BECAUSE she finds him respectable- as do all the other people on the ship. Any of them are free to leave his command at any time without a single repercussion.

As another example- the renegade Companion (i.e. highly-educated, independent sex-worker) has her clients referred to by the author as "rapists" and "fvckers" without any explanation as to how or why they are rapists.....

And one last one- the cheerful Kaylee has a comment made about her by the Captain- "Jayne asks Mal [the captain] to get Kaylee to stop being so cheerful. Mal replies, "Sometimes you just wanna duct tape her mouth and dump her in the hold for a month." The author says this is "woman-hating bile." Absolutely absurd! It's a sarcastic comment made in jest by a surly, cynical guy about the cheerfulness and optimism of a woman who he respects and cares about DEEPLY and, on numerous occasions, risks his life to save and protect and does various other annoying things (to him) just to make her happy and contented. Kaylee kisses him on the cheek afterward saying how much she loves him and he smiles cutely. She does this because she knows he didn't really mean it. He was merely poking fun at how cheerful she is. And he can do that because they are so close.

Most of this author's analysis is based on the first episode and the review revolves almost entirely around what a jerk the Captain is. The thing is- THAT'S KIND OF THE POINT! Over the course of the series, Mal grows as a person and characters are supposed to have flaws and Mal is somewhat of a rebel anti-hero, like Han Solo. Mal IS a d1ckbag. He's not great at interpersonal relationships. But when it really, really counts- when Kaylee gets tied up by a bounty hunter and when she really wants something only he can give her, when Inara is insulted by a man who doesn't respect her as a person and when her companion friends are in dire trouble, when Zoe is unconscious and injured, etc. (and male characters as well!) Mal is the FIRST one to go to extreme to right wrongs. And THAT is why they all respect him and follow his orders even when he's a prick sometimes. He earned it. They don't respect him and follow him just because he's a white man.

/nerdrant

I love the overt hatred of male gays that she displays. It seems to her like 'homoerotic' is synonymous with 'everything that is wrong about men'. It's pathetic to see a so-called champion of equality do this.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 5:24:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Two - one to screw in the light bulb, and the other to suck my cock.
YYW
Posts: 36,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 5:34:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 10:43:50 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Describe your position on feminism in a paragraph or less! I think feminism was once important, but not it just seems absurd and sexist. Also it haz the dumb sometimes: http://feministing.com...

I'm cool with first and second wave feminism, but many aspects third wave feminism is a bit over the top. It also happens to be the case that feminism towards the end of the 20th century and into the 21st century seems to have taken a similar route to American liberalism insomuch as both have the curious tendency to "find" victimization where it otherwise might not have existed. I use the word "find" with a bit of caution, because in many cases "fabricate" is a much more appropriate description. I'm not an "anti-feminist" though, by any measure. Feminist critiques have done a great deal of good to keep certain sociopolitical elements -that I'm not going to go into in this paragraph- in check, while elucidating problems that we might not have otherwise seen. Feminist theory, like most normative theory, gives a valuable perspective -or "lens"- through which to view the world, but it is by no means a "perfect" framework that all may be understood by. But even still, "feminism" is a pretty charged word because of the misconceptions that people have about it -and I think that while most know a little bit about some things, most don't know a whole lot at all despite the fact that many still have an opinion on the matter. I think that at some point I might have a "political theory 101 with YYW" thread to lay some basic foundation so that all might have a better understanding on DDO of the big "isms" we all seem to talk about... I might have time to put something together later this summer... or I might forget about it. Time will tell.
Tsar of DDO
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 7:35:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I find that constructive dialogue on feminism is, in almost all instances, obfuscated by a lack of understanding concerning important developments in the movement (developments in concurrence with postmodernism, the curious case of black feminism, third world prevalence of overt sexist oppression, etc.), undue attempts to present feminism as a monolithic system of thought (ex. Bringing up random feminists who make obviously outrageous claims, for instance sex segregation, universal lesbianism, etc as evidence against feminism as a whole.), or sole focus on uninportant points of focus (relately speaking) i.e., things like opening doors and basic chvalry. These are all easy was to demonize (or make seem unimportant) something you already oppose for whatever reason. Or it could simply be predicated on a lack of intellectual rigor, not sure which is more prevalent. I think actually discussing one's view of feminist issues can only come after these thought patterns are left in the past. Unfortunately its eradication this type of thinking is one of the main focuses of feminist thought so......basically thinking about feminism depresses me.
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
PrivateEye
Posts: 972
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2013 7:45:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
What I think is hilarious is how women were duped into smoking by a man claiming that he was only trying to help the feminist movement in putting forward cigarettes as beacons of freedom (it was illegal for women to smoke at the time) and having female celebrities photographed smoking which started a craze, while he was only actually trying to sell more cigarettes. Good job, ladies. When I see that cigarette I will think power!!
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 11:56:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 5:22:56 PM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/7/2013 3:51:33 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.

Wow. I'm reading this firefly review and boy is it a heaping pile of sh1t. Not only do they blatantly misunderstand comments, scenes, and characters, they do it to an extreme when they take their misunderstanding and make a poor interpretation/review of it. This review should be burned at the stake.

As an example- the author doesn't like that the surly, renegade CAPTAIN tells his underling to "shut up." (because men shouldn't tell women to shut up sometimes? Perhaps they're too fragile? I don't know.) She says she specifically doesn't like it because it's a white man telling it to a black woman (as if her black-womanness is the only reason to tell her to shut up). She also dislikes that this black woman calls this white man, "sir."...... Let me rephrase that, she dislikes that a person refers to their captain, the captain who has had their back and continues to have their back through the darkest times either of them have ever gone through, their oldest friend, "sir" as a sign of respect .... PUH-LEEEZE! Zoe is a very dutiful character. She is first and foremost a soldier and that is made clear through her constant use of "sir" when referring to... *drum roll* HER CAPTAIN! There is even an episode which deals with this where her husband accuses her (as the author does in this review) of blindly following the captains every command. It simply isn't true. She is not assigned to him as a soldier anymore for the entire course of the show. She is a free agent. She follows his orders BECAUSE she finds him respectable- as do all the other people on the ship. Any of them are free to leave his command at any time without a single repercussion.

As another example- the renegade Companion (i.e. highly-educated, independent sex-worker) has her clients referred to by the author as "rapists" and "fvckers" without any explanation as to how or why they are rapists.....

And one last one- the cheerful Kaylee has a comment made about her by the Captain- "Jayne asks Mal [the captain] to get Kaylee to stop being so cheerful. Mal replies, "Sometimes you just wanna duct tape her mouth and dump her in the hold for a month." The author says this is "woman-hating bile." Absolutely absurd! It's a sarcastic comment made in jest by a surly, cynical guy about the cheerfulness and optimism of a woman who he respects and cares about DEEPLY and, on numerous occasions, risks his life to save and protect and does various other annoying things (to him) just to make her happy and contented. Kaylee kisses him on the cheek afterward saying how much she loves him and he smiles cutely. She does this because she knows he didn't really mean it. He was merely poking fun at how cheerful she is. And he can do that because they are so close.

Most of this author's analysis is based on the first episode and the review revolves almost entirely around what a jerk the Captain is. The thing is- THAT'S KIND OF THE POINT! Over the course of the series, Mal grows as a person and characters are supposed to have flaws and Mal is somewhat of a rebel anti-hero, like Han Solo. Mal IS a d1ckbag. He's not great at interpersonal relationships. But when it really, really counts- when Kaylee gets tied up by a bounty hunter and when she really wants something only he can give her, when Inara is insulted by a man who doesn't respect her as a person and when her companion friends are in dire trouble, when Zoe is unconscious and injured, etc. (and male characters as well!) Mal is the FIRST one to go to extreme to right wrongs. And THAT is why they all respect him and follow his orders even when he's a prick sometimes. He earned it. They don't respect him and follow him just because he's a white man.

/nerdrant

I love the overt hatred of male gays that she displays. It seems to her like 'homoerotic' is synonymous with 'everything that is wrong about men'. It's pathetic to see a so-called champion of equality do this.

Yeah, I did not get that comment AT ALL. I don't see any of the male relationships in the show as homoerotic, first off. And second, I don't really understand her implication that it's a bad thing or should be considered insulting to them. It was very strange.
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 12:42:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 7:35:08 PM, Noumena wrote:
I find that constructive dialogue on feminism is, in almost all instances, obfuscated by a lack of understanding concerning important developments in the movement (developments in concurrence with postmodernism, the curious case of black feminism, third world prevalence of overt sexist oppression, etc.), undue attempts to present feminism as a monolithic system of thought (ex. Bringing up random feminists who make obviously outrageous claims, for instance sex segregation, universal lesbianism, etc as evidence against feminism as a whole.), or sole focus on uninportant points of focus (relately speaking) i.e., things like opening doors and basic chvalry. These are all easy was to demonize (or make seem unimportant) something you already oppose for whatever reason. Or it could simply be predicated on a lack of intellectual rigor, not sure which is more prevalent. I think actually discussing one's view of feminist issues can only come after these thought patterns are left in the past. Unfortunately its eradication this type of thinking is one of the main focuses of feminist thought so......basically thinking about feminism depresses me.

I think the key here is to think for yourself what feminism means. Let others do their own thinking. If you let others dictate what a certain idea or concept means to you, you will invariably be depressed by what that concept becomes.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
suttichart.denpruektham
Posts: 1,115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:06:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Female superiority? It certainly not gender equality because otherwise they will need to pay attention to both sex and not just their female counterpart (i.e. male workers have difficulty penetrating a well paid, yet female-dominate profession such as air hostess )
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 6:51:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 4:17:36 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.

Whoa... I just noticed this.. Are you saying that this Firefly review was not an example of a "feminazi" type nit-picking, patriarchy-blaming, blowing-up-every-tiny-thing sort of example of feminist cultural critique?

I'd have to say, reading that review made my blood boil. This person seems determined to be insulted by sexism and brings up any perceived mistreatment of women or flaw in women characters in the show as evidence that firefly is "misogynist, racist trash."

She also says in the comments: "If you are pro-prostitution then you are not a feminist and pro-prostitution/women-hating opionions are not welcome on my journal. All prostitution is rape." What a load of sh1t.

Pro-prostitution=hating women?!

All prostitution=rape?!

What?!

"Oh, and any more pro-prostituion comments will be deleted."

You can't even challenge her opinions here. Only a few comments in moderate disagreement were allowed. Here is a good example:

"Howdy!

I'm a fan of counter-intuitive thinking, so I was intrigued by your post when I was directed to it by someone who disagrees with your conclusion. What you've presented is obviously well-researched - I was particularly amused by the verbal analysis, which appears to have revealed some subconscious archetyping on the part of the script-writers. You got me thinking: what sort of plot would you find to not be anti-feminist? Every plot of which I can conceive can be construed as hateful to women from the perspective of your blog post:

"Pretty girls fight evil and save the day." -> "Why do female heroes have to be reduced to eye candy?"

"Ugly lesbians fight evil and save the day." -> "Whedon has created his female heroes as carictures of everything men find hateful, and through that correlates the image of strong, heroic women with what men find hateful."

"Neutral-looking women of no apparent sexual orientation fight evil and save the day." -> "The female leads are all stripped of their female characteristics and fade into the scenery, essentially putting them into the kabuki role of female servitude in which they should be neither seen nor heard."

"No women are in the show at all." -> "Buffy presents a world in which women have been wiped out, and the guys run around wisecracking and fighting evil and having a grand old time. They are winking at genocide."

. . . do you see where I'm coming from? As much as I love counter-intuitive thinking, I wonder if your admitted biases have put you in a position where everything is anti-feminist, nothing is pro-feminist, and anti-women subplots can be found lurking behind every bush. If there's a plot that would pass your scrutiny, I'm curious what it would be.

Thank you for your time."

She responds:

"Ugly lesbians fight evil and save the day.

Hey, I'd love to see this show. Especially if the ugly lesbians are 'fighting' rapists and wife-bashers."

.....right................ This is the only show that openly passes her test.... Women who only love and make love to women who fight men that abuse women..... For fvck's sake, kill me now.

I was most definitely presenting that as an example of pure feminazi crap. I had just started rewatching firefly, and I came upon it. It ruined my whole day, because I just couldn't stop being angry at the pure bullsh!t, spewed about one of my favorite shows.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 6:58:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/7/2013 3:51:33 PM, Oryus wrote:
At 6/7/2013 2:56:10 PM, muzebreak wrote:
I'm neither for, nor against feminism. I do prefer egalitarianism though. What I am opposed to, is the majority of feminists. That being, because the majority will search for any tiny little thing they can blow up and blame on the patriarchy, as being the oppression of women. A good example is Anita Sarkeesian, and her tropes in video games series, or this feminist review of Firefly I came across today: http://users.livejournal.com...

Some feminists might as well be egalitarians, and I like them, but then you get groups like the one who stopped the MRA lecture in Ontario. A lot of feminists are just feminazis, but there are good ones in the bunch.

Wow. I'm reading this firefly review and boy is it a heaping pile of sh1t. Not only do they blatantly misunderstand comments, scenes, and characters, they do it to an extreme when they take their misunderstanding and make a poor interpretation/review of it. This review should be burned at the stake.

As an example- the author doesn't like that the surly, renegade CAPTAIN tells his underling to "shut up." (because men shouldn't tell women to shut up sometimes? Perhaps they're too fragile? I don't know.) She says she specifically doesn't like it because it's a white man telling it to a black woman (as if her black-womanness is the only reason to tell her to shut up). She also dislikes that this black woman calls this white man, "sir."...... Let me rephrase that, she dislikes that a person refers to their captain, the captain who has had their back and continues to have their back through the darkest times either of them have ever gone through, their oldest friend, "sir" as a sign of respect .... PUH-LEEEZE! Zoe is a very dutiful character. She is first and foremost a soldier and that is made clear through her constant use of "sir" when referring to... *drum roll* HER CAPTAIN! There is even an episode which deals with this where her husband accuses her (as the author does in this review) of blindly following the captains every command. It simply isn't true. She is not assigned to him as a soldier anymore for the entire course of the show. She is a free agent. She follows his orders BECAUSE she finds him respectable- as do all the other people on the ship. Any of them are free to leave his command at any time without a single repercussion.

As another example- the renegade Companion (i.e. highly-educated, independent sex-worker) has her clients referred to by the author as "rapists" and "fvckers" without any explanation as to how or why they are rapists.....

And one last one- the cheerful Kaylee has a comment made about her by the Captain- "Jayne asks Mal [the captain] to get Kaylee to stop being so cheerful. Mal replies, "Sometimes you just wanna duct tape her mouth and dump her in the hold for a month." The author says this is "woman-hating bile." Absolutely absurd! It's a sarcastic comment made in jest by a surly, cynical guy about the cheerfulness and optimism of a woman who he respects and cares about DEEPLY and, on numerous occasions, risks his life to save and protect and does various other annoying things (to him) just to make her happy and contented. Kaylee kisses him on the cheek afterward saying how much she loves him and he smiles cutely. She does this because she knows he didn't really mean it. He was merely poking fun at how cheerful she is. And he can do that because they are so close.

Most of this author's analysis is based on the first episode and the review revolves almost entirely around what a jerk the Captain is. The thing is- THAT'S KIND OF THE POINT! Over the course of the series, Mal grows as a person and characters are supposed to have flaws and Mal is somewhat of a rebel anti-hero, like Han Solo. Mal IS a d1ckbag. He's not great at interpersonal relationships. But when it really, really counts- when Kaylee gets tied up by a bounty hunter and when she really wants something only he can give her, when Inara is insulted by a man who doesn't respect her as a person and when her companion friends are in dire trouble, when Zoe is unconscious and injured, etc. (and male characters as well!) Mal is the FIRST one to go to extreme to right wrongs. And THAT is why they all respect him and follow his orders even when he's a prick sometimes. He earned it. They don't respect him and follow him just because he's a white man.

/nerdrant

Wow, you put my thoughts into type, better than I could. Thank you. The really funny bit, was that right after I read the review, well the half that I managed to read before I raged out, I went to watch the next episode of firefly. It just so happened to be the episode where Wash gets angry because he believe Zoe is blindly following the Captain. Through the entire fight between Wash and Zoe, I kept wondering how the fvck she can make an argument that is actually directly refuted in the show. It truly boggles the mind, what rationalization of ones ideology can do to a person.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 9:20:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 6:58:30 AM, muzebreak wrote:
Wow, you put my thoughts into type, better than I could. Thank you. The really funny bit, was that right after I read the review, well the half that I managed to read before I raged out, I went to watch the next episode of firefly. It just so happened to be the episode where Wash gets angry because he believe Zoe is blindly following the Captain. Through the entire fight between Wash and Zoe, I kept wondering how the fvck she can make an argument that is actually directly refuted in the show. It truly boggles the mind, what rationalization of ones ideology can do to a person.

ha! Thanks. I'm surprised anyone actually read it. It was actually longer before. I had to cut some stuff out XD

Anyway, yeah, I read the whole thing and skimmed through all the a$$-kissing comments. That is a sad piece of crap of a review. The mental gymnastics... mind-boggling.. I mean the title alone... jesus H.

Thinking about all of it did make me want to re-watch the show though haha!
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Quan
Posts: 97
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2013 1:12:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
What started as a misguided* push for women's rights is now just a bunch of misandrists trying to establish a matriarchy. They deny any and all biological differences between genders, except when it's convenient for them (e.g. in order to maintain exclusive rights concerning reproduction and parenting, avoid the draft, etc.) They simultaneously fight for more rights and against the responsibilities that come with them. The responsibilities are instead pushed onto men, who are expected to continue fulfilling their traditional roles despite no longer having any incentive to do so.

* When I say "misguided," I'm alluding to the failure to perceive the difference between equality and sameness. Much effort and many resources are wasted maintaining the illusion that gender roles do not exist so that women can pretend to be men.

Ultimately they want to replace fathers, and men in general, with government programs that steal resources from those men. To an extent, they have already accomplished this. For example: On a whim a mother can file for a no-fault divorce, win custody by default simply by being the mother, and even effectively deny the father his visitation "rights", yet continue to benefit from his income through court-ordered child support and alimony without any form of reciprocation.

The father is forced to support a family he is no longer a part of. Actually, the fact that he ever was a part of it was just an illusion. He has no rights or privileges in this area except those granted by the mother. He had been at the mercy of her whim since conception. He just didn't realize it because his wants just happened to coincide with hers at the time.