Total Posts:29|Showing Posts:1-29
Jump to topic:

The Importance of a clean house

Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
neptune1bond
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 7:29:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam
I just thought I should point out what is stated at the beginning of that article by Paul Elam:

"Pubisher"s note: This article, originally published on October 22, 2010, is a satirical response to a piece that appeared on the feminist site Jezebel ("Have you Ever Beat Up a Boyfriend? Because, Uh, We Have") and to common media "jokes" about women physically assaulting men and boys. It has been brought back to the front page with a tip of the hat to Ally Fogg, probably one of the most disingenuous hacks on the planet. Fogg"s been discussing the "vile," violent Men"s Human Rights Movement and he and his commenters are on a tear again, seeking attention through attacking AVFM in the comments to a recent article on the Justice 4 Men and Boys party (not affiliated with AVfM, although we are on friendly terms with founder Mike Buchanan) with selective out-of-context quotes, apparently in the hopes others are too stupid to know satire when they see it, even when it"s painstakingly pointed out to them. The article is reposted as is, the only changes will be "Fogg Alerts" which we use to help Ally"s numerous intellectually slow followers to know satire as it appears in front of their eyes. Those items which are not satire, but might be confused as such by the intellectually impaired, will also be identified in brackets."

The article was meant to satirize an article on Jezebel where they discussed women abusing their boyfriends/husbands and the men aren't fighting back no matter what the level of abuse. Women then were talking in the comments section about how they had horribly abused the men in their lives and how funny or great it was when men are beat and hurt and all the things that they did to "deserve" it. The satirical article was meant to point out how incredibly unacceptable it would be if we were to flip the genders and discuss the violent abuse of women in such a way. You may disagree with his quite provocative method of doing this, but I think it's important to point out the actual intention of the article so people actually know what was going on here. Also, phrases from this article are still (dishonestly) quote-mined by feminists in order to discredit Paul Elam, although it's quite telling that they still have to go to an article written 4 years ago to do it. I'm not saying that that was your intention or that you were even aware of the original article that the quote was taken from, but context is still important, even if you find his methods of displaying the gender hypocrisy to be extreme. I don't personally always agree with Paul, but I still believe in representing people fairly.

As far as my problems with feminism goes, I'm actually rarely talking about the "extremists". I'm talking about your average feminism and its accompanying ideology as it is taught in any average college "gender studies" course and believed by a great majority. I'm talking about the feminists who are giving talks and forming seminars with thousands of followers and supporters. I'm talking about those who are changing governmental policies and laws and influencing our entire society. They aren't some small non-existent group sitting on the outer fringe of feminism, unfortunately. My disagreements don't come from some "misunderstanding" of what "true" feminism is, but rather how it is represented by the vast majority of feminism that I've seen, read, and experienced.

I've also already stated that I agree with many "equity feminists" and actually think they can be great people. I am more than willing to work with these people as rare as they are. The main problem is, they have been often referred to as "coffee-shop feminists" and with good reason. They frequently do not have much of a voice in their movement and even if they have some small amount of people that will listen to them, they rarely will stand with any conviction against the things in their movement that even they agree is wrong because of a fear of retribution. I don't really have a problem with a person deciding to call themselves a "feminist", and I most certainly have no problem with people wanting to address women's issues. I just have a problem with the ideology that forms the foundation for most of modern feminism as well as the "activism" of many feminists simply taking that ideology to its logical conclusion.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:34:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I would doubt how satirical Paul's article is. Based on the comments section and his replies in there (from the original 2010 posting, not from the 2013 redo where he claimed it was satire), he clearly shows a problem with woman and a support with others that also have a problem with woman.

Roderick - "Your passion Paul, is like food for the starving.
People are sometimes shocked at the things I"ve said.
I don"t give a f**k about woman because of feminism.
Most men don"t know anything, "please let it change!"
Bless you. " Rod"

Paul - "Roderick, thanks for the kind words!"

Paul - "Christ, even the bitch that wrote the article concluded the readers were dangerous and violent."

Paul - "Mandy,
You were treated with more respect than you deserve. He even went and got the info that you were too lazy to get for yourself.
Find another website, or post over at the feminist and mangina page. You are done here."

While I doubt that he actually wants a "beat a bitch month" his other posts have shown that he is expressing his inner beliefs. If you do serious stuff and sprinkle it with sarcasm, then you have meaningful sarcasm. If you do nothing but sarcasm, it is not hard to see through the guise of how one really feels (especially when they let in continue and grow in their comments section).

He has mentioned plenty of other things, such as with mothers day where he explicitly states "I am not joking."

The point is that things like this, on both sides, are what hurt your own side and give fuel to continue the fighting, rather than meaningful discourse. And you've just shown how it continues. You've defended a single example and dismissed the rest. Rather than saying that things like that are not acceptable within your belief structure, you ignore them and turn back to fighting some kind of "enemy" who you've broad brushed. Claiming that those people are just a super minor fringe on your own side, but on the other side, they are actually the majority.

No, the truth is that they are a minority on the other side as well. That minority just gets to be very vocal on the internet (just like on your side) to make them seem bigger than they are.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 4:34:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ore_Ele::: Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

The Fool: They reason why its MRA, as appose to Masculism is because "ism" Pre-supposes an Ideology. But there is no MRA Ideology like Feminist Theory is to Feminism.

Even believing in "equal rights" is not really an Ideology persay, it's just a singular belief, like believing in happiness is not really an Ideology.

Marxism is an Ideology.

A religion is a type of Ideology, while simply believing that their exist a God, or not. Is not really an Ideology.

Feminist Theory is an ideology. ts just called it "Theory" but for the most part it's really just a collection of general Feminist Speculation. It has an elaborate narrative. Thus, Feminist tend to focus only on facts which seem to agree with their Bible while ignoring and disregarding facts that contradict it. That's where the PROBLEM is.

Ore_Ele: It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

The Fool: Dude, the MRA is about 2% percent the size of Feminism.

Feminist have a MONOPOLY on gender issues, in academia, and in research, and they are doing everything in their power to keep a hegemony.

Almost all gender research, since there has been gender research, has been not by neutral researchers but FEMINIST researchers who see the world though Feminist Theory. Gender history and narrative has been cherry picked and written by Feminist, themselves, and the most influential on the Feminist narrative of gender, has been of those who hate men the most. It's all about INFLUENCE on the movement, and Feminist have a massive world wide propaganda machine, which they exploit shamelessly.

Ore_Ele:
"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement.

There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

The Fool: What MRA's? It's about INFLUENTIAL leaders, on approach and policy.

We do have Leaders, your just not familiar enough with it. Karen Struagn. Victor Zen and Warran Farrel, Jonathan Taylor, to name a few.

Ore_Ele:: "Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

The Fool: Don't confuse MGTOW, with MRA. Nice Try though.

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

The Fool: And then it says,

"Now am I serious about this?" NO!!"- Paul Elam

WHERE IS THAT PART????

This is Textbook Feminism tactics.

Ore_Ele:
"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

The Fool: ?? What does this have to do with MRA. You being a Feminist Right now. By giving false information.

Ore_Ele:: These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

The Fool: Nice try. Those were unrelated Random Quotes cherry picked Feminist Style.

Ore_Ele:: Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas.

The Fool: The MRA does do that already. We have a few advantages because we get to learn off the mistakes of Feminism. You are very misinformed.

Ore_Ele::Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

The Fool: Dude, most Feminist Advertisement GIVE FALSE INFORMATION and people don't even know that Feminist theory is not FACT, but Fabrication. Don't give me this "WE" bullshlt.

Against The Ideologist

ITS NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!! Don't try and make it like it is.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
neptune1bond
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 5:17:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:34:13 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I would doubt how satirical Paul's article is. Based on the comments section and his replies in there (from the original 2010 posting, not from the 2013 redo where he claimed it was satire), he clearly shows a problem with woman and a support with others that also have a problem with woman.

Roderick - "Your passion Paul, is like food for the starving.
People are sometimes shocked at the things I"ve said.
I don"t give a f**k about woman because of feminism.
Most men don"t know anything, "please let it change!"
Bless you. " Rod"

Paul - "Roderick, thanks for the kind words!"
I'm sure that he was referring to the "food for the starving" comment, the rest wasn't really "kind words" towards him, so he couldn't have been referring to it. He never really commented on the rest of the post, but was instead just receiving the part that was a compliment. It doesn't mean he supports absolutely everything this person says and there's nothing to indicate that.

Paul - "Christ, even the bitch that wrote the article concluded the readers were dangerous and violent."
He was obviously talking about the writer of the Jezebel article, who was indeed claiming that the negative responses to the article were from abusive men which is the only reason they didn't find it acceptable, all the while celebrating women abusing men in horrible ways. I don't think it's "woman-hating" to call a single woman a "b*tch". Calling a woman you think is vile "a b*tch" doesn't mean that you think all women are that way. In fact, the whole point of his article was to criticize her article.

Paul - "Mandy,
You were treated with more respect than you deserve. He even went and got the info that you were too lazy to get for yourself.
Find another website, or post over at the feminist and mangina page. You are done here."
I don't know who Mandy is or what her comments were. Obviously this was at the end of some sort of exchange that lasted for more than one post by Paul, so this was taken out of context and I obviously cannot comment without knowing the actual situation. But any random comment taken out of context that is negative towards a woman doesn't prove hatred of all women everywhere on any level. You just can't make that claim. Paul can be fairly insulting to some men who are actually MRAs as well, but he obviously doesn't hate the MHRM or men.

While I doubt that he actually wants a "beat a bitch month" (etc.) in their comments section).
But the point is that he's expressed how he actually feels multiple times afterward for anyone that was actually confused. If you're not really sure how he actually feels, you would have to ask him yourself. You may not like his satire, but it was indeed (and quite obviously in my opinion) satire. Many MRAs do not police their comments because they believe in free-speech and don't want their ideas to bounce around in an echo-chamber of people that agree with them. That's why you'll notice that they also do not delete the opinions of feminists or others who criticize them either.

He has mentioned plenty of other things, such as with mothers day where he explicitly states "I am not joking."
I don't know what he wrote on mother's day that he was not joking about. Just because a person makes a random comment at another time of "I am not joking" doesn't mean that they never were joking in the past, it depends on the context of the conversation.

The point is that things like (etc.) fringe on your own side, but on the other side, they are actually the majority.
I specifically said,"I don't personally always agree with Paul, but I still believe in representing people fairly." I wasn't really defending him specifically (because I do think he could take it too far, especially in the past, and I said this already), but rather pointing out that context is important and quote-mining obviously represents someone as far more heinous than they actually were.

I didn't respond to the one other MRA quote, because I wasn't familiar with the quote or the person and completely unaware of the context. As far as the rest of your comments, that was what the rest of my post was in response to. The thing about feminists is that I've have many conversations as well as witnessed many conversations with them. The "equity feminists" I've come across are indeed rare in my experience. There are many feminists that will say "not all of us are like that" and then immediately turn around and spout the same things that I despise and defend it all the while claiming that they believe in it wholeheartedly, proving they are indeed "just like that". If they are such an incredible minority, then why can't I find much of anything else? If they are such a minority, then why are they lobbying government, forming huge campaigns that cost incredible amounts of money, so incredibly prominent, and why is their ridiculous and unfounded hypotheses actually taught in the vast majority colleges around the nation and taught in almost the same way. I'm sorry but, in regards to this, I cannot agree that this is some incredible minority of feminists that believe the things I absolutely hate about their ideology. It's the ideology that I REALLY disagree with and it is the foundation for the vast majority of feminist belief and is taught and reiterated in every academic institution and most feminist literature. That isn't some "lack of understanding about feminism", it's simply the reality right now. I'm not picking two or so feminists that actually say,"kill all men" (as some do) and then pointing to that and saying,"See? Feminism is evil!" I'm actually simply disagreeing with a great amount of feminist ideology that forms the foundation for most feminist thought and I'm not referring to the ideology of extremists, but rather the ideology that is taught in any academic institution and is constantly reiterated by the majority of feminists to be found anywhere. How is that a minority? I think there are SOME incredible feminists (which I actually have come across myself), but if they are such a huge majority then why do I have such a difficult time coming across them....well....practically anywhere?

No, the truth is that they are a minority on the other side as well. That minority just gets to be very vocal on the internet (just like on your side) to make them seem bigger than they are.
Well, when and if I ever come across that majority, then maybe I'll change my mind. But, you saying that this majority exists doesn't mean that I can simply throw my experiences out the window and pretend they never happened. A majority really shouldn't be that hard to find and I'm not basing it on some media representation or one random feminist I heard give a talk. Unfortunately, it just doesn't seem that the majority of feminists stand for and defend the same gender equality that I seek. That is why when I actually argue with feminists, I mention only the parts of their ideology that I really disagree with. If they say "I don't actually believe in this, that, or the other", then those obviously are not the feminists I'm talking about and that is really what determines how the conversation goes. Unfortunately, although I have indeed found some feminists who are incredible people (as I've already said), most feminists I've come across actually believe in the parts of the ideology that I find horrible, hateful, and very contrary to anything that will lead to progress in gender inequality and they rarely can be convinced otherwise.

I've already expressed the value of a movement that stands for women's issues in other forums. I have no problem with a "feminism" of some sort (and I've expressed that many times), I only have a problem with the parts of the ideology that I find horrible and that is really all I argue against.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:07:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

I'm not exactly surprised that yer floating the "extremes on BOTH sides are wrong" narrative but it's still kinda weird seeing it from you (although I think I remember you being hella transphobic somewhere so maybe it's not out of the ordinary). But let's analyze the quotes you provided.

Three women were quoted trash talking men. Maybe a bit harsh but whatevs they're just words. Last time I checked there aren't systematically reported statistics showing a general trend of women beating men to a bloody pulp (statistics report the opposite). The animals bit is whatevs and the rapist part probably stems from the trend among anti-feminists of ignoring the systematic nature of rape and abuse from men. It stems from their idea that because they haven't done anything that they lack any responsibility for the matter. When women speak out against rape, the first response of many men is to excuse themselves from responsibility. That is, their first instinct isn't necessarily sympathy for actions which would curb that trend, but with maintaining their own non-complicity in the matter (which ends up just showing the opposite). End point though, these statements don't justify any actual discrimination or oppression of men. They're indicative of a justified hostility towards people with seemingly no interest in changing the status quo.

Then the MRA texts. The first is a justification for the actual murder of women. Given recent events (such as Elliot Rodger's shooting spree as fighting feminism, death threats sent to Zoe Quinn, the reaction to Emma Watson's modest speech before the U.N., etc.), the broader history of specifically female-targeted violence (Marc Lepine's murder spree in the late 80's as one example), and the general violence perpetuated against women, this isn't just someone saying mean things. This is a person justifying actually-existing violence against an already targeted group. The second is a man organizing other men to beat women. Again, justifying and attempting to perpetuate actually-existing violence. The next one is justifying the already lenient legal process towards rape. Yeah, there's no equal dichotomy to be had here. Feminism is an attempt to rectify already-existing inequalities between the sexes. MRA's are whiny piss babies who can't handle that subsequent loss of privilege and dominance over the other sex. One side is kinda mean sometimes, the other justifies the literal murder and abuse of women. Equivocating the two is why people throw their hands up against feminism and actual work being done to help women and lends credence to MRA/anti-feminist misogyny.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:20:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I would disagree with the interpretation of what Paul said and meant, however the purpose of the OP is not defeated by that one quote being accurate or not. You also make the comment that quote mining can misrepresent a person. I'm not trying to represent any of the people, only showing that there are extreme statements and individuals.

Now, you say that you've never come across moderate feminists. That I doubt, as there are many in this site. There are also a few more extreme ones, however as I said early, the extreme are highly vocal minorities, so if you are basing everything off online, the proportions are going to be skewed.

You say that our colleges are teaching this extremist feminism, please share examples of all the colleges doing this. Likewise, all the bills that they are trying (or tried) to pass recently.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:30:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:07:37 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

I'm not exactly surprised that yer floating the "extremes on BOTH sides are wrong" narrative but it's still kinda weird seeing it from you (although I think I remember you being hella transphobic somewhere so maybe it's not out of the ordinary). But let's analyze the quotes you provided.

Sounds like a predisposed opinion. I'd also think you have either a misunderstanding of my views, or believe that if I'm not on the side of supporting every right you do, then I must hate/fear transgendered people. You have to remember that I don't believe in rights. It has nothing to do with men or women or homosexuals or heterosexuals or transgender or asexual.


Three women were quoted trash talking men. Maybe a bit harsh but whatevs they're just words. Last time I checked there aren't systematically reported statistics showing a general trend of women beating men to a bloody pulp (statistics report the opposite). The animals bit is whatevs and the rapist part probably stems from the trend among anti-feminists of ignoring the systematic nature of rape and abuse from men. It stems from their idea that because they haven't done anything that they lack any responsibility for the matter. When women speak out against rape, the first response of many men is to excuse themselves from responsibility. That is, their first instinct isn't necessarily sympathy for actions which would curb that trend, but with maintaining their own non-complicity in the matter (which ends up just showing the opposite). End point though, these statements don't justify any actual discrimination or oppression of men. They're indicative of a justified hostility towards people with seemingly no interest in changing the status quo.

Then the MRA texts. The first is a justification for the actual murder of women. Given recent events (such as Elliot Rodger's shooting spree as fighting feminism, death threats sent to Zoe Quinn, the reaction to Emma Watson's modest speech before the U.N., etc.), the broader history of specifically female-targeted violence (Marc Lepine's murder spree in the late 80's as one example), and the general violence perpetuated against women, this isn't just someone saying mean things. This is a person justifying actually-existing violence against an already targeted group. The second is a man organizing other men to beat women. Again, justifying and attempting to perpetuate actually-existing violence. The next one is justifying the already lenient legal process towards rape. Yeah, there's no equal dichotomy to be had here. Feminism is an attempt to rectify already-existing inequalities between the sexes. MRA's are whiny piss babies who can't handle that subsequent loss of privilege and dominance over the other sex. One side is kinda mean sometimes, the other justifies the literal murder and abuse of women. Equivocating the two is why people throw their hands up against feminism and actual work being done to help women and lends credence to MRA/anti-feminist misogyny.

I think that is part of the problem. When you say "the extreme comments on our side are okay, and actually, all your fault anyway, but your extreme comments are evil" you're only isolating your side and hurting your cause. Because people in the middle don't want anything to do with people that say "go beat women" or "all men are rapists" and they don't want to support anyone that defends those comments as "extreme but understandable"
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:39:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:30:48 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:07:37 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

I'm not exactly surprised that yer floating the "extremes on BOTH sides are wrong" narrative but it's still kinda weird seeing it from you (although I think I remember you being hella transphobic somewhere so maybe it's not out of the ordinary). But let's analyze the quotes you provided.

Sounds like a predisposed opinion. I'd also think you have either a misunderstanding of my views, or believe that if I'm not on the side of supporting every right you do, then I must hate/fear transgendered people. You have to remember that I don't believe in rights. It has nothing to do with men or women or homosexuals or heterosexuals or transgender or asexual.

I do have a predisposed opinion. I don't read a post by Fool or CP the same as I'd read one by a person with less sh'tty views. Same goes for you. And if I remember correctly it was you saying that trans women weren't actually women or something to that effect. Hating or fearing isn't the problem. It's perpetuating a discourse which people use to justify murdering them/clinging to a problematic understanding of gender.


Three women were quoted trash talking men. Maybe a bit harsh but whatevs they're just words. Last time I checked there aren't systematically reported statistics showing a general trend of women beating men to a bloody pulp (statistics report the opposite). The animals bit is whatevs and the rapist part probably stems from the trend among anti-feminists of ignoring the systematic nature of rape and abuse from men. It stems from their idea that because they haven't done anything that they lack any responsibility for the matter. When women speak out against rape, the first response of many men is to excuse themselves from responsibility. That is, their first instinct isn't necessarily sympathy for actions which would curb that trend, but with maintaining their own non-complicity in the matter (which ends up just showing the opposite). End point though, these statements don't justify any actual discrimination or oppression of men. They're indicative of a justified hostility towards people with seemingly no interest in changing the status quo.

Then the MRA texts. The first is a justification for the actual murder of women. Given recent events (such as Elliot Rodger's shooting spree as fighting feminism, death threats sent to Zoe Quinn, the reaction to Emma Watson's modest speech before the U.N., etc.), the broader history of specifically female-targeted violence (Marc Lepine's murder spree in the late 80's as one example), and the general violence perpetuated against women, this isn't just someone saying mean things. This is a person justifying actually-existing violence against an already targeted group. The second is a man organizing other men to beat women. Again, justifying and attempting to perpetuate actually-existing violence. The next one is justifying the already lenient legal process towards rape. Yeah, there's no equal dichotomy to be had here. Feminism is an attempt to rectify already-existing inequalities between the sexes. MRA's are whiny piss babies who can't handle that subsequent loss of privilege and dominance over the other sex. One side is kinda mean sometimes, the other justifies the literal murder and abuse of women. Equivocating the two is why people throw their hands up against feminism and actual work being done to help women and lends credence to MRA/anti-feminist misogyny.

I think that is part of the problem. When you say "the extreme comments on our side are okay, and actually, all your fault anyway, but your extreme comments are evil" you're only isolating your side and hurting your cause. Because people in the middle don't want anything to do with people that say "go beat women" or "all men are rapists" and they don't want to support anyone that defends those comments as "extreme but understandable"

You totally ignored the body of my post. I'm saying that one side is justifying the already-existing oppression/murder/rape of women and the other one is pissed off about it. People "in the middle" equate these two because people like you equate them and spread narratives like this equating them.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:46:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:39:13 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:30:48 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:07:37 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

I'm not exactly surprised that yer floating the "extremes on BOTH sides are wrong" narrative but it's still kinda weird seeing it from you (although I think I remember you being hella transphobic somewhere so maybe it's not out of the ordinary). But let's analyze the quotes you provided.

Sounds like a predisposed opinion. I'd also think you have either a misunderstanding of my views, or believe that if I'm not on the side of supporting every right you do, then I must hate/fear transgendered people. You have to remember that I don't believe in rights. It has nothing to do with men or women or homosexuals or heterosexuals or transgender or asexual.

I do have a predisposed opinion. I don't read a post by Fool or CP the same as I'd read one by a person with less sh'tty views. Same goes for you. And if I remember correctly it was you saying that trans women weren't actually women or something to that effect. Hating or fearing isn't the problem. It's perpetuating a discourse which people use to justify murdering them/clinging to a problematic understanding of gender.


Three women were quoted trash talking men. Maybe a bit harsh but whatevs they're just words. Last time I checked there aren't systematically reported statistics showing a general trend of women beating men to a bloody pulp (statistics report the opposite). The animals bit is whatevs and the rapist part probably stems from the trend among anti-feminists of ignoring the systematic nature of rape and abuse from men. It stems from their idea that because they haven't done anything that they lack any responsibility for the matter. When women speak out against rape, the first response of many men is to excuse themselves from responsibility. That is, their first instinct isn't necessarily sympathy for actions which would curb that trend, but with maintaining their own non-complicity in the matter (which ends up just showing the opposite). End point though, these statements don't justify any actual discrimination or oppression of men. They're indicative of a justified hostility towards people with seemingly no interest in changing the status quo.

Then the MRA texts. The first is a justification for the actual murder of women. Given recent events (such as Elliot Rodger's shooting spree as fighting feminism, death threats sent to Zoe Quinn, the reaction to Emma Watson's modest speech before the U.N., etc.), the broader history of specifically female-targeted violence (Marc Lepine's murder spree in the late 80's as one example), and the general violence perpetuated against women, this isn't just someone saying mean things. This is a person justifying actually-existing violence against an already targeted group. The second is a man organizing other men to beat women. Again, justifying and attempting to perpetuate actually-existing violence. The next one is justifying the already lenient legal process towards rape. Yeah, there's no equal dichotomy to be had here. Feminism is an attempt to rectify already-existing inequalities between the sexes. MRA's are whiny piss babies who can't handle that subsequent loss of privilege and dominance over the other sex. One side is kinda mean sometimes, the other justifies the literal murder and abuse of women. Equivocating the two is why people throw their hands up against feminism and actual work being done to help women and lends credence to MRA/anti-feminist misogyny.

I think that is part of the problem. When you say "the extreme comments on our side are okay, and actually, all your fault anyway, but your extreme comments are evil" you're only isolating your side and hurting your cause. Because people in the middle don't want anything to do with people that say "go beat women" or "all men are rapists" and they don't want to support anyone that defends those comments as "extreme but understandable"

You totally ignored the body of my post. I'm saying that one side is justifying the already-existing oppression/murder/rape of women and the other one is pissed off about it. People "in the middle" equate these two because people like you equate them and spread narratives like this equating them.

That is the point of your post. Both sides are equal. You are dismissing one side as an emotional reaction, rather than an actual opinion. Do you know if that is the case? I doubt it. You are giving one side the benefit of the doubt and not the other side. You shouldn't fight discrimination or inequality with other discrimination or inequality. You should support equality for all, meaning both sides, or neither side gets the benef
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 8:58:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:46:47 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:39:13 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:30:48 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

Sounds like a predisposed opinion. I'd also think you have either a misunderstanding of my views, or believe that if I'm not on the side of supporting every right you do, then I must hate/fear transgendered people. You have to remember that I don't believe in rights. It has nothing to do with men or women or homosexuals or heterosexuals or transgender or asexual.

I do have a predisposed opinion. I don't read a post by Fool or CP the same as I'd read one by a person with less sh'tty views. Same goes for you. And if I remember correctly it was you saying that trans women weren't actually women or something to that effect. Hating or fearing isn't the problem. It's perpetuating a discourse which people use to justify murdering them/clinging to a problematic understanding of gender.

I think that is part of the problem. When you say "the extreme comments on our side are okay, and actually, all your fault anyway, but your extreme comments are evil" you're only isolating your side and hurting your cause. Because people in the middle don't want anything to do with people that say "go beat women" or "all men are rapists" and they don't want to support anyone that defends those comments as "extreme but understandable"

You totally ignored the body of my post. I'm saying that one side is justifying the already-existing oppression/murder/rape of women and the other one is pissed off about it. People "in the middle" equate these two because people like you equate them and spread narratives like this equating them.

That is the point of your post. Both sides are equal.

No they're not? Do you think discourse arises out of a vacuum? No, one came out of female struggles for equality in an unequal society and has a history of shifting and evolving to check itself (the emergence of the third wave, postcolonial studies, queer theory and gender feminism, etc.). The other arose purely in reaction to feminism and commonly resorts to justifying the rape, assault, and murder of women.

You are dismissing one side as an emotional reaction, rather than an actual opinion.

Call it an emotional reaction but I generally don't get along with people who ignore systematic oppression of women and actively seek to reinforce or justify it. Playing around as if political neutrality is something that discourses ever come close to abiding by is reminiscent of a sh'tty way of philosophizing and it's invocation is almost universally a mechanism for shutting up radical viewpoints.

Do you know if that is the case? I doubt it. You are giving one side the benefit of the doubt and not the other side.

One side has repeatedly proven itself to be capable of shifting to accommodate "subjugated discourses" and become more accepting of over-looked or minority viewpoints. The other hasn't. They've done nothing to deserve getting the benefit of the doubt.

You shouldn't fight discrimination or inequality with other discrimination or inequality.

Lol telling straight, white guys that they have sh'tty opinions and letting them know that they're perpetuating oppression isn't on the same level as the justification of oppression against women. This sentence is the definition of the problem dood.

You should support equality for all, meaning both sides, or neither side gets the benef

Whatevs bruh
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:44:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Now you're making the mistake of claiming that the entire other side is the same as those extreme points.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 9:51:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:44:40 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Now you're making the mistake of claiming that the entire other side is the same as those extreme points.

I see something structurally similar in MRA's regardless of whether they're overtly as misogynistic as some of the "extremes" or not.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 10:56:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 9:51:01 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:44:40 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Now you're making the mistake of claiming that the entire other side is the same as those extreme points.

I see something structurally similar in MRA's regardless of whether they're overtly as misogynistic as some of the "extremes" or not.

I would suggest that much of that is either you only looking at extremists or a misunderstanding of what they are saying, much like another member is claiming the exact same thing, but for the other side.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:17:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 10:56:26 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:51:01 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 11/12/2014 9:44:40 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Now you're making the mistake of claiming that the entire other side is the same as those extreme points.

I see something structurally similar in MRA's regardless of whether they're overtly as misogynistic as some of the "extremes" or not.

I would suggest that much of that is either you only looking at extremists or a misunderstanding of what they are saying, much like another member is claiming the exact same thing, but for the other side.

More equivocation. This is getting boring.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:24:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

I agree with most everything you've said, except the idea that one can control a member of a group with which one associates. How do you kick someone out of "feminism?" Our society preserves free speech, and no one has any control over what anyone else says. I agree that everyone you quoted is an idiot. But how does one clean house?
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
mortsdor
Posts: 1,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:46:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 11:24:03 PM, bluesteel wrote:
But how does one clean house?

Through practicing the most tried and true method of correcting behavior....

Shame them.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/12/2014 11:49:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 11:24:03 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

I agree with most everything you've said, except the idea that one can control a member of a group with which one associates. How do you kick someone out of "feminism?" Our society preserves free speech, and no one has any control over what anyone else says. I agree that everyone you quoted is an idiot. But how does one clean house?

There are two ways that spring to mind (there are probably more that I haven't thought of). Either dividing into subdivisions within a group or through a "civil war."

By "civil war," I mean standing against others that use the label with a different meaning. The more powerful side will end up winning out (and usually the defeated side will just resort to a different term, or both sides will simply subdivide).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
neptune1bond
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 8:52:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 8:20:14 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I would disagree with the interpretation of what Paul said and meant, however the purpose of the OP is not defeated by that one quote being accurate or not. You also make the comment that quote mining can misrepresent a person. I'm not trying to represent any of the people, only showing that there are extreme statements and individuals.
I assume that this was maybe aimed at me? Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then on Paul Elam's article. Yes extremists exist everywhere and you're right that it doesn't prove the invalidity of any group or movement, nonetheless it also doesn't prove the validity of any group or movement either. Both feminism AND the MHRM are open to scrutiny, no matter how much certain members of the groups may dislike it. No one (and i do mean NO ONE) is beyond reproach

Now, you say that you've never come across moderate feminists. That I doubt, as there are many in this site. There are also a few more extreme ones, however as I said early, the extreme are highly vocal minorities, so if you are basing everything off online, the proportions are going to be skewed.
Actually, I've never once said that I never have come across moderate feminists and I also never said that I base it solely off of what I've seen online. I hope you actually read my posts. What I've said is that I actually agree with and happen to like many "equity feminists" but find them to be very rare. The problem I have isn't with the "idea" of feminism, it's the common ideology as it is taught in any gender studies course in almost any college across the nation that I have a problem with. My problem is that the vast majority of feminists I seem to come across subscribes to that very same ideology that I so very strongly disagree with. Really it comes down to what you call "extremists". Most feminists don't necessarily consider their standard ideology to be "extreme", but either way, I just consider it to be horribly wrong to the detriment of everyone.

You say that our colleges are teaching this extremist feminism, please share examples of all the colleges doing this. Likewise, all the bills that they are trying (or tried) to pass recently.
Again, my definition of "extremist" and yours may differ. In fact, in my posts I actually said that the type of ideology is not only those held by what many consider to be "extremists", but rather the majority of feminists. That is why you will find it in any gender studies college course. So, in answer to which colleges are doing this, any college in most western countries that offers a gender studies course with the standard gender studies curriculum. They use similar textbooks and feminist literature as well (gender studies is, basically, actually the study of feminism and the entire course is based on feminist ideology). As far as trying to list all the bills they lobbied for, it would take a lot of time for me to dredge up all the information and considering I don't necessarily feel the need to actually take the immense amount of time to compile all the information I've come across over time (I only responded in reference to why I specifically am against certain aspects of feminism since you brought this subject up), I'll simply reference you to this website which gives a small collection (not comprehensive) of feminist lobbying, campaigns, protesting of talks about men's issues and equality, and general activities:
http://www.cultural-misandry.com...

You can agree or disagree, but the fact is that there are feminist groups that do indeed lobby the government for change, like NOW and the Feminist Majority Foundation (among others). Since most of these feminists actually have degrees in gender studies and most of these foundations and lobbyists are based in the standard feminist ideology, it can be easy to see why it would be a problem for those who believe that feminist ideology does not represent equality on any level. I love the idea of equality, I care about women's AND men's issues, and I only want what i think is best for everyone's interests, but I simply do not believe that the standard feminist ideology actually is in line with any of those things (*again, not necessarily extremist ideology, but just the standard as it is taught in any gender studies college course*).
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/13/2014 8:47:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
In defense of Paul Elam
Part 1

Ore_Ele: I would disagree with the interpretation of what Paul said and meant, however the purpose of the OP is not defeated by that one quote being accurate or not. You also make the comment that quote mining can misrepresent a person. I'm not trying to represent any of the people, only showing that there are extreme statements and individuals.

The Fool: It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a matter of omitting key information which makes the whole difference, since well, you wouldn't even have the belief that you do, if you had access to the entire post. The following sentences, make the whole difference, that's why they were left out, by feminist. You probably got the information from a feminist a source.

"Now am I serious about this?" NO!!" - Paul Elam

That is a general feminist tactic.

The way they capitalize on this in social science studies is to create studies which take into account how much women are beaten by man, but it ignores and, even goes as far as to erase data, on female Aggression Against men which is just as frequent if not more, but just less damaging, because men are generally stronger.

Or fact like,these men who beat women, are mostly in relationships where there's already back-and-forth physical aggression between the couple.

Or they'll omit that females are much more to be indirectly violent: (As in the video)

https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

Why? Because it's not consistent with their Ideology where men are The natural evil antagonist unless ""socialized" by feminist, and women are Always the good neutral and innocent protagonists. For even when Women Dissent from feminism, it's only because they're being brainwashed(Internal misogyny) by the patriarchy somehow.

Remember feminist theory, is built on a subjectivist postmodern/Marxist platform, which capitalizes on rhetoric, and emotional responses rather than Reason. This generally include moral subjectivism, where one can thus justify "anything", as long as they can "socialize" people to believe it.

Thirdly, the MRA has only really taken off in the last year or so. Although it's been around for a while, it was hardly known. Previously, the "a voice for men website", was simply "a forum like" site where anybody can post, what they want, without feeling that they have to be politically correct.

Since then, it's become kind of the flagship of the MRA, and Paul Elam has done a great job cleaning house, and making it more politically respectable. Anything or anybody who even suggest violence, or homophobia, or racism, or sexist, gets the boot, while he himself has been promoting this kind of brotherhood alliance, between men of different sexual orientation and/or race.

He's had to make some hard decisions, and kick out some very intelligent and influential, but nonetheless, not the type of people we want to be representing the MRA. In doing so, he created a lot of enemies, and has lost support from many MGTOWS. (Pronounced "MIG-TOW")

One of the big problems with "MIG-TOW's" is that they were upset with too many women being key figures in the men's movement. And some who were "fired", have become champions of this view in MGTOW. MGTOW does have general ideology, which is in the midst of being formulated.(at key debate in MGTOW, is whether or not you can be a MGTOW and be married)
'
Where feminism, see the society as on evil patriarchy, many MIGTOW see the world as Gynocentric, (involving around women needs, at the disposability of men and their interest.) And many believe in that just as strong as feminist believe in "patriarchy theory".

MGTOW, is now the place for the more politically incorrect, and does not have clean house. It's much easier to find misogyny in MGTOW, then it is MRA.. Feminists, hardly recognize the difference, and are generally conflate the two groups. They are both in a way a part of the Mens movement, I still wouldn't go as far as saying MGTOW is to MRA as Radial Feminism is to Mainstream Feminism, as they are Apples and Oranges, but both fruit.

Anyways, my point was that Paul Elam has done a great job in a reforming the men's movement, and he does it because he cares, not to make any kind of profit. I would say his key role in the movement right now is simply keeping the movement together, while at the same time keeping it politically correct, and selecting respectable representatives. But because he is a key figure, and a masculine "no-nonsense" man, who walks and talks like a stereotypical "man" (it is the "men's" movement after all) thus the very image which feminism is trying to demonize, he is going to be an unrelenting target of "feminist". So don't be surprised to hear all kinds of bullshlt, about Paul Elam From Feminist...

Against The ideologist

I have a link for a "voice for men" a Flagship MRA website, and a key MGTOW website. See for yourself and be your own judge.

I will answer your other questions after, although I can't tell which one's directed at me.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2014 8:40:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
There's your Civil War!
Part 1

At 11/12/2014 11:49:00 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

There are two ways that spring to mind (there are probably more that I haven't thought of). Either dividing into subdivisions within a group or through a "civil war."

By "civil war," I mean standing against others that use the label with a different meaning. The more powerful side will end up winning out (and usually the defeated side will just resort to a different term, or both sides will simply subdivide).

The Fool: Barbossa or Bar Bar, who is speaking here is an emerging leader amongst the MGTOW community. His philosophy is becoming very influential, but one cannot ignore the Blatant misogynistic overtones.

It's a Revolutionary philosophy comparable to radical feminism and feminist theory, but in its best moments it can be so intellectually stimulating and Motivating. It so wrong but it's hard to not keep listening.

Against The Ideologist
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2014 8:43:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

People have actually said this?! Wow...

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2014 9:07:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/12/2014 4:34:19 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ore_Ele::: Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

The Fool: They reason why its MRA, as appose to Masculism is because "ism" Pre-supposes an Ideology. But there is no MRA Ideology like Feminist Theory is to Feminism.

Even believing in "equal rights" is not really an Ideology persay, it's just a singular belief, like believing in happiness is not really an Ideology.

Marxism is an Ideology.

A religion is a type of Ideology, while simply believing that their exist a God, or not. Is not really an Ideology.

Feminist Theory is an ideology. ts just called it "Theory" but for the most part it's really just a collection of general Feminist Speculation. It has an elaborate narrative. Thus, Feminist tend to focus only on facts which seem to agree with their Bible while ignoring and disregarding facts that contradict it. That's where the PROBLEM is.

Ore_Ele: It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

The Fool: Dude, the MRA is about 2% percent the size of Feminism.

Feminist have a MONOPOLY on gender issues, in academia, and in research, and they are doing everything in their power to keep a hegemony.

Almost all gender research, since there has been gender research, has been not by neutral researchers but FEMINIST researchers who see the world though Feminist Theory. Gender history and narrative has been cherry picked and written by Feminist, themselves, and the most influential on the Feminist narrative of gender, has been of those who hate men the most. It's all about INFLUENCE on the movement, and Feminist have a massive world wide propaganda machine, which they exploit shamelessly.

Ore_Ele:
"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement.

There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

The Fool: What MRA's? It's about INFLUENTIAL leaders, on approach and policy.

We do have Leaders, your just not familiar enough with it. Karen Struagn. Victor Zen and Warran Farrel, Jonathan Taylor, to name a few.

Ore_Ele:: "Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

The Fool: Don't confuse MGTOW, with MRA. Nice Try though.

You're free to call it whatever name helps you sleep.


"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

The Fool: And then it says,

"Now am I serious about this?" NO!!"- Paul Elam

WHERE IS THAT PART????

Right here (had to change some words because of the filter)

Now, am I serious about this?
No. Not because it"s wrong. It"s not wrong. Every one should have the right to defend themselves. Hell, women are often excused from killing someone whom they allege has abused them. They can shoot them in their sleep and walk. Happens all the time. It"ll even get you a spot on Oprah, and cuntists across the kunt-o-sphere will be lionizing you.
In that light, every one of those women at Jezebel and millions of others across the western world are as deserving of a righteous azz kicking as any human being can be. But it isn"t worth the time behind bars or the abuse of anger management training that men must endure if they are uppity enough to defend themselves from female attackers.:
This is Textbook Feminism tactics.

Did you miss that part or agree with it?

Ore_Ele:
"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

The Fool: ?? What does this have to do with MRA. You being a Feminist Right now. By giving false information.

He is a major proponent for men's rights. There was no false info.


Ore_Ele:: These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

The Fool: Nice try. Those were unrelated Random Quotes cherry picked Feminist Style.

You clearly missed the point. It was that there are extreme quotes out there, but we should not let those cloud or muddy the entire movement. That applies to feminism as well.


Ore_Ele:: Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas.

The Fool: The MRA does do that already. We have a few advantages because we get to learn off the mistakes of Feminism. You are very misinformed.

Yes, I see how you absolutely did not just blindly defend every extreme statement and attempt to slander me as a feminist using "feminist tactics".


Ore_Ele::Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

The Fool: Dude, most Feminist Advertisement GIVE FALSE INFORMATION and people don't even know that Feminist theory is not FACT, but Fabrication. Don't give me this "WE" bullshlt.

Against The Ideologist

ITS NOT EVEN CLOSE!!!! Don't try and make it like it is.



I see you're about as lost a cause as Charles.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2014 9:42:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/13/2014 8:52:40 AM, neptune1bond wrote:
At 11/12/2014 8:20:14 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
I would disagree with the interpretation of what Paul said and meant, however the purpose of the OP is not defeated by that one quote being accurate or not. You also make the comment that quote mining can misrepresent a person. I'm not trying to represent any of the people, only showing that there are extreme statements and individuals.
I assume that this was maybe aimed at me? Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then on Paul Elam's article. Yes extremists exist everywhere and you're right that it doesn't prove the invalidity of any group or movement, nonetheless it also doesn't prove the validity of any group or movement either. Both feminism AND the MHRM are open to scrutiny, no matter how much certain members of the groups may dislike it. No one (and i do mean NO ONE) is beyond reproach

Now, you say that you've never come across moderate feminists. That I doubt, as there are many in this site. There are also a few more extreme ones, however as I said early, the extreme are highly vocal minorities, so if you are basing everything off online, the proportions are going to be skewed.
Actually, I've never once said that I never have come across moderate feminists and I also never said that I base it solely off of what I've seen online. I hope you actually read my posts. What I've said is that I actually agree with and happen to like many "equity feminists" but find them to be very rare. The problem I have isn't with the "idea" of feminism, it's the common ideology as it is taught in any gender studies course in almost any college across the nation that I have a problem with. My problem is that the vast majority of feminists I seem to come across subscribes to that very same ideology that I so very strongly disagree with. Really it comes down to what you call "extremists". Most feminists don't necessarily consider their standard ideology to be "extreme", but either way, I just consider it to be horribly wrong to the detriment of everyone.

You say that our colleges are teaching this extremist feminism, please share examples of all the colleges doing this. Likewise, all the bills that they are trying (or tried) to pass recently.
Again, my definition of "extremist" and yours may differ. In fact, in my posts I actually said that the type of ideology is not only those held by what many consider to be "extremists", but rather the majority of feminists. That is why you will find it in any gender studies college course. So, in answer to which colleges are doing this, any college in most western countries that offers a gender studies course with the standard gender studies curriculum. They use similar textbooks and feminist literature as well (gender studies is, basically, actually the study of feminism and the entire course is based on feminist ideology). As far as trying to list all the bills they lobbied for, it would take a lot of time for me to dredge up all the information and considering I don't necessarily feel the need to actually take the immense amount of time to compile all the information I've come across over time (I only responded in reference to why I specifically am against certain aspects of feminism since you brought this subject up), I'll simply reference you to this website which gives a small collection (not comprehensive) of feminist lobbying, campaigns, protesting of talks about men's issues and equality, and general activities:
http://www.cultural-misandry.com...

You can agree or disagree, but the fact is that there are feminist groups that do indeed lobby the government for change, like NOW and the Feminist Majority Foundation (among others). Since most of these feminists actually have degrees in gender studies and most of these foundations and lobbyists are based in the standard feminist ideology, it can be easy to see why it would be a problem for those who believe that feminist ideology does not represent equality on any level. I love the idea of equality, I care about women's AND men's issues, and I only want what i think is best for everyone's interests, but I simply do not believe that the standard feminist ideology actually is in line with any of those things (*again, not necessarily extremist ideology, but just the standard as it is taught in any gender studies college course*).

The link you presented started with "Feminists are sexist. They have a horrible, and very well deserved, reputation as being close-minded, manhating sheep, indoctrinated by their women"s studies class to see "oppression" everywhere." So it is hard yo consider it an unbiased source. However they start by attacking the NOW. Yes, the NOW focuses on woman, much like some organizations focus on student athletes, some focus on cancer survivors, some focus on African Americans, some focus on married people. However, the example they use for NOWs evil ways was an Action Alert that only focused on spreading information (we can question the quality of that info, but that is not part of the evidence they provided). Another key that they focused on was the Duke "rape" case and mainly the letter of 88. Claiming that the ad said that the boys were guilty before due process. This was not the case at all. First, the ad was mostly focused on race, rather than sex (any if the quotes were from the African American studies program forum), and it was only using the case as the spark to talk about a larger issue. Whether the boys were or were not racist (they weren't) the case from the get go was centered around race (as far as the national news was concerned). This ad was to address the fear that students were experiencing at that time.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2014 10:35:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Keeping a Clean House
Part 2

The Fool: I apologize, I was in a complete defensive mindstate, when I responded to this two days ago.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

The Fool: What MRA's? It's about INFLUENTIAL leaders, on approach and policy.

We do have Leaders, your just not familiar enough with it. Karen Struagn. Victor Zen and Warran Farrel, Jonathan Taylor, to name a few.

Ore_Ele:: "Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

The Fool: I'm relatively educated in critical philosophy, feminist theory, and the history of feminism. I go to feminist university, and am very familiar with MRA positions, so I like to think that I do have a sense of what is actually going on.

Ore_Ele:: You clearly missed the point. It was that there are extreme quotes out there, but we should not let those cloud or muddy the entire movement. That applies to feminism as well

The Fool: My point was that the difference between the types of quotes were that the quotes you considered to be MRA, either satirical, from insignificant proponents or not a part of MRA literature persay. On the other hand, the feminist quotes that you used, are from key influential figures of feminist ideology, and part of official feminist literature which can be found in textbooks that are taught in gender studies classes across the Western world.

MGTOW Vs MRA

The Fool: Don't confuse MGTOW, with MRA.

Ore_Ele:: You're free to call it whatever name helps you sleep.

The Fool: I think you still that you perhaps don't recognize the difference.

MRA's are men's human rights activist. It's a politically correct movement which fight for gender equality, in areas which are disadvantages to men.

MGTOW is an emerging lifestyle philosophy and ideology. MGTOW members are those who adopt its principles. Members can say or do they want, It's not necessarily politically correct or anything. In fact sometimes downright misogynist.

Recognizing the difference is huge. MRA's are getting fed up with the bitterness and misogyny in MGTOW, which often gets conflated with MRA's agenda. But not all MGTOW is bitter and or misogynist.

In defense of Paul Elam
The prequel

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

The Fool: And then it says,

"Now am I serious about this?" NO!!"- Paul Elam

WHERE IS THAT PART????

Right here (had to change some words because of the filter)

Now, am I serious about this?

Ore_Ele:: No. Not because it"s wrong. It"s not wrong. Every one should have the right to defend themselves. Hell, women are often excused from killing someone whom they allege has abused them. They can shoot them in their sleep and walk. Happens all the time. It"ll even get you a spot on Oprah, and cuntists across the kunt-o-sphere will be lionizing you.

In that light, every one of those women at Jezebel and millions of others across the western world are as deserving of a righteous azz kicking as any human being can be. But it isn"t worth the time behind bars or the abuse of anger management training that men must endure if they are uppity enough to defend themselves from female attackers.:

This is Textbook Feminism tactics.

Did you miss that part or agree with it?

The Fool: I already argued that it was a satire, and at the time it was written, "a voice for men" was not a politically correct site, in fact it was specifically a site which acted as a type of catharsis, were men were able to vent about their relationship frustrations. Thus "a voice for men". So, it's not a great example, or representative because the MRA is organized differently.

Feminism is huge, across the globe, with no central power, consisting of many small divisions, making it very hard, and time-consuming, to be able to reform anytime soon.

MRA has had the advantage of learning off of the feminist mistakes, and by virtue of being a smaller organization with an implied hierarchy of Representatives, And a small set of key centralized websites, and so is able to better reform itself, than feminism.

I also argued that, yeah, Paul Elam is a no-nonsense masculine man who speaks, like a man you would perhaps find on a construction site, and he shares what I think a very justified, passion, a concern about the fact that feminist sites like Jezebel, and feminist generally, are partially to blame for the insensitivity in regards to men in abusive relationships.

And yes I agree with that view. Men should be angry, at feminists for that.

Against The Ideologist



Ore_Ele: I see you're about as lost a cause as Charles.

The Fool: No I'm not, I've addressed every question, claim and argument appropriately. I didn't go on some long nonfactual Polemic rant which ignores the other persons position altogether.

If there's anything you feel that I've missed, and not accounted for then ask away. I'll be happy to address it.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2014 11:03:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/15/2014 10:35:34 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Keeping a Clean House
Part 2

The Fool: I apologize, I was in a complete defensive mindstate, when I responded to this two days ago.

Understandable, I apologize for my snarky comments.


This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

The Fool: What MRA's? It's about INFLUENTIAL leaders, on approach and policy.

We do have Leaders, your just not familiar enough with it. Karen Struagn. Victor Zen and Warran Farrel, Jonathan Taylor, to name a few.

Ore_Ele:: "Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

The Fool: I'm relatively educated in critical philosophy, feminist theory, and the history of feminism. I go to feminist university, and am very familiar with MRA positions, so I like to think that I do have a sense of what is actually going on.

Ore_Ele:: You clearly missed the point. It was that there are extreme quotes out there, but we should not let those cloud or muddy the entire movement. That applies to feminism as well

The Fool: My point was that the difference between the types of quotes were that the quotes you considered to be MRA, either satirical, from insignificant proponents or not a part of MRA literature persay. On the other hand, the feminist quotes that you used, are from key influential figures of feminist ideology, and part of official feminist literature which can be found in textbooks that are taught in gender studies classes across the Western world.

MGTOW Vs MRA

I will take that I've probably been incorrectly using the two interchangeably. From the outside of those groups, the lines between them seem very blurred. I've only recently develed into them to see the structural differences. It may be more accurate to replace "MRA" from my OP with "masculism" (just as the counter point to feminism) or MGTOW.


The Fool: Don't confuse MGTOW, with MRA.

Ore_Ele:: You're free to call it whatever name helps you sleep.

The Fool: I think you still that you perhaps don't recognize the difference.

MRA's are men's human rights activist. It's a politically correct movement which fight for gender equality, in areas which are disadvantages to men.

MGTOW is an emerging lifestyle philosophy and ideology. MGTOW members are those who adopt its principles. Members can say or do they want, It's not necessarily politically correct or anything. In fact sometimes downright misogynist.

Recognizing the difference is huge. MRA's are getting fed up with the bitterness and misogyny in MGTOW, which often gets conflated with MRA's agenda. But not all MGTOW is bitter and or misogynist.

I believe it was a different thread on a similar topic that I said while some philosophies don't advocate passive aggression, they appeal to those that do. There are many, what I would call "anti-woman" (really, just men that are pissed, and venting probably more extreme than they really mean) that are describing themselves under the MRA (or MRM) tag.



In defense of Paul Elam
The prequel

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

The Fool: And then it says,

"Now am I serious about this?" NO!!"- Paul Elam

WHERE IS THAT PART????

Right here (had to change some words because of the filter)

Now, am I serious about this?

Ore_Ele:: No. Not because it"s wrong. It"s not wrong. Every one should have the right to defend themselves. Hell, women are often excused from killing someone whom they allege has abused them. They can shoot them in their sleep and walk. Happens all the time. It"ll even get you a spot on Oprah, and cuntists across the kunt-o-sphere will be lionizing you.

In that light, every one of those women at Jezebel and millions of others across the western world are as deserving of a righteous azz kicking as any human being can be. But it isn"t worth the time behind bars or the abuse of anger management training that men must endure if they are uppity enough to defend themselves from female attackers.:

This is Textbook Feminism tactics.

Did you miss that part or agree with it?

The Fool: I already argued that it was a satire,

I believe that was Neptune that said it was a satire. However, while it is easy to say that while he says "do I really believe this? No.." everything before that is clearly satire, that line makes a distinct divide between the satire and the non-satire. Also, as I said, I do believe he was just venting up a storm, but the underlying feelings are clearly shown.

and at the time it was written, "a voice for men" was not a politically correct site, in fact it was specifically a site which acted as a type of catharsis, were men were able to vent about their relationship frustrations. Thus "a voice for men". So, it's not a great example, or representative because the MRA is organized differently.

Again, it is not meant to be a representation of the MRA or Masculism or MGTOW, but as an example of how the extreme statements can cloud the actual movement.


Feminism is huge, across the globe, with no central power, consisting of many small divisions, making it very hard, and time-consuming, to be able to reform anytime soon.

MRA has had the advantage of learning off of the feminist mistakes, and by virtue of being a smaller organization with an implied hierarchy of Representatives, And a small set of key centralized websites, and so is able to better reform itself, than feminism.

I also argued that, yeah, Paul Elam is a no-nonsense masculine man who speaks, like a man you would perhaps find on a construction site, and he shares what I think a very justified, passion, a concern about the fact that feminist sites like Jezebel, and feminist generally, are partially to blame for the insensitivity in regards to men in abusive relationships.

And yes I agree with that view. Men should be angry, at feminists for that.

Against The Ideologist



Ore_Ele: I see you're about as lost a cause as Charles.

The Fool: No I'm not, I've addressed every question, claim and argument appropriately. I didn't go on some long nonfactual Polemic rant which ignores the other persons position altogether.

If there's anything you feel that I've missed, and not accounted for then ask away. I'll be happy to address it.

Again, I apologize for the abrupt reaction on my part and what I said was uncalled for.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
neptune1bond
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2014 4:20:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/15/2014 9:42:18 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:

The link you presented started with "Feminists are sexist. They have a horrible, and very well deserved, reputation as being close-minded, manhating sheep, indoctrinated by their women"s studies class to see "oppression" everywhere." So it is hard yo consider it an unbiased source.
Having a position doesn't make the videos and links to actual feminist articles any less relevant. That's like saying that any evidence that I provide is automatically tainted just because I'm obviously against most of feminist ideology as it currently stands. There really are no unbiased people in any debate, everyone has a stance or position that they support. In almost every debate, people do indeed take sides, but nonetheless we can't throw evidence out just because they take the side opposite of the one we prefer.

However they start by attacking the NOW. Yes, the NOW focuses on woman, much like some organizations focus on student athletes, some focus on cancer survivors, some focus on African Americans, some focus on married people. However, the example they use for NOWs evil ways was an Action Alert that only focused on spreading information (we can question the quality of that info, but that is not part of the evidence they provided).
Didn't you notice that the information they were spreading was on why they are against fathers having equal rights over their children in a divorce and they were suing to stop fatherhood programs. The idea of "forced joint custody" was a farce. The actual bills that they were lobbying against was simply joint custody as the standard so that both parents could have rights to be equal custodians over their children. There is no excuse for this, fathers love their children just as much as mothers and should be treated equally in a divorce. You need to ask yourself how you would feel if your marriage didn't work out but you had your children ripped from you while automatically being assumed to be less fit as a parent than your spouse simply because of your gender. Women are assumed to receive sole custody in the vast majority of cases and it isn't because we have some huge epidemic of horrible fathers everywhere. No one was asking for fathers to receive automatic sole custody, they only wanted to have the standard be joint custody unless one of the parents are shown to be unfit. That's only fair and organizations like NOW shouldn't be fighting against gender equity if that's what they supposedly stand for (which they obviously don't). Being a "women's" organization doesn't suddenly make this less disgusting or horrendous.

Nonetheless, this doesn't address the very fact that these substantially large groups (among others) are lobbying the government based on feminist ideology that I strongly disagree with and find to be very destructive to equality and the general well-being of both women and men. As I said, I don't disagree with the idea of feminism, it is the ideology and the results of that ideology.

Another key that they focused on was the Duke "rape" case and mainly the letter of 88. Claiming that the ad said that the boys were guilty before due process. This was not the case at all. First, the ad was mostly focused on race, rather than sex (any if the quotes were from the African American studies program forum), and it was only using the case as the spark to talk about a larger issue. Whether the boys were or were not racist (they weren't) the case from the get go was centered around race (as far as the national news was concerned). This ad was to address the fear that students were experiencing at that time.
It was hard for me to find an actual example of the advertisement itself but I did find this article:
http://johnsville.blogspot.com...

It said this:

The listening statement asserted unequivocally that something must have "happened" to the accuser, and that these members of the faculty had committed themselves to "turning up the volume." The advertisement also said "thank you" to the protesters who had participated in potbanging demonstrations (one with a 'Castrate' banner) against the lacrosse team and who were distributing "wanted" posters of the Duke Lacrosse team throughout the community.

"Something must have "happened" to the accuser" sounds like an assumption of guilt to me (although a more "politically correct" one), how could it be anything else? Also, considering that the demonstrators they were thanking were calling for castration and for the boys to "tell the truth" as shown in the pictures, and also considering that the announcement for the protest said:
"We are having a "Cacerolazo," or a pots & pans protest, because it is a tool women all over the world use to call out sexual assaulters."

It really sounds like an assumption of guilt to me when you are trying to "call out sexual assaulters". If you're not having any assumptions, why have a protest at all? Also, people frequently backtrack and try to cover up their dirty mistakes, so it isn't all that unrealistic that the faculty would claim that the advertisement was "about something else". But, think about it for a second. Why should race even matter in a rape case unless they are trying to imply that they raped her because of her race? Either way the whole thing reeks of inappropriateness and unfairness, especially in a college atmosphere.

It's also interesting that Wikipedia had this to say:
"John Podhoretz wrote in the New York Post that: "The school has perhaps 700 professors who teach undergrads. So, at a moment when Duke students were being shadowed by a rape accusation, one-ninth of their professoriate had effectively declared that those students did not deserve the presumption of innocence - primarily because so many of their fellow students were supposedly being victimized by the atmosphere of 'racism and sexism.'" Furthermore, Podhoretz quoted Stephen Baldwin, a professor of chemistry: "There was a collision between political correctness and due process, and political correctness won."[5]

In Howard Wasserman's Institutional Failures, he says that the Group's decision to go public so quickly left them vulnerable once more information emerged to change the case. He goes on to cite an investigation into the lacrosse players' personal behavior by Duke Law School professor James Earl Coleman Jr. Coleman found that the players were "good students who caused no problems in the class, treated Duke staffers with respect...and had no record of sexist, racist, or other forms of anti-social behavior.""
paininthenuts
Posts: 161
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2014 4:46:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 11/11/2014 1:54:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Ideologically, of course.

This particular thread is directed at MRAs and Feminists, though it really applies to any form of ideological passion.

It seems that both sides have bunkered down, circled the wagons, and are only looking at not giving any ground. The problem is that while most are being reasonable and have noble goals, their message and their "side" (for lack of a better word) is being corrupted by highly vocal extremists that hide within those noble causes. Just for example...

"I want to see men beaten to a bloody pulp, with high heels shoved in their mouths." - Andrea Dworkin

"To call a man an animal is to flatter him." - Valerie Solanas

"All men are rapists and that's all they are." - Marilyn French

There are plenty more examples. These are not comments from YouTube comments, or from 4Chan or some other anonymous internet group. These are/were prominent members of the feminist movement. There are, of course, plenty of quotes from MRA activists that are just as extreme (though they typically don't have public leaders since they are more negatively viewed).

"Women have to accept this incident as a tax on their freeloading. Women get men to buy them drinks, dinners, and bridezilla weddings, all in return for virtually nothing. Once in a while, a few women get shot up. Given the $500 billion a year that women mooch off of men each year, that is a relatively small tax to pay."

"In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I"d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women " to beat the living sh!t out of them. I don"t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won"t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.

And then make them clean up the mess." - Paul Elam

"Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true." - Ron Hollander, a lawyer.

These extremists are the ones creating the conflicts and causing moderates within each group to think the other group is more like the extremes, rather than what they actually are.

Each group needs to turn its attention inward, and either at least attempt to cleanse itself of these extremists or openly admit that they welcome those quotes and ideas. Beyond that, each group also needs to make the conscious choice to be aware that the groups they are arguing with are not those extremists. Once we do that, we can then actually engage in meaningful discourse to forward the goals of society and our success as a species.

===================

There was I all ready to discuss the importance of good housekeeping standards, and it being a woman's main role in life, and then find out it's another bloody feminist thread.

On the point of feminists, can you please answer this question. If feminists hate men so much, why do they go out of their way to look them ?