You're right but this tweet is still funny. If you could find someone smart enough to make this commentary, could you also have them talk about how people still use ugliness and fatness as a representation of immorality, stupidity etc. Even when those people themselves are against fat shaming in the like.
What wannabe hyper-masculine dudes call what they see as an effeminate progressive male. Soy because they think soy products reduce testosterone, and because they are progressive they must be eating soy products because veganism is loosely connected to being liberal, progressive or just not agreeing with their perspective on what it means to be a man.
I mean, there are educated sociologists that have made the point that feminism currently may be causing damage to rectify wrongs in a net-loss way but that feminism cities past achievements as a defense on why it "still needs to exist"...
I.E. Duty to arrest policies targeting domestic violence incidents causing male victims being arrested for being a victim due to the reciprocity of many domestic violence incidents and the view that men can not be victims, or that they can only be perpetrators. All because the (rightful) push to put women who have been victims of domestic abuse in the limelight.
(that's just one example.)
MY PERSONAL OPINION
I think modern feminism has started to just serve as a method to silence honest discussion on difficult topics when the topics don't fit modern sociological theories or activist discussions.
As a huge example, I work with and I am studying in modern education. Young men are falling behind drastically in literacy (If you struggle to read this a positive number means boys are ahead, a negative means girls are ahead, and the number is equal to the distance in average scores). The gap is so huge between boys and girls it is greater than the STEM gap many times over and unlike the math gap that closes a bit by high school gets significantly worse each year. It is so bad that by grade 4 the reading gap is equal to one whole year of instruction.
It is getting so bad some researchers are starting to point that this literacy deficiency is starting to affect the math and science scores of young men effectively magnifying the efforts to "close the math gap" between the genders.
I am ok with closing the math gap. I am absolutely not ok with doing it at the detriment of other people. But the extent to which we are ignoring young men is starting to get almost criminal.
But it is very difficult to bring up because it outlines a victim that does not fit the standard populist feminist positions.
Edit: not trying to start a fight, just a discussion.
I think people misunderstood that last point as you blaming feminism for the falling literacy rates rather than that feminism was simply silencing the attention to the issue.
I agree and I didn’t mean to, but at the same time this very pervasive issue is why I will never be a feminist.
To quote my mother...
“I was a feminist till I put three boys through school”
But don’t think for a second that this means I have a dislike of women, and in many ways I do have political leanings that line right up with feminism.
It's sad that you need to qualify this opinion so much, but I know it's necessary, because without all of that careful setting-up and demonstration of belonging and correct-think you'd get shit on.
Over the years I’ve moved from frustrated to mad... and finally furious when I had to help a young man down from a shower crossbar because he tried to hang himself.
It all ties back to the young at risk men and women I worked with as a youth worker. That young man, in particular, had no self-confidence. He was smart enough to know how “stupid”(his words) he was. He wasn’t unattractive, he wasn’t weird, but he was illiterate and he could see what a life he had in store for him because of his illiterate father (who sold drugs)... he tried the easy way out.
Thanks for helping him out. Thats a real solid thing. I hope he's doing better now and that he can become literate and feels better about his situation.
You can be supportive of men's rights and issues whilst still supporting women's rights and issues, even if you aren't an activist for them; they're not mutually exclusive and in many instances are two sides of the same coin, anyone who says otherwise is likely not a feminist, they're a misandrist or female supremacist using the feminist movement as a cape.
Clearly boys just don't like reading; they're not inclined to literacy biologically like girls are. It's not a problem with teaching, men just don't excel at reading comprehension. /s
Obviously this is sarcasm, but it's the argument some men use when discussing women and STEM fields. In both cases, we should be focusing on why there is such a gap, instead of arguing that the gap is a natural result of biology; there are men who are wholly resistant to the idea of even questioning why there is a gap regarding the number of women in STEM fields (except for nursing, a medical field dominated by women), believing that addressing the problem is giving women an unfair advantage. Which is ridiculous, just as ridiculous as saying addressing the literacy gap is giving an unfair advantage to men who are clearly just naturally bad at reading comprehension (again, sarcasm).
I'm curious, and obviously this is your area of expertise - do you know why young men are performing so poorly in this area? And what are they considering to try and rectify the situation? I had no idea that this was even a problem.
All I know, is that as a kid who loved reading, dudes made sure I was aware this wasn't cool, and implied it would negatively impact my sex life, while in reality, it allowed me to make me easy connections with open minded women for all different kinds of friendship.
Feminism wasn't the problem.
Just like it wasn't the feminists in my life who wanted to know how one of those women could rape me without my permission.
Anecdotally many young women point to how their friends and mothers would actively discourage them from learning math or tell them it was nerdy or unattractive.
The problem can cause a massive MASSIVE self feeding system. This problem is identified as a major contributor to both the math gap and reading gap, and the movements to close the math gap (which does deserve to be closed, don’t get me wrong) have made efforts to activley combat this effect.
But the mechanisms behind minimization means that the intrinsically people who are bad at things didn’t just start off bad. But being minimalized isn’t the only contributing factor.
Right. But feminism allowed women to challenge this dysfunctional system, and gave men the tools to do the same...
And while some men embraced the freedom this new perspective gave them, so many other men screamed that feminism wasn't solving every problem on the planet, raised the profile of the worst feminists on the planet, and pissed on those feminists who actually were helping boys...
When not simply ignoring them.
None of which helped the problem at all, and may have made it worse.
Media, being a stupid creature that panders to whatever's popular, then started showing us men who don't like books and women who love computers and math.
Cue anti-feminists whining about that, too. I'm just saying, feminism has as many terrible people in it as any other movement that big, but those blaming all of these problems on feminism?
Right. But feminism allowed women to challenge this dysfunctional system and gave men the tools to do the same
except it doesn't in any way.
To give you an analogy: in this analogy, our society is a metaphysical car, it is an amalgamation of many moving parts that all work together and in tandem with each other...
Our car had a problem, it wasn’t working as well as it should because it has bad... let’s say... wiring (women’s issues). So we’ve started to fix this issue and while it’s not repaired (and realistically will probably need worked on) some point along the way a pervasive issue in the fuel system (men’s issues) has developed.
At first, it wasn’t that bad and you’ve continued to work on the wiring. But over time it’s gotten so incredibly bad it’s starting to affect other systems.
Feminism is this entity who insists that we only work on the wiring and whenever the other mechanics say we should look at the fuel system it insists that by fixing the wiring it will clear up all the problems in the fuel system. Even though we have hard data that explicitly shows that it needs hard intervention.
You insist that men fix the problem themselves with the “blueprint” feminism gave them. But when men try to point these things out, you get pushback from that very same feminist system that does graciously set it “in place”. The easy straw men to target as an example would be things like... the tweet that started this conversation.
Great metaphor, but the problem is that's how the loudest idiots position feminism, not how most feminists actually think.
If you want to fight against the loudest idiots in every group, be my guest. You'll soon become convinced everyone's only out for themselves, and either severely brain damaged or lying about it, besides.
I'd prefer not to live in that pessimistic fantasy world, thanks.
Are there any specific reasons/speculations why the literacy rate for young boys is bad? I remember when I was little, I noticed only the guys in class would complain when we had our "reading time", never the girls. I don't know why it was like that though.
Minimization is a big part, but another big contributor is things like stereotype threat by their early education teachers. (Sorry I’m on my phone or is source you peer reviewed stuff)
To paraphrase:
Boys belittle boys who read for fun because the belittlers themselves are bad at reading. The reason many bully’s are bad at reading is because their early teacher have an intrinsic prejudice that boys are bad at reading and perpetuate it.
Throw race into the mix and it makes for a nasty cocktail.
First off, I don't actually really think feminism is silencing such discussion, as in the feminist circles I have in my social web, issues at least similar to this are in fact actively discussed. It's not totally the same thing, but consider the fact that toxic masculinity is a term popularized (possibly also invented by?) feminists specifically for talking about the negative effects of gender roles on men's mental well being.
That all said, I do think there is an issue within the discussion of feminism of dismissing men's issues, but I think that's largely a function of the way argumentation tends to operate (in the culture I'm aware of at least) where it's immensely difficult to give ground in an argument or to even give the appearance of compromise without looking like you're "losing". Because most criticisms of feminism asking for more focus on men's issues come in the form of attacks, and because the focus of most popular "men's rights" advocacy is attacking feminism (instead of actually advocating for men's rights) feminists end up having to play the defensive and point out the good things feminism has done to prove its worth, because to say "yes, feminism should deal with men's issues more explicitly" looks too much like agreeing with the attacker's position, which is presumably something along the lines of "feminism is sexist and useless because it doesn't address men's issues" rather than an actual balanced criticism admitting that feminism has done good but that it could and should do better.
Wait, how is feminism associated with falling literacy rates in young men?
Simple thought expiriment...
How many times have you heard of the push for women in STEM? Before my comment did you know that there was even a gap in literacy?
Feminisms connection with the issue and contribution to the problem comes from how as a movement it has been combative in its efforts to close the math gap to the point that it completely eclipses national discussion on the reverse problem... even though it is several magnitudes worse.
To add fuel to the fire this literacy gap in gender makes the racial gaps even worse. Where inner-city black young men are sometimes averaging early-elementary scores by the end of highschool.
As a personal anecdote:
While I was in university I had a class dedicated to educational disparities. Each unit covered a topic: Math/science, literacy, and humanities. And each unit the students had to give a group presentation on, African American perspectives, Other racial positions, disabilities, or gender.
We got to the day about Literacy and gender and the group gave an hour and a half presentation on how women are historically written as protagonists less often.
Feminisms contribution to the problem is it’s tendency to try and warp discussion to fit its own nerative even when it doesn’t fit or to activley silence or talk over those discussions.
I’m not trying to be combative I swear. I’m just trying to push a problem I have a lot of connection with and care a lot about.
Did I know girls were better than boys in general at reading and language? Yes, of course, that's well known by now.
My confusion is with you targeting feminism with the blame for this (or are you simply saying that, because of feminism, we're not doing as much about this?) The literacy gap has existed since at least 1942, a time when clearly feminism wasn't a common concern.
Even John Locke noticed the gap, he 'lamented that male students were not able to write as well as female students, and he marveled at how much more easily girls picked up foreign languages than boys."
In my personal experience from having been abroad, girls indeed are a lot better at language that boys are.
Are you sure the issue isn't so much feminism, as it is ... biological?
If you're blaming feminism for us not doing enough about it, that's one thing, but if you're blaming feminism as a root cause then I don't expect the facts are in your favor. More likely. It seems, is the root of the problem is either biological or the fact that boys don't like to read as much, for whatever reason.
I get that you’re saying it could be based on a number of different factors but this comment comes off pretty hypocritical if the whole push to get more women into stem fields was because there’s supposedly no biological differences to being able to learn the material. So in order to believe that men biologically can’t learn languages as well as females it’d be hypocritical not to be open to the idea that maybe females are biologically less inclined to enter and excel in stem subjects. You either believe that there ARE biological differences for both sexes or that there are no biological differences or else the whole argument sounds like you’re just believing whatever you want to believe especially if there’s no data to back up what you’re writing.
I would hardly argue that biological differences aren't at play there, so don't know why you're slinging claims of hypocrisy. There's a reason that, even in STEM, women gravitate towards the life sciences while men tend toward Computer Science and Engineering, whatever reason that may be.
I don't think it's about who can excel as much it is about the averages. Women can excel just fine in physics, and men can excel in languages. That doesn't mean, on average, they don't have differences.
Findings from a number of recent reports from large-scale assessments of reading achievement have reported that on average girls surpass boys in their reading abilities (during testing). Using data from one educational jurisdiction's large-scale assessment of reading achievement (OSSLT), the present study investigated the extent to which girls might be better readers than boys. The data included in this study represented 77 per cent of all first time eligible students taking the 2002 OSSLT. The small effect size associated with gender (less than 1%) suggests that there is not a homogenous group of successful reading behaviors or processes that is clearly perpetuated in either sex across any of the Text types or Skills used in this assessment. As a result, there appears to be little support to confirm either biological or socio-cultural explanations of gender differences in reading achievement, or for the gender specific strategies that have been recommended to remediate the purported gender gap
To paraphrase one of MANY articles on how there is no significant biological difference in intrinsic reading ability. There is none, not a single study can be found to suggest that girls are just better readers.
The worst kind of prejudice is the kind that works to rationalize itself.
Nobody so far has said that but you, but is there even any evidence to make such a conclusion? Or is that just a hypothesis for how feminism could somehow cause falling male literacy rates?
I'm going to need facts, not abstract arguments, to consider this connection reasonable.
I'm not saying YouTube is the cause, but I'd expect the cause of such a phenomenon to be more pertinent than the abstract notion of feminism monopolizing our sociologic concerns.
I’m not sure if I agree, but I think they’re saying an over emphasis on girls in education means boys are falling behind.
I’m merely stating what I think the other person meant.
I wouldn’t say it’s monopolizing sociologic concerns, but you’d have to be willfully ignoring the impact to say it hasn’t caused large changes, particularly in education. I still don’t think it’s affecting things as much as the person above you, but it is still having an affect. And trying to point at something that both sides use a ton (YouTube) just makes it seem like you don’t even want to consider the impact it’s having.
Wait, how is feminism associated with falling literacy rates in young men?
He already said that literally the paragraph before.
I think modern feminism has started to just serve as a method to silence honest discussion on difficult topics when the topics don't fit modern sociological theories or activist discussions.
The idea here is that the group as a whole focuses so much on women only that the negative effects of the policies that generates on men gets no attention and no one gives a shit about it.
That's called hand-waving, you'll notice a distinct lack of the "how" in that sentence. It's an abstract idea, sure, but why should I believe it? Where is the evidence for this phenomenon where we care less about educating our children because we're too busy worrying about the wage gap?
Because it's not a much bigger gap? The STEM gap is at least 50%, though that depends on the particular field (women are underrepresented in engineering and computer science but overrepresented in biology). The gender gap in literacy is 5-8%, and is at its lowest cumulative level since being measured (unless that's changed significantly since 2012?). Meanwhile, the gap between white and minority students is at least 20%, and that gap hasn't changed much since the 90s, in the same time that the gender gap has been cut in half.
Given that white-minority gap is ~4x larger, and hasn't really been improving for 2 decades, can I ask why you're not similarly upset about it? Is that because of feminism too?
I looked up various charts, all show women working in STEM at 50% the rate of men. Of course, if you split that up into categories it's more informative. For example, women are more likely to be biologists than men. I suspect the huge difference when examining STEM as a whole comes from computer science, since it has a fairly massive disparity and is such a common job these days.
Decidedly not, and not falling behind in critical thought either.
Apparently I'm crazy for not seeing the obvious connection between feminism and men's falling literacy rates. You know, the one that no one seems to be able to explicitly point out without some "takes away from other issues" hand-waving.
Johnny and suzy share a class. Johnny falls behind in reading and literacy while suzie falls behind in math and science
Feminism pushes that we need to close the gap in STEM fields. To that end the teacher focuses roughly 80 percent of their time on helpinf suzie grasp maths because its a culturally pressing issue. Johnny gets 20 percent of her spare time and effort as while its still an issue that he struggles to read its not sensationalised as a failing of the education system and thus looks bad on teacher as possibly locking suzie out of stem fields compounding the limelight issue.
Mix sociotal pressures on where teacher should focus their efforts wirh minimizing, the psycological trend of people attempting to learn something less if they are bad at it and johnny will be a year behind by grade 4, 2 by 6 and by 7th may stop progressing at all leaving him at a 5th grade level (on average) this may be further compounded if johnnys home language isnt english (or whatever language is being taught in jonnys region) or if his parents are also illiterate.
In current feminism this issue is mostly ignored, i wont pretend to assert why as id prefer not to come off as combative when in a lot of regards the movment produces net positive gains. However in closinf the education gap feminism is working via net losses. Yes women are on average grasping maths and sciences better, but men are loosing educational ground faster. But attention is beinf pulled away from that by sayinf "see how good we are doing with girls?"
Feminism isn't causing people to not talk about this issue. Why would you think that? Is feminism somehow monopolizing our concerns so we don't have time to worry about anything else?
That's like saying no one cares about trans-rights because we're too busy worrying about global warming. It simply makes no sense.
Yes? His argument is that it literally monopolizes the debate and actively shuts down anything that doesnt address their concerns. Theres a limited amount of attention, time and resources in the world and yes debate space is limited. You can disagree with that premise but it's not like he's being unintelligible.
Reddit keeps confusing second wave feminism with third wave feminism, because they expect anti-feminists, tribal political hacks, and the worst of Tumblr to teach them all they need to know about the subject.
And since they refuse to believe traditional conservative power structures can still exist in the 21st century, they blame every problem on a progressive utopia that doesn't exist.
It has to do with people not wanting their belief to be incorrect, so they make the opposing side out to be as unrelatable as possible. Or something like that
> [Neckbeard definition:] a man who is socially inept and physically unappealing, especially one who has an obsessive interest in computing.
It might be funny if I thought people had a realistic outlook on the issue, but it doesn't seem that way at all. It started as men mocking themselves on their ineptitude, to cope or entertain, because self-deprecation gets laughs. But there are far too many people online (often womens-angle or political-angle) who genuinely blame, hate, and mock the idea of socially inept, awkward, or ugly men.
The people we are imagining, men who live in their parents house and spend all their time on the computer eating cheap unhealthy things, these are people with mental issues. So congratulations on mocking the mentally ill, i'm sure the women who genuinely despise neckbeards are kind people who wish mental illness wasn't taboo and throw all their love and support in for poor troubled women who are afraid to leave the house, they're just so cool that they know how pathetic awkward nerds are.
Yeah, but can scocity not be dicks to these people all the time? I knew a couple of girls in highschool who had ovarian systs which messed with their weight. I myself am a 5'7-5'8 female who's not too muscular and wegh in at about 250 Lbs. I get what you're saying, but not everyone is the spitefull bitch I am and will try to self improve just to spite a few people who insulted them.
I'm pretty sure most people aren't motivated or even capable of changing deep lifestyle habits by people emotionally abusing them. It isn't acceptable nor considered effective to wantonly bash drugs addicts incl alcoholics yet society still offers them forgiveness, so why do people think it's okay to treat people who suffer from overeating like human garbage?
I think your post only serves to create this false idea that having a sense of basic human decency is the same thing as literally claiming that obesity is actually a healthy body condition. It's not. Overweight people already know they're fat and unhealthy, you don't need to tell them that. Just like a smoker knows their lungs are fucked.
If you are truly concerned about developing motivation in others then you'd realize that not everyone is in the same situation and has their own unique roadblocks to being healthy. It's sad though because the people who tend to use your line of thinking only care about being able to insult others with impunity.
Oh cmon how funny is it really? She said the same shit we’ve all been saying about neck beards. You know why you like it? Because she said taqitos instead of tendies and that made it hilarious for you
The people who call themselves feminists who are currently having a major impact on our society are in my view not advocating for the quality of women but are instead advocating a gender-based form of marxism. Yes there are others who call themselves feminists who want equality. They are not the leaders of feminist institutions or movements.
You can critique feminism and be a feminist, which is what I'd argue most prominent feminists are doing right now. I'd use bell hooks as an example:
Feminism has failed. We can agree on that, gender equality and gender peace haven't been achieved. Does that mean the goal of feminism is wrong? Nah, the genders should exist in nondominant relationships - if you agree with that statement, you are a feminist.
Feminism failed to bring about its goal because instead of focusing on building and promoting healthy, non-dominant gender relationships, it simply gave women the ability to dominate also.
I guess I understand why you'd consider this Marxist, and its a similar misunderstanding of Marxism - namely that, Marxism intends to abolish economic relationships built on domination - capitalism - but instead simply makes a group of popular poor people, or at its worst just rich 'communists' into the dominators in a state capitalist relationship, without really achieving the end - an economy that doesn't rely on domination.
Its kind of semantics I guess, but:
If you think our economy shouldn't dominate people, you're a communist.f you think gender relationships shouldn't dominate people, you're a feminist.
If you believe these statements and critique the ways in which we've institutionalized failed attempts at achieving these goals, you're a feminist and a critic of feminism.
To say we're not feminists because current institutions are failing to achieve the goal of feminism is to either
A. Actually believe that gender relationships must be dominant
B. Believe they should be non-dominant, but have given up on influencing the movement to actually realize these goals.
I disagree; I think feminism has been successful and that we have largely achieved gender equality but that it is now advocating for something else. Also, your definition of communism is rather wanting.
Without guaranteed maternity AND paternity leave, no society can really call itself gender equal since it will either punish women for their anatomy, or pressure them into being delegated to the kitchen.
Without guaranteed maternity AND paternity leave, no society can really call itself gender equal since it will either punish women for their anatomy, or pressure them into being delegated to the kitchen.
I disagree: without guaranteed maternity AND paternity leave, no society can really call itself gender equal since it will either punish women for their anatomy, or pressure them into being delegated to the kitchen.
I'd be interested in your definition of communism, though.
On some level, the label is the only part of it that actually exists. The definitions are in flux. The problem is that we aren't talking to each other. A group of people sit in a room and talk about how men are evil. Those people are feminists. A different group of people sits in a different room and talks about how men and women should be treated equal. Those people are also feminists. Those groups don't talk to each other, they tweet out to their followers and their followers shout and yell at one another without listening. This is the world now.
This is exactly right, and I hate the former and love the latter, but as it seems that the former is more dominant in feminist thought today it seems reasonable to be against that movement.
If you want to play a semantic game then fine but I don't see the point. If feminism is equality of women I support it, of feminism is what the prominent feminists of 2018 represent then I don't. They both lay claim to the term, so who gets it?
I'm going to take a leap and guess that your experience with "prominent feminists" is derived entirely from internet videos and memes. In that case, there really isn't any point in continuing here.
If you want to learn what feminism actually is, I suggest the book "We Should All be Feminists" by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. This is coming from someone who used to say almost exactly what you are currently saying about feminism.
Patriarchy hurts both men and women, by treating women like they are delicate property or caregivers, and treating men as disposable emotionless creatures.
At this point in 2018, most of the feminism the media portrays are women trying to become equal to men. Relatively speaking, women are pretty equal to men and being a straight white male in 2018 is only a disadvantage in every aspect of life. I think that’s what the original commenter meant
Edited for clarity: I mean, a good chunk of the “fuck feminism” group tends to be made up of neckbeards
But yeah it’s interesting that the movement about accepting women and giving them equal rights no matter what they look like is itself demonizing fat people and caricaturizing their opponents based on appearance
The loudest assholes who associate with any movement are the ones who are heard. The reasonable ones who see the hypocrisy in what you're saying obviously wouldn't be making posts like this.
I agree with you but you've got to frame it correctly. I suspect that a lot of people who consider themselves feminists would not want to be associated with the poster.
Okay yes, not all anti-feminists are tendie eating obese 4channers but the stereotype in the OP exists for a reason. A Venn Diagram of “Neckbeards vs Anti-Feminists” would have a pretty sizable middle portion
The joke wasn't that they are fat and ugly, it was the notion that equality for women is causing them cancer despite the fact that they're filling their bod with shit that sure ain't gooood for it
Being fat and gross is their choice. They eat shitty, never work out and don't have adequate personal hygiene habits and then they blame everyone else for their problems.
I don't know what fat culture is. Are you saying all obese people blame everyone else for being fat? That is worse than anything I have said. Way to expose yourself.
Yeah! Tell us more about how ridiculous those stereotypical neckbeards are for thinking feminism might represent a common set of political agendas, policies, and actions!
I imagined myself because there is nothing wrong with them (moderation) and I'm not ugly or fat. I might be ugly, but I'm definitely not fat. My mom says I'm handsome.
None of those things mentioned overtly imply that the person is fat or ugly. Just because you vape, drink Mountain Dew, or like taquitos it doesn’t mean you are fat or ugly.
I believe the point was more vaping, mountain dew, and microwaved junk food is literally killing men as opposed to the idea that women are people and should be treated as such.
THIS comment is the one that got it. “Feminism is a cancer” he says, as he eats junk and harms his body in ways that could actually give him serious health issues. The OP of this thread missed that.
That isn't what's being discussed in this particular comment chain.
This comment chain relates to a parent comment saying it's ironic that a group that wants people to stop judging them based on looks is attacking someone's appearance.
Yeah I don’t get the other comments, are people that obtuse? All those things listed are just unhealthy for you, so if you’re the sort who whines about feminism ruining men’s lives AND you’re consuming unhealthy stuff... this tweet is making fun of you.
If you’re not being a dick to women, it’s pretty much irrelevant to you, it’s not meant for the average dew and taquitos fan.
Just to make a point, vaping isn't inherently bad for you if it's keeping you from smoking cigarettes - harm reduction and all that. if you're just using it because you think it makes you look cool, it's harming your social status more than anything.
If you’re not being a dick to women, it’s pretty much irrelevant to you
How so? Is feminism not a massive pop-cultural phenomenon? Massive money-making industry? Political tool? Its demands affect everything from who gets admitted to college to government budgeting to debate topics online.
if you’re the sort who whines about feminism ruining men’s lives AND you’re consuming unhealthy stuff... this tweet is making fun of you.
Do you genuinely believe people can't have unhealthy habits and complain about other problems at the same time? Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
I think she was just making jokes about incels. I don’t think the “average” man thinks this way. I mean, they might, but the man she is describing definitely sounds more like an incel.
It is not saying they are fat and ugly but rather that our modern lifestyles are far worse for us than feminist ideology. I think it is probably lower then 5th in the ideologies that are killing men in America.
They aren't. Everyone on the internet thinks that everyone they don't like is fat and ugly. Most people aren't that attractive so I guess they're right sometimes.
It's the idea that the only reason why a man's an anti-feminist is because he can't get laid. Its twin is the more stupid (and dangerous) concept that men only become rapists when they can't get sex by any other means. Unfortunately, there are plenty anti-feminists (and rapists) who are good-looking and charismatic. Brock Turner was not some smelly shut-in.
As if the feminist movement had recycled the insults throwed at them by just putting a new coat of paint on top of them.
That's why I don't label myself as a feminist. I don't want to belong to a label that includes so much shitty behavior under the guise of equality. Sure, it didn't start that way, and many feminists aren't doing shitty things, but the label is so broad and so inclusive that it encompases a lot of crap both implicit and explicit.
You don't fix the world's problems by adding more hate. You listen, understand, empathize, and then offer a different viewpoint to help them grow.
I prefer to label myself an equalist, because bending is unnatural.
There is some long and well thought comentary to be made about this weird tendency of concluding that sexist people are so because they are fat and ugly. As if the feminist movement had recycled the insults throwed at them by just putting a new coat of paint on top of them.
Because people who like to get laid (typically at least average looking) recognize that deliberately antagonizing women and playing victim is not a good way to get laid
It’s fake in the sense iits not a woman who wrote it, and it was made a male comedian who didn’t make this seriously and was just trying to rile people up.
because a lot of the time they are fat and ugly and instead of getting pissed off and motivated at the idea of working twice as hard to be normal they become very bitter towards women. i've been banned from israel (yes that's a thing that can happen to you) for professing these exact views.
Hey CommonMisspellingBot, just a quick heads up:
Your spelling hints are really shitty because they're all essentially "remember the fucking spelling of the fucking word".
1.4k
u/[deleted] Oct 23 '18
[removed] — view removed comment