• Radical Feminists Trying to Attack and Desecrate a Cathedral, Peaceful Defenders Attacked.
    281 replies, posted
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43082368]you could give compensation by not automatically assuming your wife or partner is the one who will do the housework.[/QUOTE] com·pen·sa·tion (kmpn-sshn) n. 1. The act of compensating or the state of being compensated. 2. Something, such as money, given or received as payment or reparation, as for a service or loss. 3. Biology The increase in size or activity of one part of an organism or organ that makes up for the loss or dysfunction of another. 4. Psychology Behavior that develops either consciously or unconsciously to offset a real or imagined deficiency, as in personality or physical ability. I don't think that not giving a shit about gender roles is compensation.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43082447]Just a moment ago you've said that all those people are feminist and that you don't want division. The fact of the matter is, there are radical feminists and liberal feminists all called feminists. And that, plus the portrayal of the feminism throws people off the idea gender equality. A movement with a different name with a stricter definition and which advocates gender equality is beneficial to the cause.[/quote] feminism is a movement that advocates gender equality though. [quote]Why does it have to be institutionalized to be a problem? It makes discrimination one sided. Awesome equality you've got there. "You can only discriminate women".[/quote] it's an individual problem instead of a cultural problem. instead of missing the forest for the trees, you are mistaking a tree for a forest. [quote]Equality means the same standards for both genders. Every time you go men this, women that, you oppose the very nature of equality. Equality is completely gender-neutral.[/QUOTE] ok men and women are equal in society feminists pack your bags no movement is needed. [editline]5th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Silly Sil;43082481]com·pen·sa·tion (kmpn-sshn) n. 1. The act of compensating or the state of being compensated. 2. Something, such as money, given or received as payment or reparation, as for a service or loss. 3. Biology The increase in size or activity of one part of an organism or organ that makes up for the loss or dysfunction of another. 4. Psychology Behavior that develops either consciously or unconsciously to offset a real or imagined deficiency, as in personality or physical ability. I don't think that not giving a shit about gender roles is compensation.[/QUOTE] yea it's not an accurate term for what i am trying to convey.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43082489]feminism is a movement that advocates gender equality though. [/QUOTE] Feminism focuses on issues that affect women and ignores male specific issues. You can't achieve equality by only focusing on one group. Pushing for compensation is also hardly advocating for equality.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082539]Feminism focuses on issues that affect women and ignores male specific issues. You can't achieve equality by only focusing on one group. Pushing for compensation is also hardly advocating for equality.[/QUOTE] there are no male specific issues though. go ahead and name one.
[QUOTE=Tweevle;43082478]If a class in a video game was underpowered, and then the devs gave that class a buff to compensate, would you say "Dude, if you want all the classes to be balanced why are you buffing only one class? Treat them all equally, you hypocrites!"[/QUOTE] Except buffing one class happens because you strive for all classes to be equal in a way. It's not "class X needs this and that". It's" ALL classes need this and that and the class X is missing it at the moment, hence the buff". Same with men and women, the idea should be to have the same standards for men and women. When you go, all men are oppressors and should pay compensation to women then it's not really a gender-less standard is it?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43082572]Except buffing one class happens because you strive for all classes to be equal in a way. It's not "class X needs this and that". It's" ALL classes need this and that and the class X is missing it at the moment, hence the buff". Same with men and women, the idea should be to have the same standards for men and women. When you go, all men are oppressors and should pay compensation to women then it's not really a gender-less standard is it?[/QUOTE] gender-equality isn't a gender-less movement.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43082561] go ahead and name one.[/QUOTE] The legal system more likely to give men harsher sentences than women for the same crime. Men are also held responsible for children they don't want and really have no say in the issue.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082539]Feminism focuses on issues that affect women and ignores male specific issues. You can't achieve equality by only focusing on one group. Pushing for compensation is also hardly advocating for equality.[/QUOTE] MRAs exist on the same level as white nationalists: they ride on existing issues wrongly. [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082561]there are no male specific issues though. go ahead and name one.[/QUOTE] This is mostly true, but the only thing that I can think of that negatively effects me is that I'm mostly expected to act in a certain way that's related to my gender (under the reason of a patriarchy that weighs down everyone). I want to be who I am. My stance on feminism branches off to egalitarianism.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43082489]feminism is a movement that advocates gender equality though.[/QUOTE] And it's divided and often confused with war on men, which you don't want to separate from, and so people want a different name for the more moderate movement against gender roles. [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082489]it's an individual problem instead of a cultural problem. instead of missing the forest for the trees, you are mistaking a tree for a forest.[/QUOTE] Who said discrimination has to be cultural to be a problem? Why is it that you people point it out that men are not being discriminated when a single example of discriminating men shows up? Does it make it less of a discrimination? So discrimination of men based on gender is not as bad as discrimination of women based on gender? You are a movement for gender equality right? [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082489]ok men and women are equal in society feminists pack your bags no movement is needed.[/QUOTE] Who the fuck said that men and women are equal in society right now? Can you put at least a little of effort into your posts please? And is this really your counter argument for being called out on creating double standards? I'm just saying that if you support equality then your standards should be equal to both genders. [editline]6th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082630]gender-equality isn't a gender-less movement.[/QUOTE] Gender quality isn't a movement. And gender quality is gender-less because it treats all genders equally you hypocrite.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43082676]And it's divided and often confused with war on men, which you don't want to separate from, and so people want a different name for the more moderate movement against gender roles.[/quote] the radical movement is opposed to gender roles too. [quote]Gender quality isn't a movement. And gender quality is gender-less because it treats all genders equally you hypocrite.[/QUOTE] gender-equality is a movement. it's called feminism. [QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082662]The legal system more likely to give men harsher sentences than women for the same crime. Men are also held responsible for children they don't want and really have no say in the issue.[/QUOTE] why are men given harsher sentences than women? is the second statement about child support? are women not forced to pay child support when they don't have custody of the child? [quote]Who the fuck said that men and women are equal in society right now? Can you put at least a little of effort into your posts please? And is this really your counter argument for being called out on creating double standards? I'm just saying that if you support equality then your standards should be equal to both genders. [/quote] you just said that acknowledging gender inequality goes against the idea of equality.
[QUOTE=Ownederd;43082668]MRAs exist on the same level as white nationalists: they ride on existing issues wrongly. [/QUOTE] The problem with movements like Feminism and Mens rights is that they really only focus on one gender. This had lead to them developing this idea that only one side faces any discrimination. Feminists ignore mens issues and MRA's act as if all discrimination against women is gone. Both genders have their own specific problems and to achieve an equal society they all have to be solved.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43082572]Except buffing one class happens because you strive for all classes to be equal in a way. It's not "class X needs this and that". It's" ALL classes need this and that and the class X is missing it at the moment, hence the buff".[/QUOTE] You're truncating the second quote. It'd actually be "ALL classes need this and that and the class X is missing it at the moment, [I]therefore[/I] class X needs this and that". The only difference between your two quotes is in the first one giving class this and that is just for the sake of it (which would be unbalancing the game), while in the second one there is a sensible reason to give class X this and that, because the classes are currently unbalanced, just as there is a sensible reason to give women this and that because society is unequal. You aren't going to sort out balance issues in an unbalanced game by treating all the classes the same (i.e. buffing them all) because it doesn't address the problem. Similarly, you aren't going to sort out equality issues in an unequal society by treating all genders the same, because that doesn't address the problem. Once balance/equality has been reached, [I]that's[/I] when you can start treating everything the same way; until then you're just perpetuating the problem.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082814]The problem with movements like Feminism and Mens rights is that they really only focus on one gender. This had lead to them developing this idea that only one side faces any discrimination. Feminists ignore mens issues and MRA's act as if all discrimination against women is gone. Both genders have their own specific problems and to achieve an equal society they all have to be solved.[/QUOTE] The most plain definition of feminism says that it wants to level out the playing field for everyone involved, so no, it isn't focused on one gender.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082814]The problem with movements like Feminism and Mens rights is that they really only focus on one gender. This had lead to them developing this idea that only one side faces any discrimination. Feminists ignore mens issues and MRA's act as if all discrimination against women is gone. Both genders have their own specific problems and to achieve an equal society they all have to be solved.[/QUOTE] neither side has their own specific problems. they are all intertwined under a patriarchal culture. [editline]5th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Ownederd;43082832]The most plain definition of feminism says that it wants to level out the playing field for everyone involved, so no, it isn't focused on one gender.[/QUOTE] the most radical feminists want to completely disassemble gender as an idea.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43082850]neither side has their own specific problems. they are all intertwined under a patriarchal culture.[/QUOTE] This implies that its men perpetuating all of the problems when its in fact people of both sexes at fault.
[QUOTE=xxncxx;43082277]Except they did, which is why I said that. But I'm not going to argue semantics with you.[/QUOTE] Except they didn't! And you can't read!!! :)
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082887]This implies that its men perpetuating all of the problems when its in fact people of both sexes at fault.[/QUOTE] nobody said men perpetuate all problems. men receive net benefit though.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43082740]the radical movement is opposed to gender roles too.[/QUOTE] How's that relevant to what I said? Female domination isn't opposed to gender roles. [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082740]gender-equality is a movement. it's called feminism.[/QUOTE] Gender-equality is the goal for feminism which it tries to achieve. And gender equality means [B][U]equal [/U][/B]treatment of both genders. It means that people have the same standards regardless of gender. It's gender-less. [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082740]you just said that acknowledging gender inequality goes against the idea of equality.[/QUOTE] I just said that creating standards based on gender goes against the idea of equality, even if those standards would be beneficial to women.
actually radical feminism tends to be more opposed to gender roles more than the liberal feminist movement silly sil. [editline]5th December 2013[/editline] feminism isn't about destruction of gender roles. it's about equality for men and women. destruction of gender roles is more along the lines of revolutionary-radical transfeminism.
[QUOTE=Tweevle;43082815]You're truncating the second quote. It'd actually be "ALL classes need this and that and the class X is missing it at the moment, [I]therefore[/I] class X needs this and that".[/QUOTE] This is exactly what I said. [QUOTE=Tweevle;43082815]The only difference between your two quotes is in the first one giving class this and that is just for the sake of it (which would be unbalancing the game), while in the second one there is a sensible reason to give class X this and that, because the classes are currently unbalanced, just as there is a sensible reason to give women this and that because society is unequal. [/QUOTE] Uhhhh what? "ALL classes need this and that" is the balance that should be strived for, hence the buffs if a class falls behind. How is it doing it "just for the sake of it (which would be unbalancing the game)"??? [QUOTE=Tweevle;43082815]You aren't going to sort out balance issues in an unbalanced game by treating all the classes the same (i.e. buffing them all) because it doesn't address the problem. Similarly, you aren't going to sort out equality issues in an unequal society by treating all genders the same, because that doesn't address the problem. Once balance/equality has been reached, [I]that's[/I] when you can start treating everything the same way; until then you're just perpetuating the problem.[/QUOTE] So if one gender is treated worse, you need to treat them better than the other gender before you treat them equally? Why can't you just start treating both genders equally? [editline]6th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082961]actually radical feminism tends to be more opposed to gender roles more than the liberal feminist movement silly sil. [editline]5th December 2013[/editline] feminism isn't about destruction of gender roles. it's about equality for men and women. destruction of gender roles is more along the lines of revolutionary-radical transfeminism.[/QUOTE] Except I was talking about war on men not radical feminism. And I used war on men as an example of what you would (hopefully) oppose. You brought radical feminism up. And when I was talking about war on men I meant the bullshit like "you can't oppress men" and "it's okay to treat men worse based purely on their gender".
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083033]Except I was talking about war on men not radical feminism. And I used war on men as an example of what you would "hopefully" oppose" You brought radical feminism up. And when I was talking about war on men I meant the bullshit like "you can't oppress men" and "it's okay to treat men worse based purely on their gender".[/QUOTE] idk when that has been said but ok.
And how is it equality for men and women if you want to treat men differently?
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;43082887]This implies that its men perpetuating all of the problems when its in fact people of both sexes at fault.[/QUOTE] when one side has more power they have a greater responsibility in dismantling these problems [editline]6th December 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083109]And how is it equality for men and women if you want to treat men differently?[/QUOTE] what are you even on about?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;43083102]idk when that has been said but ok.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=yawmwen;43082740][QUOTE=Silly Sil;43082676]And it's divided and often confused [B]with war on men[/B], which you don't want to separate from, and so people want a different name for the more moderate movement against gender roles.[/QUOTE] [B]the radical movement[/B] is opposed to gender roles too.[/QUOTE] I don't know why you're talking about radical feminism when I wasn't.
you guys really need to grow out of this psycho 'THEY'RE AFTER US' mentality
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43083124]what are you even on about?[/QUOTE] The fact that apparently you can't discriminate men but you surely can discriminate women and the fact that some feminists demand compensation from all men for women? How is this not treating men and women differently?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083154]The fact that apparently you can't discriminate men but you surely can discriminate women and the fact that some feminists demand compensation from all men for women? How is this not treating men and women differently?[/QUOTE] noones said you can't discriminate men (oh wait you're gonna provide some tumblr proof i bet), but people HAVE said that discrimination of men is a RESULT of the male patriarchy, and despite that men benefit from this far more and women are discriminated against far more. and i don't know what you're meaning by compensation, like monetary reparations or something? [editline]6th December 2013[/editline] men get harsher jail sentences? that's because societies gender roles have us perceive men as more dangerous than women. men get fucked over in custody battles? that's because societies gender roles have us perceive women as primary care-givers
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083134]I don't know why you're talking about radical feminism when I wasn't.[/QUOTE] "war on men" is a codeword for radical feminism.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;43083180]noones said you can't discriminate men (oh wait you're gonna provide some tumblr proof i bet)[/QUOTE] I can give you links to posts on this site saying that. Plus every time someone says "this this discriminating men" you get someone saying "oh no men are being oppressed lol". [QUOTE=Lachz0r;43083180]but people HAVE said that discrimination of men is a RESULT of the male patriarchy, and despite that men benefit from this far more and women are discriminated against far more. [/QUOTE] And this is an excuse for treating men worse than women or it was just an irrelevant titbid? [QUOTE=Lachz0r;43083180]and i don't know what you're meaning by compensation, like monetary reparations or something?[/QUOTE] I don't fucking know. Ask the people who are saying that on top of equal treatment men should compensate somehow for what other men did.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083033]This is exactly what I said.[/QUOTE] Sure, but I was trying to make it more clear. [QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083033]Uhhhh what? "ALL classes need this and that" is the balance that should be strived for, hence the buffs if a class falls behind. How is it doing it "just for the sake of it (which would be unbalancing the game)"???[/QUOTE] You misunderstand me, I worded it kinda confusingly, I guess. The first quote "class X needs this and that" is just saying class x needs this and that for the sake of it, so it's probably going to unbalance the game if the other classes don't get something too - just as giving women advantages for the sake of it would result in inequality. The second quote "ALL classes need this and that and the class X is missing it at the moment, therefore class X needs this and that" is saying that class X needs this and that [I]because[/I] there's an imbalance, so treating it differently (buffing it and not the others) is justified because it rectifies the existing imbalance, rather than creating a new one. The buff won't necessarily be making class X as powerful as the others in the same way, it could be a quick, blunt fix until some more deep-set problems in the game mechanics are sorted out. But the important thing is that the classes are now more equal, even if things aren't working how they should be for the final product. [QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083033]So if one gender is treated worse, you need to treat them better than the other gender before you treat them equally?[/QUOTE] If one class is underpowered, you need to give them better stuff before you give all the classes equally good stuff, yes. [QUOTE=Silly Sil;43083033]Why can't you just start treating both genders equally?[/QUOTE] Because society doesn't treat both genders equally. If you don't do anything about that then you're leaving the problem to continue, and in the mean time people are still disadvantaged.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.