See, the problem here is feminism. Women shouldn't be taking care of children because the belief that females are gentle, kind, incapable of cruelty, etc is the worst kind of politically correct blasphemy. Interesting fact is that most physical injuries inflicted on children are by their mothers, not their fathers. You can't trust a society where women are ever allowed to have their way. The fact that Western society, especially British, is one where the man automatically loses for no logical reason whatsoever is a perfect example of why things like this happen. And then we'll hear a bunch of female nonsense about how it's not the murderer's fault because she's a woman and therefore innocent. Surprise surprise, she'll get away with it without breaking a sweat. We need to violently ditch the Satan-spawned liberal evil that is political correctness once and for all.
way to not understand even the most basic forms of feminism
for instance: feminists are also insulted by the idea that they are these motherly, soft, breeders. Feminists want equality in the court systems, and believe the idea of a child always going to its mother is a stereotype from hundreds of years ago.
Originally posted by inimalist
way to not understand even the most basic forms of feminismfor instance: feminists are also insulted by the idea that they are these motherly, soft, breeders. Feminists want equality in the court systems, and believe the idea of a child always going to its mother is a stereotype from hundreds of years ago.
They believe no such thing. Feminism isn't the belief that women are people. It's the fascist ideology that they're the mistress race. Feminism is the belief that men are less than people, less than human. Feminists don't want equality in the courtroom unless by "equality" you mean "omnipotence". Any man who doesn't know this is the one who doesn't understand. If you think feminists aren't monsters then I guess a black guy should think the Ku Klux Klansmen are his friends as well. Feminists are not, have never been, and will never be anything but Nazis. Those bloodsucking, hypocritical, soulless she-harpies from the blackest pit in all of Hell should go straight back where they came from and take any man who sides with them, with them. The only goal of these hairy she-monsters is to make our lives miserable, make us weak, and make us powerless.
Originally posted by inimalist
studies show feminists have much more sexually fulfilling relationships than women who don't consider themselves feminists.other than that, your rambling is inane
That makes sense as they would be more likely to speak up on what they want. That's sexy to me. I don't like 'em shy in the bed.
There was a really horrifying case of child abuse her in New Zealand. A three year-old was abused by her mother's partner and his younger brother and his partner. The girl had suffered horrific abuse. She had been put in a clothes-drying machine and the button was pushed on, put on a clothes line and then they spun it round and she fell off, they often practiced wrestling moves on her, and often threw things at her. The partner eventually ended up kicking her in the head repeatedly. She went uncouncious and they kept her in bed for a couple of days, refusing to take her to the hospital. Her condition worsened and she was foaming at the mouth and having seizures and wasn't responding to having cold water washed over her, so they eventually took her to hospital and she went into a coma and died a few days later. All of them were just convicted of guilty of murder, manslaughter, and child abuse just last week. It's a well-known case her in NZ. They did many more horrible things to here, but some of which I don't remember.
Originally posted by dadudemon
That makes sense as they would be more likely to speak up on what they want. That's sexy to me. I don't like 'em shy in the bed.
indeed, it makes sense to rational people
however, to those who think feminism=bull dyke, it should come as a surprise
I love feminists... except my goddamn ex...
Originally posted by UKRYou don't know much at all, do you?
They believe no such thing. Feminism isn't the belief that women are people. It's the fascist ideology that they're the mistress race. Feminism is the belief that men are less than people, less than human. Feminists don't want equality in the courtroom unless by "equality" you mean "omnipotence". Any man who doesn't know this is the one who doesn't understand. If you think feminists aren't monsters then I guess a black guy should think the Ku Klux Klansmen are his friends as well. Feminists are not, have never been, and will never be anything but Nazis. Those bloodsucking, hypocritical, soulless she-harpies from the blackest pit in all of Hell should go straight back where they came from and take any man who sides with them, with them. The only goal of these hairy she-monsters is to make our lives miserable, make us weak, and make us powerless.
You obviously don't grasp the most basic ideas of feminism. Though, unlike inimalist, I don't really love feminists. I believe that they are too one sided and some that call themselves feminist, kinda lost track of what the idea of feminism is. Now, I think like any other civil right group, it is not necessarily bad to have such focussed groups, but on the whole it just seems to me that anyone that solely focusses on women's rights, gay rights, race rights is putting an undeserved focus on one particular part of civil rights over another, usually do to being part of the oppressed group. Obviously easy for me to say being a white male between the age of 20 and 40 ermm
by feminism, I generally am refering to "old school" types, much like Wendy McElroy who is quoted in my sig (and of course Emma Goldman).
The piece that quote is from is McElroy responding to modern feministic anti-porn staces, where she supports individual freedom.
There are 2 groups, and I'm not saying your criticism isn't apt Bardock (it is), just that I would largely share it with you.
it just seems to me that anyone that solely focusses on women's rights, gay rights, race rights is putting an undeserved focus on one particular part of civil rights over another, usually do to being part of the oppressed group
I couldn't disagree more, and I think you made a really dogmatic, black-and-white statement. People have every right to focus solely on the biggest problem if their life. Are you saying homosexuals should just stop focusing solely on homophobia because there are 'larger' problems out there? These people are treated like second-rate citizens. They aren't allowed to marry, could be fired from their job for being gay (not in my country, that's illegal, but not in the US) and half the people they meet probably judge them based on nothing but their sexual orientation. They're looking to be treated equally, and they have every right to. If that's the one problem in their life they want to focus on, so be it.
Originally posted by BlackC@I never said that they can't focus on it. I even specified that I very well understand why, but...what inimalist said...I believe that "human rights" is the issue. As do many in those groups, who very much argue for all civil rights.
I couldn't disagree more, and I think you made a really dogmatic, black-and-white statement. People have every right to focus solely on the biggest problem if their life. Are you saying homosexuals should just stop focusing solely on homophobia because there are 'larger' problems out there? These people are treated like second-rate citizens. They aren't allowed to marry, could be fired from their job for being gay (not in my country, that's illegal, but not in the US) and half the people they meet probably judge them based on nothing but their sexual orientation. They're looking to be treated equally, and they have every right to. If that's the one problem in their life they want to focus on, so be it.
But I agree with you, as I said I sympathise with them. If someone pissed on my lawn every morning I'd probably focus on eliminating that problem, even if there's someone that shits on my neighbours lawn every day as well.
Feminism in reality is far from the definition offered by some people in this thread. It isn't a "mistress race", no matter how the far rights like Mr. Limbaugh want to make it out to be. It's very much rooted in equality. The only reason people like Mr. Limbaugh gain a foothold in explaining it as a female-dominationnn ideology is because there are always men who think women should have and know their place, just like there's always an audience for the kind of stupidity we see in some people when they say that blacks will get uppity because of the election of Obama. It's the "give them an inch and they'll take a mile" mentality in it's most absurd form.