Feminism is Anti-male

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
21

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/lifestyle/smart-living/why-do-men-need-women-to-smile/ar-BBL3tVb?ocid=spartanntp

A male asks his female colleague to smile…how awful.

We’re at a point now where the slightest ‘infraction’ committed by men against women makes national headline news.
And we’re suppose to believe women and society have absolute 0 expectations of men…none whatsoever.
A man asks a woman to smile, meanwhile millions of women are asking men to bail them out financially, ‘defend their honor’ from other men/come to their aid and rescue, pick up the tab, or not bitch and moan as much as many of them do, to man up, it’s just not making headlines, because the media unambiguously does not give two shits about men, which’s part of the reason why more and more men, and people in general are turning away from it.
The MSM just does not represent working class, white men.

Feminism ought to be designated a hate movement, because that’s all it does, 24/7 around the clock is hate on men, on college campuses and in MSM.

Meanwhile, in the middle east:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHtLNWkPsZ0

Sigh, first world problems.

That being said, it’s not as if men aren’t stoned to death for committing adultery in West Asia, they are, you just don’t hear about it, because patriarchy, right?
Gotta maintain the narrative.

Oh and by the way, the media criticizes parts of West Asia for practicing female genital mutilation, but what about the millions of infant boys who’re having their genitals mutilated AKA male circumcision in our own backyard?
Again, more proofs college campuses, the media, politicians and society as a whole, does not give two fucks about men’s rights and issues.

If something affects women or people in general?
Great, let’s look into it.
If something affects men alone?
Fuck em!

22

I wonder what working class white men are guilty of today?
Better check the headlines, I can’t wait.

I guess the patriarchy owns the press too, if it was really impartial, 98% of its content would be dedicated to slamming stupid white men, instead of the paltry 75-80% we get now.

23

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ancient_Rome#Domestic_abuse

24

Throughout much of European history at least, women were not in any reasonable sense, oppressed.
In the Roman Republic/Empire, they were legally and socially protected from physical and sexual abuse, and albeit socially protected from mental and emotional abuse.
They were free to divorce their husbands and remarry whomever they chose.
They were free to own property, engage in business, and live and travel independently.
They were educated nearly as much as boys, and could take just about any job, except for jobs in the military, politics and a few others, because these jobs were perceived as being especially masculine activities, and in the case of the military at least, they were probably, objectively right.

In the modern, western era the bar has been lowered to admit women into the military, so perhaps the Romans had the right idea, the bar shouldn’t be lowered in order to accommodate them, as doing so makes our military less effective, consequently costing lives.
And politics, at least for the Romans, was perceived as an extension of the military, or vice versa, and thereby also a strictly masculine domain.
Politicians gave the orders and laws, and the military carried them out.
The bar shouldn’t be lowered for firefighting and policing for that matter either, or any other job where women collectively have a significant, objective disadvantage, most especially jobs where lives are on the line.
There is such a thing as taking equality to absurd lengths.
And the same goes for men too, should we find something women are substantially better at.

While there were many jobs available to women, from the likes of waitressing, acting, to the likes of scribing, many women were encouraged to be stay at home moms…but there’s reasons for that.
Altho contraception and abortion existed in Ancient Europe, because it wasn’t nearly as effective, and because infant morality was significantly higher, women spent much of their lives being pregnant and weening small children at home, and so the vast majority of them simply did not have the time, energy or skills to be as career driven as men, at least if they wanted a family, which most of them did, and were encouraged to, just as most men did, and were encouraged to.
And likewise men were discouraged from being stay at home dads/encouraged to be the sole or primary bread winners.
Still many Roman women worked when they could, to help support their families, or to better themselves.

So even tho only men were legislators, officially anyway, clearly they were legislating with their mothers, sisters and daughters welfare in mind, in addition to their fathers, brothers and sons welfare.
And of course the wives of rich, powerful men were able to privately influence what they did in public.

Without contraception and abortion methods improving in the early-mid 20th century, most 21st century would have to be stay at home moms as well, no matter the ideolog(ies) in place.
And staying at home isn’t all bad, on the contrary, it was much safer and in many ways, and less physically demanding, which’s part of the reason why women outlived men by a few years.
And men were also equally if not moreso discouraged from being stay at home dads.
Women also had 24/7, around the clock access to the household and its contents, like food, drink and access to the hearts and minds of their children, slaves and other members of their household, which they could poison and blacken against their men, if they so desired, a kind of domestic power men lacked.

Now Ancient Greece might be another matter, the way they treated women was in some respects more Asiatic than properly European, which makes sense, given they were in closer proximity to West Asia, which has a appalling track record of infantilizing women/treating them like invalids.
But throughout much of Europe and European history at least, women were never oppressed.

The feminist narrative is a fallacy, one that demonizes men and has damaged male/female relations for decades, perhaps centuries to come.
Mainstream feminism isn’t equality between the sexes, we’ve always had that in the west.
Men and women’s roles may’ve differed to some extent, but not as starkly as in other regions of the world, and women’s abuse was rarely, if ever permitted, they were never treated like children, invalids or worse, slaves, not remotely.

Feminism is, or at least has gradually become cancer.
It is the tyranny of women over men, masquerading as equality.
Feminism is a reaction to a collective crime that was by and large, never committed, at least not on European soil, and isn’t being committed, they then use as a justification, a pretext to oppress men.
There never was a patriarchy, or even if there was to some extent, it was largely benevolent towards women.
But today we live increasingly in a matriarchy that demonizes, and subjugates men.

25

or, it’s getting better and it’s only anti-male because it’s pro-male in a savage garden. It’s a movement of strong women in the pursuit of social-engineering strong men.

26

I think one excellent thing feminism has done is that it combatted the idiotic images of women (and to some degree men) that were prevalent before the 20th century and continuing up into certainly the 60s as rules. That women were childlike and incapable of all sorts of things - in science, physical activities, working class type skills, various types of research and intellectual abilities, etc. IOW it was considered almost a rule that women could not do all sorts of things that they can in fact do. I do not believe men and women are the same. Nor am I saying everyone should work, etc. But we had as a norm a hallucinated image of women, what they were capable of, what they were interested in and what their temperment must be. I think it is invaluable to have realistic ideas about humans and there were confusions, lies, and idiocy and it is excellent that this has been challenged by amongst others, feminists. Men also have been put in little boxes, but not to the same degree. They were generally seen to have a wide range of temperments, skill potentials, interests, wider anyway than women.

Perhaps some people thing it is a noble lie to tell women and men that women cannot do all sorts of things we now take for granted they have the ability to do or learn to do. IOW ok, they can do these things, but they shouldn’t, so let’s keep that noble lie in place. I think that’s just BS.

I prefer it that the woman I am with was not infantalized and limited. That it was assumed she could do all sorts of things, that many people still refuse to think they can. Her not being boxed in entails that the person I live with can challenge me with a complicated intelligence and confidence.

Just like the middle-aged morons who seem to think that sleeping with a 17 year old virgin is some kind of lottery win, I think people who want to go back to the way women were throught of an treated have a very low sense of self. Like its really fun to play a sport you are good at with someone with no experience. Like it’s great to have discussions with someone who has never really thought about much. That seems to be the attraction of having sex with virgins. Maybe those men just ain’t got game. And then to raise this to a whole lifetime. To want to be close to someone who has been told and has believed they are not capable of all sorts of things they are capable of.

Sure we can jump back to pagan societies, but pagans and indigenous groups often allowed women a greater range of roles that so called civilized societies. Fucking Abrahamic judgments of women, humans, nature.

Before feminism in the West, middle class women and up were treated like poodles. Working class and poorer women like oxen at best.

Who wants half the human race, and close loved ones, to have their brains and abilities treated like bonsai trees?

And the rage aimed at them to get them back in their boxes, it is never personal, it is always presented as logical. It never has to do with the lives of the people, this rage for women to go back to pretending they are retarded spazes who should be treated like dried flowers.

No one pushing for them to get back in boxes ever, every is willing to admit their fear.

27

This argument is much like the way Nazis defended the historical oppression of Jews. There were many Jews who, despite their oppression, rose to high positions and became Professors or experts in their field, but they were all the same oppressed. In the same way, women have in European history been at a disadvantage, despite having contributed in many ways to the development of society. However being “the other half”, albeit smugly called “the better half”, but not having a say because women were deemed emotionally unstable or associated with similar derogatory attributes is a kind of oppression under which many women suffered. This is especially true in households where the man was a drunkard, a bigot, a brute or just simply an idiot, but remained “head” of that household, despite the woman being the only hope for the children born into such a relationship.

It all has to do with biology. Most men are attracted to women in a way that they have to learn to control if they are not to be considered depraved idiots by their peers. This is because the instinct that nature gives them is to get their genes reproduced. Women, at least in young years, have all the attractions that nature gave them to ensure that the species survives, and the very sight of a naked woman has rendered men unable to think of anything else. Of course in a modern society, it isn’t acceptable for people to go around copulating and making children, indeed, due to progress, it isn’t necessary because more children survive to become adults.

With this in mind, women can, of course, use this advantage to influence men and almost always do. Sometimes the results are not what they expect or wish, very often because they do not understand what they are doing. This is very often the case with young girls who have reached full-blown puberty. Whilst society must protect these young women, with time most women learn to use their influence to their advantage. Of course, after the fever has dropped, men realize how their drive has been used by women to get what they want, and the men start to resent this. This is particularly so when it becomes apparent to others and is one reason for the insecurity amongst men.

To defend their ego against such insecurity, men devise various approaches. One that seems to contribute to their attractiveness in some cases, is to pretend they don’t care. This has complications, however, and with time wears off. Many try to take command of the situation, and as long as the women accept this control it can go well, as long as the insecurity of the man doesn’t get the better of him. Then they turn into the brutes I mentioned above. Some retreat because they notice how little they attract a woman, and are left to “love themselves”. Others, apparently a minority, are able to overcome their insecurities and find a soul-mate with whom they harmonize and have a happy life.

It becomes clear then, that Feminism is not an attack on the last group of men, but more against the brutes that think that the only way to stay in control, is to prevent women gaining influence and do so by ridiculing, reducing them to sex objects and generally oppressing them. I think more men should understand this because it could lead to a better co-existence of women and men, and a sharing of the particular attributes each sex has to contribute to the problems that we are facing.

28

Or were men oppressed, because they couldn’t stay home, cook and clean while women chopped wood, coal mined, farmed, policed and soldiered?

Women had to stay home, we weren’t permitted by the Abrahamic religions to practice infanticide, and abortion, and while we had contraception, from lambskin condoms to pulling out, it wasn’t nearly as effective.
Additionally, the infant morality rate was much higher, you had to give birth to 6 kids just to have 3 make it to adulthood.
Women were giving birth to 5, 10, 20 kids, half the time they were pregnant and weening.
Furthermore, jobs were more dangerous and physically demanding, and politics, and even business were more cutthroat, ruthless.

Consequently the vast majority of women neither labored, nor were educated as much as men, and their efforts in laboring and education weren’t taken as seriously, just as stay at home dads, or gigolos with sugar mamas weren’t taken as seriously, well they’re still not.
This wasn’t oppression, it was pragmatism, feminism could not exist in the dark ages.

The world was a more frightful place in many ways, and on top of that, women were handicapped, pregnant and weening half the time, consequently the vast majority of them had to be protected and provided for, and men risked life and limb doing just that, reducing their own life expectancy in the process.
And what appreciation does mankind get?
Absolutely none.
Instead they got guilt tripped and shamed for bringing forth a civilization from rocks, trees and dirt, amidst wild beasts.

And if women still aren’t taken as seriously in politics and business as men, men still aren’t taken seriously as fathers, which’s why family courts award women custody the overwhelming majority of the time.

And women were always protected, by men collectively from being raped by men individually, except during warfare, so I don’t know what you’re getting at.
Now we’ve gone to the other extreme, if a modern man so much as glances at a woman, he’s raped her, well unless he’s Brad Pitt or Matt Damon, than it’s okay.

29

Go and take a long run off a short pier …

You have no intention to discuss, so forget it.

30

There it is, right in there. Amazing how a whole philosophical position can be built on the rage and hurt tucked into an image, an image taken for reality.

31

Men and women each have strengths and weaknesses.
It, should go without saying, but recognizing differences that are there, isn’t the same as misogyny, or misandry for that matter.
When it comes to intelligence, as far as cognitivists can measure, men and women seem to be roughly equal, men tend to be somewhat visual-spatially smarter, women tend to be somewhat linguistically smarter, and they’re roughly equal when it comes to other intelligences, at least the ones measured.

However, physically and emotionally, there are significant differences relevant to this topic.
Men’s physical advantage is they’re stronger, women’s physical advantage is they can give birth, and while women might be more emotionally intelligent in some ways, in identifying and expressing emotions, men’s emotions are more stable, they’re arguably better at redirecting and repressing them when need be, not allowing themselves to be overwhelmed by them, and they’re better at dealing with dangerous, highly volatile situations, at remaining calm in a crisis.
Women have evolved to avoid, or flee from such situations, in the main, relatively.
While there are exceptions, some women who’re physically and emotionally stronger than many men, the world, and jobs were more physically demanding and dangerous hitherto, and men were better at dealing with it, and them, consequently women had to be sheltered more.
Furthermore, women were handicapped by being pregnant and weening half the time.

It is only now, that our world has been made less physically challenging and safer, by men, now, that we have better contraception methods, thanks to men, now, that we’re recognizing overpopulation is a problem, again thanks to men, that women are able, and willing to have fewer children, and can participate in the economy and politics more.
And even now, the vast majority of dirty, physically demanding and dangerous jobs are done by men, even tho we have lowered our standards so women can do them too.
And you don’t hear femininists complaining too much about that.
Of course they want all the cushy, high paying jobs and none of the grunt work men still by and large do themselves to this day.
Not only when it comes to construction, firefighting and so on, but even tho women are probably just as capable of understanding human anatomy as men, still the vast majority of surgeons, and EMTs are men, because arguably men are better at keeping their cool in a crisis than women, and/or don’t mind dealing with life/death situations on a regular basis, where as women tend to shy away from that sort of thing.

My counternarrative is that women always, at least in the west, had rights, the right not to be physically and sexually abused, the right to be protected and provided for by their fathers and husbands, who had a duty to protect and provide for them.
Men and women had different roles because they are different, and these differences were more relevant back then than they are today, which’s not to say they’re completely irrelevant today, just less so.
As these differences started mattering less, women were granted more rights, and men less duties, to have to take care of them, proportionately.
The west, as in Europe since Rome and its offshoots (the USA and so on), have mostly tended to maximize the amount of freedoms given to women, and minimize the number of duties given to men, as opposed to say the middle east, which have mostly done the opposite.

Was it men who first demanded that women needed to be coddled (assuming that’s what men were doing, coddling women), or was it women?
Is coddling someone harder on the coddled, or the coddler?
Throughout history, men wrote the majority of the books, but women may’ve been content with their station in life, I think it’s contentious to presume they weren’t.

32

Today, thanks in large part to feminism, there are no social, legal or financial ramifications for women falsely accusing men of rape.
Men are presumed rapists until proven innocent, and even after being proven innocent, few will ever look at them the same way, most of the damage has already been done by the accusation alone.
Women, on the other hand, are presumed helpless, hapless victims.
Men are warned time and time again, not to misread the signals women put out, or there will be dire consequences, but women aren’t warned not to mislead men, just so long as they feel they’ve been harassed, they have been, what they mayn’t, or may’ve done to bring on men’s sexual advances, they’re taught, is irrelevant.

And of course women would never, ever voluntarily use their sex to gain unearned favor over their colleagues in the workplace, and then cry wolf about it years, or decades later, in order to garner sympathy, reparations and publicity they don’t deserve.

Meanwhile, female on male rape isn’t taken seriously, most are not even aware of its existence, and there’s probably just as much female on male domestic violence, it just goes underreported, because men are never, ever victims, only perpetrators.
If a man calls 9-11 and says, my wife or girlfriend is attacking me, they’re still far more likely to arrest the man than they are the woman, because again, men aren’t victims, only perpetrators.
And a man cannot publicly defend himself from being assaulted by a woman, without some naïve, sexist morons attacking him, further enabling her anti-social behavior.

These are just a few examples of how sexism goes both ways.
Often sexism favors women at men’s expense.

33

Objectification and sexism goes both ways.
if there’s a tendency for some men to use women for sex, there’s a tendency for some women to use men for money.
If there’s a tendency for some men to view women as dumb, crazy, emotionally unstable and helpless, there’s a tendency for some women to view men as boorish, selfish, sadistic, savage brutes, domineering, aggressive and impulsive, it’s just we don’t hear women’s sexism and objectification of men criticized and condemned on college campuses, in the media or political arena, on the contrary, they encourage it, because they’ve long since been taken over by radical feminists, who’s only real interest is in exploiting men.

34

Please do not read much into this but this post deserves a kiss on the cheek. :romance-kisscheek:

Reading it was akin to walking in a cool gentle rain on a warm day ~ bare-footed ~ on the grass ~ very affirming toward women.

I did not quite understand this at first so I looked up the meaning of Bonzai (they are beautiful by the way) and I read this:

The word “Bon-sai” (often misspelled as bonzai or banzai) is a Japanese term which, literally translated, means “planted in a container”. … The ultimate goal of growing a Bonsai is to create a miniaturized but realistic representation of nature in the form of a tree.

Perhaps you were referring to the “planted in a container” phrase where the Bonsai’s growth would have to necessarily be stunted. But at least there, though miniaturized, it is a realistic representation of nature.
Bonzai’s are truly awesome to behold in my estimation.

35

It’s done great and necessary work.
Among the first feminists were the sexual-psychological liberators, the first women that revealed their dreams and fantasies.
Of course equal rights are a basic value to us now, and rightly so.
It will only go wrong when it keeps pushing for the dishonouring of men. Before we know it women will be possessions again. Its up to women to put a stop to the proliferation of the idea that women are morally superior to men. It won’t end well otherwise, I can see that decades in advance.

36

There’s sociobiological reasons why men typically valued youth more than women did.
Women’s fertility plummets in their 30s, and is virtually nonexistent by their 40s.

37

There’s no question young women, and men for that matter are generally more physically attractive, and healthy than older women, and men.
Personally there’s things I like about young women, and things I like about older women.
If more men value women for their beauty, health and vitality than women value men for said qualities, so what?
They have every right to select the women they want, for whatever reasons they want.

People tend to construe it as older men wanting to take advantage of young women, but it can just as easily be seen as older men wanting to take care of young women, in more ways than one: financially, mentally and emotionally.
Older men typically have more money than young men, and a lot of young women are more than happy to take advtange of their wealth and resources than date their peers, it goes both ways.

There’s a lot of women getting a ‘free ride’ (well that’s not really how I see it, but it can be construed that way), who have little-nothing to offer financially, intellectually and emotionally, who’re being taken care of, on account of their (youthful) beauty.
How many older, richer women would do the same for young men?
Not many.

That’s how things work in our society, women tend to get taken care of, by men individually, or by the state.
There are fewer homeless women, fewer women in prisons and psych wards, more money spent on women’s health, battered women’s shelters and on, and on, men have a lower life expectancy, drink more, commit suicide more, take all the dangerous and physically demanding jobs, etcetera.
If you place a male, and female beggar on the street, who do you thinks going to get more handouts?

38

Feminism is an ideology, movement and organization(s) dedicated to promoting women’s interests, not equality.
In some cases they’ve promoted their interests fairly, in others they’ve promoted their interests at the expense of men’s, and even children’s.
And increasingly it’s been more a case of the latter, than the former.
We cannot expect a movement ran predominantly by women, for women, to uphold the interests of men and boys, which’s why there either needs to be (a) more prominent counter movement(s), or there needs to be a movement promoting equality between the sexes in all areas, across the board, not only when it benefits women.

It’s no longer occasionally, it’s all day long now, we’re being bombarded with misandry, by academia, the media and politicians.
There’s a small, but growing backlash against it.
Men, and women increasingly are taking note of the injustices being committed against men and boys, and increasingly growing sick and tired of the media belittling and demeaning them.
Now I want to see a positive, just response, not a reaction to all this, that corrects inequities feminism has committed, without adding to them.

And I completely disagree with you on this, women in 21st century NA and the EU are in absolutely no danger of being subjected and subordinated to ‘patriarchy’, no it’s the other way round, if we follow the path we’re on to its logical conclusion, men’s status won’t be much better than that of slaves, or beasts of burden.

39

So still only falsehoods, bad arguments, and shaming from the pro-feminist side.

I’d argue with you, but you know…

40

Right now my latest one is 23, I’m about to be 39. I didn’t hit on her or anything. She just came along and basically made it clear by grabbing me by the crotch and then keeping in contact and coming over to bang in her spare time. So maybe it’s not always older guys going for younger women, but the other way around.