Jump to content

Noober's Second Rant Sure to get him in BIG trouble


.Rooster

Recommended Posts

im not even sure what ive been reading

 

im going to go jump in a lake now

Well the OP is 100% bait.  

 

"These women are being unfair and trying to stop free speech."

 

Go on.

 

"Therefore women should not be allowed free speech." (Literately in the video's description)

 

Wat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I do agree your usual feminist deserves to be punched in the face for their beliefs, I do believe that there are some that genuinely want women to be equal to men rather than treat men like slaves and dirt. Hugh Hefner or as I my husband likes to say "The King" is actually a feminist surprisingly. Not hard to see though. These models/women earn scholarships through his company and actually grow to be respectable and intelligent women. If I remember correctly one of the bunnies is a Marine Biologist. Anyway, while I don't agree with the "women shouldn't have the freedom of speech" part, I do agree a large portion of your average feminist would get slammed in the face by Susan B. Anthony. A woman that stood up for controlled prostitution, abortion, and many other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I do agree your usual feminist deserves to be punched in the face for their beliefs, I do believe that there are some that genuinely want women to be equal to men rather than treat men like slaves and dirt.

A usual feminist wants women to be equal to men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A usual feminist wants women to be equal to men.

If the usual feminist believed in equality rather than the "women are the superior sex" then we wouldn't have as much news and sources on such. It's clear in US news at least that radical feminism is the more norm and known. Their own website shows this to be true by their resource page which goes by easily disputed studies. If their own website contains ideas and beliefs typically held by the radical feminist then I'm sure your typical feminist believes in superiority. I mean, seriously,

Of those victimized by an intimate partner, 85% are women and 15% are men.2 In other words, women are 5 to 8 times more likely than men to be victimized by an intimate partner.

Meanwhile

Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 2006-07 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.


New source. Lovely http://www.saveservices.org/2012/02/cdc-study-more-men-than-women-victims-of-partner-abuse/
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What news and sources are you referring to exactly? As I rarely see them.

 

If you mean feminist.org, then I don't exactly see what you're talking about. On their mission statements, they clearly state:


FMF promotes equality between women and men and girls and boys, and supports constitutional and statutory measures to gain full equality locally, statewide, nationally, and globally.
FMF does not permit discrimination on the basis of sex, race, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, religion, ethnicity, age, marital status, national origin, or disability

 

I don't exactly see how a study is highly disputed when it comes from the department of justice. Nor do I see how using that as a resource to discuss violence against women in any way makes radical feminism the norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To Tentacruel: I am telling you I did not know the video had that bullcrap in it. Women deserve equal rights. Plus only campaigning for women's rights still is a bad cause.

 

Now lets discuss Loose Women and how all they can say is 'I wonder how the men would like it if they did the hard work'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What news and sources are you referring to exactly? As I rarely see them.
 
If you mean feminist.org, then I don't exactly see what you're talking about. On their mission statements, they clearly state:

 
I don't exactly see how a study is highly disputed when it comes from the department of justice. Nor do I see how using that as a resource to discuss violence against women in any way makes radical feminism the norm.

because you're ignoring what I'm bringing up. The mission statements don't mean anything if they're going to use studies and resources used by radical feminist. If they were the respectable feminist then they would actually go with the more correct studies. Their resources right now might as well say, "Men are evil and will hurt you." They're painting men as the primary and vast majority of abusers when they're clearly not. It isn't bias, it's clearly radical.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because they use the same studies as radical feminists doesn't make them radical feminists. The resource they're using is from the department of justice, which is a reputable source.

 

Nothing you've said has given any indication that they are what you assume are "radical feminists" except your own assumptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents: Women can be ass-kicked with a shotgun-propelled flying steel boot just as hard as men, kids, elders and so on and so forth; if they piss me off with intention, I'll boot them with a shotgun-propelled flying steel booth and then punch them. And no, I won't hold back, if they wanted special treatment, they wouldn't piss me off when I have my flying steel booth shotgun propeller at my hands. They're all getting their just desserts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because they use the same studies as radical feminists doesn't make them radical feminists. The resource they're using is from the department of justice, which is a reputable source.
 
Nothing you've said has given any indication that they are what you assume are "radical feminists" except your own assumptions.

You mean the same Department of Justice that still believes there is a lack of racism, sexism, and prejudice in the court room?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that it's never really as simple as people hating men or wanting women to be superior.  I've seen some obnoxious male feminists. 

 

Early feminism was based on tangible rights.  Voting, wages, and the like.  Modern feminism seems to be more based on gender identity.  

 

One of the most harmful things I've seen is the concept of "internalized misogyny," as it's essentially a way to shut out and marginalize a woman's opinion, which is incredibly ironic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...