How do we fight back against Feminism?

[y2k1]

So I was watching Stefan's video titled 'The War on Drugs is a War on People'. Anyhow in the video he referred to how women's pay inequality was a myth, citing Warren Farrell. So I looked him up and was gobsmacked by his research on how the pay gap is a myth and that in reality the reason is simple economics: That men earn more because they take the jobs which quite frankly women don't want to do because they are awful, such as a truck driver (no offense intended to any out there!). It was quite mind blowing because I always just passingly accepted it as fact and evidence of routine discrimination. Turns out that men are poorer than women in terms of net worth because their pay is eaten up by women!  I can testify to this as my mother didn't/doesn't work and she spends all the money! 

 

I fully recommend you listen to this video. It's lengthy but as I say mind blowing:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8Raufh8fP8

 

My point on this thread is how do we challenge this? So many people view pay-gap as simple fact. It's like from birth that we are socialized into this: men are evil women are good who put up with men. Everytime I watch a feminist video on YouTube these days, especially when it's a news channel, I get angry and want to reveal this 'patriarchy' myth. It just seems such a strong discourse and as Stefan states is a prerequisite for government expanding its power, such as through affirmative action. If men come out and point out the hypocrisy of Feminism and defend themselves from routine discrimination, we are labelled as misogynist. Can we fight this discourse and how? How can we rally against the bully tactics of Feminism without it exasperating the us v them mentality? 

[Pepin]

All you can do is be a great person and make clear and concise arguments that some people will listen to and accept.

[Stephen C]

I'd suggest focusing on parenting / family.Why does this kind of feminism exist?

[y2k1]

All you can do is be a great person and make clear and concise arguments that some people will listen to and accept.

But they tend to be easily ignored, hence why I haven't heard of this until today. There has to be a more powerful way to do so surely? How can we achieve a Libertarian society if we cannot even challenge Feminist lies, or even awaken to the fact that they exist? If Feminism and the state is so intertwined, then is the fact that we are still passing lies as truth a sign that we are sooooo far behind? It feels like we are fighting an uphill battle. Is this a battle we can win or are we fighting culture itself? 

[PatrickC]

The way I've approached this topic, rather than ignore it, is by being very conscious that the ideology exists. Having said that you cannot change the culture for other folk, you can merely reject it yourself with reason to others. It's a tough topic because of the culture we live in. But for virtuous men and women out there that broach this topic, good on them, they will change the culture with reason eventually.. I take it like anarchism, a slow but methodical process of reason. Hope that helps.

[Kevin Beal]

Turn it into a joke.

[Emanuel]

I think there's only one thing we can do if and when we encounter individuals who have ideological views not based on philosophy and reality.

The best and surest way of either getting the person to hear reason or know immediately if they cannot be argumented with is to avoid the subjects of ideology as a whole and discuss the origins of knowledge, Philosophy and ask about childhood experiences and try to notice emotional overtones in what the person is saying.

 

Sadly, a lot of people are controlled by a false self and I feel that when you argue with them, you are really arguing with the parents. As a rule, if I notice I'm getting into an argument, or a power struggle with someone, I just end the conversation. I know that what I say will not help them explore the truth and will not help me achieve happiness. I find it hard to just give up on some people, but I feel that it's best for me if I follow that path.

[fridolutin]

This feminist debate is as most of them deviated from the beginning.  There are no doubts our planet is under a partriarcal domination, the acceleration of movement in any domains is clearly a male trait. The Chinese summarize this as yang equals movement and yin immobility.

 

This particular debate is therefore truncated because it is in  male perspective of that accelerated movement which in this case is the artificial manmade environment of money and work.

 

We shall realize that the true nature of woman is the natural unmodified world and since she was forced out of it by a male overpassing the limits of equilibrium by his quest for exaggerated renown and power, she is out powered and in a servile condition.

 

The answer to the question how we fight against feminism is answered by the comprehension of this yang amplification and needed reduction as a way to reestablish peace that is equilibrium. 

A fight can only bring more fights. One has to accept a loss for the cessation of war.

[y2k1]

 

This feminist debate is as most of them deviated from the beginning.  There are no doubts our planet is under a partriarcal domination, the acceleration of movement in any domains is clearly a male trait. The Chinese summarize this as yang equals movement and yin immobility.

 

This particular debate is therefore truncated because it is in  male perspective of that accelerated movement which in this case is the artificial manmade environment of money and work.

 

We shall realize that the true nature of woman is the natural unmodified world and since she was forced out of it by a male overpassing the limits of equilibrium by his quest for exaggerated renown and power, she is out powered and in a servile condition.

 

The answer to the question how we fight against feminism is answered by the comprehension of this yang amplification and needed reduction as a way to reestablish peace that is equilibrium. 

A fight can only bring more fights. One has to accept a loss for the cessation of war.

 

 

 

Well what do you actually mean by 'power'? if a white middle class boy is told by his dad from a young age 'when you grow up you are going to become a government minister or chairman of a boardroom' and then he does become such is that really power? I would argue not. What if that individual wanted to be a stay at home dad? Society however says that husbands and men in general should not be stay at home fathers. In that scenario isn't that a form of powerlessness? Infact I think 'power' in this context is wrong. Sure he may be a minister but he had only one route to go. I doubt if he had told his dad he wanted to be a stay at home dad that it would be encouraged. IMO the individual is playing a role but is not demonstrating power. IMO power is agency to do as you wish. Just as how women could not have careers in the 19th century or were restricted from such in the early 20th century, today men have little power in that they HAVE to work. Infact according to Farrell men chose high paying jobs not out of desire or agency, but simply because they have to. Similarly Feminism has more or less reduced womens option to stay at home as they are demonized as being as backward. 

 

Furthermore all these affirmative action programs have seen men become discriminated against in the workplace.

[Kevin Beal]

Hi fridolutin!

 

I'm super curious why you think that men are blind to patriarchy. Are we guys situational sociopaths? Are we just totally unable to empathize with women? Are we all just lying about it to cover our tracks?

 

I've heard about this male privilege that I'm supposed to have and I cannot see it at all. I'm inclined to believe that it's all bullshit, but I'm very interested to hear an explanation for it.

[y2k1]

Hi fridolutin!

 

I'm super curious why you think that men are blind to patriarchy. Are we guys situational sociopaths? Are we just totally unable to empathize with women? Are we all just lying about it to cover our tracks?

 

I've heard about this male privilege that I'm supposed to have and I cannot see it at all. I'm inclined to believe that it's all bullshit, but I'm very interested to hear an explanation for it.

 

If the West is patriarchal I sure haven't had any benefit

 

-Quotas/affirmative action discriminating against men

 

-No child rights after divorce. Of course F-ism will state its to keep women in their place, and yet how many Feminist are members of Fathers4Justice? Hypocrites.

 

-Life expectancy of men is 6/7 years younger than women, which is largely due to men not taking as much from the state as women. 

 

-Prison rates are higher for men, and are sentenced to harsher sentences (we all know about self-fulfilling prophecies).

 

-The average net worth of men is lower than women, despite the fallacy of men supposedly being paid more. 

 

-Conscription for men only 

 

-More men are homeless than women

 

-The education system is largely female. 1/4 primary schools in the UK don't have a single male teacher

 

-The family is matriarchal. Seems odd that women have the 2 major ideological institutions and yet they are victims of this patriarchal ideology 

 

 

Seems like a pretty shitty deal for men. Oh but more men are in positions of government. Well that's because we live an elitist society not a patriarchal society. Nothing stops women from creating their own businesses or from picking male occupations. You know why they don't? Because men do the jobs women don't want to do. Lets say an Atlas Shrugged scenario occurs but with men just dissapearing. Suddenly all these male jobs need filling.  Do you know any women who want to be truck drivers or engineers? I don't. Well what do those 2 jobs have in common? 

 

-Isolation (esp for truck driver)

-Long hours (men work on average 8hrs longer than women and feminist complain about the 2hrs of womens domestic work a week)

-Lack of family time, again mainly truck driver

-Death rates. 94% of all workplace deaths are male. 

-Boredom and routine work. 

-Engineering is a 5 year degree as opposed to humanities which are 3 years, and don't have the same career options. 

 

So going back to that scenario. Is it plausible that this second half of the female population would get paid more than the original half of the female population? Of course. Why? Because those jobs are a lot more shitty than working as a receptionist. 

 

Going back to politics. The reason women aren't in positions of power is because women don't do politics. Oh there are affirmative action. I remember in I think 2007 David Cameron (UK PM) promised half his cabinet be female. That promise wasn't met, not because there was something sinister going on but because he had no well qualified women to chose from. If only 10% of the people who go into politics are women then it only makes sense that more men would get into politics via merit and NOT from patriarchy or a conspiracy theory. 

 

The difference between men and women can be summarised as thus: Men get degrees in engineering. Women get degrees in media studies. 

[PatrickC]

fridolutin is trolling this board with his leftist Taoist ideaology. He knows only too well what this board stands for and like many leftists is attempting to set the cats amongst the pigeons.

[ribuck]

 

... how do we challenge this? ... How can we rally against the bully tactics of Feminism without it exasperating the us v them mentality? 

 

As you imply, no "win" is possible from an "us v them" mentality.

 

Just work towards true freedom; an environment in which neither feminism nor masculinism can flourish or is needed. Just ignore political feminists; they crave recognition.

[fridolutin]

Well what do you actually mean by 'power'?

 

 

 

When I say women are out powered it is by looking to wild nature and how humans have move around her limitations to submit her. Nature and women are the same.  

 

The stay at home dad is possible in an artificial world where mother can be without milking breast, where cows are thought to be as good milk providers than women. That belief is wrong, human milk cannot be replaced without negative consequences. 

 

In this context power is speed seen as  exaggerated compared to human natural abilities. When I use technology to accelerate or amplify any of my natural senses or abilities I am exceeding the normal speed I should use and by doing so I provoke a disequilibrium. Nature and by extension relations with women are distorted when in the amplified mode.

 

I’m conscious we are far from nature in the modern world and that I ‘m myself over speeding and over amplifying. I still think  the source of the problem is the use of technology to supposedly ameliorate our lives. 

The fact is it made it worst than ever.  In my case I’ve considerably reduced my speed.

 

Its not all humans that adopted the illusion of power the technoscience offered them and those wont be as affected when the punzy pyramid of modern civilizations will fall to the ground. 

I'm super curious why you think that men are blind to patriarchy. Are we guys situational sociopaths? Are we just totally unable to empathize with women? Are we all just lying about it to cover our tracks?

 

I've heard about this male privilege that I'm supposed to have and I cannot see it at all. I'm inclined to believe that it's all bullshit, but I'm very interested to hear an explanation for it.

 

 

 

Hi Kevin

 

You’r right, this apparent privileged man is an illusion that was concocted by merchants to become rich using the male pride and his need to showoff. Who, first,  fell in the trap ? Man. 

 

Men became blinded of their abusing behavior because of the speed technology have attained in all domains.  I use the comparison of the driver in a car going fast, his perception of the details 

along the road is partial because his attention is focused on the road not the surroundings. The same happened for his relation with nature and women. Increasing speed narrows perception.

 

Male as female are, in techno developed countries, both in the same speedy mode that obliterates perception of their true nature. Relations are therefore conflicting.   

 

One example is high technology applied to communications look at with a non partisan regard. 

We can communicate fast with many all around the world, but we realize that the message  is proportionally diluted to a point of nonsense.  Its not because we can do something we will do it right. 

 

What I’m trying to say by resuming the problem with the yin( passivity)  and yang ( mobility), is that the problem is one of excessive energy and even if man is yang in essence, it doesn’t mean he is the only one perpetuating the problem. 

 

As women started investing the male traditional domain by using the artificial power offered by technology (Transport, communication, work tools etc ) they became more yang adding to the unbalance.  There is and will be a point of no return where all this will collapse to the opposite extreme .  

 

The over consumption of resources by the rich countries has significantly affected most of the earth ecosystems to a point they are collapsing without any hope of a fast recovery. The debts of our countries reflect the individual debt towards nature resources.  The cosmetic solutions used presently to retard the effect of that collapse are losing their efficiency. 

 

This situation  is related to the man woman conflict over equality as everything is interconnected.

No durable solutions are possible in the extreme environment in which we are living in the rich and developed countries of the world. To reestablish the balance between man and woman we’ll have to reduce our speed to the natural capacity of nature to provide our basic needs.

 

As times go by, less is left to return to middle land.

 

Then and only there can the balance be even.  

[Kevin Beal]

Thanks for the reply

 

I'm confused as to what you mean. It's just a little too abstract for me. Can you give me some examples that I could relate to in my life as a man?

 

I can't for the life of me see how I'm living at the expense of women, much less abusing them. Can you see how I might be skeptical about that?

[fridolutin]

I'm confused as to what you mean. It's just a little too abstract for me. Can you give me some examples that I could relate to in my life as a man?

 

 

 

It seems abstract because its so down to earth that we, disconnected creatures, can no more understand simplicity.

 

Be humble and respectful with women, treat them like you do for your own mother or the mother you wish you’d had. 

 

Nature and women are the same , they carry and nurture life. If you treat well nature you respect women. If you treat them well, they will reward you with love. Dont mix love and sex.

 

Dont try to argue, speak with your heart. 

[Wesley]

Dont mix love and sex.

So I am not supposed to have sex with a woman I love? Why not?

[Kevin Beal]

It seems abstract because its so down to earth that we, disconnected creatures, can no more understand simplicity.

 

Be humble and respectful with women, treat them like you do for your own mother or the mother you wish you’d had. 

 

Nature and women are the same , they carry and nurture life. If you treat well nature you respect women. If you treat them well, they will reward you with love. Dont mix love and sex.

 

Dont try to argue, speak with your heart. 

 

Can you provide an example, . . . please?

[fridolutin]

So I am not supposed to have sex with a woman I love? Why not?

 

 

 

Love can exist without sex and sex without love.

 

You’r free to do what you want as long you accept the consequences otherwise it might enslave you. This is not morals its physics.

 

Can you provide an example, . . . please?

 

 

 

Just this morning I had a talk with two wonan and it came to the point one of them told me that she was aware intuition (woman, right brain) and reason ( man, left brain) are usually in conflict because they dont speak the same language even if they try to say the same thing. Therefore to communicate with a woman a man has to use the heart language of emotions while a woman communicating with a man should use the down to earth more Cartesian type.

 

This is a general rules a nd some exceptions exist where man are more feminine and woman more masculine.

 

If we come back to the basics of this yin and yang philosophy, where you might remember yin is female and yang is male.         .Yin is also the earth, humidity, cold, and many other characters. When you look at those characteristics you can see what c an please a woman, be some appreciated help for her. Usually the get balanced by what opposes what they are, humidity by dryness, cold by heat. Be cautious not to overdue. Seek balance.  

 

If you look at fast recognition for what your doing forget this science. The follower of those principles find their satisfaction in the action, not the profit it can bring. If ever there is retribution they enjoy it but they wont wait for it. Working in the essential is the retribution in the way it comforts your conscience. 

 

 This is not giving what she wants but what she needs in the perspective some things she wants are superfluities and you should work with the essentials. 

 

Why work with the essentials ? Because they last while the superfluities are ephemeral. 

 

 

How do we fight back against Feminism? by surrendering ...

[Kevin Beal]

Hi fridolutin

 

What? I have no idea what that means.

 

The definition of the word example is:

 

 

 

 a thing characteristic of its kind or illustrating a general rule.

 

Can you offer me an anecdote? I would appreciate if you demonstrated what you are saying by use of actual events.

 

For example, I said that I thought a woman nearby was a "hotty" and the woman I was talking to took offense and told me that I'm just a typical man who only cares about looks and doesn't appreciate women's personalities. (I just met this woman and she knew very little about me). This, to me, is an example of sexism against men.

 

That's the sort of thing I'm looking for. I'm really not so good with abstractions and adjectives. Please indulge me if you can.

[fridolutin]

I said that I thought a woman nearby was a "hotty"

 

 

When you think at a woman is Hotty does it have any sexual connotation ? Or maybe its her appearance ? Ether ways it seems your reducing her to some object of your desires and that can be sensed intuitively by the woman that will reject you .  I would suggest a change in your attitude and it’s the object of my intervention, trying to expand the feminine aspect to a global planetary loving goddess that will respond accordingly to your true implication.

This means to be respectful  to the entire person, not only the outside shell. 

 If you stay in the lower dimension of your selfish desires you will attract a lower feminine aspect, a kind of vampire seeking to feed on your energy.  

 

The feminine principle is all that nurtures and take care of life. There are no separations as man have traced to separate kinds and species, life is one. Rejoin the essence, from there you’ll embrace love.  

[Kevin Beal]

I would suggest a change in your attitude and it’s the object of my intervention, trying to expand the feminine aspect to a global planetary loving goddess that will respond accordingly to your true implication.

This means to be respectful  to the entire person, not only the outside shell. 

 

She was physically attractive for sure. A global planetary loving goddess? Probably not.

 

So, why aren't you treating me like a global planetary loving god?

[fridolutin]

So, why aren't you treating me like a global planetary loving god?

 

 

I am...