Feminism based on lies

[GregMerwe]

I try and refute feminism by pointing out that women are not victims by showing that men are just as much victims as women. I have found that even when I show statistics that men experience more violence, more rape, have to go to war, have to work all the worst and difficult jobs, have less rights in marriage and so on and on. They still fail to accept that women are not the victim sex. It is an extremely powerful cognitive dissonance which is not surprising. A lot of western women base their entire understanding of reality on this victim feminist perspective.

The foundation of feminism is also incorrect. Women have always worked and most men in history were not educated or worked low level jobs like farming with no hope of becoming a doctor or other professional jobs. Most men in history could not vote as well, it was class based or you had to be a land owner which was some what class based as well. When women started working and breaking away from the traditional gender role of motherhood. They had no reputation as a sex working in specific fields, like doctors for example. It was culturally unheard of for women to be doctors so a lot of men would refuse the service on the grounds of competence, sure it was sexist but that is not oppression. As women gained more competence in the field that they had traditionally not operated in they were eventually accepted by the community to complete that service. This even happens in more recent times with the cliche police women on tv proving how not only is she capable but she is better than her male peers. There was definitely some cultural changes that did occur when modern feminism took off, but it was not responsible for giving women the vote or allowing them to get jobs like a registered doctor.

I have been told that there was instances where the government made it illegal for women to work in specific fields. Now that could be classified as oppression, although I could not find any specific examples of laws that prevented women from working in specific fields but there was some articles about it. There has been female nurses though out history of course. Western feminism has painted a very sad history for women that is largely exaggerated and false. Women often had the better deal in history, while the men was out doing tough work, the women would teach the children and raise the children and do work around the house. This was before washing machines and televisions to entertain the children and before most children could afford education. There was of course many women in history going back 100s of years that accomplished a lot. Women have been queens for 1000s of years, this idea that in 1960 women were set free from male enslavement is a complete fabrication and misrepresentation of history. I do think though that the history of women was suppressed to some extent. Often the feats of women were not appreciated or recorded as well as men. Then many men were also not appreciated or remembered in the history books just the same. Feminism paints the experience that women had in history as the sort of experience women face in saudi arabia at the moment. I don't see any evidence to suggest that women were treated that way in western civilisations or even ancient civilisations. Although I stand to be corrected if anyone can refute this i would be happy to hear it.

 

I recommend watching this documentary series on feminism, it explains the history of feminism and its impact on modern society.

 

It is very long a documentary, it was made over a period of several years. Recently the original creator and uploader of the video vanished from the internet and removed his youtube channel without any explanation. It has been uploaded elsewhere.

 

[Kevin Beal]

I've had the same experience. Even when they accept the truth of what I'm saying, they'll talk later as if the conversation never happened.

 

My first taste of anti-feminist material was this documentary you linked. It's well done and really put a lot of things into perspective for me. Here's my favorite segment from the series:

 

[NotDarkYet]

Even when they accept the truth of what I'm saying, they'll talk later as if the conversation never happened.

That, exactly.

 

I had a marathon session with a feminist where I got her to accept my debunking of various idea.

 

Weeks later, via Gmail IM chat, back to square one.....

[GregMerwe]

I heard recently a feminist say to me that it was not until 1993 that women were set free from sexual slavery within marriages. She tried to paint a picture that women were just completely powerless before 1993 within domestic abuse scenarios. The feminist cited the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_rape

In December 1993, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights published the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women. This establishes marital rape as a human rights violation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_rape#20th_and_21st_century_criminalization

Was that realy such a problem in the west before 1993 that feminism can count that as something that feminism has accomplished and helped solved? I don't think that was such a problem before 1993 as it is made out to be and with laws like this, it can be used in a marriage against a man without much recourse. In a domestic abuse disputes both sides escalating their arguments. If it is not a domestic dispute like that and there is a clear form of violence and control being put over the man or women then that could be handled with individual rights just the same. There is no need to make an exception for marrage and women.

That law seems like it would help women in Islamic culture who are being forced to be a wife and have sex. This i think is something that is good to prevent. I don't think many muslim women will take advantage of this type of law though.

Another point about this Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women is, would not men and boy's benefit form such a declaration as well? Not that i want the UN to publish declarations. I am just pointing out that men could equally benefit from additional rights in exactly the same way. I think it would be better if atheists were behind these types of laws than feminists. Atheists would frame the laws in such a way that it was gender neutral whilst still worked to prevent religious activity from justifying violence between the sexes. Now I of course am against rape in marriage and violence and so on. I can see how it is important to have a law that specifies that it is transgressing against someone self ownership whether they are in marriage or not to rape or commit violence. I am more interested in this idea that feminism has helped solve that problem and this is just one of the many successes of feminism. What do you think, can we say that feminism was responsible for that UN mandate or is it just a result of the development of culture, like many other declarations before it, in the sense that it was more about preventing religious violence within the marriages in islamic culture in the west and less about modern feminism itself.

The question is can the "pay gap" and "rape culture" be all equated under one umbrella called feminism, along side real oppression within the marriage in cultures around the world.

[Frosty]

Feminist rhetoric is primarily based on feelings and emotion, not rationality and logic.

 

Many of them believe that things such as oppression, bullying and even rape are things which are true if you feel like they are true, which is why when you try and have a discussion with a feminist about rape and you say that rape has a specific definition and that altercations between people can be objectively classified as rape or not, you'll be accused of being a rape supporter and part of rape culture - this essentially using social pressure to silence people.

 

These are people who feel entitled to control the freedoms of other people in order to protect their own fragile mental state, it's this behaviour that leads to us being able to silence applause and swap it out with Jazzhands. It doesn't help that such groups and ideologies attract people who have been physically or mentally abused as these people typically have much higher mental sensitivity and so require greater restriction of other peoples personal freedoms in order to operate in society.

[fractional slacker]

Using reason and logic with feminists is like drinking salt water to quench your thirst.

[AccuTron]

 

Even when they accept the truth of what I'm saying, they'll talk later as if the conversation never happened.

That, exactly.

 

I had a marathon session with a feminist where I got her to accept my debunking of various idea.

 

Weeks later, via Gmail IM chat, back to square one.....

 

Think of a herd of deer as human analog.  

 

The males are all about rational interpretation of circumstances to best defend the herd, can't pretend anything or a cougar will eat somebody; in human males (generalized) this is the imperative to seek the rational and true.  

 

The females are most concerned about their place in the herd, for when the winter is bitterly cold, the babies on the edge turn blue and die, and so females have a hardwired mortal fear of even minutely reducing their place in the female pecking order.  Larger rationality has nothing to do with it, it's all about being closer to the center of the herd.  Where mortal fear is present, any organism will do anything to remove it, and in a hurry or panic too.

 

When that female got away from your immediate presence she was back into that ruthless aspect of nature that we call female.  Her mind had no (ahem) choice but to pretend the truth never existed.  This is easy to do, since a female herd/tribe animal must immediately be able to dismiss anything, including someone else's dead babies, as immaterial to her (and her young's) immediate well being.  Those babies at the edge died, well, they just had to, too bad but not my concern...which is entirely correct in the ruthless natural world.

 

Also, a female who raises young must always feel that THEY ARE CORRECT IN ALL DECISIONS, which is proper when it's about finding good water and food, nesting, avoiding trouble, etc.  It's so natural as to be unnoticed.  In a deer.  But in our society with so much power to corrupt and misinform, this is deadly.  I think this is also hardwired.

 

I've not seen this overtly mentioned elsewhere, but I'd say that female pecking order is probably a dominant force in feminism-as-fascism, perhaps THE dominant, for it is the tool...based upon unspoken mortal fear...that can make women en masse do anything.  Just lie to them; the fear is afraid to take a chance that it's a lie, will just go along anyway as a reflex towards self-preservation.  In the natural world, that worked.  But we ain't there no more, no more.