Feminism on Atlas Forum

[A18]

Value is relative. The market decides what a profession is worth.

Unless there are men in that profession, doing the same work and getting paid more, there's no discrimination involved.

[dazzleman]

Value is relative. The market decides what a profession is worth.

Unless there are men in that profession, doing the same work and getting paid more, there's no discrimination involved.

I agree.  Women work on average fewer hours than men, and on average have less demanding jobs.  This accounts for the "gender gap" in wages.  In situations in which men and women are doing the exact same job, women are often paid slightly more.  I posted an article on this topic about a week ago.

There is no way government should get into defining what people in different professions should be paid.  The market should decide that.

My position is that there is no gender gap in wages, and that feminist insistence on this non-existent gap is another one of the untrue statistics that these people put out in order to ram their agenda down people's throats.

[John Dibble]

I don't think people should be paid equally unless their labor is truly equally valuable, regardless of sex.

Different professions need to be evaluated to make sure they are paid comparably to what they are worth.

Too many female-dominated professions tend to over underpaid, even if the work is of a high value (i.e. early childhood education).

It's pretty insane to advocate professions being 'evaluated' for their worth. Who would do that? The government? It's been done in other countries, only to have craptacular results.

The market assigns professions their value just fine in my opinion.


Oh, and here's a sterling example of comparable worth:

"In Minnesota, for example, nurse shortages arose in many cities after the passage of comparable worth legislation. Many job evaluation systems determined that nurses were paid more than they were “worth." This occurred despite already existing nurse shortages that would normally indicate the need to raise wages. The subsequent decline in nurses’ compensation led to an even greater shortage of nurses illustrating perfectly the danger of ignoring supply and demand in setting wage rates."

http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/Articles/2003_07_03Thacker.htm

[??????????]

I support women fighting for the right to vote and fair employment. But pretty much the rest of the "equality" they are fighting for is petty, selfish and generally cruft.

[dazzleman]

Here's a good summing up of the practical positions of the feminists:

The Evil Essence of Femi-NAZI-ism

by Paul Robbins

As far as I can tell...

feminists believe all men are guilty of being men, an original sin no amount of virtue can erase. So I confess—I’m guilty. First, of being a man, second, of not being a feminist. If that makes me a misogynist, so be it.

I’m a man and I make no apologies for being a man.

I am not a feminist because I believe society must balance the inter-related needs, rights, and interests of men, women, and children, while feminists believe the needs, rights, and interests of women always outweigh those of men and children.

So here, Brother Hugo, is my mea culpa—read it and weep.

I respect and acknowledge Condoleeza Rice for being the first black woman to be confirmed as Secretary of State.

Feminists oppose Dr. Rice because she's a political conservative. Barbara Boxer all but called her a liar during her confirmation hearing. So much for the sisterhood.

I deeply admire and respect Mother Teresa, a Catholic nun who felt called to spend her life comforting the dying untouchables in India.

Feminists dislike Mother Teresa because she opposed abortion. Germaine Greer wrote a snippy, catty critique of her life when she died. Feminists admire Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood; Sanger was a racist eugenicist who wanted to sterilize blacks to limit their numbers.

I believe the only difference between The Vagina Monologues and a blue movie is that the blue movie has better monologues.

Feminists believe The Vagina Monologues is the greatest piece of literature since Medea.

I'm not a male feminist. A male feminist believes all men beat their wives—except himself. A male feminist believes all men rape women—except himself. A male feminist believes all men oppress women—except himself. He's half right–he doesn't, but neither do most men.

Female feminists believe all men beat their wives, rape women, and oppress women–except for Bill Clinton.

I believe men have made enormous contributions to civilization and that absent those contributions civilization itself would disappear.

Feminists believe men are good for three things: donating sperm, changing the oil, and paying child support.

I believe women have made enormous contributions to civilization and that absent those contributions civilization itself would disappear.

Feminists believe women would have made enormous contributions to civilization if men had not oppressed them. Since their liberation, feminists have made up for lost time by giving us Women’s Studies. I’m a misogynist because I believe most women are fair-minded individuals who seek fairness and equality for both men and women.

Feminists seek fairness and equality for women but not for men.

I believe when the Titanic goes down without sufficient lifeboats, women and children should share the lifeboats.

Feminists believe women should share the lifeboats with the children—if there’s room.

I believe children need both mothers and fathers.

Feminists believe children need mothers and child support checks but not fathers.

I believe most men truly love their children and their wives and that most men behave responsibly and lovingly towards their wives and their children.

Feminists think women are good, men are bad. Well, except for the evil Dr. Rice and Mother Teresa, of course.

I believe a father who loses his kids in an unfair and biased custody decision suffers an injustice—and that his pain at losing his children is real.
Feminists believe his pain is real but deserved. If he didn't want to lose his kids in a nasty divorce, he shouldn't have married. You know, kind of like the black slave who objected to being whipped–if he didn't want to be whipped, he shouldn't have run away in the first place.

I believe children deserve both a mother and a father in the event of a divorce.

Feminists believe children deserve only a mother and a child support check in the event of divorce. Whether children ever see their father again should be left up to mom.

I believe no man should be forced to support another man's child.

Feminists believe women have the right to lie to their children about who their fathers are, lie to fathers about who their children are, and to jail any man who refuses to support the child the woman said was his–even if the DNA proves she lied.

I believe both fathers and mothers should have both rights and responsibilities when its comes to their children.

Feminists believe mothers should have rights to children, fathers should have responsibilities.

I believe that marriage benefits men, women, and children and deserves widespread societal support.

Feminists oppose heterosexual marriage but think homosexual marriage is the greatest thing since Roe v Wade.

I believe in the event of divorce, the state has an obligation to treat both the husband and wife fairly and equally and to mitigate the damage to all parties, but especially to the children.

Feminists believe the purpose of divorce is to allow a woman to end a marriage but keep all its benefits, including the children and her former husband's money.

I believe the destruction of the family is a result of ideas and policies advanced largely by feminists.

Feminists agree—and they’re proud of it. According to Germaine Greer, widespread divorce is feminism's greatest achievement.

I believe most divorces are filed and initiated by wives because they know they'll receive the children, the bulk of the marital property, and a sizable share of their former husband's income.

Feminists believe women file most divorces because the husband deserves it. He’s a man, after all.

I believe divorced fathers are justly angry at a family court system that routinely deprives them of their children, their property, and their rights–and that calling these men "misogynists" will not suffice to silence their anger and their cries for justice.

Feminists call these men "misogynists" to silence them so that women's gravy train will not be derailed.

I believe domestic violence is a human problem, that women are as likely to resort to violence in an intimate relationship as men, a conclusion supported by numerous scientific studies.

Feminists believe that only men resort to violence and a woman who appears to resort violence is actually defending herself. Feminists have no explanation for intimate violence in lesbian relationships, so they don't talk about it.

I believe most child abuse and murder is committed by mothers, not by fathers, a conclusion supported by solid evidence.

Feminists avoid dealing with this issue. When confronted, they say it's because mothers spend more time caring for children than fathers, but feminists do not make the same effort to prevent mothers from abusing their children as they do to prevent men from abusing their wives.

[Hatman 🍁]

That post is complete nonsense.

[dazzleman]

That post is complete nonsense.

No, it hits quite close to the truth in many ways, especially on issues of child custody and visitation rights.

Just because you fail to recognize that doesn't make it so.  It seems the only defense of feminism now is to simply issue blanket denials of the truth behind feminist positions, and their effect on the population at large, especially children.

Can you refute any of the specific points raised in the post?

[Lunar]

As someone who's actually read a reasonable amount of radical feminist literature (including feminist criticisms of everything from language to international relations to privacy), I've yet to read anything that suggests that men are inherently worse than women.  It seems most conservative writers love to characterize the entire feminist movement (which is very fractured and disagrees with itself a LOT) based upon a single protest poster they saw once or based upon the writings of other conservative writers (who based theirs on other writers, and so on).

The feminist argument is that the current systems our society is built upon is structured against women.  There are more women than men, so statistically speaking we should have had a female president by now.  The argument goes that while suffrage was important, it never addressed the fundamentals that created the patriarchal system of power relations in the first place, thus that system is still in place.

I don't identify with the feminist movement whatsoever and disagree pretty strongly with its methods, but there have been a lot of misconceptions in this thread on both sides.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The author does a bad job refuting a bunch of positions that most feminists don't argue.

Most of your other posts on this thread have been pretty solid, just that article is pretty much rubbish.

[dazzleman]

Most of your other posts on this thread have been pretty solid, just that article is pretty much rubbish.

Having had my share of experience with feminists and the real results of feminism, I think there is a lot of truth in that post.  It overstates the case in some ways, but I believe it is largely true.

The problem is not just feminism - feminism is part of a whole school of thought that encourages people to view everything in the world through the prism of gender/race etc. and to assign virtue vs. bad qualities based upon those factors.

And if you can tell me that you haven't seen feminist literature saying that men are bad and that women are inherently better than men, then with all due respect, you haven't been reading very much, because that idea is at the forefront of contemporary feminist thought.

[Alcon]

Most of your other posts on this thread have been pretty solid, just that article is pretty much rubbish.

Having had my share of experience with feminists and the real results of feminism, I think there is a lot of truth in that post.  It overstates the case in some ways, but I believe it is largely true.

The problem is not just feminism - feminism is part of a whole school of thought that encourages people to view everything in the world through the prism of gender/race etc. and to assign virtue vs. bad qualities based upon those factors.

And if you can tell me that you haven't seen feminist literature saying that men are bad and that women are inherently better than men, then with all due respect, you haven't been reading very much, because that idea is at the forefront of contemporary feminist thought.

How can that be considered feminism when the very definition of feminism, as far as I am aware, is that women should be equal to men, reflecting their equality of skill? Do you not agree with the feminist movement that just desires equality? That is what I consider true feminism; I do not think anyone contests that "feminazism" (I really dislike using the word "Nazi" in such stupid contexts) is ridiculous in concept.

[dazzleman]

Most of your other posts on this thread have been pretty solid, just that article is pretty much rubbish.

Having had my share of experience with feminists and the real results of feminism, I think there is a lot of truth in that post.  It overstates the case in some ways, but I believe it is largely true.

The problem is not just feminism - feminism is part of a whole school of thought that encourages people to view everything in the world through the prism of gender/race etc. and to assign virtue vs. bad qualities based upon those factors.

And if you can tell me that you haven't seen feminist literature saying that men are bad and that women are inherently better than men, then with all due respect, you haven't been reading very much, because that idea is at the forefront of contemporary feminist thought.

How can that be considered feminism when the very definition of feminism, as far as I am aware, is that women should be equal to men, reflecting their equality of skill? Do you not agree with the feminist movement that just desires equality? That is what I consider true feminism; I do not think anyone contests that "feminazism" (I really dislike using the word "Nazi" in such stupid contexts) is ridiculous in concept.

What I have been saying, if anybody has been listening, is that as a practical matter, the leaders of today's feminist movement do not have the stated goal of equality between the sexes as their true goal.  It is that simple.  I think men and women should be legally equal.  I simply don't think that women should get special preferences, and that is what feminism advocates for today.

I feel sorry for you guys that are buying the feminist tripe.  You will be in for a very rude awakening one day when you realize that you have acquiesced in a system that deems you inferior to women because of your equipment. 

It may come a number of different ways.  Like when you lose your job, or get a reprimand or demotion, due to a false accusation of sexual harassment from a woman whom you turned down for a date.  Or when your wife takes up with another man, then has you removed from the house that you paid for, and you are ordered to pay child support to your children with no guarantee of regular visitation or input into their upbringing.  Or when your parental rights are terminated because your wife/ex coaches your kids to falsely claim sexual abuse by you.

These things happen every day, courtesy of the woman's movement.  The position of the woman's movement is that women don't lie about these matters, period, and that they should be believed by default.  It takes a huge effort for a man to prove a woman wrong in these cases.

I'm not saying that injustices don't happen to women too.  But I don't see any male-oriented group demanding that they continue.  Feminist ideology is grounded in the notion that discrimination against men should be institutionalized through the legal system.  Just open your eyes if you want to see the truth.

[Alcon]

Most of your other posts on this thread have been pretty solid, just that article is pretty much rubbish.

Having had my share of experience with feminists and the real results of feminism, I think there is a lot of truth in that post.  It overstates the case in some ways, but I believe it is largely true.

The problem is not just feminism - feminism is part of a whole school of thought that encourages people to view everything in the world through the prism of gender/race etc. and to assign virtue vs. bad qualities based upon those factors.

And if you can tell me that you haven't seen feminist literature saying that men are bad and that women are inherently better than men, then with all due respect, you haven't been reading very much, because that idea is at the forefront of contemporary feminist thought.

How can that be considered feminism when the very definition of feminism, as far as I am aware, is that women should be equal to men, reflecting their equality of skill? Do you not agree with the feminist movement that just desires equality? That is what I consider true feminism; I do not think anyone contests that "feminazism" (I really dislike using the word "Nazi" in such stupid contexts) is ridiculous in concept.

What I have been saying, if anybody has been listening, is that as a practical matter, the leaders of today's feminist movement do not have the stated goal of equality between the sexes as their true goal.  It is that simple.  I think men and women should be legally equal.  I simply don't think that women should get special preferences, and that is what feminism advocates for today.

But my very argument is that they are no more feminists than Timothy McVeigh was a good, Christian man. That may be what they claim to be, but in reality, if they are perpetuating racial inequality, they are anti-feminists. I do not care what they call themselves. To me, that is not what they are.

I feel sorry for you guys that are buying the feminist tripe.  You will be in for a very rude awakening one day when you realize that you have acquiesced in a system that deems you inferior to women because of your equipment.

This may happen, but there are many traditionalists, especially in executive positions, who believe that it is a man's job to do the work and a woman's to stay at home. I find it hard to believe that the system is entirely against males by nature.

It may come a number of different ways.  Like when you lose your job, or get a reprimand or demotion, due to a false accusation of sexual harassment from a woman whom you turned down for a date.  Or when your wife takes up with another man, then has you removed from the house that you paid for, and you are ordered to pay child support to your children with no guarantee of regular visitation or input into their upbringing.  Or when your parental rights are terminated because your wife/ex coaches your kids to falsely claim sexual abuse by you.

Woah woah woah. Slow down there, man. What does one's wife cheating on them have to do with feminism? If someone's wife sleeps with another man, it isn't because of feminism. It's because they want to sleep with another man. And the first item is a great reason, among many, to not date co-workers.

These things happen every day, courtesy of the woman's movement.  The position of the woman's movement is that women don't lie about these matters, period, and that they should be believed by default.  It takes a huge effort for a man to prove a woman wrong in these cases.

You sound like you have some sort of vendetta, almost. Again, I do not consider any of this feminism - it is just stupidity and the assumption that women are by nature too stupid to not be angelic.

I'm not saying that injustices don't happen to women too.  But I don't see any male-oriented group demanding that they continue.  Feminist ideology is grounded in the notion that discrimination against men should be institutionalized through the legal system.  Just open your eyes if you want to see the truth.

Again, this is not feminism. This is sexism by females against males. There is also sexism by males against females. Women are paid less than men and are much less likely to hold executive positions. How do you explain this? I don't support radical feminism, but if you don't think that some males will do anything to avoid bruising their ego by being beaten by a woman in the professional arena, you're the one who needs to open your eyes.

[dazzleman]

Alcon, with all due respect, you're not getting what I'm trying to tell you.

Under today high priestesses of feminism, the philosophy of feminism has degenerated into sexism against men.  They are largely one in the same, whether you recognize it or not.

You fail to recognize the practical effects of positions on real issues taken by feminists, as opposed to the philosophy that they say they support.

Men face big-time legal discrimination when a woman chooses to break up her family, retain full control/custody of the children, and retain all the financial benefits of marriage, and a man has no say in the matter.  I could continue with other examples, but I am not penetrating your hard skull, so I am going to stop here.

You don't believe me, and you'll have to learn the hard way through bitter experience.  One day, you will recognize what I am trying to tell you now.  I too used to be a supporter of the women's movement.  No more.

[nclib]

Dazzleman, do you honestly believe that men have it harder than women?

[dazzleman]

Dazzleman, do you honestly believe that men have it harder than women?

I don't think there's a single answer to that question.

I just think we should question the feminist brainwashing we have gotten about how hard women have it.  Men have it hard in certain ways too.  And I know plenty of women who have it quite easy.

Not that I'm complaining, but I resent the feminist implication that every difficulty in a woman's life is caused by men, and that men should pay for it through unfair laws.

Are you aware that in Sweden, feminists are proposing that all men be forced to pay an additional tax to deal with the problems that men supposedly cause in society?

I think it is high time that men should start questioning the assertions of feminism.  Men are used to having an advantaged position in society for so long that it is hard to get me to understand the true nature of what the feminists wish to do to us.

I had four guys at my job falsely accused of sexual harassment by a psycho bitch who was upset that one of them declined to date her, so she took revenge on him and all his friends.  They were nearly fired, but of course, she faced no consequences for what was clearly a lie.  They had to continue to work alongside her despite what she did.  Feminist dogma is that a woman would never lie about such a thing, and should automatically be believed.

And still, I had trouble convincing these guys that they needed to be vigilant when a friend of this psycho (another psycho, who backed up her lies) started making sexual advances at them.  They still didn't get it, just as you guys who are defending feminism here don't get it.

In some ways, men are advantaged, and in some ways, women are advantaged.  It can never be otherwise, given our biological differences.  But I don't accept a philosophy that effectively advocates in favor of legal discrimination against men, as feminism does.

[nclib]

In some ways, men are advantaged, and in some ways, women are advantaged.  It can never be otherwise, given our biological differences.

True, however men have always had more advantages than women.

But I don't accept a philosophy that effectively advocates in favor of legal discrimination against men, as feminism does.

Feminism is competing against patriarchy, a philosophy that effectively advocates in favor of legal discrimination against women.

[dazzleman]

In some ways, men are advantaged, and in some ways, women are advantaged.  It can never be otherwise, given our biological differences.

True, however men have always had more advantages than women.

But I don't accept a philosophy that effectively advocates in favor of legal discrimination against men, as feminism does.

Feminism is competing against patriarchy, a philosophy that effectively advocates in favor of legal discrimination against women.

Replacing one bad system with another is not the answer.  And that is what feminism seeks to do.

No offense, but you guys just don't get it.  It will take some type of personal experience in your life before you will be able to see beyond the feminist propaganda that you are mouthing, and how you have been duped by it.

[Alcon]

It sounds more like you have a personal vendetta here and blame the feminist movement for the actions of women you do not like.

There are plenty of viable feminist outfits. I know this because I know many people who run them. If you are going to tell me that people who I am friends with and I know well are secretly hateful of males, well, I have some trouble believing that.

No offense at all, but it seems like you are someone paranoid and are blaming any actions individual women may have taken that end up hurting you on the feminist movement.

[The Dowager Mod]

It sounds more like you have a personal vendetta here and blame the feminist movement for the actions of women you do not like.

There are plenty of viable feminist outfits. I know this because I know many people who run them. If you are going to tell me that people who I am friends with and I know well are secretly hateful of males, well, I have some trouble believing that.

No offense at all, but it seems like you are someone paranoid and are blaming any actions individual women may have taken that end up hurting you on the feminist movement.

I don't hate men i even married one.

[Lunar]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not a feminist advocate but this is clearly not the way to judge an entire movement.

Just because you're robbed by a Black man, doesn't make all Blacks criminals.

[dazzleman]

It sounds more like you have a personal vendetta here and blame the feminist movement for the actions of women you do not like.

There are plenty of viable feminist outfits. I know this because I know many people who run them. If you are going to tell me that people who I am friends with and I know well are secretly hateful of males, well, I have some trouble believing that.

No offense at all, but it seems like you are someone paranoid and are blaming any actions individual women may have taken that end up hurting you on the feminist movement.

Actually, I have not personally been hurt by this, but I am a good observer.  I also know plenty of women who are more strongly anti-feminist than I am.  I don't even think that feminists have always been all wrong, but I strongly resent the implication that only women make sacrifices in life, only women have difficulties, and they are all or mostly caused by men.  That is the theory behind modern day feminism, whether you want to admit it or not.  

I know many women, as well as men, who have difficult lives, caused mostly by their own choices and sometimes by unfortunate upbriningings and family backgrounds.  I also know plenty of women and men with great lives, also usually because of a combination of good luck and good choices.  I have never seen that one gender automatically enjoys a better life than the other, as the feminists contend.

In your comments about me, you are employing the standard feminist tactic of questioning the sanity of anybody who tells the truth about their motives and the effects of their policy proposals.  It's a tactic that has worked very well for the feminists for a long time.  It is intended to chill discussion rather than address the issues that have been raised, kind of like a left-wing McCarthyism, actually.  You're an excellent learner of this tactic.  I wish you could think a little more deeply, and engage me in a deeper discussion on this topic because it is a very timely and interesting one.

But as I said, with all respect, you guys don't get it (to borrow a feminist term), so I don't intend to try to talk to you about it further.  You will have to learn the hard way.  So far, you have swallowed the feminist mantra hook, line and sinker, and I hate to see a brother get eaten by sharks in this manner.  I know you'll pay for it later.

When you can get beyond the feminist propaganda and platitudes, and talk about real issues in a deeper way, then we can have a discussion.  Until then, it's really not worth the effort.

I could also add that women and children have been hurt by the feminist movement, arguable at least as much as men have been.  But you're not ready to explore beyond the narrow boundaries that you have placed in your own mind.

But let me be clear about a couple of things.  I dislike the feminist movement and much of what it has done to society.  That doesn't mean that I think every feminist is evil.  One of the things I hate the most is how the movement has brainwashed so many people into rejecting even the possibility that it could be flawed in some way.  We've seen great examples of that in this thread.

Like the other great "isms" of the last century, feminism will eventually come to grief because at bottom, it is contrary to human nature, just as communism was.  The only question is how many lives it will damage before that happens.

[Alcon]

Actually, I have not personally been hurt by this, but I am a good observer.  I also know plenty of women who are more strongly anti-feminist than I am.  I don't even think that feminists have always been all wrong, but I strongly resent the implication that only women make sacrifices in life, only women have difficulties, and they are all or mostly caused by men.  That is the theory behind modern day feminism, whether you want to admit it or not.

I strongly resent that implication, too. But, again, my point is that modern day feminism by your definitions is sexism. There are still plenty of feminists who are not sexist, and to lump them together with the sexists in the category of "modern day feminism" is not fair to the valid movements.

I know many women, as well as men, who have difficult lives, caused mostly by their own choices and sometimes by unfortunate upbriningings and family backgrounds.  I also know plenty of women and men with great lives, also usually because of a combination of good luck and good choices.  I have never seen that one gender automatically enjoys a better life than the other, as the feminists contend.

Other than being paid less, I do not really see any major difference in life quality between the two other than stupid sexual politics, which can never be "cured."

In your comments about me, you are employing the standard feminist tactic of questioning the sanity of anybody who tells the truth about their motives and the effects of their policy proposals.  It's a tactic that has worked very well for the feminists for a long time.  It is intended to chill discussion rather than address the issues that have been raised, kind of like a left-wing McCarthyism, actually.  You're an excellent learner of this tactic.  I wish you could think a little more deeply, and engage me in a deeper discussion on this topic because it is a very timely and interesting one.

I am not questioning your sanity. However, the situations which you described were so detailed I assumed they were coming from personal experience. If they were, I would get the impression that you may have a personal vendetta against "feminists" because of a few women who call themselves that who you believed wronged you. I assumed wrong, and I apologize. This was wrong of me to assume.

I am willing to listen, and to think, and try my best not to use any tactics. Any cheap shots that I make on you I regret; it is not my intention to turn this into a war of debating styles. That's not intellectually stimulating.

But as I said, with all respect, you guys don't get it (to borrow a feminist term), so I don't intend to try to talk to you about it further.  You will have to learn the hard way.  So far, you have swallowed the feminist mantra hook, line and sinker, and I hate to see a brother get eaten by sharks in this manner.  I know you'll pay for it later.

This is the point where I have no idea what you are talking about any longer. What mantra is it that I am swallowing? Please, tell me. Because I agree strongly with you that there are too many sexists who call themselves feminists. For someone who continuously complains about the feminist tactic of telling people they "don't get it," you seem to say that a lot.

When you can get beyond the feminist propaganda and platitudes, and talk about real issues in a deeper way, then we can have a discussion.  Until then, it's really not worth the effort.

What you seem to be saying is that you will not discuss this until I agree with you. This is an odd concept.

I could also add that women and children have been hurt by the feminist movement, arguable at least as much as men have been.  But you're not ready to explore beyond the narrow boundaries that you have placed in your own mind.

If I was not, I would not be here.

But let me be clear about a couple of things.  I dislike the feminist movement and much of what it has done to society.  That doesn't mean that I think every feminist is evil.  One of the things I hate the most is how the movement has brainwashed so many people into rejecting even the possibility that it could be flawed in some way.  We've seen great examples of that in this thread.

Nothing is flawless. Anyone who assumes otherwise is foolish.

Like the other great "isms" of the last century, feminism will eventually come to grief because at bottom, it is contrary to human nature, just as communism was.  The only question is how many lives it will damage before that happens.

I believe radical feminism will, yes. But the movement from equality will never die, no matter how many sexist pigs (male and female) attempt to poison it.

Now, if that's mantra, so be it.

[dazzleman]

Alcon:

Let me tell you about a few situations.

1.  My cousin was married to a raging alcoholic.  She physically attacked him on a regular basis.  She wasn't really able to hurt him, because he's stronger, but she always taunted him to hit her back.  One night, it got so bad he called the police.  They came and wanted to arrest him.  Why?  Because feminists have huge power in this area, and under feminist dogma, the man is ALWAYS responsible for domestic violence.

She could hit him as much as she wanted, with no repurcussions, but if he hit her, he probably would have been arrested and it would have resulted in her winning full custody of their child as an abusive and dysfunctional alcoholic.

I hate domestic violence, but my experience is that women are responsible for it about as often as men.  But feminists have defined it as this horrible cruelty that men inflict on innocent women.  Sometimes it is, but other times it is not.

2.  Same case.  This couple is now separated, and he is fighting an uphill battle for custody of their daughter (with supervised visitation rights for her).  Feminist dogma is that the mother should have full custody.  This mother was a poor mother even before the separation and would be worse now.  She works, but spends all her money on liquor on cigarettes.  She expects him to pay all the real bills for her and the child (even though the child lives with him half time anyway).  Her attitude is a great example of the "what's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine" attitude of feminism.  He doesn't drink, yet is in danger of losing custody to this woman.  Divorce and family courts are notorious for their anti-male attitudes.

3.  My sister separated from her husband a long time ago.  When she went to talk to a counselor, a court officer no less, this woman encouraged her to fabricate domestic violence charges against her husband.  The whole case operated under the "woman as victim" assumption, even though my sister was really a victim only of her own stupidity for marrying that loser in the first place.

4.  I have witnessed false sexual harassment charges brought against co-workers.  The case involved a woman who was stalking a man at my office (God help the man if he had been stalking the woman).  She stalked him and tried to get him to date her, and when he said no, she made up graphic sexual harassment allegations against him and all his friends.  They were nearly fired.  She suffered no repurcussions.  Her charges, even though everybody knew them to be false, had to be taken with the utmost seriousness.

Alcon, as a man who will soon be in the working world, you need to wake up and recognize that thanks to the feminists, the system has been rigged to make it very easy for a woman to ruin a man's career with false charges, and to blackmail him for behavior to which she consented at the time.

I am not trying to be a bitter nutcase about this.  As I said, none of this is my own personal experience.  But it could have been me; it could be any guy.  And the system is not set up fairly when a man is presumed guilty simply because he is a man, and a woman is presumed innocent simply because she is a woman.

I favor equal treatment for men and women and have always behaved accordingly.  But I have to be afraid even to make a joke in front of a female colleague, that I will be charged with sexual harassment.   Meanwhile, a woman can do whatever she wants and get away with it.

I think you seriously underestimate the insidious real life effects of feminism, as opposed to the stated goals of the movement, which are deliberately quite different.  Everything I say to you, I say as a friend, because I don't want to see any guy who has done nothing wrong get put through hell by the structures that have been put in place by the feminists.

The ironic thing is, all this will end up hurting real women.  I always have my "psycho meter" on full blast when interviewing female job candidates, because I have to be so careful not to allow someone who is apt to make false accusation into the company, since the law offers them such strong protection against dismissal, protection that men completely lack.

I know from practice in managing people.  If I see the need to terminate a white male, nobody has any concerns, because white males, unless outwardly gay, suffer no protection.  But if I want to terminate a woman or a minority, human resources raises all kinds of concerns.  It is easier just to hire white men, quite frankly.  They won't report you for running a "hostile environment" if you make an off-color joke, and if it doesn't work out, you don't have to worry about a huge legal settlement when it's time for them to move on.

I have a lot of real world experience with the effects of feminism, and trust me, it isn't pretty.  Every man, especially a man in a managment position, has to live in fear of the day he gets snared in the feminist trap even if he does nothing wrong.

[John Dibble]

1.  My cousin was married to a raging alcoholic.  She physically attacked him on a regular basis.  She wasn't really able to hurt him, because he's stronger, but she always taunted him to hit her back.  One night, it got so bad he called the police.  They came and wanted to arrest him.  Why?  Because feminists have huge power in this area, and under feminist dogma, the man is ALWAYS responsible for domestic violence.

She could hit him as much as she wanted, with no repurcussions, but if he hit her, he probably would have been arrested and it would have resulted in her winning full custody of their child as an abusive and dysfunctional alcoholic.

I hate domestic violence, but my experience is that women are responsible for it about as often as men.  But feminists have defined it as this horrible cruelty that men inflict on innocent women.  Sometimes it is, but other times it is not.

2.  Same case.  This couple is now separated, and he is fighting an uphill battle for custody of their daughter (with supervised visitation rights for her).  Feminist dogma is that the mother should have full custody.  This mother was a poor mother even before the separation and would be worse now.  She works, but spends all her money on liquor on cigarettes.  She expects him to pay all the real bills for her and the child (even though the child lives with him half time anyway).  Her attitude is a great example of the "what's yours is mine, and what's mine is mine" attitude of feminism.  He doesn't drink, yet is in danger of losing custody to this woman.  Divorce and family courts are notorious for their anti-male attitudes.

Very similar case happened to one of my co-workers. He married a woman who was a narcisist/compulsive liar/alcoholic who was verbally and physically abusive towards him. She made up all sorts of crap about him when they finally got a divorce, and she got partial custody when anyone who knew her could tell you she was a crazy bitch. Fortunately, after a couple years of legal battles, he's finally gotten full custody(he built up a stack of evidence and witnesses to attest to this woman's pathetic excuse for parenting).

[Bono]

(he built up a stack of evidence and witnesses to attest to this woman's pathetic excuse for parenting).

Which, when there's willingness, it's very easy. Most detective agengies will get you what you want in no time.