Feminism

[Venetia]

idk ... i think that some people deserve insults sometimes.

insults are the real direct type of criticism some types of people need for a wake-up call!

 

[Daxis]

insults are opinionated so you really can't say that anyone insults someone else
I mean i could say that that shirt emphasizes your chest to a girl, and it would most likely a compliment
or i could say that same thing to a guy and insult him (or construe it as i'm hitting on him, but that's a whole different matter)
double standards and circumstances make up a lot of different standards for men and women already
men and women are not equal, that's a given fact. People say that we are literally equal are simply being idealistic, and people that use that reasoning for sexist ideals are just being stupid/good at taking advantage of others
i believe we should be equal in any ways we can, including hitting back girls and stuff. then again i believe we should all kill ourselves so :\

 

[Lyric]

I think some might view criticism as an insult, but criticism is different to me than an insult. An insult is intended to hurt. A criticism is meant to inspire change or offer a different point of view. I think intent separates the two as well as the outcome.

 

[Daxis]

I think some might view criticism as an insult, but criticism is different to me than an insult. An insult is intended to hurt. A criticism is meant to inspire change or offer a different point of view. I think intent separates the two as well as the outcome.

you may mean it as an criticism, but others may take it as an insult. There are lots of examples where this can be proven. Intent does seperate the two on a personal and singular level, but as an outcome, it's perception of the insult by the victimee/whatever that actually makes it important as an outcome. You can say it's the thought that counts, but pissed off people don't really care how you meant it.

/off topic

 

[Venetia]

idk ... imo sometimes people really deserve to be called dickheads.

not like "hey, guy who has a deformity that looks like a penis growing out of your forehead, you are a dickhead."

more like, "hey, person who is a total douchebag asshole, you are a dickhead."

examples:

"hey, al qaeda, you are a dickhead."

"hey, hugo chávez, you are a dickhead."

"hey, guy who keeps pissing on the bus, you are a dickhead."

"hey, lady who organizes feminist rallies called 'women, chocolate & shoes', you are a dickhead."



p.s. it's not a bad thing to take a topic on a tangent if a discussion is still going, esp. if the original discussion has run its course.

 

[So fist]

you're a dickhead.

 

[BlueScope]

Oh hell yeah, favourite topic... and I couldn't agree more with what's in the first post, aside from the alimonies maybe, which is handled differently in all the countries anyway though...
Aside from that, I'm personally trying to treat people of both genders just the same regarding those matters - when someone punches me, I punch back, girl or not. Seriously, I just don't feel like being goody two shoes to someone just because they're female... it's not like they didn't know that before they hit me.
So, just to clarify myself: I don't like to treat women badly or anything of the sort. I treat everyone with respect that treats me with respect, males and females alike, and I'm the last person who wants males to be superior in general. While it's kind of hard to earn my respect (or so I've been told... I don't think I ask for all that much), I'm still trying to give everyone the same chance... any people going feminist on me don't really stand a chance there...

Why is it okay for a woman to insult a man, but a man can't insult a woman?

At least this part is completely dissolved over here... I haven't heard of anything insult-ey being differenced between gender in Germany.

Why is it socially acceptable for a woman to hit a man, but a man can't hit a woman?

I explained my view on the situation up there, but in general, Venetia said anything: Weaker physics, which is genetically based. Thing is, if a woman tries to hit me anyway, then that doesn't apply anymore - when you start a fight, better be prepared for what you get out of it.

Do Feminists really want equality, or do they want Superiority?

Superiority, all of them. Otherwise, they'd be Equalists by definition, and since I don't think such a term exists, that pretty much underlines the whole situation...


I gotta say something to the animal parallels example that's been brought up... Almost all kinds of animals have a dominant female throughout the whole race - you'll hardly find exceptions. Primates may or may not be an exception, tbh I don't know this one for sure; however, somehow the female gender seems to be more suitable for being the dominant part. Still, our benefit over the animal world (being the ability to socially interact with each other pretty well) seems to have changed that around. Makes me thinking definately, as there's usually a reason why things develop this or that way; and while we have different cultural evolvements all around the world, it seems to have resulted in males being the dominant gender all over the world as of now...

and yeah, we will never get real equality because the world and its people are huge piles of shit

You might be a kiddo most of the time, but I think this one pretty much nails it...

 

[Kingdom Ablaze]

<3 loves blues rant on feminism

 

[BlueScope]

<3 loves blues rant on feminism

You gotta be fucking kidding... :haha:

Alright, back to topic :shades:

 

[Venetia]

I gotta say something to the animal parallels example that's been brought up... Almost all kinds of animals have a dominant female throughout the whole race - you'll hardly find exceptions.

Er ... Not really.
Quite the opposite!
Especially if you're talking about anything outside the arachnid, insect, or bird kingdoms.



Female hierarchal "dominance" is reliant on a few factors:

1.) Are females larger in size/stronger (sexual dimorphism)?
-- > Ex: Black widows, anglerfish, spotted hyenas

2.) Do females vastly outnumber males due to genetic pre-selection (haploidism)?
-- > Ex: Ants, wasps, bees

3.) Are there absurdly high demands on raising offspring, placing females at a premium?
-- > Ex: Elephants, bison
Note: This also ends in "harem" behavior, wherein the male is dominant anyway. (Ex: Lions, rabbits)

4.) Are males constantly competing for mating preference and rarely interact socially with females, or have significantly lower life expectancies due to competitive violence?
-- > Ex: Deer, orca


There are only a very small number of species that don't adhere to these above conditions but experience matriarchal behavior.

The include the lemur, bonobo, and human (certain societies).


The vast majority of mammalian and "higher-order" species' gender dominance can be summed up to hormone levels: males have hormones that make them stronger and more violent, so, socially, they exhibit "dominant" tendencies.



Summary: I like zoology

 

[Venetia]

(P.S. Here are some terms you should know!:

A species is a classification of a group creatures that can interbreed successfully.
Such as: Humans, apples, bees.

A race or breed is a classification of a group of creatures within a species, that are only slightly genetically different, but can still interbreed with other members of the same species.
Such as: Caucasians, Braeburn apples, Buckfast bees.

Typically the word 'race' is only really applied to humans, whereas 'breed' is applied to non-human organisms.

A subspecies is like a breed, except the differences in morphology are more significant (but they can still interbreed)
Example: The Malayan tiger vs. the Bengal tiger.


These things are mixed up a lot so there's your taxonomic lesson for the day!!)

 

[Sauk]

To clarify the whole " Why can women insult men, but men can't insult women " question, I was pertaining to them being disgusted when they hear rude comments made back to them in retaliation to their verbal onslaught over it being an illegal act or however else it was interpreted ( Unless there was no communication errors, then never mind this post ).

I was more or less giving a prime example of irrational thinking and behaviour.

Here's two scenarios, one male vs male, the other male vs female:

Male1: You guys are fages, especially you, you faggot goof.
Male2: At least my girlfriend didn't fuck my brother while I was out buying her a gift
Male1: rage rage rage
Male2: rage rage rage
Male1 & 2 fight


Female: You have no life you fucking goof, "picken" on an innocent girl do you think you're tough? I wish I knew where you lived.
Male: lol what are you going to so, slap me?
Female: I'd do more. She's a good mom and you don't even know what "your" talking about, fucking goof you must have a tiny dick LOLOLOLZ.
Male: You vs. a 5' 11" 190lb guy... I'm sure. I'd knock you out cold without a second thought if you put your hands on me you dumb fucking cunt, you must be out of your irrational little mind to think I wouldn't. Do you think you're tough? I've been doing nothing but giving facts as to why your whore friend is a whore, so you threaten me lawl.
Female: ANY REAL MAN WOULDN'T TALK TO A CLASSY LADY SUCH AS MYSELF LIKE THIS I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID ALL OF THAT TO ME DESPITE ME CHIRPING YOU AND CALLING YOU OUT YOU HAVEN'T CONFORMED TO SOCIETY AND TREATED ME LIKE A QUEEN LIKE I DON'T DESERVE BUT THINK I DO BECAUSE I GIVE BIRTH.




Yes I got carried away but that's basically the gist of what happened in my experience, and what I saw with a lot of my friends vs women / women in general talking about how " they bitched this guy out and he didn't say anything back lololol ".

 

[Sauk]

(P.S. Here are some terms you should know!:

A species is a classification of a group creatures that can interbreed successfully.
Such as: Humans, apples, bees.

A race or breed is a classification of a group of creatures within a species, that are only slightly genetically different, but can still interbreed with other members of the same species.
Such as: Caucasians, Braeburn apples, Buckfast bees.

Typically the word 'race' is only really applied to humans, whereas 'breed' is applied to non-human organisms.

A subspecies is like a breed, except the differences in morphology are more significant (but they can still interbreed)
Example: The Malayan tiger vs. the Bengal tiger.


These things are mixed up a lot so there's your taxonomic lesson for the day!!)

I thought that anthropologists had no definition for the term race, and used a different term to differentiate between people.

When people talk about race in most cases ( or so I re-call ), it's just another term used to describe a species ( I could be wrong, however ).

My favourite thing about the " race " topic is people thinking that Puerto Rican, Mexican, Hawaiians, and Native Americans are their own ethnicity, when in reality they're all the same people from the same classification ( idr the actual term ): Mongoloid. Just like Italian, German, Arabics: they're all Caucasoids, Arabs belonging to the Semitic branch along with Italians.

 

[Venetia]

When people talk about race in most cases ( or so I re-call ), it's just another term used to describe a species ( I could be wrong, however ).

The debate has philosophical roots, because we regard ourselves differently from other creatures ... But "race" is a fuzzy term that doesn't really apply that well in a modern sense!

In a purely zoological sense, say, if an alien from another planet used a similar taxonomy system, and were trying to classify us, they would say that humans can be categorized as having difference races (or, breeds).

A human of entirely mongoloid descent is clearly different from a human of entirely negroid descent.

Then there are sub-races (or, sub-breeds) that narrow things down even more ... But, typically, animals are confined to a single geographic location and don't do enough intermixing to get into the sub-breed or sub-sub-breed classifications. We are rather unique in that aspect. Plus anthropologists like to bicker about race origins and whittle "sub-race" differences down to a small number of "great races", which are always being contested.



Anthropology is silly with folk taxonomy!
Ethnogenesis is so complicated it's stupid.

Example:

Folk Taxa:

My nationality is American.
My ethnic sub-group is German-American.
My ethnic group is Non-Hispanic White.
My sub-race type is Celt.
My sub-race is Nordish.
My linguistic phylum is Indo-European.
My descent is North-European Caucasoid.
My race is Europid, or Caucasoid.

Scientific:

My sub-species (or, trinomen) is Homo sapiens sapien.
My species is Homo sapiens.
My genus is Homo.
My subfamily is Homininae.
My family is Hominidae.
My suborder is Haplorrhini.
My order is Primate.
My subclass is Theria.
My class is Mammalian.
My subphylum is Vertebrata.
My phylum is Chordata.
My domain is Eukarya.



In generally-used taxonomy, it rarely gets more specific than "species" for classification--if organisms can interbreed successfully, then they're part of a species. Everything else is just putting labels on our perception of different shapes or colors.

(and it only applies to things that always or mostly reproduce sexually--asexually reproducing things have their own systems that're complicated and i'm not even going to bother about it lol)

 

[Sauk]

A human of entirely mongoloid descent is clearly different from a human of entirely congroid descent.

you use the 6 group template.

I thought that there were fewer genetic differences between a white and a black person than a black and a black person / a white and a white person? ( Just thought I'd throw that in even though I know what I said has nothing to do with what you said ).

 

[Venetia]

Yea I edited to "negroid" after considering it ... But fuck, it's all stupid.
You're considering race as defined by genetic variation--but "race" was defined in a pre-genetically-aware era, where sub-species and breeds were categorized only by appearance or size.

The 6-group model is mostly based on genetic studies, and it mostly just divides up the "negroid" race, really. And, even then, in that very study, they said the "main" differences lie in up to 20 diff clusters but that 6 was a better guess. Bleh

Two humans of any "race" may vary at a genetic level by a very tiny amount ... And any polymorphisms are still being found by genetic testing.

Theoretically, the variations merely correspond to the isolation of ancient groups. For instance, Middle-easterners spread out all over Europe and Northern Africa, and are similar enough to just be grouped in with them. Certain South African groups were very geographically isolated, by water and desert and mountains and jungle, and can have a relatively large genetic distance between themselves and persons in, say, Egypt--or even between inlanders and those who live in coastal areas historically visited by Europeans.


SO, it's very possible that if you took a "black" person from Sudan, and a "black" person from Zambia, they would be more genetically distant from each other than that "black" person from Sudan and a "white" person from Greece.


"Race" is not really viable in scientific terms, but applicable to medicine via statistics, as some groups of people share unique "quirks" (such as sickle-cell traits in those with sub-saharan heritage).

 

[Venetia]

Also,

[other examples]
Female: ANY REAL MAN WOULDN'T TALK TO A CLASSY LADY SUCH AS MYSELF LIKE THIS I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID ALL OF THAT TO ME DESPITE ME CHIRPING YOU AND CALLING YOU OUT YOU HAVEN'T CONFORMED TO SOCIETY AND TREATED ME LIKE A QUEEN LIKE I DON'T DESERVE BUT THINK I DO BECAUSE I GIVE BIRTH.

Chicks who say things like this are called "bitches"--please know that they are not representatives of all women.

Guys do the same fucking shit too though

How many times have I heard?:
Dude: "ANY REAL WOMAN WOULDN'T TALK TO AN AWESOME BRO SUCH AS MYSELF LIKE THIS I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID ALL OF THAT TO ME DESPITE ME CALLING YOU OUT YOU HAVEN'T CONFORMED TO SOCIETY AND TREATED ME LIKE A KING LIKE I DON'T DESERVE BUT THINK I DO BECAUSE I HAVE A PENIS."

Answer: Nearly every god-damned day!

But these dudes are called "douchebags" and I don't regard them as being representatives of their gender either.

 

[Sauk]

Also,

[other examples]
Female: ANY REAL MAN WOULDN'T TALK TO A CLASSY LADY SUCH AS MYSELF LIKE THIS I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID ALL OF THAT TO ME DESPITE ME CHIRPING YOU AND CALLING YOU OUT YOU HAVEN'T CONFORMED TO SOCIETY AND TREATED ME LIKE A QUEEN LIKE I DON'T DESERVE BUT THINK I DO BECAUSE I GIVE BIRTH.

Chicks who say things like this are called "bitches"--please know that they are not representatives of all women.

Guys do the same fucking shit too though

How many times have I heard?:
Dude: "ANY REAL WOMAN WOULDN'T TALK TO AN AWESOME BRO SUCH AS MYSELF LIKE THIS I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID ALL OF THAT TO ME DESPITE ME CALLING YOU OUT YOU HAVEN'T CONFORMED TO SOCIETY AND TREATED ME LIKE A KING LIKE I DON'T DESERVE BUT THINK I DO BECAUSE I HAVE A PENIS."

Answer: Nearly every god-damned day!

But these dudes are called "douchebags" and I don't regard them as being representatives of their gender either.

See: the beginning of this thrad ( Thank God someone understand where I'm coming from. I went to get a second opinion from another forum and all they did was white knight and claim girls can do no wrong etc. )

The thing I seem to observe is that for every asshole, there's a woman who made him that way ( obviously my observations =/= what happens everywhere and to everyone, it just goes to show why I have my viewpoints and have a hard time believing otherwise ).

Take for instance, myself. Up until I opened my eyes to what went on around me and had a first hand experience with caring about a heartless whore, I used to be your typical white night defending women even in they deserved what they were being dealt and claiming to never hit them even when struck back. I date a whore, start noticing similar trends within other women who don't classify themselves as a bitch etc, the same bitch uses me and plays with my emotions, and now I think most women are whores. The most recent example was the pregnant bitch playing victim and getting everyones sympathy even though she was the one who chose to trap her boyfriend with a child that he wasn't prepared to have. The girls were appalled that I wasn't siding with the girl and couldn't think rationally to see how wrong this woman was and tried rationalizing her actions with " AT LEAST SHE KEPT IT. " Good for her that she didn't abort it, however, she planned to have it so why would she abort it?

Talking to you, I don't think you're one of those kinds of people ( no white knight ), so it does shine some sort of a light on my perhaps irrational theory of all women being the same: but more times than less I see similar " queen " traits amongst most women I come in contact with ( especially in the generation of '88 - '96 ). I don't think all women are like this, but I do feel as though almost all are.

 

[Daxis]

i would say that the trait is close to pretty much everyone i know, to more or less degrees. some simply act more bitchy than the other, but that general idea of queenish trait is pretty damn predominant. I count several that act less bitchy, but the basic "girly" traits would still be there i'd say

some people are nice, and know they act like that, but mostly as a joke. They i can totally stand, cause hey, societal rules, it's funny, like political incorrectness. However, others are just basically bitches, which are really, really annoying, especially when they think that having attitude justifies their actions.

I think, however, that the white knight trait is a lot less predominant in comparison to bitchiness in females, as far as i can see. Then again, it might be because there's lots less chances to act upon this- bitchiness is constant while people acting out would need some sort of general catalyst (or maybe not :P), but i see less of this. I would say that the general "NEVER HIT GIRLS" mentality goes on all over the place, though.

then again my environment isn't exactly the model american stereotype but whatever

 

[Venetia]

idg balking about the "don't hit chicks" thing

does it really come up that often??

are you just talking about being playful or something?
b/c i'll gently slug people playfully from time to time
getting hit back is part of it (again, not hard!)

if it's not being playful, wtf kind of girls do you hang out with?

it sounds to me like you're gaging these opinions entirely from a couple of cliques of high school or sorority girls who are vain and retarded.