What are your thoughts on toxic masculinity?

@NearMiss: No patriarchy as defined by feminism*. The implicit point. Not simply rule by men, but oppressive rule by men, wherein men as a whole benefit from controlling society, to the wholesale detriment of women. Such a thing has never existed in the West. Or the East, prolly.

Both genders had their roles, and both preformed those roles willingly, as a whole. From the dawn of history: male disposability and female nurturing. Its bow we survived this long. Wasnt a construct of the "patriarchy".

Women have never been oppressed, as a group. They were and always have been considered more valuable than men, to be honored and protected and to die bloody for. Case in point, prostate cancer kills as much men as breast cancer does women. Yet, breast cancer receives tremendously more federal funding and profoundly more awareness. Women have value to society and always have. Unaccomplished males, do not. 0 value.

The rights they did not have, they did not have, for their protection in pre-Industrial America [n prolly other countries]: which was a dangerous place. Much like how we haven't allowed women in combat positions, until last year--we actually give a fuck about their lives.

@NearMiss: I dont think there is. Feminism is anti-masculine. You just proved it by saying women are effectively inferior. Man, you really havent met my mom. That's part of the feminist theory. Men oppressed women for 100,000 years, marriage was slavery and female oppression; and, men benefited solely from controlling--dominating--society. Despite the tens of millions of graves from wars and hard labor.

There are feminists who view feminism as simply "the desire for equality". But that's not what feminism is. Feminism is feminist theory. And there's a lot more to it than a desire for equal rights. Which isnt even what it really pursues.

So you do believe in female inferiority: just openly?

Humans did not survive this long due to our physical strength. Even men are quite weak in contrast to the animal world. We survived based on numbers and opposable thumbs: tools and intelligence and cooperation. Are you saying that physical strength overpowers intelligence and tools? Or that women are simply weak, stupid flowers in contrast to intelligent, powerful, dominating men? Because that sounds like protecting feminity and hating masculinity, to me.

I don't believe women should be in combat roles, either, though. Or, at least, the physical requirements shouldn't be any different from thr males.

Even in the Middle East where women are considered property and not allowed to leave the house, would you rather be considered a cherrished possession or a disposable one?

They're just back in the stone age, yes.

Well, that's a good point.

Men or women might not be toxic, but feminism is. You seem fairly rational. Why would you choose to be a feminist when you could be an egalitarian? Ultimately, it's all about human rights.

Gah. Domestic abuse is about 50/50 according to the CDC. At least where severe abuse is concerned. Mild and moderate is stated to be around 80/20. Yet. Most men would not report mild or moderate abuse, because it would emasculate them. "Yeah, police? got my ass kicked by my 100 pound girlfriend/wife. Do you know a support groups number i could use?" All in all, it's 50/50. Just one is socially acceptable, and the other isnt.

Domestic abuse isnt just a male thing. No. You didn't say that, but the implication was clear. "Women are non-violent; men are violent." That's part of the feminization of the West. The idea that masculinity is violent and oppressive, and feminity is weak and stupid and pathetic--yet, desirable and men should try to be more like peaceful women. That is feminism--that is hating masculinity. "The best man is a woman in a mans body."

Shit, my mom beat the shit out of my dad for years. And he didn't do anything but backstep with hands up, because hes socially not allowed to do anything. Anything from knives to glass, metal, pots and pans. Like Fred Flintstone shit. Would have been hilarious if my mom wasn't actively trying to murder my dad. She has issues. Whatever cuts, scrapes, and bruises he got, you think he called the police or went to the hospital? No way.

If we want to talk about patriarchy, then I think it should also be mentioned that were you to publically state women are smarter than men, praise would be lavished upon you. Say men are more intelligent, and you'd be boo'd off the stage and prolly lose your job. Sounds more like a matriarchy, to me.

That's the thing about feminism. It simultaneously cherishes femininity while stating women are inferior to men: so, feminity must be enforced: protected from evil masculinity.

Women have a lot more power than it seems and always have. The difference is that male power is overt and noticible, and female power is subtle--but nonetheless powerful. More powerful prolly, because men listen to what women want. Otherwise, we wouldnt get laid. It causes influence and exerts pressure from the shadows. Like Satan, herself. (Just kidding about that last part. :p)

Masculinity used to be respected and admired. Thats why men were content to throw their lives away to provide or protect. It isnt anymore. You can see it everywhere. Like on TV sitcoms. The wife is always a clever, responsible, while the husband is almost always a dumb fuck asshole who doesnt do enough, lucky to have found her.

@NearMiss: Suit yourself. I do back the statement. If you're that afraid to confront your ideology, doesn't affect me.

You dont know how much im thinking things through, because you refused to follow my thought process. You can pick one or the other, but you cant have both. You dont get to explain my ideology to me as flawed, without examining it.

@NearMiss: Respect? Who said anything about respect? I saw a hole in your ideology, and I poked it. That's what arguments are. O_o And if you didn't want to argue, or 'debate' as a nicer word, then you shouldn't talk about heavy shit like social justice issues.

Ill make it short and simple, then.

Your statement: society must protect women from individual males due to male domination.

E.g. women are inferior to males, as they are dominated by them, thus require protection.

Implicitly, males are somehow not in need of protection, because they are superior--because they can handle themselves. [Even yhough domestic abuse is 50/50 according to the cdc]

Women are at a "disadabtange". I also addressed this.

Clear as day, you're arguing female inferiority. Might not br your intent, but that is what your words mean. How am i wrong?

Your assertion was predicated on pregnancy and children. But that doesn't suddenly make a woman weak her entire life.

@NearMiss: But you are, Mrs "I'm not reading that."? I directly asked you how i was wrong. You chose to ignore it and take a pseudo-intellectual high ground to avoid an argument. Because you know I'm right, but can't accept it.

Ma ii. Believe as you will.

Look up karen straughan or factual feminist on youtube, if you ever care to hear the antifeminist or factual feminist position

@NearMiss: No wonder your parents abused you, you old-ass, dried up, most likely butt-ugly sheep. Then i gotta make the sentence count then is what you're saying?

A "feminist" who defended Trumps pussy grab comment and supports sexism incarnate. You're a walking, talking self-contradiction, you ridiculous, old wrinkly hag. You're hilariously hypocritical every step of the way. Dull, indoctrinated, supercilious, passive aggressive cunt.

You wanna try to get under my skin instead of comparing ideology? Fine by me. Let's see who can do more damage.

You see the difference between me fighting and me debating?

@NearMiss: You stopped the conversation long ago. Then you actively attempted to piss me off, instead of just dropping it. And it worked. You can try to take the moral high ground and go "Oh, look how bad of a person you are," but you set it up. This is the outcome you wanted. But we both know that it was a hail mary attempt to win the debate by pissing me off.

Congratulations. You win by foul play. Enjoy it.

@NearMiss: No. I made the difference between me fighting and debating crystal clear. You're the one who wanted to fight. That's why you provoked me by saying that bullshit "I only read one line." I showed you the difference. One is obvious; the other is not. I was debating. You wanted to fight.

I don't give a fuck if you call yourself a god damn unicorn. It doesn't make you one. *That* is delusion and ignorance. "Feminism" is "feminist theory". Not a bland synonym for "equality". That is a misconception by the uninformed. Likewise, if I were to say "I'm a socialist, but I believe in privatized means of production," I would be full of shit. You can't "make" a word mean whatever you want it to mean.

@NearMiss: Do you even know the precepts of feminism? Fine tell me. What is "feminism"? Do you even know?

@NearMiss: And there is your issue. You have no idea what feminism means. Read feminist theory. There is profoundly more to it than that.

How does feminism seek to obtain these goals? What is feminist theory on history? Society? How does feminism define equality? What has feminism done to establish "equality between the sexes"?

And, incidentally, if feminism is "equality between the sexes," then why is it named after women? FEMINim. Doesn't sound very equal, to me. Is it just poor wording? Why wouldn't one simply call themselves an egalitarian? Is there a difference between egalitarianism and feminism? Both state they seek equality. So why pick one over the other? Are they actually different?

With political, economic, and social movements, a bland one sentence definition doesn't explain the belief system. At all.