"White anti-feminist men in Japan"

[Nyororin]

Originally Posted by Alkindus

Yes just like I believe that a ´terrorist´ can never be muslim so there is no such thing as ´islamic´ terrorism and that zionists can never be jewish......

I never understood that people acknowledge that they are not what they claim they are yet still prefer calling ´them´ that what they are absolutely not...´hey what you stand for and do really has nothing to do with communism, but I still consider you a communist though´ (insert feminism etc) that kind of twisted logic really doesn´t make any sense.

basically you(not you but others) just keep the ignorancy alive.

If the majority of people I have encountered who call themselves feminists belong to a specific mindset - I have every reason to believe that is indeed what feminism is.
Someone coming along and saying, "Well, we might be in the minority, but they`re the wrong ones! Feminism is really this and this. They`re not really feminists." ... Why should I change my understanding of that word over to the meaning it carries for that minority? They are, ultimately, the minority. Their definition of the word carries less weight than how it is understood and practiced by the majority.

[Nyororin]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

Well since you are obviously aware that kind of feminism is not actually the point, nor is it feminism at all, then there is no point in me trying to convince you otherwise. I am one of the people you are describing, who do believe in equality when a man is wronged too. I don't know how many people are like me, and I can't speak for them.

No, that is what I understand feminism to be. I do not think of women caring about world equality when I hear the word. Instead, I think of women giving themselves a pat on the back for getting back at men.

Your "feminism" is something I could possibly support. Only that is not what feminism means to me, nor is it what every woman I have encountered so far in real life seemed to believe feminism was. If you want me to think of "feminism" as something good, then try figuring out how to actually make it into something good outside of the select few "true" believers.

Originally Posted by kireikoori

Well I believe all those women are not feminists.

Tell them that, because they certainly thought they were. Who is right now? This is a self given title - not something you can test via science.

[Wasabista]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

There have been women opressors and men opressors. Just seems like there have been more men.

Well, basically men always used to be the people who DO things. Warriors? Men. Doctors? Men. Astronauts, scientists, inventors? The vast majority were men. Women had the option of letting the men do the heavy lifting, while sharing in the spoils. Wisely, they took it.

If there is any record of Caesar conquering Gaul and Mrs. Caesar saying oh no honey, please leave those nice Gauls alone, I've never seen it.

Basically you're applying 2008 assumptions to huge swathes of human history and it doesn't make sense.

Originally Posted by MissMisa

Feminism ... is not, and never has been, women whining about men. If you think that's the case, you clearly have the wrong impression of what feminism is.

Really? A little history for you my friend.

Gloria Steinem: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

Marilyn French: "All men are rapists, and that's all they are."

Andrea Dworkin: "Sex and murder are fused in the male consciousness, so that one without the imminent possibility of the other is unthinkable and impossible."

Roseanne Barr, on reading that a Utah housewife stabbed her husband 37 times: "I admire her restraint."

Andrea Dworkin again: "I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."

Entirely representative quotes, not taken out of context, from some of the leading feminist thinkers of modern times (except Roseanne Barr who's just an obnoxious cow.)

[Alkindus]

Originally Posted by Nyororin

If the majority of people I have encountered who call themselves feminists belong to a specific mindset - I have every reason to believe that is indeed what feminism is.
Someone coming along and saying, "Well, we might be in the minority, but they`re the wrong ones! Feminism is really this and this. They`re not really feminists." ... Why should I change my understanding of that word over to the meaning it carries for that minority? They are, ultimately, the minority. Their definition of the word carries less weight than how it is understood and practiced by the majority.

lol, so if you started a ´Nyororin´ movement and I would copy your name, and do things in your name etc but would do totally different things you would not have approved and would have never done you would still considered me ´nyororin´.

besides, how come you automaticly assume the majority of the feminists are like the ones you encountered? why even say the majority of all feminists are like what you said worldwide and that the ones others described

what do you know about feminists all over(especially eastern europe) that are fighting for abortion rights? or simple things like equal pay etc a lot of women worldwide are still struggling and don´t have the basic rights which we have in Japan and the Netherlands......you live in Japan, just take a look at the countries surrounding you. there is another world outside most parts of the ´west´ where women don´t have simple rights.

here in the Netherlands, feminists only demand equal things regarding certain jobs that can be done by both male and female but are still dominated by males, which has a lot to do with certain aspects of ´discrimination´.

I know where just talking about a ´word´ and I don´t wanna dismiss your personal experience with some foolish broads but please don´t let that blind you from everything else around you. don´t forget about the feminists who really do fight for the rightious cause in many other parts of the world. I think they are the majority. from China to Mali.

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Wasabista

Well, basically men always used to be the people who DO things. Warriors? Men. Doctors? Men. Astronauts, scientists, inventors? The vast majority were men. Women had the option of letting the men do the heavy lifting, while sharing in the spoils. Wisely, they took it.

If there is any record of Caesar conquering Gaul and Mrs. Caesar saying oh no honey, please leave those nice Gauls alone, I've never seen it.

Basically you're applying 2008 assumptions to huge swathes of human history and it doesn't make sense.



Really? A little history for you my friend.

Gloria Steinem: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

Marilyn French: "All men are rapists, and that's all they are."

Andrea Dworkin: "Sex and murder are fused in the male consciousness, so that one without the imminent possibility of the other is unthinkable and impossible."

Roseanne Barr, on reading that a Utah housewife stabbed her husband 37 times: "I admire her restraint."

Andrea Dworkin again: "I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig."

Entirely representative quotes, not taken out of context, from some of the leading feminist thinkers of modern times (except Roseanne Barr who's just an obnoxious cow.)

Actually, you have taken some quotes out of context.

Let me break this down.


Gloria Steinem: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

I agree. No women actually needs a man at all. In modern society, women can make their own money. They don't need to have a partner as they are perfectly able to sustain themselves on their own. They do not need a man to support them.

Marilyn French: "All men are rapists, and that's all they are."

The full quote is actually 'Whatever they may be in public life, whatever their relationships with men, in their relationships with women, all men are rapists, and that's all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes.' She did not mean physically raping someone. In any case, I don't agree with this statement, and although she was a 'feminist' she was a radical one, she was not a speaker of the organisation, she just wrote novels.

Andrea Dworkin: 'Sex and murder are fused in the male consciousness, so that one without the imminent possibility of the other is unthinkable and impossible.'

She's a radical feminist. They are minority of feminists that are extremist, I have already said I do not agree with what they believe. I am defending feminists here, not radical feminists.

Roseanne Barr, on reading that a Utah housewife stabbed her husband 37 times: "I admire her restraint."

That's an awful thing to say. If she did in fact say that then it's inexcusable, but does not represent the feminist group. You could also call her a radical feminist because of her extreme views.

[Wasabista]

Yeah, Dworkin was a radical feminist all right. And David Duke is a radical racist.

Miss Misa, I'm sorry but if that reply was intended to rebut my argument, it seems to have had the opposite effect. You've confirmed the intent and malice of three of the four quotes, and your support for the first one was lame. Just imagine the hue and cry if a man said, "All women are useless!"


Again, I'm all in favor of equal rights (and responsibilities) for women. In fact, I consider it an urgent priority. But feminism has less to do with this noble goal with each passing year, and I oppose it.

[Ronin4hire]

I don't understand how anyone can be against feminism? It's such a complex and vast realm of discussion and thought that to be against ALL of it means you're either ignorant of it's history and importance with regard to women's rights today or you're a male chauvinist.

Feminism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Feminism is a discourse that involves various movements, theories, and philosophies which are concerned with the issue of gender difference, advocate equality for women, and campaign for women's rights and interests. According to some, the history of feminism can be divided into three waves. The first wave was in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the second was in the 1960s and 1970s and the third extends from the 1990s to the present. Feminist theory emerged from these feminist movements. It manifests through a variety of disciplines such as feminist geography, feminist history and feminist literary criticism.

Feminism has altered predominant perspectives in a wide range of areas within Western society, ranging from culture to law. Feminist activists have campaigned for women's legal rights (rights of contract, property rights, voting rights); for women's right to bodily integrity and autonomy, for abortion rights, and for reproductive rights (including access to contraception and quality prenatal care); for protection from domestic violence, sexual harassment and rape; for workplace rights, including maternity leave and equal pay; and against other forms of discrimination.

During much of its history, most feminist movements and theories had leaders who were predominantly middle-class white women from Western Europe and North America. However, at least since Sojourner Truth's 1851 speech to American feminists, women of other races have proposed alternative feminisms. This trend accelerated in the 1960s with the Civil Rights movement in the United States and the collapse of European colonialism in Africa, the Caribbean, parts of Latin America and Southeast Asia. Since that time, women in former European colonies and the Third World have proposed "Post-colonial" and "Third World" feminisms. Some Postcolonial feminists, such as Chandra Talpade Mohanty, are critical of Western feminism for being ethnocentric. Black feminists, such as Angela Davis and Alice Walker, share this view.

Since the 1980s Standpoint feminists argued that feminism should examine how women's experience of inequality relates to that of racism, homophobia, classism and colonization. In the late 1980s and 1990s postmodern feminists argued that gender roles are socially constructed, and that it is impossible to generalize women's experiences across cultures and histories....

[Bureda]

Gloria Steinem: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."

I agree. No women actually needs a man at all. In modern society, women can make their own money. They don't need to have a partner as they are perfectly able to sustain themselves on their own. They do not need a man to support them.

No man needs a woman either, but in the end who would want to die alone and crusty. Its called a mutual understanding. The natural law of life: reproduction.

Marilyn French: "All men are rapists, and that's all they are."

The full quote is actually 'Whatever they may be in public life, whatever their relationships with men, in their relationships with women, all men are rapists, and that's all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes.' She did not mean physically raping someone. In any case, I don't agree with this statement, and although she was a 'feminist' she was a radical one, she was not a speaker of the organisation, she just wrote novels.

Okay, the societies have given females freedom and how do they act? They act just like males. Fantasising about men, famous people and all that.

The female world population is greater than the male. We may think naughty thoughts of our counterpart sisters, the females, but in the end it boils down to logical thinking. We know to give respect to receive respect.

Andrea Dworkin: 'Sex and murder are fused in the male consciousness, so that one without the imminent possibility of the other is unthinkable and impossible.'

She's a radical feminist. They are minority of feminists that are extremist, I have already said I do not agree with what they believe. I am defending feminists here, not radical feminists.

Some crimes are committed over female influence, but then again her thinking is nasty, she must have had one dry vagina. Its a good extreme view to study but not to follow.

Roseanne Barr, on reading that a Utah housewife stabbed her husband 37 times: "I admire her restraint."

That's an awful thing to say. If she did in fact say that then it's inexcusable, but does not represent the feminist group. You could also call her a radical feminist because of her extreme views.

Female Jail awaits that thinking.

Note: I have not chosen sides, I have generalised my points. It the end it boils down to mutual understanding.

You are meant to study these views and draw a mutual conclusion out of them, not follow them.

Everyone deservers respect and quality, not matter of gender. Nobody escapes the law of nature, that's about it.

[MissMisa]

Originally Posted by Wasabista

Yeah, Dworkin was a radical feminist all right. And David Duke is a radical racist.

Miss Misa, I'm sorry but if that reply was intended to rebut my argument, it seems to have had the opposite effect. You've confirmed the intent and malice of three of the four quotes, and your support for the first one was lame. Just imagine the hue and cry if a man said, "All women are useless!"


Again, I'm all in favor of equal rights (and responsibilities) for women. In fact, I consider it an urgent priority. But feminism has less to do with this noble goal with each passing year, and I oppose it.

I never said a man needs a women either. The statement is not 'men are useless' the statement is that women do not need a man. The same as a man does not need a women. What's wrong with that? Nothing.

All those quotes were from radical feminists. I was not defending radical feminism, yet all those quotes came from radical feminists, so really it had no relevance to what I was defending and that was what I was trying to tell you.

Originally Posted by Bureda

No man needs a woman either, but in the end who would want to die alone and crusty. Its called a mutual understanding. The natural law of life: reproduction.



Okay, the societies have given females freedom and how do they act? They act just like males. Fantasising about men, famous people and all that.

The female world population is greater than the male. We may think naughty thoughts of our counterpart sisters, the females, but in the end it boils down to logical thinking. We know to give respect to receive respect.



Some crimes are committed over female influence, but then again her thinking is nasty, she must have had one dry vagina. Its a good extreme view to study but not to follow.



Female Jail awaits that thinking.

Note: I have not chosen sides, I have generalised my points. It the end it boils down to mutual understanding.

You are meant to study these views and draw a mutual conclusion out of them, not follow them.

Everyone deservers respect and quality, not matter of gender. Nobody escapes the law of nature, that's about it.

There is nothing wrong with having a partner. There is nothing wrong with being alone. Everyone has different ideas of what they want life to be like. The point in feminism is to give people that choice. Many people do not want children. Many people would be happy to be without a partner. I couldn't care either way, and now I have that choice because I'm able to sustain myself without the support of a man, because in my country I am able to get a well paying job. It was not always like that.

Let me clarify what I think. I do not support radical feminism. As I have already said, judging feminists by radical feminists is like judging muslims by extremist muslim terrorists. They both say and do terrible things by twisting existing beliefs. I support any kind of feminism that promotes equality. I do not support the idea that women are better than men. I support equal pay and equal rights - some of which do not exist for women in some countries today. Feminism is not a bad thing, unless it is extremist, but I can assure you those are the minority, just as all extremists are the minority. There are bad apples within every organisation.

Coming back at me with quotes from radical feminists is pointless, I've already said I do not support radical feminism. That isn't the only type of feminism, nor is it the biggest, and if you are inclined to believe so then I can't think of any other way to describe you but ignorant.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Wasabista

Yeah, Dworkin was a radical feminist all right. And David Duke is a radical racist.

Miss Misa, I'm sorry but if that reply was intended to rebut my argument, it seems to have had the opposite effect. You've confirmed the intent and malice of three of the four quotes, and your support for the first one was lame. Just imagine the hue and cry if a man said, "All women are useless!"


Again, I'm all in favor of equal rights (and responsibilities) for women. In fact, I consider it an urgent priority. But feminism has less to do with this noble goal with each passing year, and I oppose it.

You obviously have no understanding of feminism or you are using classic strawman tactics.

Also how does pulling a few quotes from self-proclaimed feminists make an argument? (Roseanne Barr? She's as much an authority on feminist thought as the Ku Klux Klan is an authoritative thought on American national identity)

As for Misa's support for the first one... how is that lame? I agree with it also. Perhaps you don't understand the context in which she is saying it or do you really believe that a women's identity and self worth is dependant on a man?