There's a difference between wanting equality and being bitter about the male sex.

I'm all for equality, but most self proclaimed "feminists" spew bullshit and just hurt the cause because of their nonsensical behavior.

imgur wrote There's a difference between wanting equality and being bitter about the male sex.

I'm all for equality, but most self proclaimed "feminists" spew bullshit and just hurt the cause because of their nonsensical behavior.

A stellar opinion, thank you for sharing my exasperation haha

Right, so this is a big post to tackle.

I don't agree with you directing a thread specifically at 'feminists' because I'm quite sure the problems you describe are representative of feminists entirely but rather the so-called feminists who alienate the message of equality and misunderstand social interactions. I'm a feminist and happy to be one. Any human that believes in equality for humans should be a feminist in my opinion because feminism is about just that (it's not a man-hating ideology; sure the word is bias but so is the word 'mankind' yet people happily use that).

The opening a door rant, I agree with. It's not something I've had to deal with during my life but opening a door for someone is a gesture of politeness. I'd happily do the same for either gender and don't think that's an example of misogyny.

The GTA thing, I don't have much of an opinion on. There needs to be research with accurate scientific method that proves video game content impacts real life behaviours. The argument isn't limited to feminists though. Many parents believe it promotes violence and gang cultures.

I think you've misunderstood the point about companies. Your 'simple counter' is rather foolish even if we accept your misunderstood view as fact. Companies couldn't hire exclusively women because there would be discrimination lawsuits and a heavy decline in public image (hence profits wouldn't arise). I've heard two arguments in regards to companies, each of which use slightly different logic to you.

i) Studies show that women are at least as good as men in exams (if not better) yet only 5 FTSE 100 companies have female CEOs. Sure, some imbalance is to be expected because some jobs have male-dominated inflows of employees (and vice-versa). This imbalance though is surely nothing near 19:1. It seems as though there is a psychological preference for males in the promotion process.

ii) The argument raised by my former Geography teacher suggested that companies prefer hiring men because they won't have to worry about maternity leave eating in to their profits. There's a glass ceiling effect for women that prevents them achieving the top jobs (I guess that interlinks with the FTSE 100 stat).

Ched Evans, my views'll be biased. I'm not going to bother.

I appreciate your views on many things @Fielding. You're a smart guy but I think you've generalised views and been very dismissive of other opinions.

There is an inherent gender bias in modern society but it's improving, it's more socially stigmatised and it's more psychological than intentional.

OhDiegoCosta wrote Right, so this is a big post to tackle.

I don't agree with you directing a thread specifically at 'feminists' because I'm quite sure the problems you describe are representative of feminists entirely but rather the so-called feminists who alienate the message of equality and misunderstand social interactions. I'm a feminist and happy to be one. Any human that believes in equality for humans should be a feminist in my opinion because feminism is about just that (it's not a man-hating ideology; sure the word is bias but so is the word 'mankind' yet people happily use that).

The opening a door rant, I agree with. It's not something I've had to deal with during my life but opening a door for someone is a gesture of politeness. I'd happily do the same for either gender and don't think that's an example of misogyny.

The GTA thing, I don't have much of an opinion on. There needs to be research with accurate scientific method that proves video game content impacts real life behaviours. The argument isn't limited to feminists though. Many parents believe it promotes violence and gang cultures.

I think you've misunderstood the point about companies. Your 'simple counter' is rather foolish even if we accept your misunderstood view as fact. Companies couldn't hire exclusively women because there would be discrimination lawsuits and a heavy decline in public image (hence profits wouldn't arise). I've heard two arguments in regards to companies, each of which use slightly different logic to you.

i) Studies show that women are at least as good as men in exams (if not better) yet only 5 FTSE 100 companies have female CEOs. Sure, some imbalance is to be expected because some jobs have male-dominated inflows of employees (and vice-versa). This imbalance though is surely nothing near 19:1. It seems as though there is a psychological preference for males in the promotion process.

ii) The argument raised by my former Geography teacher suggested that companies prefer hiring men because they won't have to worry about maternity leave eating in to their profits. There's a glass ceiling effect for women that prevents them achieving the top jobs (I guess that interlinks with the FTSE 100 stat).

Ched Evans, my views'll be biased. I'm not going to bother.

I appreciate your views on many things @Fielding. You're a smart guy but I think you've generalised views and been very dismissive of other opinions.

There is an inherent gender bias in modern society but it's improving, it's more socially stigmatised and it's more psychological than intentional.

You're quite coherent on the matter yourself but would you not find it more prudent to say you are a humanist rather than feminist? Human equality is far more important than a westernized feminist view, since quite obviously there is a genuine shortage of feminists raising valid arguments.

As for the wage gap point you make, statistics can easily be manipulated to show any result theoretically, whereas I find that if you take all matters into account such as pregnancy, personality differences, the fact males have been proven to put several hours more in on average than women in work, that the whole being paid less is a fabrication... Plus industry would be a female dominated industry, therefore going against what feminism truly stands for

Fielding wrote

OhDiegoCosta wrote Right, so this is a big post to tackle.

I don't agree with you directing a thread specifically at 'feminists' because I'm quite sure the problems you describe are representative of feminists entirely but rather the so-called feminists who alienate the message of equality and misunderstand social interactions. I'm a feminist and happy to be one. Any human that believes in equality for humans should be a feminist in my opinion because feminism is about just that (it's not a man-hating ideology; sure the word is bias but so is the word 'mankind' yet people happily use that).

The opening a door rant, I agree with. It's not something I've had to deal with during my life but opening a door for someone is a gesture of politeness. I'd happily do the same for either gender and don't think that's an example of misogyny.

The GTA thing, I don't have much of an opinion on. There needs to be research with accurate scientific method that proves video game content impacts real life behaviours. The argument isn't limited to feminists though. Many parents believe it promotes violence and gang cultures.

I think you've misunderstood the point about companies. Your 'simple counter' is rather foolish even if we accept your misunderstood view as fact. Companies couldn't hire exclusively women because there would be discrimination lawsuits and a heavy decline in public image (hence profits wouldn't arise). I've heard two arguments in regards to companies, each of which use slightly different logic to you.

i) Studies show that women are at least as good as men in exams (if not better) yet only 5 FTSE 100 companies have female CEOs. Sure, some imbalance is to be expected because some jobs have male-dominated inflows of employees (and vice-versa). This imbalance though is surely nothing near 19:1. It seems as though there is a psychological preference for males in the promotion process.

ii) The argument raised by my former Geography teacher suggested that companies prefer hiring men because they won't have to worry about maternity leave eating in to their profits. There's a glass ceiling effect for women that prevents them achieving the top jobs (I guess that interlinks with the FTSE 100 stat).

Ched Evans, my views'll be biased. I'm not going to bother.

I appreciate your views on many things @Fielding. You're a smart guy but I think you've generalised views and been very dismissive of other opinions.

There is an inherent gender bias in modern society but it's improving, it's more socially stigmatised and it's more psychological than intentional.

You're quite coherent on the matter yourself but would you not find it more prudent to say you are a humanist rather than feminist? Human equality is far more important than a westernized feminist view, since quite obviously there is a genuine shortage of feminists raising valid arguments.

As for the wage gap point you make, statistics can easily be manipulated to show any result theoretically, whereas I find that if you take all matters into account such as pregnancy, personality differences, the fact males have been proven to put several hours more in on average than women in work, that the whole being paid less is a fabrication... Plus industry would be a female dominated industry, therefore going against what feminism truly stands for

We'll assume feminist comes under the category humanist for ease.

I think wage levels at lower levels are close to equal and so would agree with you there. It's the huge male dominance in higher job positions that's hard to explain. So many company CEOs are males (stats can be manipulated but how can you ignore a 1:19 ratio??)..

There are actually a lot of good arguments by feminists. The problem is that they're very easily drowned out by radical men-haters, operating under the feminist persona.

OhDiegoCosta wrote

Fielding wrote

OhDiegoCosta wrote Right, so this is a big post to tackle.

I don't agree with you directing a thread specifically at 'feminists' because I'm quite sure the problems you describe are representative of feminists entirely but rather the so-called feminists who alienate the message of equality and misunderstand social interactions. I'm a feminist and happy to be one. Any human that believes in equality for humans should be a feminist in my opinion because feminism is about just that (it's not a man-hating ideology; sure the word is bias but so is the word 'mankind' yet people happily use that).

The opening a door rant, I agree with. It's not something I've had to deal with during my life but opening a door for someone is a gesture of politeness. I'd happily do the same for either gender and don't think that's an example of misogyny.

The GTA thing, I don't have much of an opinion on. There needs to be research with accurate scientific method that proves video game content impacts real life behaviours. The argument isn't limited to feminists though. Many parents believe it promotes violence and gang cultures.

I think you've misunderstood the point about companies. Your 'simple counter' is rather foolish even if we accept your misunderstood view as fact. Companies couldn't hire exclusively women because there would be discrimination lawsuits and a heavy decline in public image (hence profits wouldn't arise). I've heard two arguments in regards to companies, each of which use slightly different logic to you.

i) Studies show that women are at least as good as men in exams (if not better) yet only 5 FTSE 100 companies have female CEOs. Sure, some imbalance is to be expected because some jobs have male-dominated inflows of employees (and vice-versa). This imbalance though is surely nothing near 19:1. It seems as though there is a psychological preference for males in the promotion process.

ii) The argument raised by my former Geography teacher suggested that companies prefer hiring men because they won't have to worry about maternity leave eating in to their profits. There's a glass ceiling effect for women that prevents them achieving the top jobs (I guess that interlinks with the FTSE 100 stat).

Ched Evans, my views'll be biased. I'm not going to bother.

I appreciate your views on many things @Fielding. You're a smart guy but I think you've generalised views and been very dismissive of other opinions.

There is an inherent gender bias in modern society but it's improving, it's more socially stigmatised and it's more psychological than intentional.

You're quite coherent on the matter yourself but would you not find it more prudent to say you are a humanist rather than feminist? Human equality is far more important than a westernized feminist view, since quite obviously there is a genuine shortage of feminists raising valid arguments.

As for the wage gap point you make, statistics can easily be manipulated to show any result theoretically, whereas I find that if you take all matters into account such as pregnancy, personality differences, the fact males have been proven to put several hours more in on average than women in work, that the whole being paid less is a fabrication... Plus industry would be a female dominated industry, therefore going against what feminism truly stands for

We'll assume feminist comes under the category humanist for ease.

I think wage levels at lower levels are close to equal and so would agree with you there. It's the huge male dominance in higher job positions that's hard to explain. So many company CEOs are males (stats can be manipulated but how can you ignore a 1:19 ratio??)..

There are actually a lot of good arguments by feminists. The problem is that they're very easily drowned out by radical men-haters, operating under the feminist persona.

Again the stat of the 1:19 doesn't take into account personality traits nor the fact women do tend to branch out for family more than men. Not saying CEO and higher positions do generally have men that dont want families but they are more likely to be dedicated to the job and put it above all else than a woman.

Also the fact that a male is genetically the dominant species of human and there are anomalies, and women are identifiably more willing to bend to the will of the male than vice versa.

And as someone who isn't against feminism but speaking from a business POV (I have to do this regularly) I find that the males in a meeting are more likely to take into consideration the opinion of those speaking than a woman who continually will try and get her point across, much akin to the "little man syndrome". However again I don't say this is in all cases, my manager is a woman and she is one of the most brilliant managers i've had, tends to everyones needs and is fantastic at her job.

The wage gap completely disappears when you compare men and women with the exact same level of education who do the exact same job.
In America 71% of women who graduate from High School go on to College, only 61% of men do.
79% of girls graduate from High School while 69% of boys do, so that number only increases even further.
Women live 5 years longer, on average, than men in US, and men are 3x more likely to commit suicide.

So women are better educated, live longer, and kill themselves less than men, in America.

Anyone who identifies as a feminist or an MRA should drop that and pick up Egalitarianism.

Meanwhile, women in other parts of the world are severely oppressed, are genitally mutilated, are kidnapped by the hundreds, and are sold as wives or sex slaves by groups like Boko Haram.

Woodkid wrote The wage gap completely disappears when you compare men and women with the exact same level of education who do the exact same job.
In America 71% of women who graduate from High School go on to College, only 61% of men do.
79% of girls graduate from High School while 69% of boys do, so that number only increases even further.
Women live 5 years longer, on average, than men in US, and men are 3x more likely to commit suicide.

So women are better educated, live longer, and kill themselves less than men, in America.

Anyone who identifies as a feminist or an MRA should drop that and pick up Egalitarianism.

Meanwhile, women in other parts of the world are severely oppressed, are genitally mutilated, are kidnapped by the hundreds, and are sold as wives or sex slaves by groups like Boko Haram.

But that doesn't matter because women are killed on GTA, and god forbid they have gender colour coded items!!!!

Fielding wrote

Woodkid wrote The wage gap completely disappears when you compare men and women with the exact same level of education who do the exact same job.
In America 71% of women who graduate from High School go on to College, only 61% of men do.
79% of girls graduate from High School while 69% of boys do, so that number only increases even further.
Women live 5 years longer, on average, than men in US, and men are 3x more likely to commit suicide.

So women are better educated, live longer, and kill themselves less than men, in America.

Anyone who identifies as a feminist or an MRA should drop that and pick up Egalitarianism.

Meanwhile, women in other parts of the world are severely oppressed, are genitally mutilated, are kidnapped by the hundreds, and are sold as wives or sex slaves by groups like Boko Haram.

But that doesn't matter because women are killed on GTA, and god forbid they have gender colour coded items!!!!

There's a pretty regular trope in video games which nobody really pays any attention to.
It's called the 'Male enemy' trope. I wonder how many men are killed on a single play through of any action game ever made.

Men are portrayed as drug dealers, horrible rich business men, thieves, murderers and gangsters in GTA 5? Who cares.
Women are portrayed as hookers? THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!